Middle East Thread of Despair: More Broken Than Syria

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Middle East Thread of Despair: More Broken Than Syria

«‹›3125 »

VERTiG0: Jul 11, 2001; go move over bro

Niedar posted:

Well thats great and all but I don't think we should be killing ISIS at all so im not sure how pointing out how spending a ton of money killing them is bad is white privilege.

Is this a real post

# ? Oct 1, 2014 18:36

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 16, 2024 01:09

Dopilsya: Apr 3, 2010

Cat Mattress posted:

It's not a question of racism or privilege. The purpose of a weapon of war is to damage the enemy's ability to fight, either by killing the enemy directly or by destroying the enemy's weapons. In this respect, the worth of an enemy combatant's life is the worth that the enemy assigns to their combatants' life. If they're using suicide attacks to weed out raw recruits and claim in their propaganda movies that they love death, then that worth mustn't be very high.

In any case it's easier to compute values for materiel. If you destroy a Toyota Hilux, you destroy a Toyota. Maybe it was parked and there was nobody, causing no victims. Maybe it was transporting fifteen combatants and they're all dead now. It's often hard to tell with an airstrike just how many casualties it caused.

SedanChair posted:

Interesting, would you like to take another dump in the form of words so I can smell that also?

Since reading comprehension is hard, the guy you're replying to is sarcastically replying to the previous discussion about the cost of flight time and bombs vs. the benefits. He's saying that spending 300k pounds bombing a 10k pound truck can't be described as valueless on the pure cash value because there's worth in bombing IS fighters that's not measured in money (i.e. that the lives of the IS fighters make it worthwhile to bomb that target).

# ? Oct 1, 2014 19:56

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

quote:

�Unfortunately, there is zero coordination with the Free Syrian Army. Because there is no coordination, we are seeing civilian casualties. Because there is no coordination, they are hitting empty buildings for ISIS.�
Now, in addition to the Assad regime and ISIS, they have to worry about getting killed by U.S. and coalition airstrikes on al Nusrah targets too. Already, one Syrian rebel group supported in the past by the United States condemned the aerial attacks, calling them �an attack on national sovereignty� and demanding that the West train its firepower on Assad instead. To make matters worse, some FSA leaders now say that the airstrikes are threatening to push many rebel groups�including al Nusrah�back toward the side of ISIS.
--
Andrew Tabler, senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said the Obama administration is not coordinating with the FSA because it still doesn�t believe it can trust the FSA with sensitive information about ongoing military operations. But that also means the FSA can�t capitalize after the strikes by taking over the territory that has been cleared.

�Everybody knows you can�t bomb your way out of this problem, and if your game plan is for the moderate opposition to fill up that vacuum, then it would seem it�s important the moderate rebels benefit,� he said. �We need to win the opposition over to our side and this doesn�t help that at all. And if this continues, the Assad regime will be the main party to benefit.�

By announcing that U.S. airstrikes would be paired with help for the FSA but then not delivering that help quickly or even talking to the FSA, the U.S. is putting the moderate rebels in the worst possible position and needlessly harming the effectiveness of the mission, said Mouaz Moustafa, the executive director of the Syrian Emergency Task Force, an American-based organization that works with the Syrian opposition, and political director of United for a Free Syria.

�You are helping alienate the FSA from their popular support on the ground and you are risking ISIS regrouping or allowing the regime to take over these areas, which contradicts the stated policy of the president of the United States,� he said.

Less than a month in and we've already made some major (possibly even irreparable) fuckups.

If we were coordinating with the rebels and also assisting them in the fight with Assad, they'd probably be more willing to assist us with fighting ISIS, and also probably be more willing to overlook any fuckups that happened. As it is, the rebels aren't going to be all that willing to fight ISIS if there's nothing in it for them, and the coalition isn't really giving them much help (and in some cases is actually hurting them):

The rebels can't take advantage of strikes against ISIS since we're not coordinating with them.
We're not helping the rebels to fight Assad, so there's no goodwill generated there.
Bombing al-Nursa (aka one of the strongest rebel factions) caused in-fighting among the rebels, and killed a lot of potential goodwill towards the coalition.
Any civilian casualties will be seen as the fault of the coalition, and will start to turn the rebels against the coalition (like what's already happening).

"Use the rebels to fight ISIS" relies in the rebels having the will and desire to do so. We're currently not giving them either of those things.

Xandu posted:

Can't imagine why the US would be hesitant to coordinate with them

They irony of the US literally coordinating with al-Qaeda notwithstanding, there are only so many rebel groups left in Syria. We wouldn't have to help al-Nursa, just avoid bombing them, but it's (probably) already too late for that. We burned that bridge already.

I'm not opposed to intervention in Syria, but I am opposed to the way we're currently doing it; right now we're just making things worse. I was assuming we'd handle this more like Libya, where the fuckups would start happening after most of the fighting was done.

# ? Oct 1, 2014 20:10

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

Here's the YPG with equipment they captured from the Islamic State, who captured it from the Iraqi Army, who was given it by the US.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Ui7CqGf17c

# ? Oct 1, 2014 20:29

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Brown Moses posted:

Here's the YPG with equipment they captured from the Islamic State, who captured it from the Iraqi Army, who was given it by the US.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Ui7CqGf17c

I don't think that resupply method is going to be viable long term.

# ? Oct 1, 2014 20:44

tsa: Feb 3, 2014

fade5 posted:

I'm not opposed to intervention in Syria, but I am opposed to the way we're currently doing it; right now we're just making things worse. I was assuming we'd handle this more like Libya, where the fuckups would start happening after most of the fighting was done.

Because in Libya it was against a fairly conventional military, which always goes well for the US. Battling insurgencies that integrate into the population, not so much. And Libya is a laughable success, anyway; essentially Libya was no different than Iraq except we left right after we did the easy part of blowing up lovely outdated military crap. It's pretty funny hearing people go 'bbbbut give it some time it doesn't get better overnight' --completely indistinguishable from the Bush cry once it turned out Iraq wasn't going to be sugar and rainbows.

quote:

Less than a month in and we've already made some major (possibly even irreparable) fuckups.

If we were coordinating with the rebels and also assisting them in the fight with Assad, they'd probably be more willing to assist us with fighting ISIS, and also probably be more willing to overlook any fuckups that happened. As it is, the rebels aren't going to be all that willing to fight ISIS if there's nothing in it for them, and the coalition isn't really giving them much help (and in some cases is actually hurting them):

The rebels can't take advantage of strikes against ISIS since we're not coordinating with them.
We're not helping the rebels to fight Assad, so there's no goodwill generated there.
Bombing al-Nursa (aka one of the strongest rebel factions) caused in-fighting among the rebels, and killed a lot of potential goodwill towards the coalition.
Any civilian casualties will be seen as the fault of the coalition, and will start to turn the rebels against the coalition (like what's already happening).

"Use the rebels to fight ISIS" relies in the rebels having the will and desire to do so. We're currently not giving them either of those things.

Supporting one side of the civil war in a middle eastern country is pretty much exactly why we are here in the first place. But you are right that what we are trying to do instead is completely schizophrenic.

But suppose we did help, we get rid of Assad. Then what? Syria would be in the same place as Iraq post-Saddam, the genociders become the genocided etc.

# ? Oct 1, 2014 20:57

swizz: Oct 10, 2004; I can recall being broke with some friends in Tennessee and deciding to have a party and being able to afford only two-fifths of a $1.75 bourbon called Two Natural, whose label showed dice coming up 5 and 2. Its taste was memorable. The psychological effect was also notable.

Raqaa is Being Slaughtered Silently is reporting that ISIS executed 35 activists on September 19th and buried their bodies in a mass grave

# ? Oct 1, 2014 21:12

Dolash: Oct 23, 2008; aNYWAY,
tHAT'S REALLY ALL THERE IS,
tO REPORT ON THE SUBJECT,
oF ME GETTING HURT,

Hm yes sounds terrible, but isn't the real crime that the US is trying to kill those ISIS members who committed that mass murder? Surely the world would be a better place if they could carry on unmolested by American airstrikes that can only do more harm than good.

# ? Oct 1, 2014 21:22

flashman: Dec 16, 2003

Of course not. The United States fairly bombs all groups guilty of war crimes and religious fundamentalism motivation. Only way to see any hypocrisy in that would be if the USA were funding or supporting such a regime when it suited their interest.

# ? Oct 1, 2014 21:40

Ardennes: May 12, 2002

Dolash posted:

Hm yes sounds terrible, but isn't the real crime that the US is trying to kill those ISIS members who committed that mass murder? Surely the world would be a better place if they could carry on unmolested by American airstrikes that can only do more harm than good.

Maybe not, but there is certainly an argument to be made that the US doesn't really seem to have a much of a gain plan and that collateral damage plays into ISIS' hands. This is not to mention the rather unstable factional dynamics.

It is a mobius strip of death.

# ? Oct 1, 2014 21:44

Rip Testes: Jan 29, 2004; I never forget a face, but in your case I'll be glad to make an exception.

Brown Moses posted:

Here's the YPG with equipment they captured from the Islamic State, who captured it from the Iraqi Army, who was given it by the US.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Ui7CqGf17c

# ? Oct 1, 2014 21:57

Ardennes: May 12, 2002

Well that is about as close to the border as you are going to get.

# ? Oct 1, 2014 21:59

swizz: Oct 10, 2004; I can recall being broke with some friends in Tennessee and deciding to have a party and being able to afford only two-fifths of a $1.75 bourbon called Two Natural, whose label showed dice coming up 5 and 2. Its taste was memorable. The psychological effect was also notable.

haha I noticed that too

# ? Oct 1, 2014 21:59

swizz: Oct 10, 2004; I can recall being broke with some friends in Tennessee and deciding to have a party and being able to afford only two-fifths of a $1.75 bourbon called Two Natural, whose label showed dice coming up 5 and 2. Its taste was memorable. The psychological effect was also notable.

Not sure where my previous dumb post went but just to ensure I didn't somehow break the thread [edit: there it is], here's an IS youtube account with recent videos. Includes an American drone and what Twitter says are several Chechans/Libyans strategizing on a hilltop near Kobane. Also, unfortunately, there is a video of some YPG troops getting caught in the open while retreating. They do not make it, so, you know, here's your warning.

swizz fucked around with this message at 22:18 on Oct 1, 2014

# ? Oct 1, 2014 22:12

My Imaginary GF: Jul 17, 2005; by R. Guyovich

Ardennes posted:

Maybe not, but there is certainly an argument to be made that the US doesn't really seem to have a much of a gain plan and that collateral damage plays into ISIS' hands. This is not to mention the rather unstable factional dynamics.

It is a mobius strip of death.

I can give you several game plans. There are no good outcomes, and all of them start to wobble when you get into 40th order and 50th order contingencies.

ISIS poses a threat to US citizens and US-allied citizens the world over. ISIS' support base is within the Syrian Sunni population. The longer ISIS is allowed the exist, the further its ideological support base will spread. Do we allow ISIS to exist for a hundred years, or do we allow ISIS and its support base to exist for one generation?

There are no easy solutions. Anyone who says there is, is being dishonest or sociopathic.

E:

Brown Moses, do you recognize that as a Turkish or Iraqi border post?

# ? Oct 1, 2014 22:22

Xandu: Feb 19, 2006; It's hard to be humble when you're as great as I am.

It's Rabia.

# ? Oct 1, 2014 22:25

fade5: May 31, 2012; by exmarx

tsa posted:

Because in Libya it was against a fairly conventional military, which always goes well for the US. Battling insurgencies that integrate into the population, not so much. And Libya is a laughable success, anyway; essentially Libya was no different than Iraq except we left right after we did the easy part of blowing up lovely outdated military crap. It's pretty funny hearing people go 'bbbbut give it some time it doesn't get better overnight' --completely indistinguishable from the Bush cry once it turned out Iraq wasn't going to be sugar and rainbows.

Supporting one side of the civil war in a middle eastern country is pretty much exactly why we are here in the first place. But you are right that what we are trying to do instead is completely schizophrenic.

But suppose we did help, we get rid of Assad. Then what? Syria would be in the same place as Iraq post-Saddam, the genociders become the genocided etc.

Well, the FAA/Assad forces would start to fall apart without their leader, meaning that the rebels could start to fight back better against them. Also, the various rebel factions would have to deal with a lot fewer airstrikes and gassings by Assad's forces. So, the rebels go from having to be on the defensive to going on the offense, and can fight back against both the remaining Assad forces and ISIS better. After a little while, Syria would probably start to look more like Libya, with local bands of militias controlling various areas, and scattered fighting everywhere.

Also, the Alawite factions would probably start getting killed by the more vicious rebel factions, which really sucks. I have no answer to this one, since there's going to be mass ethnic cleansing/genocide no matter who ends up triumphing. However, the Syrian rebels are a lot less organized than Assad's forces, which would limit the amount of killing/ethnic cleansing they can do. Yes, I am aware this sounds (and is) completely horrible; there is no "good" solution, so I just want to see if a less bad solution can be reached. :smith:

However, my "strategy" (such as it is), can't start happening if the current Syrian strategy continues to be as schizophrenic as it is.

Oh, and back the Kurds to the hilt; they're the closest thing to a "good guy" in this.

E: I'm not saying my strategy is the right/best way to doing this, it's just what I personally think is the least bad option to move forward. I fully admit I could be wrong and that there's a better way, or that things still gently caress up even worse if/when Assad is killed.

The Middle East is hard, all right? :mad:

fade5 fucked around with this message at 22:42 on Oct 1, 2014

# ? Oct 1, 2014 22:27

My Imaginary GF: Jul 17, 2005; by R. Guyovich

fade5 posted:

Well, the FAA/Assad forces would start to fall apart without their leader, meaning that the rebels could start to fight back better against them. Also, the various rebel factions would have to deal with a lot fewer airstrikes and gassings by Assad's forces. So, the rebels go from having to defensive to going on the offense, and can fight against both the remaining Assad forces and ISIS better. After a little while, Syria would probably start to look more like Libya, with local bands of militias controlling various areas, and scattered fighting everywhere.

Also, the Alawite factions would probably start getting killed by the more vicious rebel factions, which really sucks. I have no answer to this one, since there's going to be mass ethnic cleansing/genocide no matter who ends up triumphing. However, the Syrian rebels are a lot less organized than Assad's forces, which would the amount of killing/ethnic cleansing they can do. Yes, I am aware this sounds (and is) completely horrible; there is no "good" solution, so I just want to see if a less bad solution can be reached.

However, my "strategy" (such as it is), can't start happening if the current Syrian strategy continues to be as schizophrenic as it is.

Oh, and back the Kurds to the hilt; they're the closest thing to a "good guy" in this.

The Kurds and Alawites have developed state-level institutions and population bases of indiginous local support. To destroy the Alawite state without the institutional infrastructure to replace it is to invite a century of humanitarian disasters.

I diagree that lack of organization limits ability to commit genocide. Sometimes, it enhances that ability. Especially when there is broad support for, or lack of action against, genocide in a majority population group with minority institutional power.

My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 22:32 on Oct 1, 2014

# ? Oct 1, 2014 22:30

Snipee: Mar 27, 2010

A Kurdish friend of mine said that Turkey secured the release of the hostages by providing Daesh with military hardware. Is there any evidence for this? Has anyone heard anything similar/know if this is possible at all?

# ? Oct 2, 2014 01:00

My Imaginary GF: Jul 17, 2005; by R. Guyovich

Snipee posted:

A Kurdish friend of mine said that Turkey secured the release of the hostages by providing Daesh with military hardware. Is there any evidence for this? Has anyone heard anything similar/know if this is possible at all?

I've heard similar rumors, it makes logical sense and is in line with Turkish foreign policy: I'd wait for Brown Moses to post verification, however, I anticipate verification as more likely an outcome than not.

# ? Oct 2, 2014 01:20

Cat Mattress: Jul 14, 2012; by Cyrano4747

There's been a number of indirect gifts. Something is given to a rebel group, that then transfers it to JaN or Daesh.

# ? Oct 2, 2014 01:25

Volkerball: Oct 15, 2009; by FactsAreUseless

Snipee posted:

A Kurdish friend of mine said that Turkey secured the release of the hostages by providing Daesh with military hardware. Is there any evidence for this? Has anyone heard anything similar/know if this is possible at all?

It's one of those things thats been repeated so many times that people accept it as true. No evidence to suggest it whatsoever. All the stories came out during the beginning of the siege of Kobane when the hostages were still being held, and they were just sharing pictures of trains with tanks on them, like they'd do that and expect the US to not notice, and pictures of ISIS in Turkey to show that Turkey intentionally has leaky borders. It's been rumored for years. I think it's older than ISIS even. Kurds were saying Turkey was coordinating with JaN and Ghuraba al-sham on the first attacks after Kurds took control of the north after Assad largely withdrew.

The reasoning behind JaN coming to an agreement with ISIS.

# ? Oct 2, 2014 01:42

Red Crown: Oct 20, 2008; Pretend my finger's a knife.

http://en.annahar.com/article/176253-is-announces-it-intends-to-open-a-consululate-in-istanbul-leaving-erdogens-press

quote:

The Turkish government spokesperson said on Sunday in a press conference that nearly 50 Islamist merciless detainees including a family of a prominent warlord were set free in a swap deal and in return, all Turkish hostages were released and reunited with their families. But when pushed on the subject of the consulate, his media training let him down flat. The government spokesman reiterated that he is not authorized to neither confirm nor reject reports about the probable opening of ISIS consulate in Istanbul.

If this pans out, the blowback will be staggering. An absolute shitstorm.

# ? Oct 2, 2014 02:28

MothraAttack: Apr 28, 2008

Blustering from ISIS. Turkey wouldn't let them have a consulate, especially when they might be invading ISIS territory within the week.

# ? Oct 2, 2014 02:46

Tiny Timbs: Sep 6, 2008

Niedar posted:

It gets even worse.

So when a country engages a military target does the thinking boil down to a strict checkbook balancing or are there factors like, for instance, what that asset would mean to the opposition if it was allowed to engage, subdue, and rout friendly forces?

Tiny Timbs fucked around with this message at 03:01 on Oct 2, 2014

# ? Oct 2, 2014 02:51

the JJ: Mar 31, 2011

GENDERWEIRD GREEDO posted:

So when a country engages a military target does the thinking boil down to a strict checkbook balancing or are there factors like, for instance, what that asset would mean to the opposition if it was allowed to engage, subdue, and route friendly forces?

Rout goddamn it.

Unless they are the politest terrorists ever, helpfully providing maps and directing traffic.

# ? Oct 2, 2014 02:58

My Imaginary GF: Jul 17, 2005; by R. Guyovich

Red Crown posted:

http://en.annahar.com/article/176253-is-announces-it-intends-to-open-a-consululate-in-istanbul-leaving-erdogens-press

If this pans out, the blowback will be staggering. An absolute shitstorm.

There is only one answer that is acceptable when asked whether your nation has a consulate or diplomatic relations with ISIS: No.

Anything else is unacceptable and indicates a non-no answer.

E:

MothraAttack posted:

Blustering from ISIS. Turkey wouldn't let them have a consulate, especially when they might be invading ISIS territory within the week.

Would ISIS regard a Turkish intervention as a force to be met with armed resistance? I am unsure.

My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 03:02 on Oct 2, 2014

# ? Oct 2, 2014 02:59

Tiny Timbs: Sep 6, 2008

the JJ posted:

Rout goddamn it.

Unless they are the politest terrorists ever, helpfully providing maps and directing traffic.

Yeah, sorry.

# ? Oct 2, 2014 03:02

Chokes McGee: Aug 7, 2008; This is Urotsuki.

the JJ posted:

Unless they are the politest terrorists ever, helpfully providing maps and directing traffic.

"In twenty miles, turn left at the IED."

# ? Oct 2, 2014 03:14

Berke Negri: Feb 15, 2012; Les Ricains tuent et moi je mue
Mao Mao
Les fous sont rois et moi je bois
Mao Mao
Les bombes tonnent et moi je sonne
Mao Mao
Les bebes fuient et moi je fuis
Mao Mao

Hahaha non-committal on whether Turkey is letting ISIS open up a consulate :suicide:

It's like everything coming out of Istanbul is worse than it was the day before.

# ? Oct 2, 2014 04:01

Ardennes: May 12, 2002

Berke Negri posted:

Hahaha non-committal on whether Turkey is letting ISIS open up a consulate

It's like everything coming out of Istanbul is worse than it was the day before.

The capital of Turkey is Ankara.

# ? Oct 2, 2014 04:10

Berke Negri: Feb 15, 2012; Les Ricains tuent et moi je mue
Mao Mao
Les fous sont rois et moi je bois
Mao Mao
Les bombes tonnent et moi je sonne
Mao Mao
Les bebes fuient et moi je fuis
Mao Mao

Ardennes posted:

The capital of Turkey is Ankara.

You're right.

edit: With all the pressure from opposition groups on the ground to make some effort against the regime, what would be a likely immediate reaction from Russia and Iran be if America started directing air strikes towards Assad forces?

Berke Negri fucked around with this message at 04:19 on Oct 2, 2014

# ? Oct 2, 2014 04:15

Snipee: Mar 27, 2010

Berke Negri posted:

Hahaha non-committal on whether Turkey is letting ISIS open up a consulate

It's like everything coming out of Istanbul is worse than it was the day before.

I'm so confused. How the hell could Turkey get away with this bullshit and still stay in NATO?

# ? Oct 2, 2014 04:33

MothraAttack: Apr 28, 2008

Guys the press secretary was blindsided by the question and it was officially denied. It's clearly ISIS trolling Turkey.

But yeah, Turkish policy on ISIS is so opaque that it makes opposition skepticism almost seem reasonable.

# ? Oct 2, 2014 04:39

Snipee: Mar 27, 2010

MothraAttack posted:

Guys the press secretary was blindsided by the question and it was officially denied. It's clearly ISIS trolling Turkey.

Can you source this?

# ? Oct 2, 2014 04:48

Dolash: Oct 23, 2008; aNYWAY,
tHAT'S REALLY ALL THERE IS,
tO REPORT ON THE SUBJECT,
oF ME GETTING HURT,

Any hard evidence of Turkey providing support for ISIS in even the most indirect, deniable way would ignite a shitstorm of such proportion that it's inconceivable to me that anyone in the government would think the pros outweigh the cons. It's something an official spokesperson would not bother spouting mealy-mouthed half-denials of since it's something they could absolutely not be caught doing and there's no point in provisioning against that scenario.

There's almost certainly some ISIS supporters in Turkey and there might be people running money or guns to them, people are already pretty upset about the porous border, but these are things Turkey's failed to do anything about rather than actively encouraged.

Although at the rate gossip's been flying around I could almost see Turkey attacking ISIS in Syria just as a way of saying "See?! We told you guys we weren't working with them! Get off our backs already!"

# ? Oct 2, 2014 04:49

Berke Negri: Feb 15, 2012; Les Ricains tuent et moi je mue
Mao Mao
Les fous sont rois et moi je bois
Mao Mao
Les bombes tonnent et moi je sonne
Mao Mao
Les bebes fuient et moi je fuis
Mao Mao

It'd be unbelievable for Turkey to be the first state to recognize ISIS, it's just a bad slip up and Turkey has been so lousy playing ball it seems with everyone else it is exactly what ISIS would like to get out of a statement like that.

# ? Oct 2, 2014 04:51

MothraAttack: Apr 28, 2008

Snipee posted:

Can you source this?

From the article:

The Turkish president said in an interview with state media dismissed many reports alleging that his government is keen to establish a formal relation with ISIS, lashing out at the opposition.

Edit: literally the only evidence is a now-suspended Twitter account that claimed to be representing ISIS in Istanbul (that's where the Aydinlik got its reporting from). I wouldn't read too much into this without anything else.

MothraAttack fucked around with this message at 05:02 on Oct 2, 2014

# ? Oct 2, 2014 04:58

My Imaginary GF: Jul 17, 2005; by R. Guyovich

MothraAttack posted:

From the article:

The Turkish president said in an interview with state media dismissed many reports alleging that his government is keen to establish a formal relation with ISIS, lashing out at the opposition.

Edit: literally the only evidence is a now-suspended Twitter account that claimed to be representing ISIS in Istanbul (that's where the Aydinlik got its reporting from). I wouldn't read too much into this without anything else.

Annahar posted:

" We shouldn't be remiss in understanding the great and risky mission our intelligence service accomplished in a meticulous prison exchange deal , thus we are sorry for those corrupt politicians criticizing us for negotiating with militants for the sake of securing the release of our brave diplomats" said the populist Turkish leader during Sunday night interview with TRT.

Sounds like a non-denial denial, when I need to see an unequivocale denial.

# ? Oct 2, 2014 05:03

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 16, 2024 01:09

MothraAttack: Apr 28, 2008

I'd want to see more proof than isisturkey@gmail.com.

http://www.aydinlikdaily.com/Detail/ISIS-Opens-A-Consulate-In-Turkey/4576#.VCzQMWK9KK1

MothraAttack fucked around with this message at 05:11 on Oct 2, 2014

# ? Oct 2, 2014 05:05

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Middle East Thread of Despair: More Broken Than Syria

«‹›3125 »