So, let’s check in on what people want out of this war.
Interesting opening posture. But I’m pretty sure that’s not it.
<Background Chatter, Jokes About the Road to Damascus, and if it could be “a” road to Damascus, depending on how articles work in Greek.>
Someone has told me that Greel has articles. But someone else has told me it only has one article Ah. There you go—my theory of ambiguity-a road to Damascus-is no good. Ulness it is. I don’t know the Greek article. Or the rest of Greek, for that matter.
But, on the other hand, I’m not the one who would be on the road to Damascus.
So, yeah, I could talk about the apocalypse all day, but it’s kinda a digression from what’s really happening on the ground.
Lest we forget, this thread lays it out nicely.
To make clear what’s happening in N. Syria: men who believe women belong in the kitchen are killing, torturing, & blowing apart women who are trying to create a women’s revolution in the Middle East. The US, and now even the UN are actively helping them do so. #riseupforrojava 1/
this is important. People don’t understand what Rojava is. It’s a project largely created by & largely maintained by women. An attempt to begin to undo patriarchy in the very lands where it originated in its most pernicious forms. It is being attacked IN THE NAME OF PATRIARCHY 2/
all of this is explicit. Erdogan did not just declare in advance he intends to commit war crimes – to be greeted with the support, passive or active, of the world community – he declared he was acting to put women who rose up against patriarchy back in their place 3/
he claims Rojava are “terrorists” because they support the philosophy of Abdullah Ocalan, but in fact, that philosophy largely consists of a commitment to prioritise women’s liberation since patriarchy is the foundation for all other forms of injustice 4/
in other words, Erdogan & by extension now all NATO powers want us to accept that the women’s revolution in Rojava is a form of terrorism not despite but BECAUSE of its commitment to women’s emancipation & empowerment. (Not because of any acts of terror, as these don’t exist.) 5/
(all the actual acts of terror, from the bombing of hospitals to the use of white phosphorus & napalm on children in an explicit attempt to terrorise the civilian population to flee & be ethnically cleansed, are being done by the Turkish/NATO side.) 6/
I want to emphasise this is explicit. It’s not some conspiracy theory. Erdogan says “I want to ethnically cleanse this territory.” Then he meets w the UN sec’y general who says “I’ll help”. Erdogan says “I want to put women back in their place.” Merkel gives him weapons. 7/
sure the German gov’t & US congress make superficial noises, they kind of have to, & the US army is furious because no one will want to ally w them, but they’re still providing the air cover & weapons for the forces of patriarchy who’re saying “let us kill these uppity women” 8/
Yeah, I suppose that’s too obvious. Gotta be more complicated than that.
Though I suppose that would look a lot like the end of the world to some people.
Did we ever resolve what the Bradleys were about?
Someone has suggested to me they could be bait. I like it… but…
One major caveat: They haven’t been given a good answer to why they are there besides the commander wanted them. Literally.*
They were flown up from Kuwait, so the fact that they’re available may be begging question.
Like, Bradleys are not optimal for running that route back and forth and air support can easily be flown in for such a mission and would be called in at any signs of trouble anyway. The press really pushed hard on the Bradley role at the press conference.
So I guess it makes sense to ask why—and where—they will want to pack more punch? Someone else has suggested that most IED in northern Syria are vehicle borne so armor up top might be better thn what the MRAPs bring.
As for bait, the officially stated policy the other night rested upon three major articulations, which were repeated, all of which strike me as theoretically sound. 😉
- Everyone knows where we are.
- Everyone knows what we can do.
- We possess the right of self-defense.
*Technically, Rear Adm. Byrne also said that Bradleys were really good. I don’t know if that is really useful information though. But you know how it is, interest in being thorough and all.
[QUOTE=”Darnell’s Son, post: 3628182, member: 64512″]
Could it be that the Bradleys can withstand rock attacks better than other armored vehicles?