Obama was there because he cared. There was no actual input or action he could do that would affect things. However if things went wrong, it would have been his duty to be present and observe and ultimately take responsibility for the mission’s failure.
I doubt Trump knows the meaning of the word and there’s no universe in existence where he takes responsibility.
Well also that if anything had gone wrong, having Obama there means he can authorize any necessary actions right away.
They had a few good stories on NPR Morning Edition. Sadly they aren't up for linking yet.
They had Rasmusseun who is an ex-Obama NSC staffer on and he was interested in the location which is near the Turkish border and more controlled by stuff like Al-Nursra the Syrians or Kurds or ISIS. It is more al-Queda tied groups. And since the split between AQ and ISIS seems more like a personality issue and ISIS is an AQ derivative there is a chance they might have been looking to re-consolidate and that might happen even more now. So one issue.
The more interesting stories was interviews from Mosul in Iraq where the reporter was standing at the altar where he declared himself Caliph. Even Iraqis who were at the mosque for prayer never really believed him. Some think he isn't dead. Some think he is an American or Israeli like plant or plot. Overall no one there thinks this will change the current climate or how they are still dealing with pockets of ISIS in the more rural areas.
A lot of the response in the Mid East is that of a big shrug.
Obama was there because he cared. There was no actual input or action he could do that would affect things. However if things went wrong, it would have been his duty to be present and observe and ultimately take responsibility for the mission’s failure.
I doubt Trump knows the meaning of the word and there’s no universe in existence where he takes responsibility.
Obama was there to take responsibility if things went wrong, and to make sure that the appropriate parties were recognized if things went right.
Trump was there to take responsibility if things went right, and to make sure that the appropriate parties were thrown under the buss if things went wrong.
Since Trump was there at the last minute, if that, I deduce that the military really did not want him there, possibly screwing it up, losing his nerve and cancelling it, or tipping off his dubious allies who might inform Baghdadi .
Since Trump was there at the last minute, if that, I deduce that the military really did not want him there, possibly screwing it up, losing his nerve and cancelling it, or tipping off his dubious allies who might inform Baghdadi .
No one was going to tip off Baghdadi. No one liked him and his death and the chaos it may or may not cause is a bonus for Turkey and Russia. Both countries Trump supposedly informed.
Trump has got more dubious friends than just Turkey and Russia, like Saudia Arabia's nobility.
Not an ISIS fan either. AQ and ISIS had very different goals and the ISIS ones are very much in conflict with the Saudi royal household.
Really the idea of a leak to Baghdadi is not the real issue. Now Trump going cowardly just before is much more likely. But even more likely he just didn't care.
Obama was there because he cared. There was no actual input or action he could do that would affect things. However if things went wrong, it would have been his duty to be present and observe and ultimately take responsibility for the mission’s failure.
I doubt Trump knows the meaning of the word and there’s no universe in existence where he takes responsibility.
Obama was there to take responsibility if things went wrong, and to make sure that the appropriate parties were recognized if things went right.
Trump was there to take responsibility if things went right, and to make sure that the appropriate parties were thrown under the buss if things went wrong.
This I think is also why none of the group of 8 or speaker of the house were alerted. I would bet money if the raid failed they would have memory holed the attempt and never told anybody about it.
Trump tells a Sir story about how officials would come into his office and say they killed this or that "low-level" ISIS leader, but he'd respond, "I never heard of him. I want al-Baghdadi. That's the only one I know."
Trump: "We're keeping the oil. Remember that...I've always said that...keep the oil." There are some cheers.
"Take Trump seriously, not literally" they said.
Nope. He meant the exact nonsensical thing he sounded like he meant.
They had a few good stories on NPR Morning Edition. Sadly they aren't up for linking yet.
They had Rasmusseun who is an ex-Obama NSC staffer on and he was interested in the location which is near the Turkish border and more controlled by stuff like Al-Nursra the Syrians or Kurds or ISIS. It is more al-Queda tied groups. And since the split between AQ and ISIS seems more like a personality issue and ISIS is an AQ derivative there is a chance they might have been looking to re-consolidate and that might happen even more now. So one issue.
I've been wondering about this too. Was Hayat Tahrir al-Sham protecting him? Since US Intel learned of his presence, he must have been known to the local factions to some degree. I was a bit surprised to learn that he was in Idlib.
Edit - and your speculation on a possible AQ/IS rapprochement is interesting. I'm sure there's plenty of bad blood between the two, but both are weak enough now that they could see it as a necessity for survival. The war between IS and the Taliban in Afghanistan could be a barrier even if they were so inclined, as would AQ's allegiance to the latter.
Obama was there because he cared. There was no actual input or action he could do that would affect things. However if things went wrong, it would have been his duty to be present and observe and ultimately take responsibility for the mission’s failure.
I doubt Trump knows the meaning of the word and there’s no universe in existence where he takes responsibility.
Obama was there to take responsibility if things went wrong, and to make sure that the appropriate parties were recognized if things went right.
Trump was there to take responsibility if things went right, and to make sure that the appropriate parties were thrown under the buss if things went wrong.
Obama needed to be in the room because Neptune Spear posed a material risk of getting US troops shot down by a US ally, while invading that ally
If this op went wrong it would merely be tragic, not an international incident
lmao they're already getting mad that libs aren"t giving trump credit for killing baghdadi
I'd deduce from the troop pullout that either
a) The military didn't inform him of the operation against Baghdadi until it was going down, so he blundered into the withdrawal without realizing the implications.
or
b) He did know about the Baghdadi operation and didn't give a shit about killing the leader of ISIS.
Trump would've apologized to Russia for our helicopter getting in the way of their missiles
Someone would tell him about the time Russia shot down a plane carrying a sitting US congressman, killing him and others aboard, and Reagan did nothing, so he’d equivocate the two while completely getting the details wrong, then make up fake details, all the while praising Russia for only killing some US Soldiers and not more of them.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
Where was the failing New York Times when Korea shot down a Russian plane carrying a very brave American congressman?
There's a conspiracy theory that once made the rounds claiming that KAL 007 was a CIA observation plane, and that the shootdown actually escalated into a full-scale air battle between a US Navy carrier wing and Soviet interceptors over the island of Sakhalin, which the US forces lost. Trump would probably fall for this.
Where was the failing New York Times when Korea shot down a Russian plane carrying a very brave American congressman?
There's a conspiracy theory that once made the rounds claiming that KAL 007 was a CIA observation plane, and that the shootdown actually escalated into a full-scale air battle between a US Navy carrier wing and Soviet interceptors over the island of Sakhalin, which the US forces lost. Trump would probably fall for this.
Tell it to him with a puffed out chest and tear in your eye, and he will convince a quartet of this country to fall for it as well.
lmao they're already getting mad that libs aren"t giving trump credit for killing baghdadi
I'd deduce from the troop pullout that either
a) The military didn't inform him of the operation against Baghdadi until it was going down, so he blundered into the withdrawal without realizing the implications.
or
b) He did know about the Baghdadi operation and didn't give a shit about killing the leader of ISIS.
This is why I don't give him any credit.
I want to know if he even knew before it was over in case he couldn't resist tweeting about it.
lmao they're already getting mad that libs aren"t giving trump credit for killing baghdadi
I'd deduce from the troop pullout that either
a) The military didn't inform him of the operation against Baghdadi until it was going down, so he blundered into the withdrawal without realizing the implications.
or
b) He did know about the Baghdadi operation and didn't give a shit about killing the leader of ISIS.
This is why I don't give him any credit.
The entire Baghdadi thing is an example of how isolated the bubble our leaders live in is. People gave a shit about Bin Laden because they were personally traumatized by the events of Sept. 11.
The public does not care about the leadership of ISIS. They don't even care that much about ISIS. There's no huge surge of popularity to be gained from yet another "Enemy leader dead!" announcement after 18 years of endless war.
lmao they're already getting mad that libs aren"t giving trump credit for killing baghdadi
I'd deduce from the troop pullout that either
a) The military didn't inform him of the operation against Baghdadi until it was going down, so he blundered into the withdrawal without realizing the implications.
or
b) He did know about the Baghdadi operation and didn't give a shit about killing the leader of ISIS.
This is why I don't give him any credit.
The entire Baghdadi thing is an example of how isolated the bubble our leaders live in. People gave a shit about Bin Laden because they were personally traumatized by the events of Sept. 11.
The public does not care about the leadership of ISIS. They don't even care that much about ISIS. There's no huge surge of popularity to be gained from yet another "Enemy leader dead!" announcement after 18 years of endless war.
The seemingly endless number of AQ Number Twos that got taken out before Bin Laden did not help.
Black lives matter.
Law and Order ≠ Justice
ACNH Island Isla Cero: DA-3082-2045-4142
Captain of the SES Comptroller of the State
lmao they're already getting mad that libs aren"t giving trump credit for killing baghdadi
I'd deduce from the troop pullout that either
a) The military didn't inform him of the operation against Baghdadi until it was going down, so he blundered into the withdrawal without realizing the implications.
or
b) He did know about the Baghdadi operation and didn't give a shit about killing the leader of ISIS.
This is why I don't give him any credit.
The entire Baghdadi thing is an example of how isolated the bubble our leaders live in. People gave a shit about Bin Laden because they were personally traumatized by the events of Sept. 11.
The public does not care about the leadership of ISIS. They don't even care that much about ISIS. There's no huge surge of popularity to be gained from yet another "Enemy leader dead!" announcement after 18 years of endless war.
The seemingly endless number of AQ Number Twos that got taken out before Bin Laden did not help.
And we've seen how jihadist groups seem to weather leadership losses pretty well. Killing Zarqawi and his successor didn't stop IS from reaching its peak under Baghdadi. al-Qaeda was at its strongest years after bin Laden's death, under Zawahiri. The Taliban is as strong as ever despite losing two leaders in the last decade, and IS's Afghan branch keeps trucking along despite the US killing like three of their leaders in fairly rapid succession.
Not saying decapitation has no effect, and I'm glad Baghdadi is gone, but in the grand scheme of things I doubt it's significance.
And we've seen how jihadist groups seem to weather leadership losses pretty well. Killing Zarqawi and his successor didn't stop IS from reaching its peak under Baghdadi. al-Qaeda was at its strongest years after bin Laden's death, under Zawahiri. The Taliban is as strong as ever despite losing two leaders in the last decade, and IS's Afghan branch keeps trucking along despite the US killing like three of their leaders in fairly rapid succession.
Not saying decapitation has no effect, and I'm glad Baghdadi is gone, but in the grand scheme of things I doubt it's significance.
If Trump gets removed from office we'll still have a military. It's not nothing, but organizations are organizations rather than people.
I personally feel the Baghdadi thing is a big deal, but I admit my history with the group colors my opinion on it. Not that I’m giving Trump any credit of course, just that between his death and the betrayal of the Kurds and Putin taking over the strategic control, we’ve entered a new chapter in US foreign policy in the region and there’s gonna be a lot chips falling and they’re not gonna land in a good place.
I rarely get emotional during the bad news, but these past couple weeks have kind of fractured something inside me a bit. As if something I’ve sacrificed a great deal of my time and physical and emotional health for was rendered worthless on a whim without any consideration by an insipid coward. Baghdadi’s death being my only consolation, soured by Trump undermining the meaning of his death by making it about himself, thus ruining even that small piece.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
lmao they're already getting mad that libs aren"t giving trump credit for killing baghdadi
I'd deduce from the troop pullout that either
a) The military didn't inform him of the operation against Baghdadi until it was going down, so he blundered into the withdrawal without realizing the implications.
or
b) He did know about the Baghdadi operation and didn't give a shit about killing the leader of ISIS.
This is why I don't give him any credit.
The entire Baghdadi thing is an example of how isolated the bubble our leaders live in is. People gave a shit about Bin Laden because they were personally traumatized by the events of Sept. 11.
The public does not care about the leadership of ISIS. They don't even care that much about ISIS. There's no huge surge of popularity to be gained from yet another "Enemy leader dead!" announcement after 18 years of endless war.
I distinctly remember people celebrating in the streets when bin Laden got clipped. Either public enthusiasm has dipped in the intervening decade or I’m not looking hard enough.
I'll be the one to admit it, prior to hearing of his death I'd never heard of the guy. It's me I'm the ignorant american.
Which is not to say its not "good" in the nebulous way that killing a person responsible for numerous other murders and would be probably responsible for more murders is good. Just that for americans I don't think we personally were aware of this duder. Especially not since Trump "defeated" isis.
"quotations"
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
lmao they're already getting mad that libs aren"t giving trump credit for killing baghdadi
I'd deduce from the troop pullout that either
a) The military didn't inform him of the operation against Baghdadi until it was going down, so he blundered into the withdrawal without realizing the implications.
or
b) He did know about the Baghdadi operation and didn't give a shit about killing the leader of ISIS.
This is why I don't give him any credit.
The entire Baghdadi thing is an example of how isolated the bubble our leaders live in is. People gave a shit about Bin Laden because they were personally traumatized by the events of Sept. 11.
The public does not care about the leadership of ISIS. They don't even care that much about ISIS. There's no huge surge of popularity to be gained from yet another "Enemy leader dead!" announcement after 18 years of endless war.
I distinctly remember people celebrating in the streets when bin Laden got clipped. Either public enthusiasm has dipped in the intervening decade or I’m not looking hard enough.
I was in a very hipster brewery when it was announced. There was an initial round of people yelling it out and then others checking their phones, followed by a sustained round of clapping and cheers.
lmao they're already getting mad that libs aren"t giving trump credit for killing baghdadi
I'd deduce from the troop pullout that either
a) The military didn't inform him of the operation against Baghdadi until it was going down, so he blundered into the withdrawal without realizing the implications.
or
b) He did know about the Baghdadi operation and didn't give a shit about killing the leader of ISIS.
This is why I don't give him any credit.
The entire Baghdadi thing is an example of how isolated the bubble our leaders live in is. People gave a shit about Bin Laden because they were personally traumatized by the events of Sept. 11.
The public does not care about the leadership of ISIS. They don't even care that much about ISIS. There's no huge surge of popularity to be gained from yet another "Enemy leader dead!" announcement after 18 years of endless war.
I distinctly remember people celebrating in the streets when bin Laden got clipped. Either public enthusiasm has dipped in the intervening decade or I’m not looking hard enough.
It also makes less of an impact since we have allegedly killed this guy a dozen times.
I'll be the one to admit it, prior to hearing of his death I'd never heard of the guy. It's me I'm the ignorant american.
Which is not to say its not "good" in the nebulous way that killing a person responsible for numerous other murders and would be probably responsible for more murders is good. Just that for americans I don't think we personally were aware of this duder. Especially not since Trump "defeated" isis.
"quotations"
I knew the name, but I'd forgotten that he wasn't already dead.
Dunno if this is just doing the right thing finally or specifically a rebuke of Turkey's invasion of Syria, but the House voted to recognize the Armenian genocide.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
lmao they're already getting mad that libs aren"t giving trump credit for killing baghdadi
I'd deduce from the troop pullout that either
a) The military didn't inform him of the operation against Baghdadi until it was going down, so he blundered into the withdrawal without realizing the implications.
or
b) He did know about the Baghdadi operation and didn't give a shit about killing the leader of ISIS.
This is why I don't give him any credit.
The entire Baghdadi thing is an example of how isolated the bubble our leaders live in is. People gave a shit about Bin Laden because they were personally traumatized by the events of Sept. 11.
The public does not care about the leadership of ISIS. They don't even care that much about ISIS. There's no huge surge of popularity to be gained from yet another "Enemy leader dead!" announcement after 18 years of endless war.
I distinctly remember people celebrating in the streets when bin Laden got clipped. Either public enthusiasm has dipped in the intervening decade or I’m not looking hard enough.
It’s just because Osama was considered the head of AQ, so his death was symbolic with 9-11 even though Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was the principal architect, and he’s been in Guantanamo since ‘03 which is arguably worse than death IMO. Yet I bet 90% of people don’t even know his name.
I consider Baghdadi possibly the most dangerous terrorist this decade and his death is up there in terms of global impact. But without a major US event like 9-11 or Pearl Harbor or Oklahoma City or the Alamo, no one is gonna remember.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
All else aside, Baghdadi has nearly 0 image recognition even though his name is well known. The US IC had literally two photographs of him for a long time and no video. He lived in extreme secrecy, which kept him alive for a remarkably long time, but meant his image never became a symbol to the west like Bin Laden's smug ass did.
Bin Laden went into hiding after 9/11, but he already had a lot of videos and decades of photographs which were replayed ad nauseum on western media. He was the face of salafist terrorism for years after he ceased to be a major player.
I bet most Americans - at least above a certain age - would recognize a picture of Osama, but very few, even among well-educated and aware people, would be able to name Baghdadi from his photos.
Baghdadi's successor has been appointed. Apparently Amaq (ISIS's unofficial news agency) announced him as Baghdadi's chosen replacement back in August, which is odd, since the Western reporting I've seen has presented the succession as an unknown, and incorrectly labeled that spokesman the US killed as "likely successor." Al-Monitor's bio gives a surprising amount of information on him; apparently he was a captive at Camp Bucca too (the prison in Iraq where ISIS formed in its current incarnation under Baghdadi).
Dunno if this is just doing the right thing finally or specifically a rebuke of Turkey's invasion of Syria, but the House voted to recognize the Armenian genocide.
Dunno if this is just doing the right thing finally or specifically a rebuke of Turkey's invasion of Syria, but the House voted to recognize the Armenian genocide.
Maybe I’m missing something, but that’s a bad look.
The first part of it is pretty strong.
I mean Shiff has been trying to get this passed for like 20 years, now suddenly theres a 425 to 11 consensus on something that happened over a century ago just cause were pissed at Turkey all of a sudden. It certainly robs any real sense of sincerity in it.
Especially because as she points out, there a dozen other ones we collectively ignore because its politically popular to do so.
Yeah I'm confused by that. Like because we don't recognize them all we shouldn't recognize this one?
The intent seems clear to me. She doesn't want to use the atrocities the Ottomans committed as a cudgel against modern-day Turks. She doesn't want to dump on Turkey.
Posts
Well also that if anything had gone wrong, having Obama there means he can authorize any necessary actions right away.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
They had Rasmusseun who is an ex-Obama NSC staffer on and he was interested in the location which is near the Turkish border and more controlled by stuff like Al-Nursra the Syrians or Kurds or ISIS. It is more al-Queda tied groups. And since the split between AQ and ISIS seems more like a personality issue and ISIS is an AQ derivative there is a chance they might have been looking to re-consolidate and that might happen even more now. So one issue.
The more interesting stories was interviews from Mosul in Iraq where the reporter was standing at the altar where he declared himself Caliph. Even Iraqis who were at the mosque for prayer never really believed him. Some think he isn't dead. Some think he is an American or Israeli like plant or plot. Overall no one there thinks this will change the current climate or how they are still dealing with pockets of ISIS in the more rural areas.
A lot of the response in the Mid East is that of a big shrug.
Obama was there to take responsibility if things went wrong, and to make sure that the appropriate parties were recognized if things went right.
Trump was there to take responsibility if things went right, and to make sure that the appropriate parties were thrown under the buss if things went wrong.
No one was going to tip off Baghdadi. No one liked him and his death and the chaos it may or may not cause is a bonus for Turkey and Russia. Both countries Trump supposedly informed.
Though it seems that may have been a lie.
Not an ISIS fan either. AQ and ISIS had very different goals and the ISIS ones are very much in conflict with the Saudi royal household.
Really the idea of a leak to Baghdadi is not the real issue. Now Trump going cowardly just before is much more likely. But even more likely he just didn't care.
This I think is also why none of the group of 8 or speaker of the house were alerted. I would bet money if the raid failed they would have memory holed the attempt and never told anybody about it.
Nope. He meant the exact nonsensical thing he sounded like he meant.
Edit - and your speculation on a possible AQ/IS rapprochement is interesting. I'm sure there's plenty of bad blood between the two, but both are weak enough now that they could see it as a necessity for survival. The war between IS and the Taliban in Afghanistan could be a barrier even if they were so inclined, as would AQ's allegiance to the latter.
fucks sake i remember how Obama was excoriated for using the personal pronoun too many times while announcing Osama's death
Obama needed to be in the room because Neptune Spear posed a material risk of getting US troops shot down by a US ally, while invading that ally
If this op went wrong it would merely be tragic, not an international incident
I'd deduce from the troop pullout that either
a) The military didn't inform him of the operation against Baghdadi until it was going down, so he blundered into the withdrawal without realizing the implications.
or
b) He did know about the Baghdadi operation and didn't give a shit about killing the leader of ISIS.
This is why I don't give him any credit.
Someone would tell him about the time Russia shot down a plane carrying a sitting US congressman, killing him and others aboard, and Reagan did nothing, so he’d equivocate the two while completely getting the details wrong, then make up fake details, all the while praising Russia for only killing some US Soldiers and not more of them.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
There's a conspiracy theory that once made the rounds claiming that KAL 007 was a CIA observation plane, and that the shootdown actually escalated into a full-scale air battle between a US Navy carrier wing and Soviet interceptors over the island of Sakhalin, which the US forces lost. Trump would probably fall for this.
Tell it to him with a puffed out chest and tear in your eye, and he will convince a quartet of this country to fall for it as well.
I want to know if he even knew before it was over in case he couldn't resist tweeting about it.
The entire Baghdadi thing is an example of how isolated the bubble our leaders live in is. People gave a shit about Bin Laden because they were personally traumatized by the events of Sept. 11.
The public does not care about the leadership of ISIS. They don't even care that much about ISIS. There's no huge surge of popularity to be gained from yet another "Enemy leader dead!" announcement after 18 years of endless war.
The seemingly endless number of AQ Number Twos that got taken out before Bin Laden did not help.
Law and Order ≠ Justice
ACNH Island Isla Cero: DA-3082-2045-4142
Captain of the SES Comptroller of the State
Baghdadi himself has been declared dead more than a dozen times.
Not saying decapitation has no effect, and I'm glad Baghdadi is gone, but in the grand scheme of things I doubt it's significance.
If Trump gets removed from office we'll still have a military. It's not nothing, but organizations are organizations rather than people.
I rarely get emotional during the bad news, but these past couple weeks have kind of fractured something inside me a bit. As if something I’ve sacrificed a great deal of my time and physical and emotional health for was rendered worthless on a whim without any consideration by an insipid coward. Baghdadi’s death being my only consolation, soured by Trump undermining the meaning of his death by making it about himself, thus ruining even that small piece.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
Which is not to say its not "good" in the nebulous way that killing a person responsible for numerous other murders and would be probably responsible for more murders is good. Just that for americans I don't think we personally were aware of this duder. Especially not since Trump "defeated" isis.
"quotations"
pleasepaypreacher.net
I was in a very hipster brewery when it was announced. There was an initial round of people yelling it out and then others checking their phones, followed by a sustained round of clapping and cheers.
It also makes less of an impact since we have allegedly killed this guy a dozen times.
{Twitter, Everybody's doing it. }{Writing and Story Blog}
I knew the name, but I'd forgotten that he wasn't already dead.
Trump is the person that’s gonna make it a contest about who was the bigger Nazi and completely miss the point.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
I consider Baghdadi possibly the most dangerous terrorist this decade and his death is up there in terms of global impact. But without a major US event like 9-11 or Pearl Harbor or Oklahoma City or the Alamo, no one is gonna remember.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
Bin Laden went into hiding after 9/11, but he already had a lot of videos and decades of photographs which were replayed ad nauseum on western media. He was the face of salafist terrorism for years after he ceased to be a major player.
I bet most Americans - at least above a certain age - would recognize a picture of Osama, but very few, even among well-educated and aware people, would be able to name Baghdadi from his photos.
Weirdly, Ilhan Omar voted present.
Maybe I’m missing something, but that’s a bad look.
pleasepaypreacher.net
I mean Shiff has been trying to get this passed for like 20 years, now suddenly theres a 425 to 11 consensus on something that happened over a century ago just cause were pissed at Turkey all of a sudden. It certainly robs any real sense of sincerity in it.
Especially because as she points out, there a dozen other ones we collectively ignore because its politically popular to do so.
The intent seems clear to me. She doesn't want to use the atrocities the Ottomans committed as a cudgel against modern-day Turks. She doesn't want to dump on Turkey.