Military Review

The US Department of State cannot choose between Erdogan and the Kurds ...

42
As it is known, the President of Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdogan recently indirectly appealed to the United States with a demand to make an unequivocal choice when answering the question: “With whom is the United States: with me (with Erdogan) or with the Kurds?” the president, because in fact he is trying to oppose himself to the whole ethnos, whose millions of representatives inhabit Turkey.


The US Department of State cannot choose between Erdogan and the Kurds ...


During a briefing by State Department spokesman John Kirby in his address from the correspondent Russia Today Gayane Chichakian raised the question of what comments States are prepared to make regarding the demands of Erdogan. Kirby, who has recently been answering questions from journalists RT and the Associated Press, falling into a clearly overexcited nervous state, decided to simply shy away from the answer. According to Kirby, "the United States works with all parties (both with Erdogan and the Kurds), for the United States both sides are partners."

However, an attempt to avoid an answer was not accepted by the journalist RT. Gayane Chichakian decided to clarify: how is it that the United States cooperates with Ankara and the Kurds, although Ankara calls the Kurds terrorists? Does this mean that the United States supports the "terrorists"?

From the question of Gayane Chichakyan:
How do you handle a situation in which one of your ally calls another your ally a terrorist?


After a pause, Mr. Kirby said that here, it turns out, everything is very simple: the United States does not consider the Kurdish formations as terrorists, but consider them, like Turkey, a useful partner in the fight against ISIL.

The position is interesting, especially given the fact that the United States does not express a single drop of concerns about the fact that dozens of Turks are killing Kurds in the south-eastern provinces of the country. It turns out that if the Kurds are US partners, the United States will not express concerns about the fact that if the Kurds start fighting back against the Turks?

American diplomacy, she is so ...
Photos used:
www.youtube.com
42 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Mihalich17
    Mihalich17 9 February 2016 12: 35
    +5
    Americans, like that joke monkey:
    - And I am beautiful and smart!
    But what am I, "burst" now or what ??? )))
    Although...
    "I want to, and inject, and Putin does not order!" ;)))
    1. The black
      The black 9 February 2016 12: 37
      +7
      Americans do not care. For them, between the Turkey and the Kurds - the crotch. smile
      1. Thrall
        Thrall 9 February 2016 12: 53
        +6
        The other day, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan recently indirectly turned to the United States with a demand to make an unambiguous choice when answering the question: “Who is the United States with me (with Erdogan) or with the Kurds?”

        Straight "love triangle" of some kind smile
        1. Baikonur
          Baikonur 9 February 2016 12: 58
          +1
          Erdogan: "Maybe the daisy will be enough to play? I remember here, I don't remember here ..."
          (Vasily Alibabaevich, film "Gentlemen of Fortune")
          1. velikoros-xnumx
            velikoros-xnumx 9 February 2016 13: 16
            0
            Quote: Baikonur
            Erdogan: "Maybe the daisy will be enough to play? I remember here, I don't remember here ..."
            (Vasily Alibabaevich, film "Gentlemen of Fortune")

            And another phrase came to my mind, the father of "Uncle Fedor" from the movie "Three from Prostokvashino":
            “I choose you.” I have known you for a long time, but I see this cat for the first time.
            1. Tatyana
              Tatyana 9 February 2016 13: 21
              +6
              Everything is twisted here for US interests. The United States is not going to leave BV and give someone its sphere of influence.
              The USA is conducting its DOUBLE BV game with its partners.
              On the one hand, the USA provided ISIS support in order to put pressure on partners in the region. At the same time, ISIS support for the USA is also an American investment in Turkey, on which Turkey found itself not only on the oil “needle”, but also on the ISIS gangster “needle”.
              And on the other hand, when ISIS began to get a little out of American control and show independence, for example, captured Mosul and opposed Iraqi Kurdistan, American imperialism became worried and launched its own company. However, the ultimate goal of the USA is NOT the FULL destruction of ISIS - the Americans are simply trying to bring ISIS to a level that the United States could control. And at the same time, American imperialism takes the opportunity to restore its influential position in the region by giving its support to Kurds.
              It must be remembered that the Kurdistan Workers' Party is practically the only SECOND Muslim power in the region that enjoys the support of the masses. The USA has full sense to make its stake on the BVK on the PKK - to oblige it with its help and thereby subordinate it to its influence.
              Hence all the snotty appeals of Turkey and ISIS to the United States and to "their" geopolitical Western structures.
              The US State Department will balance between Turkey, ISIS and the Kurds in their interests, depending on changes in the balance of power in the region, which, in particular, depend on the actions of the Russian Air Force to support the Syrian government forces.
        2. Reserve officer
          Reserve officer 9 February 2016 13: 13
          +3
          "The US State Department cannot choose between Erdogan and the Kurds ..."

          Just like in America itself. US authorities also could not choose between white settlers and Indians. Therefore, the latter were simply destroyed. And the problem was solved by itself.
      2. Flat5160
        Flat5160 9 February 2016 20: 00
        0
        No, both in Turkey and with the Kurds you can play with us for a long time (for the future). Who and how will feed the Kurds with their determination on autonomy or get along with Turkey, but here either pan or disappeared. You still have to choose. In this case, you will not sit on two chairs, but you will sit on one, we will be on the other. Here is the dilemma, where it is cheaper and without a miss, although on both sides we have many advantages.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Woodman
      Woodman 9 February 2016 12: 49
      +1
      Americans, like that joke monkey:
      - And beautiful and smart!


      This is the first thing that occurred to me after I read the title of the article ...

      The United States does not express a single drop of concern that Turks are killing Kurds in dozens of southeastern provinces in dozens


      The states were in a very unpleasant position ... That RT would have fanned this topic in the West, but louder ...
    4. Finches
      Finches 9 February 2016 13: 01
      +6
      But Psaki had a choice and she took advantage of it in order to avoid answers more intelligently .... laughing
      1. The black
        The black 9 February 2016 13: 32
        +3
        Yes, sorry. Psaki no. She would have ruined ... laughing
    5. PKK
      PKK 9 February 2016 13: 09
      +1
      Erdogan is not a politician, so the choice is clear. Putin and the straits for Russia! We will not offend America. We will let their ships pass into the Black Sea pool. No offense!
    6. Foresterer
      Foresterer 9 February 2016 13: 23
      +1
      The problem of such a choice is eternal, but of the two Americans always choose the third, ugly and stupid.
      1. marna
        marna 9 February 2016 14: 43
        +1
        Quote: Foresterer
        The problem of such a choice is eternal, but of the two Americans always choose the third, ugly and stupid.

        Yourself.
  2. Mainbeam
    Mainbeam 9 February 2016 12: 36
    +2
    Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan

    Far from him to Lavrov; and the State Department spokesman John Kirby is still a diplomat.

    Is the US cooperating with Ankara and the Kurds, although Ankara calls the Kurds terrorists? Does this mean that the US supports the "terrorists"?

    Gayane Chichakyan asks completely non-diplomatic and intolerant questions! How can the State Deputies explain to the plebeians their exclusivity in terrorist activities on a democratic basis, which sows democracy all over the world exclusively for the good and for the prosperity of the peoples of the world ?!
    .
  3. Uncle VasyaSayapin
    Uncle VasyaSayapin 9 February 2016 12: 36
    +1
    Who is he? States to ask questions. "Partner" USA? So relax and have fun.
  4. Smoked
    Smoked 9 February 2016 12: 37
    0
    That would have torn them apart, in an attempt to decide.
    1. The black
      The black 9 February 2016 12: 39
      +3
      Washington has long made its choice-this is oil, and who will produce it for them do not care! Who cares who changes the goods for paper? laughing
    2. Uncle VasyaSayapin
      Uncle VasyaSayapin 9 February 2016 12: 42
      +1
      Yes, they decided: e *** all in a row whom they can.
  5. Artem shlykov
    Artem shlykov 9 February 2016 12: 38
    +4
    Circus ... DB © Lavrov.
  6. horoh
    horoh 9 February 2016 12: 39
    +1
    Erdogan, Americans only together with Americans. Everything else is just interests.
  7. YGV-97219
    YGV-97219 9 February 2016 12: 39
    +1
    Trying to sit on two chairs usually ends in a fall!
    1. marna
      marna 9 February 2016 15: 00
      +1
      Quote: yugv-xnumx
      Trying to sit on two chairs usually ends in a fall!

      But not for the Americans. They usually take a step to the side and start someone in their place, observe, express concerns, give unnecessary advice, call for an answer, impose sanctions, and then return to the moment of sharing the cake. In the absence of this cake, just clog. And so it will be as long as the world is hawking and not giving them their hands ... and their heads. Schematically, all this resembles the behavior of a spoiled child in a classroom, where his mother is a class teacher. If mom, of course, is a so-so teacher.
  8. Samen
    Samen 9 February 2016 12: 42
    +2
    How do you handle a situation in which one of your ally calls another your ally a terrorist?

    It's very simple: they knocked their heads together and wait until the region becomes empty. Divide and Conquer - in Action!
  9. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 9 February 2016 12: 42
    +2
    The speech of a representative of the State Department is like a quiz in which you need to guess the correct one from several answers. But in their prepared answers you often cannot find the right one, especially if the question concerns Russia. And the United States helps someone as long as it is beneficial to them. Then, overnight, they can completely forget about their "friend" or "ally."
  10. EvgNik
    EvgNik 9 February 2016 12: 42
    0
    American diplomacy, she is so ...

    Yeah, such ... None.
  11. sgg
    sgg 9 February 2016 12: 43
    +1
    The behavior of the Turkish partner is a headache for the United States.
  12. aszzz888
    aszzz888 9 February 2016 12: 46
    0
    State Department spokesman John Kirby


    Stump, dogs s.at! This muddy mug with a cock-voice got it! wassat
  13. iouris
    iouris 9 February 2016 12: 56
    +2
    I would also have difficulty making a choice. We need to ask Psaki.
  14. 31rus
    31rus 9 February 2016 12: 58
    +1
    Dear, for a long time I have been refuting the US doctrine of the so-called controlled chaos, the doctrine theoretically can and does exist, but the execution is not important, there are many examples, but the essence is one to ruin it easily, and what is difficult for such a power, but to create something or even I wish I could bring my own policy to its logical conclusion, this is something fantastic, there are many examples: Afghanistan, Iraq, multiple color revolutions, so they cannot make up their minds with the Kurds, but here they all just throw the Kurds, "play around" and throw, the same with Turkey, this is already their official policy
  15. AID.S
    AID.S 9 February 2016 13: 01
    0
    Quote: Lesovik

    The states were in a very unpleasant position ... That RT would have fanned this topic in the West, but louder ...

    And we are in the same position with respect to Armenia and Azerbaijan in Karabakh, recently we were "in the same place" with Georgia and Abkhazia. It's just not the time to make a choice, circumstances do not force. And this is not at all an unpleasant situation, the states control the situation, they have problems there is not, and most likely the options have been worked out.
  16. Odysseus
    Odysseus 9 February 2016 13: 03
    +5
    The meaning of the US policy is clear - they create all over the world "problem points", "zones of chaos", draw as many countries as possible into these "zones", push them against each other, and they themselves act as arbiters in emerging conflicts. all their competitors, while America appears as an "island of order."
    So the US really simultaneously supports both Turkey and the Kurds, as well as the Saudis and ISIS and the "moderate opposition", while they are always ready to abandon any of their "allies" in any change in the balance of power.
    That's just to publicly announce such a policy is problematic, hence their slurred mooing in response to a direct question, and who do you support?
  17. Hooks
    Hooks 9 February 2016 13: 10
    0
    And where does he (John Kirby) have psaki beads? Hussars, keep quiet!
  18. afrikanez
    afrikanez 9 February 2016 13: 12
    +1
    The US Department of State cannot choose between Erdogan and the Kurds ...
    And all because he doesn’t really need either one. Well, if only for the good of the Americans work, so to speak.
  19. lysyj bob
    lysyj bob 9 February 2016 13: 19
    +1
    Why should they choose? For them, everything is a bargaining chip. They will have both of them in their interests and merge as unnecessary.
  20. Papapg
    Papapg 9 February 2016 13: 21
    +1
    Quote: Black
    Americans do not care. For them, between the Turkey and the Kurds - the crotch.

    For the Americans, that the Kurds, that the Turks are all one, they are for American superhuman and saviors of the world like checkers on the board when playing Chapaev.
  21. Alekseir162
    Alekseir162 9 February 2016 13: 22
    0
    Recently, Tayyip Erdogan indirectly turned to the United States with a demand to make an unambiguous choice when answering the question: “Who is the United States with me (with Erdogan) or with the Kurds?”

    Yeah. Small bug, but smelly. Well, since the SGA is not used to them, that is not a friend, then whatever ...
  22. Red_Hamer
    Red_Hamer 9 February 2016 13: 46
    0
    Uninteresting dude, some kind of boiled fish eye, when Jen pissed, her face turned red. Give back the people psaki.
  23. tehnokrat
    tehnokrat 9 February 2016 13: 46
    +4
    Quote: horoh
    Erdogan, Americans only together with Americans. Everything else is just interests.

    States "walk on corpses"; no allies, only interests. Remember, in Convoy PQ17, Churchill dictates: “The enemy can always be deceived. You can deceive your own people, for their own good. But you can never cheat an ally. " Then, after a pause: “Although it is sometimes very difficult to do”, and to the secretary: “This is not necessary to write.”
    Did Russia have to intercede for the Balkan Slavs in 1876? And in 1914? wouldn’t it be better to mobilize and enter East Prussia on the 45th day, according to the plan, and not on the 15th?
    Well, at least on the 30th! Well, the allies would not have had a "miracle on the Marne", much would have gone differently. Better yet: wouldn't it be more correct to unite with Germany against France and "our best friend" - Britain?
    What did Russia get after these wars? Shame, humiliation and collapse. But - you can’t deceive an ally.
    But when the allies surrender each other in the enemy’s camp, this is good. This means that we are fighting with worthless scoundrels, and this is the right thing!
  24. Mercenary
    Mercenary 9 February 2016 14: 41
    +5
    A classic of Anglo-Saxon politics - Mandatory counterweight to an ally, and if that (counterweight) tame unbelted ally.
    China- Taiwan
    India - Pakistan
    From Korea to South Korea
    Turkey-Kurds, etc. (by the way Russia-Ukraine on the same list)
  25. wasjasibirjac
    wasjasibirjac 9 February 2016 16: 35
    +1
    According to Kirby, "The United States works with all parties (both Erdogan and the Kurds), for the United States both sides are partners."
    Well, a harem appeared - Turkey - the first wife, Kurds - the second. Americans do not refuse anyone.
  26. syndicalist
    syndicalist 9 February 2016 18: 30
    0
    Offer a tote. I put a hundred on the choice of Kurds