@robinenergy @abumuqawama the answer to the latter Q is "so as not to annoy the Turks whose airspace we've made critical use of."
If US wanted to protect Kurdish oil by air-strikes, why does it oppose independent Kurdish exports? http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119035/us-attack-islamic-militants-all-about-iraqs-oil …
-
-
-
@jstogdill You mean the Turks who have facilitated independent Kurdish exports, to the annoyance of Baghdad?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
“
@robinenergy: If US wanted to protect Kurdish oil by air-strikes, why does it oppose independent Kurdish exports? ..." Qui bono?Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@robinenergy Agree article is awful, tho wld not necessarily be inconsistent to want KRG supply flowing to global mkt but done thru Baghdad -
@JasonBordoff That has been US policy. But why use warplanes when you could just call off the lawyers? - Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
@robinenergy@ncheaib Colonized territories, obviously or indirectly, wont be independentThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@robinenergy article is dumb. Just like every other "it's all about oil" article since 1991.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.