Trump pulls US out of Syria; GOP Senators object (1 Viewer)

superchuck500

tiny changes
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Diamond VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 9, 2004
Messages
44,578
Reaction score
58,143
Location
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Online
Sticky Post
The move comes on the supposed premise that we have "defeated" ISIS - contrary to recent comments made by administration and military officials. Others worry that the US leaving Syria only emboldens al-Assad and Iran in the region. This evening, it appears that GOP Senators, including Lindsey Graham, Tom Cotton, and Marco Rubio have joined in a letter to the president objecting to the move.

President Donald Trump is finally getting his way in Syria. Vehemently opposed to the extended presence of American troops in the war-ravaged country, he had been forced to keep them there longer than he wanted. Not, it seems, anymore.

“We have defeated isis in Syria, my only reason for being there during the Trump Presidency,” Trump said Wednesday on Twitter.

The tweet appeared to confirm news reports that the United States would withdraw the roughly 2,000 American troops stationed in Syria who are fighting the Islamic State group. The U.S.-led anti-isiscoalition has made significant territorial gains against the militant group, but has struggled to completely eliminate isis from a few pockets in Syria.

But if it is carried out, a U.S. pullout leaves open a question of the militants’ resurgence, and would delight at least two of Syria’s neighbors: Iran and Turkey. American soldiers might have been in Syria to fight isis, but they also served as a deterrent to the Islamic Republic, which supports Syrian President Bashar al-Assad with troops and militia fighters.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/12/trump-signals-us-troops-will-withdraw-syria/578569/


 

efil4stnias

ppfffffttttt
VIP Contributor
Joined
Jul 9, 2001
Messages
28,173
Reaction score
24,448
Location
Madisonville
Online
this is where you are wrong, us being their is not a deterrent, us being there is extending the killing and the war. we were never going to fully engage and fight side by side to overthrow the government and push Russia and Iran out of the area. all we are doing is throwing fuel on the fire. we were prolonging the inevitable and creating a situation that there would never be a winner but continued death. if you go to fight you go to win. giving rebels weapons to go and fight is not the support they needed.
says who?
 

the-commish

Super Forum Fanatic
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Messages
5,982
Reaction score
4,978
Location
Henderson, NV
Online
"GOP senators object" to Trump pulling U.S. support out of Syria, giving ISIS more of a chance to reconstitute itself.

That is good... but doesn't go far enough. So far, GOP is all talk. Let's have some action!

This guy has insulted NATO allies... pulled the rug out from the Kurds (still trying to figure out what Erdogan has on Trump)... agreed to stop joint U.S.-South Korea military exercises (which has been going on for decades) in anticipation of North Korea getting rid of its nukes (which obviously isn't going to happen)... still not even trying to punish Russia for interfering with our elections. DO I NEED TO GO ON?

TRAITOR!
 

Axehandle33

Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2017
Messages
161
Reaction score
277
Offline
As someone who has a nephew who’s been one of the ones in Syria I’m glad we are getting out. I don’t want him being killed defending Kurds in Syria, when most Syrians and their govt do not approve of us being there to begin with. Let France handle that mess.

Kurds are already negotiating with Damascus and Tiger forces are already being sent to Deir-Ezzoir pocket as we speak to take out the few remaining ISIS militants. My nephew and his military buddies agree it’s futile for us to be over there. He was also one iraq once training their troops. According to him that was the biggest issue, we “trained” them like a few weeks and was real basic and then left them to fend for themselves. Over the last 2-3 years they have been trained much better.
 

UriUT

Veteran
Joined
Nov 3, 2001
Messages
330
Reaction score
422
Offline
What Russia is most concerned with in the region is radical Sunni militarism. Russia/Putin do not want anything close to another Chechnya.
It's been a while, but I don't believe this is the sole reason he got involved in Syria from the articles that I read then. A naval base, testing out weaponry and projecting it as advanced to counter US superiority there, and of course regional hegemony.

Edit...And a big middle finger to the West, which were turning their backs to him.

Edit #2: I want to also add that Chechnya was hardly a problem. From my understanding, the bombings in Moscow wasn't because of the Chechnya rebels but rather from his own intelligence service. I can't remember the source (separate from the bombing story) but Putin used chechyna for political gains. the folks there were surprised when the russians invaded.

Edit #3. Sorry this really bugs me. Putin sold himself as the defender against militant islam and for white nationalism. He sponsored series of events in moscow when the reality is he is nothing more than a power hungry goon. Nothing in his foreign policy reflects this story that he's selling.
 
Last edited:

blackadder

...from a chicken, bugwit
VIP Contributor
Joined
Nov 8, 2003
Messages
26,511
Reaction score
17,106
Online
As someone who has a nephew who’s been one of the ones in Syria I’m glad we are getting out. I don’t want him being killed defending Kurds in Syria, when most Syrians and their govt do not approve of us being there to begin with. Let France handle that mess.

Kurds are already negotiating with Damascus and Tiger forces are already being sent to Deir-Ezzoir pocket as we speak to take out the few remaining ISIS militants. My nephew and his military buddies agree it’s futile for us to be over there. He was also one iraq once training their troops. According to him that was the biggest issue, we “trained” them like a few weeks and was real basic and then left them to fend for themselves. Over the last 2-3 years they have been trained much better.
The Kurds at one time or another have fought everyone in that region...the Turks...the Persians...The Iraqi Arabs...the Syrian Arabs...The Kurds sit on some significant oil reserves that touch all of those states. To create a Kurdish State takes land and resources from 4 other States. Classic conflict on top of all the other cultural, religious and tribal conflicts that cut across this area.

The United States has nothing to bring to to this and Washington's acumen in contributing anything positive to these situations is non existent as evidenced by Viet Nam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and a half dozen smaller other smaller boondoggles. Intervention doesn't make things better, in part because the Washington doesn't actually intervene to solve the underlying problems. The humanitarian babble is the fig leaf.

Underneath are more mercenary and geopolitical motivations. In Syria it is the continuation of the series of regime change wars set off with the attack in on Iraq meant to culminate in regime change in Iran as desired by the Israelis. To get at Iran a piece of the plan was to overthrow the Assad government and cut the link across Syria to the Lebanese Shia so Iran has no, or limited, ability to retaliate against Israel. Likewise inhibit Russian ability to aid the Persians.




This is why so much of the proxy army against Assad has been recruited form abroad ans sent to Syria certainly with State support. Without this harebrained scheme, Syria is not in ruins and millions of refugees are not streaming into Europe stressing that society and contributing to the rise of the right, ISIS doesn't have the chaos to feed on (as it has in Iraq as well).

Part of the motivation is also to increase the costs of the Russians of maintaining a position in Syria, as they have for like 60-70 years, which is another self-serving higher level game here that has nothing to do with "democracy" and humanitarianism in Syria and more about what Washington wants, not Syrians.

All of this was always madness.

Get out of that place and don't look back. Next out of Afghanistan.

No clear goals, No achievable goals other than to sit around and kick the can. The Middle East such that it is was better with Saddam and will be better with an anti-jihadi government in control of Syria.

And our "allies" in Syria, Lol.

"SDF" has jihadi and Al Queda groups come and go. Head choppers that you should want nothing to do with. The Kurds? Maybe more palatable but they had there own terror group at work in Turkey for a long time and at one time were Iranian allies. No one there is to be trusted and Washington has proven it can't manage these kind of treachrous elements.

I mean,,,we were allies with Osama bin Laden and Al Queda in Afghanistan. Look how that turned out.

In fact, the whole Syria boondoogle with backing jihadis to try to overthrow a Russian backed government looks astoundingly like the experience in Afghanistan. Can anyone in Washington ever learn lessons from history?
 
Last edited:

dtc

VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Joined
Dec 26, 2006
Messages
27,855
Reaction score
25,554
Location
Redneck Riviera
Offline
"GOP senators object" to Trump pulling U.S. support out of Syria, giving ISIS more of a chance to reconstitute itself.

That is good... but doesn't go far enough. So far, GOP is all talk. Let's have some action!

This guy has insulted NATO allies... pulled the rug out from the Kurds (still trying to figure out what Erdogan has on Trump)... agreed to stop joint U.S.-South Korea military exercises (which has been going on for decades) in anticipation of North Korea getting rid of its nukes (which obviously isn't going to happen)... still not even trying to punish Russia for interfering with our elections. DO I NEED TO GO ON?

TRAITOR!
The entire Republican Party is a bunch of soulless liars.

Look at what they said about Obama doing anything. Brown suit, feet up, bowing.....

This clown has done so many ignorant, stupid and wrong things and they won't say a word. Telegraphing the move out of Syria via Twitter is just the latest and given the fact that he pilloried Obama for announcing moves in advance it's just comical that the GOP has fallen to lower than dirt.
 

Brandon13

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Mar 12, 2006
Messages
3,723
Reaction score
1,759
Age
31
Location
Pensacola, FL
Online
I mean, Trump's probably going about it all wrong because that's what he does... but in general I'm happy that we're getting troops out of the Middle East.

It could end up being a forking disaster, but I'm willing to give it a shot.
 

travelingsaintsfan

ALL-MADDEN TEAM
Gold VIP Contributor
Joined
Jul 8, 2001
Messages
2,746
Reaction score
432
Location
Elberta, AL
Online
The entire Republican Party is a bunch of soulless liars.

Look at what they said about Obama doing anything. Brown suit, feet up, bowing.....

This clown has done so many ignorant, stupid and wrong things and they won't say a word. Telegraphing the move out of Syria via Twitter is just the latest and given the fact that he pilloried Obama for announcing moves in advance it's just comical that the GOP has fallen to lower than dirt.
This is one of my biggest faults with Trump. I wish someone would take his phone away from him and shove it up his butt.
 

Oye

shopgirl's metaphysic
VIP Contributor
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
20,752
Reaction score
32,643
Location
Lebronto
Offline
This is one of my biggest faults with Trump. I wish someone would take his phone away from him and shove it up his butt.
I read the first few words and thought you were responding to the "Republican party is a bunch of soulless liars" and thought maybe we're getting somewhere - but then realized it was skipped over

as for the phone - if you look at it beyond just the phone and look at what the phone represents or puts on exhibit, you learn that it's not the phone that is the problem. The problem doesn't somehow magically go away if the phone is taken from him. I hear this comment from people often, and it's usually when people are pressed to criticize Trump and it's the best they can do.

His phone addiction is not one of his "biggest faults." Rather, it's a conduit to what the bigger faults are - he lies outright, he bullies from the biggest pulpit in the land, he's relatively illiterate compared to the POTUS standard, he's tempestuous, he's underinformed, he's technologically insecure (in a literal and pyschological sense), etc.

I'm glad he's a Twitter addict and obsessed with being validated, absorbed in his own infallibility, because at least we can a peak into these various psychoses. Without his incessant need to be seen and heard, even when his thoughts are incoherent and unhinged, furiously typed out at 3am as he endures the 5-hour energy come down haze, we wouldn't be privy to 'what's he really thinking?'

In that regard, I'm actually grateful for this Twitter-induced transparency
 

travelingsaintsfan

ALL-MADDEN TEAM
Gold VIP Contributor
Joined
Jul 8, 2001
Messages
2,746
Reaction score
432
Location
Elberta, AL
Online
The entire Republican Party is a bunch of soulless liars.

Look at what they said about Obama doing anything. Brown suit, feet up, bowing.....

This clown has done so many ignorant, stupid and wrong things and they won't say a word. Telegraphing the move out of Syria via Twitter is just the latest and given the fact that he pilloried Obama for announcing moves in advance it's just comical that the GOP has fallen to lower than dirt.
Aren't all politicians liars? They may not when they first get into politics, but the parties will eventually turn them into liars.
 

saintmdterps

Well now take a look at that
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Gold VIP Contributor
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
14,580
Reaction score
13,619
Age
58
Location
Salisbury, Maryland
Offline
The Kurds at one time or another have fought everyone in that region...the Turks...the Persians...The Iraqi Arabs...the Syrian Arabs...The Kurds sit on some significant oil reserves that touch all of those states. To create a Kurdish State takes land and resources from 4 other States. Classic conflict on top of all the other cultural, religious and tribal conflicts that cut across this area.

The United States has nothing to bring to to this and Washington's acumen in contributing anything positive to these situations is non existent as evidenced by Viet Nam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and a half dozen smaller other smaller boondoggles. Intervention doesn't make things better, in part because the Washington doesn't actually intervene to solve the underlying problems. The humanitarian babble is the fig leaf.

Underneath are more mercenary and geopolitical motivations. In Syria it is the continuation of the series of regime change wars set off with the attack in on Iraq meant to culminate in regime change in Iran as desired by the Israelis. To get at Iran a piece of the plan was to overthrow the Assad government and cut the link across Syria to the Lebanese Shia so Iran has no, or limited, ability to retaliate against Israel. Likewise inhibit Russian ability to aid the Persians.




This is why so much of the proxy army against Assad has been recruited form abroad ans sent to Syria certainly with State support. Without this harebrained scheme, Syria is not in ruins and millions of refugees are not streaming into Europe stressing that society and contributing to the rise of the right, ISIS doesn't have the chaos to feed on (as it has in Iraq as well).

Part of the motivation is also to increase the costs of the Russians of maintaining a position in Syria, as they have for like 60-70 years, which is another self-serving higher level game here that has nothing to do with "democracy" and humanitarianism in Syria and more about what Washington wants, not Syrians.

All of this was always madness.

Get out of that place and don't look back. Next out of Afghanistan.

No clear goals, No achievable goals other than to sit around and kick the can. The Middle East such that it is was better with Saddam and will be better with an anti-jihadi government in control of Syria.

And our "allies" in Syria, Lol.

"SDF" has jihadi and Al Queda groups come and go. Head choppers that you should want nothing to do with. The Kurds? Maybe more palatable but they had there own terror group at work in Turkey for a long time and at one time were Iranian allies. No one there is to be trusted and Washington has proven it can't manage these kind of treachrous elements.

I mean,,,we were allies with Osama bin Laden and Al Queda in Afghanistan. Look how that turned out.

In fact, the whole Syria boondoogle with backing jihadis to try to overthrow a Russian backed government looks astoundingly like the experience in Afghanistan. Can anyone in Washington ever learn lessons from history?
The US has no need being in the middle east because the US does not understand the various cultures present in the region, nor does it want to. The US is quite happy to consider most middle-easterners (except Israelis) as ignorant goal herders who just happen to sit upon significant oil reserves.

As proof of the above, when the US went to invade Afghanistan in 2003, it knew so little about the region that it sent federal government employees on a fact-finding mission about the region. This mission consisted of going to libraries and bookstores, and buying up texts on Afghanistan then distributing them to the soldiers who were about to be deployed to the region. I **** you not, and that was the extent of it.

The US entered Afghanistan in 2003 with no exit plan, and in 15 years never did develop a plan. Not even close. Now, with Donny Boy it's just "We're taking our toys and going home, Period" The man has no knowledge of ANY subject much less the intricacies of foreign policy, because foreign policy would mean he must deal with people who don't look, act, talk, and think like him. Trump hasn't the intelligence or the will to do it.
 
Last edited:

JimEverett

More than 15K posts served!
Joined
Mar 18, 2001
Messages
24,410
Reaction score
7,357
Offline
It's been a while, but I don't believe this is the sole reason he got involved in Syria from the articles that I read then. A naval base, testing out weaponry and projecting it as advanced to counter US superiority there, and of course regional hegemony.

Edit...And a big middle finger to the West, which were turning their backs to him.

Edit #2: I want to also add that Chechnya was hardly a problem. From my understanding, the bombings in Moscow wasn't because of the Chechnya rebels but rather from his own intelligence service. I can't remember the source (separate from the bombing story) but Putin used chechyna for political gains. the folks there were surprised when the russians invaded.

Edit #3. Sorry this really bugs me. Putin sold himself as the defender against militant islam and for white nationalism. He sponsored series of events in moscow when the reality is he is nothing more than a power hungry goon. Nothing in his foreign policy reflects this story that he's selling.
I don't think its the "sole reason: for action in Syria - I am saying it is the main thrust of any broader mideast strategy.

I think there is more than one reason for what they are doing in Syria. Certainly anti-terrorism is one of the main reasons. Support for Assad is another. Perhaps taking the focus off of Ukraine plays a role as well.
But the idea that Russia has designs on the mideast in some sort of broad sense is bizarre and is simply domestic talking-points paranoia. Pulling out of Syria does not put the Arabian Peninsula, for instance, under threat of realigning with Moscow. It is laughable that people are suggesting something like that.
 

UriUT

Veteran
Joined
Nov 3, 2001
Messages
330
Reaction score
422
Offline
I don't think its the "sole reason: for action in Syria - I am saying it is the main thrust of any broader mideast strategy.

I think there is more than one reason for what they are doing in Syria. Certainly anti-terrorism is one of the main reasons. Support for Assad is another. Perhaps taking the focus off of Ukraine plays a role as well.
But the idea that Russia has designs on the mideast in some sort of broad sense is bizarre and is simply domestic talking-points paranoia. Pulling out of Syria does not put the Arabian Peninsula, for instance, under threat of realigning with Moscow. It is laughable that people are suggesting something like that.
It was Putin's stated goal yes. However, I doubt it was the main thrust or even a priority. Assad knew the West's intentions of supporting his more moderate opposition. As such, there was a silent agreement that Assad and ISIL not to engage while the two factions attacked those moderate opposition. The Russians entered and continued to bomb those moderate factions. We complained but had not any real power to stop those bombardments. All the while, Putin never seriously planned, attacked, nor cooperated in attacking ISIS. Of course, we can support Putin's lies by stating that the "moderate" opposition were terrorists in Assad's eyes and all is forgiven.

To the hegemony question, losing Syria may not be the end of the world. Rather we never had it after we decided not to intervene. This puts a lot of pressure on the Saudis though. That may not be a bad thing. They've gone rogue on us by invading Yemen. But let's not forget the real reason why we have troops in Syria. It is to destroy ISIL. Assad won't do it. Certaintly not the Russians. We made this mess by invading Iraq without any real occupation plans. As have been stated, whether you like this move or not, a president who takes actions without deliberate and well informed thoughts puts us at risk. He said ISIS was destroyed and then said it's not. He was impulsive while chatting with Erdogan and threw his hands in the air, claiming "it's yours". How bad would it be to ask your military leaders the timeline. Our presence was minimal and effective. It had a relatively low risk of casualties. They were mostly advisers and support, and not mainline attack forces. Instead, he bent to external pressures and not for our good (destroying a breeding ground for militant islam). If he were to take this action, why not withdraw all our troops who are fighting militant islam from Africa? That is dangerous considering he caved to pressures from Erdogan and Putin without deep consideration.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)



Saints Headlines (The Advocate)

Headlines

Top Bottom