Warum Washingtons kurdischer Schachzug im Iran nach hinten losgehen könnte
Warum Washingtons kurdischer Schachzug im Iran nach hinten losgehen könnte
3 Kommentare
Attempted submissions statement lmao:
Thought this was neat because of conversations I’ve read here about how a ground occupation would be necessary for regime change in Iran, but simultaneously why it probably wouldn’t work out. This article provides more specific reasons that I haven’t heard mentioned yet (TLDR will give Iranian state greater credibility amongst populace as a state with many multi-ethnic challengers while simultaneously discouraging Western-allied regional governments from helping b/c it encourages insurgencies in their own borders)
*“War on the Rocks* is a platform for analysis and debate on strategy, defense, and foreign affairs. It features articles and podcasts produced by an array of writers with deep experience in these matters: top notch scholars who study war, those who have served or worked in war zones, and more than a few who have done it all.“
Yeah. There is a lot that could go wrong with enlisting the Kurds. It might have been easier if the US had not abandoned them before. If they were to gain power in Iran it would be unclear what sort of society it would be. They may in turn use it as a plaform to unify the rest of Kurdistan. Another endless war.
I know they made defeatist articles like this back when Obama armed the Syrian rebels.