i don't think that alliances or solidarity should be transactional. this idea that "they fought for us, so we should stand with them" is backwards thinking.

we don't have a debt to the kurds; in fact, they cost us a lot of money.

war shouldn't be evaluated in these market-theoretic terms of exchange, or in these kind of bro-ish concepts of "having your back", or whatever weird idea it is that you're bringing in here. that's how they think. we're supposed to be more enlightened and sophisticated than that.

rather, we need to ask the question: do the kurds want peace in the region? and, you'd be disingenuous if you thought that they did. so, i don't want to support them for that reason - we don't have common cause. they want to fight until they get their own state, and i want to shut the war down and get out.

i guess that if you actually support the endless war, then you might see them as a preferable ally, and you might have common cause. but, then, that's the difference between you and i - you want to keep going with this, and i don't.

but, broadly speaking, i want to stand with people i agree with and have common cause with, and not just people that were loyal to me.

maybe it's cause i'm a woman - maybe that's how women think. and, maybe you're insistence on loyalty is a male thing. just a thought.

the liberals are supposed to do better than this