Why Have Democrats Deliberately Opened A New Front in the Iraq War?

Question

Even if you are opposed to the war, surely you see purposefully increasing the level of violence on our soldiers as a vile act.

Turkey is a proud country that democrats knew would react this way, and now our soldiers in Iraq will pay the price.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/10/17/turkey.iraq/index.html

outcrop: that would be same as calling you out for blaming Bush for insurgents killing Iraqies or our troops. I have a real concern here and this is a deliberate and foolish move by the Democrats.

Bert T.: You are way out of line to think that my opposition of this bill has anything to do with whether or not I think the act from 90 years ago was genocide. In reality, people could die over a completely worthless resolution. There was no need for it and the timing couldn't be worse. Getting the U.N. to recognize the genocide in Darfur would have been a worthy cause, but the democrats instead decide to condemn genocide from a century ago just to stir the pot? I call B.S. on your rant.

Answer 1

Amazing that an "ally" could be so quick to abandon its "alliance" with the US.

Turkey is only an ally when it's convenient. Someday, I hope we can depend on TRUE allies again, ones who share our vision for the future, not a shadow world of "maybe allies, maybe not" when it suits them. "Turkey is a proud country", one which ALSO appears on the US Drug Czar's list of opium producing nations (you DO recall the "War on Drugs" Reagan began in the 80s? Did we win that war too? Is opium-producing Turkey an "ally" in that war as well?).

Turkey is a proud country which ALSO appears on the UN's list of the worst human rights violators (so does Saudi Arabia, but shhhhh). Are these REALLY the kind of "allies" the Democratic, Freedom loving America SHOULD be cultivating?

And since when do Republicans worry about what ANY other country thinks? Should we ignore the genocide of millions of Armenians? Should we also deny the Holocaust, just in case it offends NeoNazis? Are you TRULY advocating letting murderers of innocent people go (at the very least) unaccused and unpunished?

Is this the sort of Right Wing "justice" we can expect in the most unlikely event Osama bin Laden is finally captured?

Would you also accept Hitler as an "ally" were he to "denounce terrorism" but otherwise do nothing to stop its spread within Germany?

How about Pol Pot? STALIN?

Good try, but as the old saying goes, "With friends like this, who needs enemies?"

Answer 2

They do not have got to. The CIA proved that Saddam Hussein had not anything to do with nine-eleven. That's correct - the CIA!!! Taking out Saddam used to be a well factor, however getting American troops killed over a LIE? That isn't and it not ever will probably be. THE WAR WAS BASED ON A LIE AND THAT IS TRUE. Where the heck have you ever been? And did you occur to look the photograph of Donald Rumsfeld shaking the hand of Saddam Hussein? Do you keep in mind that Iraq used to be an "best friend" whilst Iraq and Iran have been at battle? You have got to learn a LOT extra historical past. History is not conservative or liberal - its simply historical past and on this case it does not accept as true with your variation of "fact" Sorry friend - take a look at once more.

Answer 3

Turkey wants to attack the Kurds since April 2003. To take Saddam out was the stupidest move ever, demolishing the balances of powers in the region. Turkey is not a proud country, its a religious nuthouse.

Answer 4

While the Democratic resolution is dangerous, pointless and frivolous, it is not the sole reason that Turkey is taking action against Kurds. They were doing this several months before the resolution was mentioned. It was just small time news then. Turkey's actions are not unexpected, they are being attacked by rebels across their border and they have a right to defend themselves.

Answer 5

Some people in Congress are uncomfortable being in bed with Hitler. The Kurds are being killed because they are kurdish. This is genocide. And we are going to stand back because the Kurds don't have oil and we think we need Turkey's help to keep the Iraqi oil.

What a waste. All the angels of the Heavenly Host could not enable the USA to hold onto Iraq and its oil, since we have irretrievably alienated the Iraqi middle class, the one stratum in that society that USED TO admire the West and USED TO BE the one element that could have been used to stabilize the country.

The only solution is to withdraw from Iraq, now. Tactically, 'cos we're going to need to fight our way out of the country.

Then we can get out of bed with Hitler, prosecute the banditti in power, and restore America to the moral high ground that USED TO BE the hallmark of our foreign policy.

Answer 6

I do oppose the war, but I am also having a hard time understanding why the congress feels it's so important to pass this resolution at this time. Why do lawmakers spend time passing resolutions like this when there are more immediate matters to attend to? And no matter which side you are on regarding the war, it would seem evident that you don't want to bring in more complications in such a volatile situation. As you say it is the US troops who are caught in the middle and I regret this.

Answer 7

The democrats aren't doing anything but trying to get Turkey to admit that they committed genocide (which they did)

It sounds to me like the conservatives can't handle the truth in anything....lets look back at a few other things they didn't believe...

Iraq had nothing to do with Iraq.....check
Iraq had WMD................................check
George Bush is a terrorist.............check

Answer 8

Some poster just had this article. Seems they're losing support for it.

Support Wanes in House for Genocide Vote
By CARL HULSE
WASHINGTON, Oct. 16 — Worried about antagonizing Turkish leaders, House members from both parties have begun to withdraw their support from a resolution supported by the Democratic leadership that would condemn as genocide the mass killings of Armenians nearly a century ago.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/17/washington/17cnd-cong.html?ei=5065&en=20af3ab48140086a&ex=1193198400&adxnnl=1&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print&adxnnlx=1192629953-bWruU0IREPX4ADc82G/MGA

Answer 9

So you think Turkey will attack Iraq SOLELY because the democrats said something .... brilliant

Could it be that Turkey was thinking of doing this BEFORE they decided to have false moral outrage over being called genocidal when they actually WERE genocidal?

Plus GW KNEW that the invasion would empower (our friends) the Kurds BEFORE the invasion and much was written on Turkey's possible response.

None of this matters to you though right? For you it's all democrats, all the time right?

Answer 10

Turkey was planning on invading the Kurds as soon as they got a chance anyway. All the repubs on the commitee for the approval of this armenian thing voted for it, so it isn't just some evil dem thing.
I also think it's funny Turkey is calling it's first strike attack as a "defensive" measure. That sound familar, doesn't it?