What are your thoughts on the Kurds and Rojava? - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

All general discussion about politics that doesn't belong in any of the other forums.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

#14848726
Well, overall I like the Kurds and the Rojava. I do not like their politics per se but I feel they seek to create a stable and better footing in the Middle East and ultimately that will be better for the region that has been war torn for thousands of years. I am especially supportive of the Lions of Rojava unit, the foreign fighters, as many from America and the UK have joined their cause. I guess, however, my opinions on the matter might have less to do with "support the Kurd/Rojava mission" and more to do with "@#$% ISIS".
#14849115
skinster wrote:If this is about partition of Syria, I oppose it. :)

Creating Kurdistan would ultimately lead to partition of Syria, Turkey and Iran.
The Kurds do not have a homeland, they are minorities in all those countries.
They want to have their own country.

Edited to add : and Iraq of course.
Last edited by Ter on 06 Oct 2017 04:05, edited 2 times in total.
#14849118
Twice now, the US has used promises to the Kurds to rally support for a war against Iraq, and twice...

The situation is a mess... Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Syria all have dogs in the race, so the Kurds really don't have a chance for independence. What I believe they are doing now is getting an autonomous state in Iraq, but that still leaves the other 3 very angry at the Kurds in their borders.
#14849201
I support these Indo-Europeans in their struggle against their Semitic oppressors. Iraq and modern Syria have been Semitic supremacist states since their creation. All true anti racists are obliged to support the Kurdish struggle for freedom.
#14849292
@Rich

You don't know what Indo-European is do you? You associate Indo-European with European and picture some white, Eastern European and decided that these were the Indo-Europeans of yonder until the evil Semites attacked. You have no idea how far that is from the truth. First off, Indo-Europeans were diverse as fuck. There wasn't one race known as "the Indo-Europeans". The term Indo-Europeans simply refers to a bunch of tribes that walked around the area in between Asia and Europe for a while and settled there. It does not refer to an ethnicity as many believe. Second, many Indo-Europeans were not white at all. They were darker in skin then Semites. You can see this clearly when you compare old Persian miniatures and Sassanid paintings with newer Persian miniatures after Arab beauty standards became dominant.

Furthermore, the areas in which Iraq and Syria exist (I'll strongman your statement that modern Iraq and Syria were semitic supremacist states since their creation since I don't think you're stupid enough to believe that Arab = Semitic) were historically not supremacist in the slightest. If they were, you would not see such a large amount of non-semites in the Syria and Iraq. If the Assyrian and Babylonian Empire were supremacist, they were horrible at being supremacist. Furthermore, the Assyrian and Babylonian Empires and even modern Iraq and Syria do not possess the capabilities to exterminate their population. They could enforce institutional racism in their major cities, but they do not have the ability to eliminate all non-Semites.

Also, if Syria and Iraq were really Semitic supremacist, why would they enslave an entire Semitic population and try to destroy a Semitic country several times?

I don't think you understand Kurdistan at all or it's political philosophy. This is proof you have not even bothered to read the links I gave in the OP. A nation state of Kurdistan would be against the entire philosophy of it's political system since Rojava is anarchist and anarchism is against the establishment of any form of authority, including the establishment of the nation state. Rojava wishes to be apart of wider Syria rather than be it's own state. It simply wants complete autonomy and be recognized as a legitimate polity. That is all.

Many liberals here support the Kurdish struggle for freedom. This means that all liberals here are true anti-racists while you, (I assume you'll change your mind about the Kurds after you read this post. If you don't it'll be pretty embarrassing for you) are a true racist.


@PATRIOTZER0

I don't necessarily like their political system but I do find it fascinating and find some of it's ideas good for the Middle East. This is the first time anarchist ideology or democratic confederalism is being implemented in real-life as an actually polity. This has never been seen before so of course it'll be interesting to see how it turns out and develops. I also find it's idea that decentralization is necessary for peace in the Middle East to be a very good idea. The Middle East, as it is right now, is extremely diverse both ethnically, politically, and ideologically. It would be a good idea to give everyone who wants it, a state or canton that can be governed however they want (as long as it follows the constitution) and let unity be based on economic dependency and military protection rather than ethnicity and religious sect.
#14849294
@Ter @skinster

No it would not. Particularly Iran and Turkey. The Kurdish territories of Iran and Turkey are better off separated from them rather than apart of them. Turkey has to deal with revolts and an uncooperative population and Iran has to deal with administrating another province that it can't really administrate. Syria and Iraq may be balkanized regardless if the Kurds form their own country but there is also a chance they could be saved. A strong Kurdistan with a significant Arab population (as it will have) can potentially act as a stronghold or defender of Syria and Iraq against potential aggressors and proxy wars. The biggest aggressors in Syria right now is Turkey and Saudi Arabia. Kurdistan can potentially put a stop to that aggression and bring stability to Syria and Iraq.

So you better hope your ass that Kurdistan does not become a thing. It may just be the catalyst to all your dreams of the ways the Middle East may suffer.

EDIT: Last lines refers to Ter, not you skinster.
#14849312
I'm personally split on the topic of Kurdish independence.
I do support them having a homeland of their own independent of foreign rule in one hand, in the other hand, I believe Iran should (EDIT:NOT) give away its natural boundaries on the Zagros mountains as it represents a major line against foreign invaders that hold a great defensive value if used correctly.
And I would dare to say, that the Kurdish people do not hold a claim on any part of the Zagros mountains as in one hand the entire group is only a few centuries old while the Zagros mountains have always been historically the border line of the Persian empire.
Some Kurds try to claim that they trace their origins back to the Medes, but this is a baseless claim that in reality has many evidence standing against it while few to none supporting it. Rather there are considerable evidence to put their origins in central Asia alongside the Azaris, Turks, etc.

The situation is complicated and not easy to solve. However, based on historical precedent and as unlikable as it might sound, it is more likely for the Kurds to be evicted or ethnically cleansed from Iran than for them to take land from Iran, specially one that the Persian empire has held for thousands of years and in the modern age represents a major strategic military position.

For the Kurds in Iraq and Syria, they hold the largest chance of achieving full independence.
In Turkey, they have the chance of achieving independence, but the human cost on their side would be massive as the loss of land for Turkey and the Turks would be intolerable and faced with extreme violence and most possibly ethnic cleansing of the Kurds from many areas.
Last edited by anasawad on 07 Oct 2017 02:22, edited 1 time in total.
#14849313
@Oxymandias

I do not go along with your predictions about Kurdistan.
To start with, we have already seen that the Kurds ethnically clean the territories they liberate in Syria from Arab population.
I think it likely that once the Iraqi and Syrian Kurdish parts become independent, that they might fuse or at least become very close, and apply pressure on Turkey and Iran to release their Kurdish-majority provinces.
This is not going to be realised of course. No country likes to cede territory. Look at how Spain reacts to Catalonian wish for independence, and that is a EU country.
I agree with you that there will be foreseen but also unforeseen consequences if the Kurds manage to create their homeland in any form.

Foreseen :
Turkey will never accept it and use their military to stop it.
It will also be against the geopolitical policies of Iran

Unforeseen :
It will be interesting because indeed it will change the dynamic of the Middle East.
#14849326
@Ter

1. And your evidence is? Rojava has several Arab majority cantons and non-Kurdish cantons of wish have equal representation in political matters. Sometimes even more so due to their status as minorities. Furthermore if Rojava does do this conservatives and liberals will eat it up and claim that Kurds are blood-thirsty monsters like everyone else in the MidEast (conservatives) or against democratic and western values (liberal). However both conservatives and liberals support Rojava. Why is that if Rojava does involve itself in ethnic cleansing?

2. Yes, that is obvious. But it does not support your point that Iran, Turkey, Syria, and Iraq will suddenly become balkanized immediately after they lose some insignificant territory that they didn't control in the first place.

3. This isn't about the EU Ter, it isn't about the EU at all.

4. You haven't given any other arguments against any of my other predictions. Simply saying "I disagree" is not enough of a good argument, especially in a debate forum such as this one. Responses such as yours don't contribute to the discussion at hand.

5. Rojava has clearly stated it's interest in the well being of Syria and Iraq. In fact, Rojava has a motivation to create a pro-Rojava Mashriq (Mashriq is a geographical location encompassing modern day Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Iraq) or Levant since Rojava cannot survive on it's own. Kurdistan has one of the largest areas of arable land in the MidEast but all that agriculture is useless if there are no buyers. Turkey and Iran will not buy agriculture from Rojava or Kurdistan since Turkey relies on trade and Iran is self-sufficient in terms of agriculture. This is not the case for Syria and Iraq however. Syria and Iraq require produce to survive and dislike the neoliberal trade and unrestricted capitalism that has made the lives of so many Syrians and Iraqi difficult based on the riots of Iraqi farmers against foreign goods that they are unable to compete against.

Kurds want a protectionist Mashriq. One that is as strong as themselves and can contribute to military manners. One that is protectionist but not too protectionist. Think America's WW1-2's command economy or post-war Japan. A country that is protects it's domestic industries but is willing to buy Kurdish goods. Maybe through a deal or a special economic zone between their borders.

6. How can it be unforeseen if you predict it?
#14849331
@anasawad

I agree. It has very good defensive capabilities and this fact is irrefutable. You may also be right that the Kurds may not, in fact, be Indo-European.

But I don't think that's the goal of Rojava or Kurdistan. The president of Rojava has stated that they do not want to be apart from Syria as their own distinct country but rather a autonomous region that is apart of it. This is why Rojava cares so much for the well-being of Syria as a whole because it dependent on it. Kurdistan has historically been self-sufficient on farming and agriculture for many decades and has been apart of many different empires and nations remaining stubbornly independent throughout all those periods. But now it needs to depend on other countries and nations to modernize, to build itself up as an industrialized polity. But it cannot do that when many countries refuse to acknowledge it's existence. Iran never has ever mentioned at all I believe. I didn't even know what a Kurd was until was an adult. Kurds revolting and demanding autonomy is part of a greater issue. Kurds are heavily under-represented and are given no care at all, especially Kurds living in Turkey but they are very dependent on other nations.

So I have a solution, why won't Iran offer autonomy to areas and provinces with Kurdish majorities through a referendum. Those that accept autonomy will still remain in Iran and follow Iran's constitution but they will be given greater freedom that other provinces or areas in Iran. Unless backed by the Iranian Constitution, these autonomous areas will not have certain laws enforced upon them. Yes, this already happens in Iran in non-Kurdish majority places as well however this time it's formalized in these territories and no one has to hide this. I find that in Kurdish majority areas in Iran, lack of the enforcement of law is much more greater than that of other places in Iran (with a few exceptions, you know).
#14849334
@anasawad

Another thing is that I find that your very military focused when discussing certain aspects of Iran. A military focused perspective of Iran is fine and very helpful in today's political climate but I also find that too much of a military focused perspective may draw away attention from other very important issues.

The CIA didn't overthrow Mossadegh through force, they set up an internal coup and exploited the chaotic government of Iran at the time when an atmosphere of uncertainty shrouded most government officials. No one knew who to trust so no one trusted each other. It was very easy to infiltrate Iran due to this and the CIA had no mercy. When Iran's democracy was overthrown, all the hopes and dreams of those Iranians were shattered in an instant.

The moral of the story is, we should focus on strengthening ourselves internally before we strengthen ourselves externally. Internal strength almost always beats external strength in every situation. This is because internal strength means that not only is the country efficient and hard to corrupt, but it also means that, no matter what happens, there will always be a government in that country. A strong, faithful organization of bureaucrats follow a vision, not whoever waves the largest dollar bill.
#14849338
Oxymandias wrote:1. And your evidence is?

I read it on several occasions in the news.

Oxymandias wrote:Why is that if Rojava does involve itself in ethnic cleansing?

Because they strive to realise their own homeland. They probably assume that removing other ethnicities will make their objective more realistic.

Oxymandias wrote:2. Yes, that is obvious. But it does not support your point that Iran, Turkey, Syria, and Iraq will suddenly become balkanized immediately after they lose some insignificant territory that they didn't control in the first place.


If you do not quote me I cannot see what you are answering to.

Oxymandias wrote:3. This isn't about the EU Ter, it isn't about the EU at all.

I know, I know. I mentioned Spain's violence against the Catalonians because it happened just days ago and I wanted to illustrate that if such violence occurs in the EU, we can only imagine what will happen in the Middle East where human rights are so much less respected.

Oxymandias wrote:4. You haven't given any other arguments against any of my other predictions. Simply saying "I disagree" is not enough of a good argument, especially in a debate forum such as this one. Responses such as yours don't contribute to the discussion at hand.

Please quote what you are responding to, like I am doing here. Otherwise I do not know what exactly you are responding to.
You said something about Kurdistan defending Syria and Iraq, that looks very implausible to me.
I thin you are looking at this matter through Iran-coloured glasses.
I don't blame you for that, we each have our background.
And you can leave out the ad hominems.
Oxymandias wrote:5. Rojava has clearly stated it's interest in the well being of Syria and Iraq.

The first and foremost interest of the Kurds is to have their own homeland.
Whatever relations they will have with their neighbours will depend on circumstances.
As for Iraq, I would rather say there is a potential conflict possible about the demarcation of the future borders of Iraqi Kurdistan. The Kurds claim important oil fields in their territory and Iraq has already sent troops to occupy those oil fields.
Oxymandias wrote:Kurdistan has one of the largest areas of arable land in the MidEast but all that agriculture is useless if there are no buyers.

Agricultural products will always find buyers.
Oxymandias wrote:6. How can it be unforeseen if you predict it?

I predicted only those elements that are predictable, i.e. Turkey and Iran's unwillingness to accept/allow an independent Kurdistan to emerge.
There will be many unforeseen events when the borders in the Middle East change. More upheaval most probably. New alliances, maybe new wars ?
#14849406
I read it on several occasions in the news.


And? Can you give me the news articles that reported such a thing? Do you have any hard evidence at all. Rojava's fucking wikipedia page says on it's second paragraph that it's a polyethnic polity:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rojava

Northern Syria is polyethnic and home to sizable ethnic Kurdish, Arab, Syriac-Assyrian and Turkmen populations, with smaller communities of ethnic Armenians, Circassians and Chechens. This diversity is mirrored in its constitution, society and politics. Despite such diversity, Rojava is regarded by Kurdish nationalists as Western Kurdistan (Kurdish: ‎Rojavayê Kurdistanê), one of the four parts of Greater Kurdistan alongside southeastern Turkey (Northern Kurdistan), northern Iraq (Southern Kurdistan), and northwestern Iran (Eastern Kurdistan). It is also considered by Assyrians as Gozarto (meaning Upper Mesopotamia), part of the historical Syriac-Assyrian homeland.


All I need to disprove your point is right here.

Because they strive to realise their own homeland. They probably assume that removing other ethnicities will make their objective more realistic.


Stop taking my quotes out of context. My argument was that it would be impossible for liberals and conservatives to like Rojava because it ethnic cleanses. An ethnic cleansing Rojava would provide too much propaganda material for both conservatives and liberals. Yet I have not seen any negative propaganda against Rojava at all nor have I seen any who hates Rojava.

And please stop spreading lies about Rojava. If you bothered to look up anything about it you would've known that Rojava does not fufill your fantasies for the ME. While Rojava has many issues regarding it's freedom and ethnic diversity there has never been a single occurrence of Rojava ethnic cleansing at all.

I know, I know. I mentioned Spain's violence against the Catalonians because it happened just days ago and I wanted to illustrate that if such violence occurs in the EU, we can only imagine what will happen in the Middle East where human rights are so much less respected.


That's a lie. Pretty much everyone on this forum knows what violence happens in the Middle East considering that you and other conservatives here continuously post any human rights violations that the Middle East has. You should know better than anyone what happens in the Middle East so why would it be necessary for you to illustrate a point that you obviously know isn't necessary to illustrate?

Please quote what you are responding to, like I am doing here. Otherwise I do not know what exactly you are responding to.


Here you go:

I do not go along with your predictions about Kurdistan.


No. 4 was responding to this. You did not give a single reason why you disagreed with my predictions at all, all you did is go on a tangent about the EU and that's about it.

You said something about Kurdistan defending Syria and Iraq, that looks very implausible to me.
I thin you are looking at this matter through Iran-coloured glasses.
I don't blame you for that, we each have our background.
And you can leave out the ad hominems.


Obviously it would seem implausible to you since you know absolutely jackshit about Rojava and you're afraid to know more about Rojava because if you read even the basics of Rojava it would be enough to melt your mind. You haven't even bothered to read the smallest things about Rojava.

What is specifically "Iran-coloured" about my perspective on Rojava? You do realize that it's against Iran's interest to lose control of the Zargo mountains? So obviously this isn't Iran-biased.

The first and foremost interest of the Kurds is to have their own homeland.
Whatever relations they will have with their neighbours will depend on circumstances.
As for Iraq, I would rather say there is a potential conflict possible about the demarcation of the future borders of Iraqi Kurdistan. The Kurds claim important oil fields in their territory and Iraq has already sent troops to occupy those oil fields.


That isn't relevant to my argument at all. Furthermore Rojava wants to be apart of Syria, not removed from it. Do you not know the basic ideas of Rojava? Rojava is anarchist, it does not care about making it's own state because it is against the idea of a state.

Agricultural products will always find buyers.


Not when there's super cheap American and European agriculture that produces more that Kurdistan ever could. Rojava cannot currently compete with the West in terms of agricultural production and Western agricultural goods will continue to be the best and cheapest produce out there. Kurdistan needs a protectionist Syria and Iraq to take those goods. No one is going to bother to buy inferior and expensive Kurdish agriculture when they can get cheap and efficient Western agriculture.

I predicted only those elements that are predictable, i.e. Turkey and Iran's unwillingness to accept/allow an independent Kurdistan to emerge.
There will be many unforeseen events when the borders in the Middle East change. More upheaval most probably. New alliances, maybe new wars ?


Those aren't predictions, Turkey publicly refused to accept Kurdistan and Iran hasn't even mentioned it at all. Everyone knows this. What, were you living under a rock for the past 50 years?
#14849419
@Oxymandias
I have nothing further to say to you.
Your debating style is sub-par and you cannot refrain from personal insults in every second sentence.
Better just follow the news and see what happens in the Region.
It is not going to be to your liking.
#14849423
@Ter

The only insult I have said to you is that you know jackshit about Rojava. That's literally it. You just want to excuse yourself from the debate because you have no evidence to back up your arguments or your points. You have no way to refute the statements I provided.

Please then, enlighten me. Cite me to the news of which you gained your information. Prove to everyone who has seen this thread that you are right about Rojava.

Your reputation is at stake here.
#14849430
@Oxymandias

The Kurds Are Ethnically Cleansing Arabs From Raqqa, And The World Is Silent
https://www.globalvillagespace.com/kurd ... ld-silent/


US Backed YPG Kurds Are Ethnically Cleansing Arabs From Raqqa, and the World Is Silent
https://www.globalresearch.ca/us-backed ... nt/5595067

Amnesty International accuses Kurdish YPG of war crimes
In a 38-page report, "'We Had Nowhere Else to Go': Forced Displacement and Demolition in Northern Syria,” Amnesty International catalogues allegations of forced evictions of Arabs and Turkmens and the destruction of their homes and property. “In some cases, entire villages have been demolished, apparently in retaliation for the perceived support of their Arab or Turkmen residents for the group that calls itself the Islamic State,” Amnesty International noted. Villagers said they were ordered to leave at gunpoint, their livestock shot at. The watchdog used satellite imagery and video footage to verify the claims.

http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/ru/orig ... rimes.html
EU-BREXIT

Theresa May relies on the DUP for a Tory majority[…]

Aren't you being racist against Muslim refugees w[…]

Surely there is someone less controversial than K[…]

Is a corporation a person?

Except that there are ways to give corporate enti[…]