UTILITARIANISM

"There is a commentary at Israpundit from someone else who distrusts everything that the US and EU, and all their little allies, become involved with. I could find no link to indicate who wrote the comments or what the source is--and it's always important to evaluate sources--but there are some points made about the Kurdish situation in general. As a whole, it would seem that the author has just discovered the fact that there are no "friends" in politics, but only alliances, which I define as relationships to further one's own political interests. On the other hand, friendship is something which I define as only existing at the personal and individual level.

Given Kurdish history of the twentieth century, it is an extreme absurdity to speak of "friends" or "friendship" between the Kurdish people and any nation-state. The verb most frequently employed for the relationship between the Kurdish nation and other nations is the verb "to use," as can be seen in some of the comments on this blog post about Kurds. The ideas expressed by such phrases as "perhaps we are using," or "we should be using," Kurds, should set our teeth on edge. Another thing to notice about these kinds of comments, is that people who make them leave the impression that Kurds exist only in the small piece of land known as South Kurdistan, otherwise figuratively known as the "Good Kurds," with "good" having the meaning of "useful for someone else's interests." This is in opposition to the "Bad Kurds," those troublesome, restive and "terrorist" Kurds of Turkish-occupied Kurdistan, who, just as the "Good Kurds" of the South legitimately took up arms against successive Baghdad regimes, legitimately took up, and still do legitimately take up, arms against the occupying forces of the Ankara and Teheran regimes."
Rasti