U.S. President Donald Trump announced that they will pull out of Syria. As a matter of fact, he said they want to return their troops back home without wasting any time at all.
To be honest, it is wrong for them to wait another day.
It would have been better if they never went in the first place.
That’s what Trump said, but those who are familiar with U.S. habits did not pay any attention to these words.
They drew attention to the necessity of waiting for an explanation from military officials.
The result was a statement in the opposite direction.
Like a good cop-bad cop game.
And now, there is indication that the withdrawal they said would happen as soon as possible will not start earlier than six months.
Let’s not think there is a good American-bad American tactic.
There is only the bad.
It has always been like this.
Therefore, it is possible to separate them into three groups:
1. Bad American
2. Worse American
3. Worst American
Those who want to sell us weapons but turn back from their decision are an example of the bad American.
Those who distribute the weapons they couldn’t sell to us to terror organizations for free are worse Americans.
Those who try to stop us the moment we pull up our sleeves to produce our own weapons and when we are successful are the worst.
When we group them this way, it would be wrong to think that they are separated with sharp lines.
Transition between groups is possible. A person may be in one group in the morning and show that they are a member of the other in the evening – or the next day.
When we had a problem in relation to Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), they thought we were going to be in trouble.
Let’s note here that there is no difference between the U.S. and Israel.
Turkey is not late to produce UAVs despite all the obstacles.
We even managed to produce armored ones. When we say obstacles, it is obviously more than tripping.
They tried everything – attacks on ASELSAN engineers, our young engineers being victims of murder, the threats, blackmail, conspiracies – and still couldn’t prevent it the way they wanted.
Our lions our now preparing to produce a vehicle that will travel in the sea.
That too is going to be unmanned and armored.
Armored, unmanned sea vehicle, in short, AUSV.
It is going to monitor where necessary, and when required, it is going to stick to the enemy vessel and blast it.
It’s a good idea, but it makes one wonder, isn’t it a risk to announce it while it is still at the production stage?
Wouldn’t it be more logical to announce it after it is completed and introduced saying, “Voila! Surprise”?
You feel concerned whether you like it or not, thinking, “What if they try to stop us again?”
“What if something happens to our patriotic engineers who are working on that project?”
“What if our ally-looking enemies try to steal the idea or copy it?” To refrain from encountering any unexpected games etc., as far as we understand, the production of AUSVs is going to take a couple of years. Are we thinking too conspiratorial? You would appreciate that those who ponder upon the defense industry think deeper than us. They take all the measures necessary. Our’s is simply expressing a concern.
Looking at the above classification of Americans, if you say, “Is there not even a single good person in the huge country? It’s a ruthless determination,” I would like to remind that we are talking about the administrative cadre.
There could be many good people among the public. Of course there are people who do not approve of the U.S. going to war in far territories and planning coups.