SYRIA: What fresh hell is this?

warfare
foreign-policy
#1

What is the exact result the POTUS intends to achieve by pulling our troops out of Syria? It can’t be as simple as the “wag the dog” kinda Clintonesque boolshit could it? I don’t like the idea of letting the Turk dogs loose on the Kurds there…seriously, and I rarely give a shit about much in the middle east.

Our forces are all voluntary and they get compensate just fine. All due respect. I don’t like throwing American blood at any problem that doesn’t have an endgame well in hand. However …we have allies we shouldn’t abandon (again) : reputation still has everything to do with foreign policy until you’re big enough to take over the world…we ain’t.

1 Like
#2

Of course this is the tangled web we have been weaving for over 100 years. Backing out of American adventurism and the entanglements warned about by our founding fathers is not easy to achieve. We have allowed our government to place our well compensated ‘defenders’ in positions where we really have no vested interest… and the reason I know that is that if it was really all that important to the safety and security of the United States of America, we wouldn’t still be sitting in an opiated dustbowl 17 years later… it obviously wasn’t a particularly pressing issue. We need to move from a place where we actually put our citizens, ‘well compensated’ or not in harms way by telling advisories that should we feel compelled to intervene, it will be fast, ruthless and we will not be caring about what the countryside looks like when we are done. Peace through strength does not require us to be active in 70 countries around the world… we have massive threats right here in the USA…

1 Like
#3

What US interest is served by keeping 2,000 US troops in Syria indefinitely?

3 Likes
#4

We are involved in too many conflicts that quite frankly doesn’t concern us !!! When would be a good time to leave in your opinion ? Israel is willing to step in , so let them . Bring our boys HOME !!!

1 Like
#5

We went into a sovereign Nation uninvited, the Syrian Gov. did not request our help. Congress never voted on Authorization for Use of Military Force. Obama sent in troops anyhow and broke his promise for not putting boots on the ground in Syria.

We used the excuse that ISIS was a threat to America. So, if in fact ISIS has been defeated in Syria the mission is over.

If we stay in Syria we need a new mission and to what end?

4 Likes
#6

I never said ‘indefinitely’

So if there is no endgame, then I have no argument about bringing the troops back (they’ll probably be deployed elsewhere in the M.E.) That’s just stupid to not have an exit strategy.

1 Like
#7

There is no end game.

I’d like to see the Mission Statement.

I bet it’s horse shit.

1 Like
#8

Same mission as always - oil war.

1 Like
#9

If we are abandoning the Kurds to yet be massacred again by yet another Islamist regime it will one of the most shameful events in our history.

We’ve had no more reliable ally than the Kurds For the last 30 years and they are the most crapped on people in the world since the fall of the Ottoman Empire.

That being said ISIS as a military organization had all but been completely eliminated so our primary mission in Syria has been accomplished.

Since we first asked for their help during the Gulf War they have fought like tigers side by side with US Special Forces and Rangers and are among the best light infantry troops in the world.

They’ve been on the right side with the allies in every fight since WWI on the promise that one day they’d have their own independent state of Kurdistan and be welcomed among the community of nations as our ally.

We owe them and if we are throwing them under the bus again it’s utterly disgusting so I hope and pray that Trump has had the good sense to get an agreement with Turkey to protect them.

There’s almost no chance we won’t end up back in combat in the region and sooner rather than later and when we do we’ll need them again. Countless US and Allied lives have been spared by our association with them so we better not leave them bare and hanging again.

Syria is a horrible mess and our troops are, and have been in an extremely vulnerable position with enemies on pretty much every side so all things considered I’m happy to see them pulling back but hopefully they’ll remain close enough to jump right back into the fray if need be.

6 Likes
#10

How about just enough and long enough to ensure Iran doesn’t gain anymore of a foot hold there and same with respect to Russia?

1 Like
#11

Al Qaeda. ISIS, ISIL what’s next? Facebukchashavah? No reply necessary - I’ve been drinking rum for about 2 hours.

#12

Trump is getting our troops out while middle East partners are ramping up support for Kurds. Why haven’t we heard about this on MSM? Let Syria & the sandbox sort out their own problems, and let the Russians get stuck in another tar baby - we need out of all middle east & African entanglements!

#13

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman is sending his forces to replace the U.S. troops.

Now let’s consider the brilliance of this move.

First, remember Turkish President Recep Erdogan was the antagonist in the Kashoggi matter and Erdogan orchestrated the blame toward Saudi Crown Prince MbS. There is no better motivated mid-east ally to protect the Kurds against any military action by Turkey other than MbS. No doubt MbS and UAE will send their best forces.

Secondly, what military equipment will MbS and the UAE be shipping along with their military troops? Those would be military purchases directly from the U.S.

Third, who stood up against international pressure and refused to condemn MbS over the Kashoggi matter? That would be a strategic U.S. President Trump. MbS owes a favor; see how that works?

Fourth, what leverage does U.S President Trump have toward Turkey in order to further facilitate no hostile action? That would be the economic leverage of current sanctions against Iran; and the option of controlling/punishing any economic engagement therein.

So to summarize: President Trump withdraws U.S. troops from Syria, and leverages his relationship with MbS to step up to replace them, thereby eliminating any concern that Turkey might take hostile action toward our Kurdish allies in Northern Syria.

Our troops come home; and a stable transition is ensured by a regional ally.

How do you like them apples!

1 Like
#14

Not for us. We don’t get much oil from the ME.

#15

I regret that I can only like that post once.

We damn well better not abandon the Kurds.

2 Likes
#16

We need to learn from ourselves. NATO turned out useful when the League of Nations and the UN are crap.

We need to form a Middle East Treaty Organization (METO) with founding members including US, UK, Israel, and SA, along with the smaller willing ME states. If Russia is aligning with Iran and taking ownership of Syria, we should extend our alliance metaphor to oppose them.

1 Like
#17

From what I hear part of the payoff to keep Turkey neutral towards the kurds was at least a preliminary promise of sales of F-35’s to them from the US.

#18

True, but the price of oil is still largely dependent on OPEC. Trouble there will necessitate increases in oil prices.

#19

I’m a lot more concerned with countering the expansion of Iran’s influence than I am Putin’s. The Russians are in no shape at all to get involved in a large conflict.

Lower petroleum prices are hurting the Russians more than anyone since their economy is so dependent on oil.

#20

I see the two problems as tightly linked.