Best way to "judge" the U.S. pulling out of Syria......

[nat4900]

Besides the Trump cultists rejoicing that Trump is pulling out all of our troops from Syria, look who else is extremely happy over the decision:

Russia (Putin) is overjoyed
ISIS will soon resuscitate and couldn't be happier
Turkey (Erdogan) will have a field day attacking the Syrian Kurds
Iran's (Mullahs) could not agree more with Trump's decision
Hezbollah will be sending a dozen roses to the oval office

Always judge the company and alliances that Trump makes through his moronic decisions.

(I will say, however, that from Trump's perspective, this is a great diversion from his MANY domestic problems.)

 

[Olde Europe]

Here's what I found to be a good discussion of Trump's decision on Syria. Basically, the right thing to do, but he couldn't have bungled it more.

Good Riddance to America’s Syria Policy
By Stephen M. Walt | December 21, 2018, 11:50 AM

Fifth, many observers have been quick to see the redeployment as a loss for the United States and a big win for Russia, Iran, Hezbollah, Turkey, or whomever, and to assume that some or all of these actors will quickly consolidate a lot of valuable influence in Syria. Maybe so, but Syria isn’t much of a prize at this point and may even be something of a liability. It was always a weak state, and its economy and infrastructure have been severely damaged by a punishing civil war. Instead of being a major strategic asset, Syria is more likely to turn into a costly quagmire for the supposed victors. The area remains a cauldron of competing political forces, and as the political scientist Mark Katz points out, their competing interests are likely to come to the fore once the United States withdraws. If so, then handing the Syrian quagmire off to others could be a net win for the United States.

Instead of obsessing about who is supposedly “winning” and who is supposedly “losing,” the United States should start by identifying its core strategic interests. When it comes to the Middle East, its main strategic interest is helping ensure that Middle East oil and gas continues to flow to world markets. (The United States gets very little energy from the region these days, but a sudden cutoff would damage the world economy and thus harm America as well.) This goal does not require the United States to control the region or dictate local political arrangements, however; it merely means helping prevent any other state from taking over the region. Fortunately, the region is as divided today as it has ever been, and the danger that any state (including Iran, Russia, China, or anyone else) will take over is vanishingly small. If that is the case, then staying in Syria contributes little to U.S. security or prosperity. [...]

In calling an end to our involvement in Syria, therefore, Trump did the right thing. (In case any of you are wondering, I found it hard to type that sentence.) But true to form, he has done it in the worst possible way. There seems to have been no advance warning or interagency preparation for the decision, which means that the timing, arrangements, and broader implications have not been gamed out in advance. (It is therefore no surprise that the decision on Syria was soon followed by the announcement that Secretary of Defense James Mattis would be retiring in February). As is typical for him, Trump did not consult with U.S. allies or inform them in advance. Nor did he make any serious effort to use the U.S. presence in Syria to orchestrate a diplomatic process to stabilize the country or use the possibility of a U.S. withdrawal to elicit parallel concessions from others. Like his phony nuclear summit with Kim Jong Un or his decision to move the U.S. Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, Trump was once again demonstrating the “art of the giveaway”: making unilateral U.S. concessions and getting nothing in return.

Finally, the decision reveals that Trump’s approach to the Middle East possesses neither consistency nor a coherent strategic logic. In addition to doubling down on America’s “special relationships” with Egypt, Israel, and Saudi Arabia (thereby encouraging each of these governments to misbehave in various ways), Trump, Bolton, and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo vowed to put “maximum pressure” on Iran. Whatever one thinks of this policy—and I happen to believe it is deeply mistaken—his latest decision is clearly at odds with it. Over time, such twists, turns, and inconsistencies can only fuel the suspicion that Trump really doesn’t give a damn about what is good for the country (or the world) and is motivated solely by whatever might salvage his diminishing political fortunes.

Even when he does the right thing, in short, Trump manages to maximize the costs and minimize the benefits. But at this point in his presidency, that should no longer be much of a surprise.​

The whole thing is clear-eyed, and well worth a read.

 

[Sunni Man]

The only winner in this tragic situation is the terrorist state of Israel. ...

 

[Auld Phart]

Besides the Trump cultists rejoicing that Trump is pulling out all of our troops from Syria, look who else is extremely happy over the decision:

Russia (Putin) is overjoyed
ISIS will soon resuscitate and couldn't be happier
Turkey (Erdogan) will have a field day attacking the Syrian Kurds
Iran's (Mullahs) could not agree more with Trump's decision
Hezbollah will be sending a dozen roses to the oval office

Always judge the company and alliances that Trump makes through his moronic decisions.

(I will say, however, that from Trump's perspective, this is a great diversion from his MANY domestic problems.)

Democrats arent' happy with Trump pulling out of Syria?

When did they change their minds about our troops being there?

 

[Rocko]

I believe pulling out is a mistake, but if fairness it’s a war with no good guys.

 

[Ambivalent1]

We have no business there. The entire ME "experiment" has been a colossal mistake from day 1.

 

[nat4900]

What right wingers need to realize it is NOT neo-warm-mongering by the left......

....and whenever right wingers state that, "we have no business there [or anywhere]" then you should consider what the heck are we doing in Germany, Italy, South Korea, etc.??..........We have bases in over 150 countries all over the planet.

The difference with Syria is simple:

a. we have NOT defeated ISIS (you can defeat an army but NOT an ideology.)
b. We are abandoning one of the few decent allies there ...the Kurds.....leaving them to be slaughtered by the Turk and Iranis.
c. We have left a ME country all in the hands of the Russians and Iranians.

 

[kyzr]

What right wingers need to realize it is NOT neo-warm-mongering by the left......

....and whenever right wingers state that, "we have no business there [or anywhere]" then you should consider what the heck are we doing in Germany, Italy, South Korea, etc.??..........We have bases in over 150 countries all over the planet.

The difference with Syria is simple:
a. we have NOT defeated ISIS (you can defeat an army but NOT an ideology.)
b. We are abandoning one of the few decent allies there ...the Kurds.....leaving them to be slaughtered by the Turk and Iranis.
c. We have left a ME country all in the hands of the Russians and Iranians.

Ok, riddle me this:
a) Can you ever defeat terrorism such as ISIS, Al Qaeda, or any of the other SN terror groups?
b) Can our 2,000 soldiers in Syria really prevent Turkey from doing anything it wants to do?
c) Would the US/NATO want to oust Assad and Russia to rebuild Syria like Iraq?

If the answers to those is "NO", then why are we wasting money we don't have and US lives there? The best option is to declare victory, tell Erdogan not to fuck with the Kurds or the next coup won't fail, and bring the 2,000 troops home.

 

[Olde Europe]

The difference with Syria is simple:

a. we have NOT defeated ISIS (you can defeat an army but NOT an ideology.)
b. We are abandoning one of the few decent allies there ...the Kurds.....leaving them to be slaughtered by the Turk and Iranis.
c. We have left a ME country all in the hands of the Russians and Iranians.

Oh, for pity's sake, Nat:

ISIS is not an ideology. It's a terrorist organization bent on forming a Caliphate. The U.S. had very little to do with depriving Daesh of territory. Kurds, Syrians, Russians and Iranians did, with a little assist from the U.S.

Trump has no time for the Kurds, and never had. He'd sell them down the river for any weapons sales to the Turks any day of the week, which is precisely what he seemed to be doing, and a few U.S. troops in Syria weren't going to stand in the way anyway. If Trump calls Erdogan and can't get him to refrain from slaughtering Kurds, it's time to think again about that alliance, not station a few troops where they don't make much of a difference. Moreover, Turkey had several incursions into Kurdish territory over the last years, and in no instance did the U.S. lift a finger.

Syria is in the hands of Assad (more and more of it), with Putin and Iran sitting at the table, and the U.S. in the dog house. That was so, is so, and will remain so - no matter whether the U.S. has a few troops in the country or not.

Really, I fully understand neo-cons' strident whines about how the U.S. is losing its manhood upon withdrawal from Syria. It's what they do. The U.S. has no influence there, and - short of going to war with Russia - will not have any. Liberals now forming the background chorus for the neo-cons really amazes me no end.

 

[sartre play]

Olde, rated your post winner because it adds real substance to the conversation, would like more info on the negatives of this swift total unplanned withdraw. how much danger is added by giving Russia the ability to add more ports & air capacity to its arsenal ?

 

[Flash]

"Necessary for the Security of a Free State" begins at home, not in some third world shithole.

 

[Olde Europe]

Olde, rated your post winner because it adds real substance to the conversation, would like more info on the negatives of this swift total unplanned withdraw. how much danger is added by giving Russia the ability to add more ports & air capacity to its arsenal ?

As far as I know, the U.S. troops are sitting in some enclave in the north-east of Syria. Can you tell me how their presence there prevents any increase of Russian forces at the Mediterranean coast or in the region of Damascus? Frankly, I don't see any "negatives". Whatever, Russia's economy is in not so favorable straits, and, reportedly, the Syrian adventure costs them dearly in terms of hard currency. I don't see them expanding in Syria. If anything, they will have to spend a lot on getting the country back on its feet for them to have a stable foothold there. They will rather wind down their military operations as Daesh dwindles, or so I'd expect.

 

[nat4900]

What right wingers need to realize it is NOT neo-warm-mongering by the left......

....and whenever right wingers state that, "we have no business there [or anywhere]" then you should consider what the heck are we doing in Germany, Italy, South Korea, etc.??..........We have bases in over 150 countries all over the planet.

The difference with Syria is simple:
a. we have NOT defeated ISIS (you can defeat an army but NOT an ideology.)
b. We are abandoning one of the few decent allies there ...the Kurds.....leaving them to be slaughtered by the Turk and Iranis.
c. We have left a ME country all in the hands of the Russians and Iranians.

Ok, riddle me this:
a) Can you ever defeat terrorism such as ISIS, Al Qaeda, or any of the other SN terror groups?
b) Can our 2,000 soldiers in Syria really prevent Turkey from doing anything it wants to do?
c) Would the US/NATO want to oust Assad and Russia to rebuild Syria like Iraq?

If the answers to those is "NO", then why are we wasting money we don't have and US lives there? The best option is to declare victory, tell Erdogan not to fuck with the Kurds or the next coup won't fail, and bring the 2,000 troops home.

1. YES, you can defeat an ideology with a BETTER ideology....Right now we are dealing with 80% unemployment among young Syrian males with nothing to do but hate those their fucked up leaders tell them to hate.....(and Syria has imported thousands of like-minded young men from other countries.....including the U.S>)

2. YES, even a few hundred of our special forces troops in Syria will prevent the genocide that may indeed happen as Turkey's Erdogan wants to obliterate a possible Kurdistan once and for all........Turkey is been part of NATO for almost 70 years and eve with a despot leading that country it would NOT dare directly killing a U.S. soldier.

3. TOO LATE.....for that. Assad is a Putin puppet (like you know who) and Russia....that now has a warm water port for its navy is ecstatic.......Russia may not have the money ro rebuild Syria......but the slow establishment of a NEW soviet union just became easier for them, thanks to this idiot in the oval office.

Trump has royally pissed off the Pentagon.

 

[nat4900]

ISIS is not an ideology. It's a terrorist organization bent on forming a Caliphate.

Moronic retort.......terrorism IS an ideology.........Think before you type.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Well, one of the possible results of the pull out is that the Kurds (the people we were helping), are saying that they will no longer be able to hold ISIL prisoners, and may end up releasing them.

Trump bitched about Obama, and said that he founded ISIL when we pulled out of Iraq. Only problem is, now that Trump is pulling our troops out of Syria, the Kurds may end up releasing around 3,000 ISIL troops.

That will mean that Trump would be responsible for the reformation of ISIL because of the Syrian pullout.

And no, Trump is wrong, ISIL hasn't been defeated yet.

Kurdish-led forces 'may not be able to contain ISIL prisoners'

Ilham Ahmed of the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) warned that the Trump administration's decision to withdraw all of its forces would have dangerous repercussions and a destabilising effect on the entire region.


"Under the threat of the Turkish state, and with the possibility of Daesh (ISIL) reviving once again, I fear the situation will go out of control and we no longer be able to contain them," Ahmed said at a news conference in Paris on Friday when asked if the SDF was considering releasing hundreds of ISIL detainees.


On Thursday, The New York Times reported that the SDF had discussed releasing almost 3,200 local and foreign ISIL prisoners.

 

[eagle1462010]

Well, one of the possible results of the pull out is that the Kurds (the people we were helping), are saying that they will no longer be able to hold ISIL prisoners, and may end up releasing them.

Trump bitched about Obama, and said that he founded ISIL when we pulled out of Iraq. Only problem is, now that Trump is pulling our troops out of Syria, the Kurds may end up releasing around 3,000 ISIL troops.

That will mean that Trump would be responsible for the reformation of ISIL because of the Syrian pullout.

And no, Trump is wrong, ISIL hasn't been defeated yet.

Kurdish-led forces 'may not be able to contain ISIL prisoners'

Ilham Ahmed of the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) warned that the Trump administration's decision to withdraw all of its forces would have dangerous repercussions and a destabilising effect on the entire region.


"Under the threat of the Turkish state, and with the possibility of Daesh (ISIL) reviving once again, I fear the situation will go out of control and we no longer be able to contain them," Ahmed said at a news conference in Paris on Friday when asked if the SDF was considering releasing hundreds of ISIL detainees.


On Thursday, The New York Times reported that the SDF had discussed releasing almost 3,200 local and foreign ISIL prisoners.

Once we are gone and out of sight..........that equation will change..........count on it.

 

[Olde Europe]

ISIS is not an ideology. It's a terrorist organization bent on forming a Caliphate.

Moronic retort.......terrorism IS an ideology.........Think before you type.

It's getting worse by the day. Terrorism is a strategy, not an ideology. ISIS is an organization, not an ideology. It may be underpinned by a bastardized version of a religion, which might be called an ideology, but it isn't one.

And no, insulting me won't in any way diminish your failed argument for troop deployments in Syria. That remains as invalid as it was, previously.

And, just in case you are wondering: The best way to judge any aspect of foreign policy is to take a close look at the long-term American interests, in conjunction with the interests of allies. Looking at who might be gloating, and doing the opposite in case you don't like them, is kindergarten, not the behavior of a superpower.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Well, one of the possible results of the pull out is that the Kurds (the people we were helping), are saying that they will no longer be able to hold ISIL prisoners, and may end up releasing them.

Trump bitched about Obama, and said that he founded ISIL when we pulled out of Iraq. Only problem is, now that Trump is pulling our troops out of Syria, the Kurds may end up releasing around 3,000 ISIL troops.

That will mean that Trump would be responsible for the reformation of ISIL because of the Syrian pullout.

And no, Trump is wrong, ISIL hasn't been defeated yet.

Kurdish-led forces 'may not be able to contain ISIL prisoners'

Ilham Ahmed of the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) warned that the Trump administration's decision to withdraw all of its forces would have dangerous repercussions and a destabilising effect on the entire region.


"Under the threat of the Turkish state, and with the possibility of Daesh (ISIL) reviving once again, I fear the situation will go out of control and we no longer be able to contain them," Ahmed said at a news conference in Paris on Friday when asked if the SDF was considering releasing hundreds of ISIL detainees.


On Thursday, The New York Times reported that the SDF had discussed releasing almost 3,200 local and foreign ISIL prisoners.

Once we are gone and out of sight..........that equation will change..........count on it.

Once we are gone and out of sight, the Kurds won't have as much manpower available, and they will more than likely turn those 3,000 ISIL fighters loose.

 

[pismoe]

seems like our Saudi allies and their leader 'MSB' are sending troops to fight for and to protect and support 'kurds' from 'islamic state' and the 'turks' . If so , why are USA Troops needed to protect and fight for the 'kurds' eh ??

 

[eagle1462010]

Well, one of the possible results of the pull out is that the Kurds (the people we were helping), are saying that they will no longer be able to hold ISIL prisoners, and may end up releasing them.

Trump bitched about Obama, and said that he founded ISIL when we pulled out of Iraq. Only problem is, now that Trump is pulling our troops out of Syria, the Kurds may end up releasing around 3,000 ISIL troops.

That will mean that Trump would be responsible for the reformation of ISIL because of the Syrian pullout.

And no, Trump is wrong, ISIL hasn't been defeated yet.

Kurdish-led forces 'may not be able to contain ISIL prisoners'

Ilham Ahmed of the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) warned that the Trump administration's decision to withdraw all of its forces would have dangerous repercussions and a destabilising effect on the entire region.


"Under the threat of the Turkish state, and with the possibility of Daesh (ISIL) reviving once again, I fear the situation will go out of control and we no longer be able to contain them," Ahmed said at a news conference in Paris on Friday when asked if the SDF was considering releasing hundreds of ISIL detainees.


On Thursday, The New York Times reported that the SDF had discussed releasing almost 3,200 local and foreign ISIL prisoners.

Once we are gone and out of sight..........that equation will change..........count on it.

Once we are gone and out of sight, the Kurds won't have as much manpower available, and they will more than likely turn those 3,000 ISIL fighters loose.

If we aren't there to keep them tame.........they will not escape with their lives...........The Kurds know what they are..............