He is a civilian official. Openly gay individuals were never outright banned from those posts. It is a small footnote in a pedestrian news story, nothing more.
You guys are looking to stir the right-wing pot when there is no stew to stir. Now, if we were talking about an openly gay UCC commander, that would be a huge deal and a historic news story.
I think we are gradually moving to a situation where guys can't sit down in Washington, Moscow,and London and redraw those boundaries. I for one welcome our irrelevance. The US position in the Middle east is zugzwang and the sooner we're forced to realize it the better.
I'd stick up for the Kurds because they've been our best allies.
But to give some idea of the complexity, supporting the Kurds then alienates the Turks who are the closest thing we have to a powerful regional power broker, so then we undercut our opportunities to influence diplomatically which is how Cheney destabilized the region and created ISIS in the first place with his hamfisted "get rid of Sadam, torture and bomb" foreign policy.
Adding more players probably doesn't make a situation any less chaotic. The refugee crisis is an opportunity for the West to demonstrate to the Muslim world that we are not inherently at war with them and have the good will to help them. In terms of hearts and minds it's essential that we help them. Plus the fact that it's, ya know, kinda our fault in the first place.
Which I don't get because if you give the Kurds their own homeland in another country it ought to lessen the need to carve out territory in Turkey. Or put another way the Turkish govt can argue there's already a homeland over the border so they don't need another one. I'd trade annoyed Turks for some stability in the part of two disasterous countries. Gotta take your victories where you can, and right now these are the only people showing any iota of promise.
Which I don't get because if you give the Kurds their own homeland in another country it ought to lessen the need to carve out territory in Turkey. Or put another way the Turkish govt can argue there's already a homeland over the border so they don't need another one.
Pull out now. Done with all of them. ****ing Saudi's won't take any refugee's? The hell with all of them.
It doesn't always work that way. The Kurds living in eastern Turkey don't want to move, they want to keep their homes and be in Kurdistan. Or at least that's what the PKK wants and what the Turks are afraid of. Turkey is only 70% Turkic and there may be some truth that Turkey is worried about the Kurds peeling off the east and Greek revanchists then reviving that ancient rivalry and wanting to peel off the Ionian coast. Plus I'm sure there are hardcore Turkish reactionaries who would then use that to push a radical backlash. The Turks probably see the status quo as the safest path, and they're probably right.
Not to mention that partitioning Iraq just makes Iran even more powerful.
Or, even more simply, the same logic ought to convince the Israelis to finally accept a two state solution but, even leaving Bibi and the gorillas aside for a moment, even sane Israelis see the risk of a sovereign power base and staging ground for Palestinian attacks (see: Lebanon, Hezbollah).
I think we are gradually moving to a situation where guys can't sit down in Washington, Moscow,and London and redraw those boundaries. I for one welcome our irrelevance. The US position in the Middle east is zugzwang and the sooner we're forced to realize it the better.
You're sounding like Pat Buchanan. Do you need the antidote?
Give it time.
I have faith in you guys.
Saudi Arabia is one of the worst countries on earth and might be the worst among the more first world states.
They are literally crucifying and beheading a guy because he spoke out against their government.
Crucifying. 21st century. What the **** man?