Click to see the full-size image
The Turkish Armed Forces and pro-Turkish militant groups launched their ground operation in northeastern Syria on October 9. Since then, they have ahieved limited gains in the areas of Tell Abyad and Al Ayn.
Click to see the full-size image
Click to see the full-size image
A UN buffer zone would have solved the problem
name one example when UN solved a problem….
UN it’s just for talk.
Bosnia?
break up of Yougoslavia, with many civilian causalties and numerous other problem still appearing to this day can hardly be called a solved problem. There were also many reports about UN forces not being neutral but alowing one side to gain advantage in certain issues…..
At least no fly zone would helped alot turks and its thugs cant advance on kurds without air support.
If the US is not going to lift a finger to stop the Turks, why should they A: vote for a UN no fly zone, and B: supply the aircraft to enforce it. Who then have to fly from Inçirlik base in Turkey? And C: Russia would immediately veto ANY no-fly zone over Syria after having seen how those no-fly zones got abused over Iraq and Syria.
The Turks don’t appear to be much in a rush. Perhaps Erdogan is leery of Trump changing his mind and allowing air support for the SDF?
Everybody staying out of Syria would have been much better in the first place. The UN was part of the problem on Syria.
Please explain, why do you think the UN was part of the problem?
Tell me what you do not understand.
Everybody staying out of Syria would have meant no war in the first place. But the UN has been there since 1974 and nothing to do with 2011 – so please explain why in your opinion the UN was part of the problem? If you mean the UN Security Council then actually no, because Russia and China have vetoed a “No-fly Zone”.
Wasn’t there a UN Security council vote that allowed foreign intervention in the first place? It is the same stuff as usual, an initial UN decision is made which opens the crack necessary for the door to be blown open a mile wide by the usual suspects. UN monitoring and assessments have also been anything high;y suspect to wildly wrong. This is not a secret. you wants examples, start reading what has actually happened in the war and you will find tons of it.
The ideal of the UN is a good one. The way it has been played is outright evil. It’s ills, corruption, largess, and downright avoidance of things that need to be addressed ( Rwanda being a classic example and Yemen being a present day one ) are also noted also at a legendary level. How can half of NATO shown up in Syria in the first place and along with their friends, arm, train and support some of the most brutal dudes on the planet, without condemnation from the UN reaching levels of screaming on a daily basis (loud enough be heard outside on the streets of NYC )? It is a problem.
No offense intended but, go out and discover what has been going on. It will take while but, you will get there. Good luck in your search.
John, there is no such UNSC resolution that allowed foreign intervention other than some unarmed UN observers and the resolutions to investigate use of chemical weapons. The coalition forces have no UN mandate. Please don’t make things up.
You completely missed what I was pointing out. Go back and do your homework. I took the time to give you my reasoning, so I think a thank you is more appropriate than your actual reply. Take a hike.
You are just waffling bullshit and then get offended when someone points it out. LOL. Please tell us the UN resolution that “allowed foreign intervention” in Syria? You can’t, because it doesn’t exist. Don’t distract – this was your very question “Wasn’t there a UN Security council vote that allowed foreign intervention in the first place?”. The answer is NO, there wasn’t a “vote that allowed” foreign intervention – which would be called a UN resolution, okay? There were many votes but Russia and China have vetoed them. It’s a fact, get it over with – ah and please close the door when you leave!
Your dim is over dude. I am not going to even reading what you post anymore. So take a hike.
Yeah whatever. Writing isn’t your strength either.
chypre 1974
Quite different situation – Syria & Turkey have a hard border and Turkey claims the Kurds in Syria threaten their National Security – they don’t have Turks living in Syria they need to ‘protect’. f there was a UN Buffer Zone the Turks certainly wouldn’t be able to uphold that claim. In contrast, the Turkish Cypriot and Greek Cypriot population was mixed, without hard border. The rise of Greek Cypriot Nationalism (ENOSIS) gave Turkey grounds to invade ‘to protect’ the Turkish Cypriot minority.
No one concerned about Turkey’s problems and now they are solving their problems on their own.
Yeah sure – Turkey’s problems such as buying ISIS oil and sending thousands of terrorists through their southern borders into Syria. Just like in Cyprus, they will take any opportunity to grab land and increase the Ottoman Empire.
Have the Kurds woken up and used their get out of gaol free card or are they still hoping that the Sultan can be defeated militarily?
We must understand the difference between numerious Kurdish groups. PKK is not really different than ISIS. They lack any common sense and are blind to realities of any stuation.
For example when the zionist launched their war against Syria, why Kurds choose to ally themselves with US rather than Assad? Why did they rather to lose thousands of men and later on handed Afrin to Turks instead of striking a deal with Assad?
Cuz as I said they are not different from ISIS. They want a puppet state called Kurdistan for their zionist masters and they are more than happy to die for it. And, well, superior Turkish army seems eager to help them with their wish.
GIVE THE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO THE TURKS NOT THE USA TROOPS EXCHANGE RATES SEND THE USA TROOPS TO THE SAUDIS EXCHANGE RATES SEND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THE BILL I WORK MORE AND GET LESS THEY STEAL MY LABOR MONEY TIME AND SKILLS AND GIVE IT TO THE GLOBALIST EXCHANGED