If The Kurds Ever Won, We’d Still Have To “Liberate” Them

Image for post
Image for post

Note: Any mention of the Kurds in this article is primarily referring to Kurdish groups in Turkey and Syria, not even member of the race. In fact, Kurds are a large group made up by many people with different religious and political beliefs. However, this article is talking about the situation in the countries the situation is most effected by.

Earlier today, President Donald Trump officially withdrew US troops from Syria after the official defeat of ISIS. This move has caused heavy backlash with many interventionists, arguing that this is the United States turning its back on the Kurds against the forces of Syria and Turkey. Turkey, by the way, is officially an ally state of the US. At least, that’s why I thought we were unable to kick them out of NATO.

Mind you, the struggle between the Kurds and the rest of the Middle East is quite an old one dating back about 400 years. If you want to look at what happened last time we entangled ourselves in a conflict that old, just do some research on the Vietnam war.

One thing that is quite bothering about these people who have bleeding hearts over the Kurds is how little they tend to understand about them. Take this Tweet from today by Ben Shapiro:

Abandoning the Kurds to the tender mercies of the Turkish government — a government led by Islamist dictator Erdogan — is a foreign policy disaster.

This is a quite different attitude than when Ben Shaprio who argued that half of all Muslims were terrorists in the making. Now, a group made up mostly of Muslims have no terrorists in them whatsoever.

But what has been really surprising — or would be if you knew nothing about the situation, is the massive left-wing backlash against this move. Here’s what far-left Former Senator Mike Gravel had to say on the subject:

There is no higher disgrace to America than the abandonment of the Kurds, fighters for freedom and independence, to the hard-right forces of Erdoğan. Every American should hang their head in shame.

But he’s not the only one. Pro-war media treated Chomsky as a God among Men (after calling him a nut, a lair, and an America hater) for months on end when he said the US should stay in Syria to protect the Kurds back in late 2018. Now, I tend to like what Chomsky says on foreign politics, however, maybe, just maybe, he had a bit of a conflict of interest regarding this situation specifically.

Let me just cut to the chase, the Kurds are left-wing activists trying to set up a libertarian socialist system. Anarchist Communist and Antifa flags are common among Kurd groups in Northern Syria, and crocodile tears are not going to change that.

Here is one picture of the big Krudish groups across Northern Syria:

Does anyone see the issue here?

And that’s ignoring various terrorist activities done by the Kurdistan Workers Party all across Syria.

From the Truman Administration until the fall of the USSR, Foreign Policy was primarily led by the Truman Doctrine, or the idea we should fight communism through containment. Giving this group of Kurds a state would violate the doctrine, which is truly funny considering the first neo-conservatives became popular for advocating the continuation of the War in Vietnam.

If you want to argue Islamic terrorism is more of a threat in the 21st century than communists, that’s fine — in fact, I would agree with you. However, this contradiction must be kept in mind while arguing for the United States to protect this group. In truth, if the Kurds win the war, there would be calls to “liberate them from communism,” within a week.

Written by

Writer On Both History And Politics; Peaceful Globalist; Follow My Twitter: @EphromJosine1

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store