Short Cuts America: il blog di Arnaldo Testi

Politica e storia degli Stati Uniti

I Curdi in Normandia? Che cosa ha veramente detto Trump, o almeno avrebbe voluto dire, o almeno intendeva nella sua testa confusa.

llt808-1010-2019-130456-jpg

George Clooney, speaking at a Nordic Business Forum business seminar in Helsinki, Thursday Oct. 10, 2019, calls Trump’s quip on Kurds “pretty shocking.”

La trascrizione ufficiale delle parole di Trump del 9 ottobre, dell’intero passaggio, è questa (non ci provo neanche a tradurre, almeno al momento):

Now, the Kurds are fighting for their land, just so you understand.  They’re fighting for their land.  And, as somebody wrote in a very, very powerful article today, they didn’t help us in the Second World War.  They didn’t help us with Normandy, as an example.  They mentioned names of different battles.  They were there, but they’re there to help us with their land.  And that’s a different thing.

In addition to that, we have spent tremendous amounts of money on helping the Kurds — in terms of ammunition, in terms of weapons, in terms of money, in terms of pay.  With all of that being said, we like the Kurds.

Now you have different factions in there.  Again, you have PKK — that’s a different faction.  And they worked with us.  It’s a rough group, but they worked with us.  But we’ve spent a tremendous — and they’re fighting for their lands.  So when you say, “They’re fighting with us” — yes, but they’re fighting for their land.

Now, if we go on the theory that some of the folks in Washington go by — who all do very well with the military-industrial complex.  I mean, you know, the military-industrial complex.  Take a look at Dwight Eisenhower; he had it figured right many years ago.   It’s got tremendous power.  They like fighting.  They make a lot of money when they fight.

But it was time to bring our soldiers back home.

Il “very, very powerful article” che dice di aver letto quel giorno è con tutta probabilità questo di Kurt Schlichter, un commentatore che il New York Times definisce “conservatore”, per il website conservatore Townhall.com.  E Schlichter scrive cose che aiutano a comprendere che cosa Trump stesse cercando di esprimere con parole sue.

The Kurds helped destroy ISIS, true. It’s also true that the Kurds would have fought ISIS anyway, since the psycho caliphate was right next door.

Let’s be honest – the Kurds didn’t show up for us at Normandy or Inchon or Khe Sanh or Kandahar. The Syrian Kurds allied with us in their homeland because we shared a common interest in wiping out the head-lopping freak show that was ISIS.

Moreover, all Kurds are not equal. The PKK – the Kurdistan Workers’ Party – are a bunch of commie terrorists who have been fighting the Turks for a long time. Those reds are no friends of ours, and it’s their antics that seem to be inspiring the Turkish campaign. I have little use for the Turks, but they aren’t just picking this fight for Schiffs and giggles. The fact that it’s all so confusing is a really, really good reason for us to stay the hell out of it.

Moreover, we keep hearing about our “obligation” to the Kurds, but who is the genius who promised the Kurds that if Turkey attacked the United States would go to war? Would that promise be binding on us if it were? After all, I don’t recall my senators voting on a treaty […] agreeing to put American lives on the line to protect the sovereignty of hypothetical Kurdistan. […] Now we’re supposed to shed our blood because our elites feel we owe it to foreign strangers?

Insomma, il passaggio chiave nel discorso di Trump non è “Normandia” – il riferimento a “Normandia”  e alla Seconda guerra mondiale e a tutte quelle “different battles” di cui non ricorda il nome (e che evocano le guerre di Corea, Vietnam, Afghanistan) è solo un artificio retorico per dire: non siamo stati sempre alleati nella nostra storia, lo siamo stati qui e ora perché abbiamo avuto interessi comuni.

Il vero passaggio chiave è (o dovrebbe essere) quest’altro: “Stanno combattendo per la loro terra”. Cioè, certo combattono con noi, ma avrebbero combattuto comunque, perché hanno i loro interessi e le loro ragioni per farlo, noi li abbiamo armati, finanziati – ci siamo aiutati a vicenda. E’ una questione di realpolitik, non ci sono obblighi morali. E ora è venuto il momento di venir via, checché ne dicano le elites (in particolare le elites del dannato complesso militare-industriale). Amen.

L’ulteriore complicazione dei commies del PKK è esplicita in Schlichter, resta sospesa nel non-detto in Trump – ma tutto il suo discorso è come al solito disarticolato. Insomma, per quel che vale (per la storia, per la cronaca): Trump non intendeva dire che i Curdi, per meritare la sua lealtà, avrebbero dovuto partecipare allo sbarco in Normandia, ma il suo ridicolo e spampanato bla bla ha favorito le ridicole e ridicolizzanti interpretazioni di tutti quelli che lo hanno ascoltato e ne hanno sghignazzato.

Categories: mass media, presidenza

Tags: , , , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s