OK, let's talk about the Syrian withdrawal

[jwoodie]

Here are the choices for US troop involvement in Syria:

1. Increase the number of US troops;
2. Leave the same number there; or
3. Pull them out.

I pick #3. We no longer need Mideast oil, and I don't like placing our troops in harm's way unless absolutely necessary. We have the economic and technological means of protecting our interests without using our troops as pawns in other people's conflicts.

As for the Kurds, some of them have helped us but others have been terrorists. Turkey knows that we can destroy its economy and kick it out of NATO if it starts massacring all of them. Besides, it is not our duty to police the rest of the world.

What say you?

 

[bendog]

Here are the choices for US troop involvement in Syria:

1. Increase the number of US troops;
2. Leave the same number there; or
3. Pull them out.

I pick #3. We no longer need Mideast oil, and I don't like placing our troops in harm's way unless absolutely necessary. We have the economic and technological means of protecting our interests without using our troops as pawns in other people's conflicts.

As for the Kurds, some of them have helped us but others have been terrorists. Turkey knows that we can destroy its economy and kick it out of NATO if it starts massacring all of them. Besides, it is not our duty to police the rest of the world.

What say you?

but just yesterday Trumpy said we'd keep the oil

 

[Sunni Man]

The PKK Kurds we were arming and training are avowed Marxist atheists who have been launching terrorist attacks on Turkey for decades.

I don't blame Turkey for wanting a Kurd free buffer zone between themselves and the Kurds. ...

 

[progressive hunter]

Here are the choices for US troop involvement in Syria:

1. Increase the number of US troops;
2. Leave the same number there; or
3. Pull them out.

I pick #3. We no longer need Mideast oil, and I don't like placing our troops in harm's way unless absolutely necessary. We have the economic and technological means of protecting our interests without using our troops as pawns in other people's conflicts.

As for the Kurds, some of them have helped us but others have been terrorists. Turkey knows that we can destroy its economy and kick it out of NATO if it starts massacring all of them. Besides, it is not our duty to police the rest of the world.

What say you?

but just yesterday Trumpy said we'd keep the oil

that was just your TDS talking,,,

 

[ABikerSailor]

Here are the choices for US troop involvement in Syria:

1. Increase the number of US troops;
2. Leave the same number there; or
3. Pull them out.

I pick #3. We no longer need Mideast oil, and I don't like placing our troops in harm's way unless absolutely necessary. We have the economic and technological means of protecting our interests without using our troops as pawns in other people's conflicts.

As for the Kurds, some of them have helped us but others have been terrorists. Turkey knows that we can destroy its economy and kick it out of NATO if it starts massacring all of them. Besides, it is not our duty to police the rest of the world.

What say you?

Well, one of the problems with abandoning the Kurds is that in the future, alliances will be harder to make (especially if Trump is in charge), and other nations will be less likely to trust that we can hold up our end of the alliance. And, it's not everyone that says the Kurds are terrorists, just Turkey.

Personally? I think that bringing the troops back home is a great thing. However, there was very little thought or planning that went into the way Trump did it.

 

[Sunni Man]

The PKK Kurds are opportunists who will align themselves with anyone who will fund and arm them. ...

 

[Seawytch]

Here are the choices for US troop involvement in Syria:

1. Increase the number of US troops;
2. Leave the same number there; or
3. Pull them out.

I pick #3. We no longer need Mideast oil, and I don't like placing our troops in harm's way unless absolutely necessary. We have the economic and technological means of protecting our interests without using our troops as pawns in other people's conflicts.

As for the Kurds, some of them have helped us but others have been terrorists. Turkey knows that we can destroy its economy and kick it out of NATO if it starts massacring all of them. Besides, it is not our duty to police the rest of the world.

What say you?

but just yesterday Trumpy said we'd keep the oil

that was just your TDS talking,,,

Weird...because it looked like Trump's Twitter account...

Mark Esperanto, Secretary of Defense, “The ceasefire is holding up very nicely. There are some minor skirmishes that have ended quickly. New areas being resettled with the Kurds.” USA soldiers are not in combat or ceasefire zones. We have secured the Oil. Bringing soldiers home!​

 

[progressive hunter]

Here are the choices for US troop involvement in Syria:

1. Increase the number of US troops;
2. Leave the same number there; or
3. Pull them out.

I pick #3. We no longer need Mideast oil, and I don't like placing our troops in harm's way unless absolutely necessary. We have the economic and technological means of protecting our interests without using our troops as pawns in other people's conflicts.

As for the Kurds, some of them have helped us but others have been terrorists. Turkey knows that we can destroy its economy and kick it out of NATO if it starts massacring all of them. Besides, it is not our duty to police the rest of the world.

What say you?

but just yesterday Trumpy said we'd keep the oil

that was just your TDS talking,,,

Weird...because it looked like Trump's Twitter account...

Mark Esperanto, Secretary of Defense, “The ceasefire is holding up very nicely. There are some minor skirmishes that have ended quickly. New areas being resettled with the Kurds.” USA soldiers are not in combat or ceasefire zones. We have secured the Oil. Bringing soldiers home!​

still doesnt mean the TDS isnt the cause of his off topic outburst

 

[Sunni Man]

The politics of the middle east is way too complicated and convoluted for American politicians, let alone American citizens, to have the slightest hope of understanding. ...

 

[bendog]

Here are the choices for US troop involvement in Syria:

1. Increase the number of US troops;
2. Leave the same number there; or
3. Pull them out.

I pick #3. We no longer need Mideast oil, and I don't like placing our troops in harm's way unless absolutely necessary. We have the economic and technological means of protecting our interests without using our troops as pawns in other people's conflicts.

As for the Kurds, some of them have helped us but others have been terrorists. Turkey knows that we can destroy its economy and kick it out of NATO if it starts massacring all of them. Besides, it is not our duty to police the rest of the world.

What say you?

but just yesterday Trumpy said we'd keep the oil

that was just your TDS talking,,,

Weird...because it looked like Trump's Twitter account...

Mark Esperanto, Secretary of Defense, “The ceasefire is holding up very nicely. There are some minor skirmishes that have ended quickly. New areas being resettled with the Kurds.” USA soldiers are not in combat or ceasefire zones. We have secured the Oil. Bringing soldiers home!​

Oh thanks for the heads up. I don't bother much with progressive hunted.

Pentagon weighs keeping US troops near Syrian oil fields
"I don't think it's necessary, other than that we secure the oil," President Trump says when asked about leaving U.S. troops in Syria.

"We have a good relationship with the Kurds ... we never agreed to protect the Kurds for the rest of their lives.” http://abcn.ws/2W1Pxa7

 

[BlindBoo]

They can call it a withdrawal all they want but it was less than 50 soldiers I heard. It was more of a capitulation to the
Turks by our President. It was the support and might of the US Armed forces that was keeping the Kurdish zone safe. That is what was reversed. They no longer have protection from The Don.

 

[bendog]

Here are the choices for US troop involvement in Syria:

1. Increase the number of US troops;
2. Leave the same number there; or
3. Pull them out.

I pick #3. We no longer need Mideast oil, and I don't like placing our troops in harm's way unless absolutely necessary. We have the economic and technological means of protecting our interests without using our troops as pawns in other people's conflicts.

As for the Kurds, some of them have helped us but others have been terrorists. Turkey knows that we can destroy its economy and kick it out of NATO if it starts massacring all of them. Besides, it is not our duty to police the rest of the world.

What say you?

but just yesterday Trumpy said we'd keep the oil

that was just your TDS talking,,,

Weird...because it looked like Trump's Twitter account...

Mark Esperanto, Secretary of Defense, “The ceasefire is holding up very nicely. There are some minor skirmishes that have ended quickly. New areas being resettled with the Kurds.” USA soldiers are not in combat or ceasefire zones. We have secured the Oil. Bringing soldiers home!​

still doesnt mean the TDS isnt the cause of his off topic outburst

LOL. Facts are Not facts for your trumpcumsuking mind.

 

[bendog]

They can call it a withdrawal all they want but it was less than 50 soldiers I heard. It was more of a capitulation to the
Turks by our President. It was the support and might of the US Armed forces that was keeping the Kurdish zone safe. That is what was reversed. They no longer have protection from The Don.

Well the real problem was the only legit reason for our security that we had to be there was ISIS. Trump's narrative is that he personally conquered ISIS so hard, they are dead. Which he didn't and they arent'.

But our presence there was hindering a return of the Syrian muslim refugees in Turkey and some resolution to the Kurds being a threat to Turkey. Trump's solution was never vetted by defense or state, and just pulling out isn't really a solution. the Syrian refugees are more in peril back in Turkey near Isis, and the kurds are done at least in terms of helping with Isis.

 

[progressive hunter]

Here are the choices for US troop involvement in Syria:

1. Increase the number of US troops;
2. Leave the same number there; or
3. Pull them out.

I pick #3. We no longer need Mideast oil, and I don't like placing our troops in harm's way unless absolutely necessary. We have the economic and technological means of protecting our interests without using our troops as pawns in other people's conflicts.

As for the Kurds, some of them have helped us but others have been terrorists. Turkey knows that we can destroy its economy and kick it out of NATO if it starts massacring all of them. Besides, it is not our duty to police the rest of the world.

What say you?

but just yesterday Trumpy said we'd keep the oil

that was just your TDS talking,,,

Weird...because it looked like Trump's Twitter account...

Mark Esperanto, Secretary of Defense, “The ceasefire is holding up very nicely. There are some minor skirmishes that have ended quickly. New areas being resettled with the Kurds.” USA soldiers are not in combat or ceasefire zones. We have secured the Oil. Bringing soldiers home!​

Oh thanks for the heads up. I don't bother much with progressive hunted.

Pentagon weighs keeping US troops near Syrian oil fields
"I don't think it's necessary, other than that we secure the oil," President Trump says when asked about leaving U.S. troops in Syria.

"We have a good relationship with the Kurds ... we never agreed to protect the Kurds for the rest of their lives.” http://abcn.ws/2W1Pxa7

but that wasnt the point of the OP's comments,,,that was a reaction of your TDS,,,

 

[Maxdeath]

Here are the choices for US troop involvement in Syria:

1. Increase the number of US troops;
2. Leave the same number there; or
3. Pull them out.

I pick #3. We no longer need Mideast oil, and I don't like placing our troops in harm's way unless absolutely necessary. We have the economic and technological means of protecting our interests without using our troops as pawns in other people's conflicts.

As for the Kurds, some of them have helped us but others have been terrorists. Turkey knows that we can destroy its economy and kick it out of NATO if it starts massacring all of them. Besides, it is not our duty to police the rest of the world.

What say you?

Well, one of the problems with abandoning the Kurds is that in the future, alliances will be harder to make (especially if Trump is in charge), and other nations will be less likely to trust that we can hold up our end of the alliance. And, it's not everyone that says the Kurds are terrorists, just Turkey.

Personally? I think that bringing the troops back home is a great thing. However, there was very little thought or planning that went into the way Trump did it.

Imagine the harm that would have been done to NATO if we began a shooting war with one of the NATO treaty allies

 

[jwoodie]

I think that bringing the troops back home is a great thing. However, there was very little thought or planning that went into the way Trump did it.

So you agree with his action but don't like his style?

 

[B. Kidd]

Here are the choices for US troop involvement in Syria:

1. Increase the number of US troops;
2. Leave the same number there; or
3. Pull them out.

I pick #3. We no longer need Mideast oil, and I don't like placing our troops in harm's way unless absolutely necessary. We have the economic and technological means of protecting our interests without using our troops as pawns in other people's conflicts.

As for the Kurds, some of them have helped us but others have been terrorists. Turkey knows that we can destroy its economy and kick it out of NATO if it starts massacring all of them. Besides, it is not our duty to police the rest of the world.

What say you?

Sounds like a winner to me!

 

[Norman]

Here are the choices for US troop involvement in Syria:

1. Increase the number of US troops;
2. Leave the same number there; or
3. Pull them out.

I pick #3. We no longer need Mideast oil, and I don't like placing our troops in harm's way unless absolutely necessary. We have the economic and technological means of protecting our interests without using our troops as pawns in other people's conflicts.

As for the Kurds, some of them have helped us but others have been terrorists. Turkey knows that we can destroy its economy and kick it out of NATO if it starts massacring all of them. Besides, it is not our duty to police the rest of the world.

What say you?

Why are we defending the borders of other countries when our own are invaded like never seen before?

 

[harmonica]

never should've been there in the first place

 

[jwoodie]

Trump seems to understand the American people better than any politician in Washington.