Trump’s decision on Syria (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

    MT15

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Mar 13, 2019
    Messages
    19,457
    Reaction score
    26,663
    Location
    Midwest
    Offline
    I heard a lot of talk this morning on this seemingly abrupt decision. I heard worry that Turkey will roll into Syria and massacre the Kurds who have been one of our most loyal allies in the region. Lindsey Graham isn’t a big fan, and I think when Trump flirted with this decision before is when Jim Mattis resigned, but I may be misremembering that.

    What I have not heard is why Trump is doing this now, when he was dissuaded before. What has changed to cause us to abandon the Kurds to an oppressive regime that is certainly capable of rolling in there to slaughter them? Graham seems more concerned that this gives ISIS a new boost.


    "This impulsive decision by the President has undone all the gains we've made, thrown the region into further chaos. Iran is licking their chops. And if I'm an ISIS fighter I've got a second lease on life. So to those who think ISIS has been defeated you will soon see," Graham said during an interview on Fox News' "Fox and Friends."

    "I hope I'm making myself clear how shortsighted and irresponsible this decision is in my view," the South Carolina Republican added.

    Graham, a supporter of the President who has at times previously split with him publicly, said, "I like President Trump. I've tried to help him. This to me is just unnerving to its core to say to the American people, 'ISIS has been destroyed in Syria' -- (that) is not true."
     
    Push back? I think his support among his base has never been stronger. - I know a lot of people who are like me, they either didn't support him at all or only reluctantly pulled the lever for him in 2016 but now are definitely in his corner.
    So you support his pulling troops out of Syria? You support him doing so seemingly at the behest of Turkey's president, for reasons that certainly appear to be for his own financial gain?
     
    Push back? I think his support among his base has never been stronger. - I know a lot of people who are like me, they either didn't support him at all or only reluctantly pulled the lever for him in 2016 but now are definitely in his corner.
    That was the point watt was making. You couldn't care less about how trump's actions are at best unacceptable or at worse, criminal.
     
    Last edited:
    Some details on Trump's conflict of interest in Turkey. Apparently, Trump already caved once due to financial pressure from Turkey when he was implementing the muslim travel ban and Turkey objected. He is totally compromised.

    Without some Simon Biles' level of mental gymnastics, I honestly don't know how anyone can call themselves a constitution rooted patriot, like many in this country like to loudly identify as, and support this president? I really can't.

    The same group of founders that sanctioned Ben Franklin for accepting a dang locket from France because they were so petrified of America becoming like England and their rulers becoming corrupted by conflicts of interest like the monarchy. To then vote and endlessly defend a president who is so far beyond that pale compared to any president in history is simply mindboggling when juxtaposing the positions to me. You almost can't step into any of our most contentious or sacred foreign relationships and not find a direct or indirect conflict of interest with our president. A perception that by itself threatens the integrity in our system because it leaves room for justifiable doubt and disillusion. Or at worse, is actively compromising it in that very way.

    And even when there isn't a conflict of interest he is simply breaking the soul of the presidency in other ways, like soliciting foreign powers to interfere in our democratic processes on his behalf by leveraging his office.
     
    So you support his pulling troops out of Syria? You support him doing so seemingly at the behest of Turkey's president, for reasons that certainly appear to be for his own financial gain?

    "Certainly appear?" That seems like a jump from the term that was littered throughout that article - ostensibly. I realize that far a left writer came up with a theory, but that doesn't make it so. Kinda numb from all the "if true" reporting we have seen.

    I am not immediately appalled by moves to get out our troops out of harm's way, but I am not locked down in support of the move either.
     
    "Certainly appear?" That seems like a jump from the term that was littered throughout that article - ostensibly. I realize that far a left writer came up with a theory, but that doesn't make it so. Kinda numb from all the "if true" reporting we have seen.

    I am not immediately appalled by moves to get out our troops out of harm's way, but I am not locked down in support of the move either.
    He has with his own words stated that there's a conflict of interest concerning the Istanbul Trump Towers. What has occurred to alleviate that conflict? To my knowledge, nothing.
     
    (Note: tweet is a twitter thread)

    This all seems to be going well.

     
    If one takes Trump out of this equation, does it make sense to continue to support the mistakes of the past indefinitely?

    The United States does not have the will to engage in the Total War required to completely remake a society.

    The rehabilitation of Germany and Japan required horrific wars and authoritarian occupations in order to transform the aggressors into allies that could be trusted.

    The US is not going to engage in that in the age of instant information.

    So, knowing we will not fling the full power of the United States against a targeted country, we have engaged in endless brush fire wars with absolutely no exit possible.

    Kids born after the 9/11 attacks are now serving in the US armed forces in support of these wars we never finish.

    It would be my preference that we make no pretense of trying to fix what we break or what has been broken for centuries.
     
    If one takes Trump out of this equation, does it make sense to continue to support the mistakes of the past indefinitely?

    The United States does not have the will to engage in the Total War required to completely remake a society.

    The rehabilitation of Germany and Japan required horrific wars and authoritarian occupations in order to transform the aggressors into allies that could be trusted.

    The US is not going to engage in that in the age of instant information.

    So, knowing we will not fling the full power of the United States against a targeted country, we have engaged in endless brush fire wars with absolutely no exit possible.

    Kids born after the 9/11 attacks are now serving in the US armed forces in support of these wars we never finish.

    It would be my preference that we make no pretense of trying to fix what we break or what has been broken for centuries.

    This is fine and I agree with it.

    The objections are two fold and aren’t at odds with the overall point of your post.

    First, it appears the president came to a pretty momentous decision in a frivolous manner and then announced it late at night by tweet. No discussion took place with allies, our military, or our own State Department. There seems to be confusion about the stated objective of this permission given to Turkey. It should have been a planned withdrawal coordinated with all parties.

    Given the above point and Trump’s financial interests in Turkey paired with the subsequent scheduling of a WH visit with Erdogan, it’s fair to ask if the President had the country’s best interests or his own financial interests as the driving force in his decision.

    We already see that this President has trouble separating his own interests from official business. He routinely spends time during official events discussing political matters. He has what people in the medical field call “poor impulse control”.
     
    This is fine and I agree with it.

    The objections are two fold and aren’t at odds with the overall point of your post.

    First, it appears the president came to a pretty momentous decision in a frivolous manner and then announced it late at night by tweet. No discussion took place with allies, our military, or our own State Department. There seems to be confusion about the stated objective of this permission given to Turkey. It should have been a planned withdrawal coordinated with all parties.

    Given the above point and Trump’s financial interests in Turkey paired with the subsequent scheduling of a WH visit with Erdogan, it’s fair to ask if the President had the country’s best interests or his own financial interests as the driving force in his decision.

    We already see that this President has trouble separating his own interests from official business. He routinely spends time during official events discussing political matters. He has what people in the medical field call “poor impulse control”.
    If the decision is one you agree with, does it matter what the motivation for taking the decision is?

    Our entire Congress enriches themselves by setting up foundations and consultancies that funnel huge amounts of cash to their families in exchange for influence. A lot of that money is coming from foreign governments for policy that is seriously detrimental to this country.

    Trump's crime seems to be that he didn't pretend to be pure as the driven snow and divest himself from his legitimate businesses and participate in the DC grift with the rest of them.
     
    What matters in this case is the appearance of impropriety involving the president.

    But what really matters is the clear signal to our allies that we cannot be trusted. We will not work with them or even give them a “heads up” when we make a major policy decision. We will announce major decisions by late night tweet and then follow up with some really crazy sounding tweets by the President with grandiose delusions about destroying the economy of Turkey.

    It’s utter chaos when we should be the voice of reason and calmness.
     


    So Trump ok'ed the attack on US Allies who has been a loyal support for US troops for years.
     
    If one takes Trump out of this equation, does it make sense to continue to support the mistakes of the past indefinitely?

    No, it doesn't make sense. That is why the U.S. should not abandon the people who have helped them as we have done in the past.

    The rehabilitation of Germany and Japan required horrific wars and authoritarian occupations in order to transform the aggressors into allies that could be trusted.
    That's a strange way to put it, since the "rehabilitation" came after the horrific wars.
     
    No, it doesn't make sense. That is why the U.S. should not abandon the people who have helped them as we have done in the past.


    That's a strange way to put it, since the "rehabilitation" came after the horrific wars.
    You have finally arrived where you need to be, however unwittingly. Both choices are equally bad because of decades of foreign policy failure.

    No, we should not abandon our allies. We also should not engage in warfare with no purpose or end.

    Your choice, because Trump, is to continue a military presence that serves no purpose to US national interests and only increases the likelihood of major conflict in the region.
     
    You have finally arrived where you need to be, however unwittingly.
    Da hell are you talking about?

    Your choice, because Trump, is to continue a military presence that serves no purpose to US national interests and only increases the likelihood of major conflict in the region.
    You have no idea what my choice is.

    Speaking of things that only increase the likelihood of major conflict in the region, moving embassies to Jerusalem and going back on treaties with Iran don't help either.

    I never said the Kurds They "allies", just pawns... they have no oil or religious/political/financial ties to us, so screw them, I guess.
     
    Last edited:
    Trump's been played - pure and simple or otherwise he is truely just a pawn on a lease


    Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan issued a stern warning to Europeans on Thursday.

    In a defiant address to lawmakers from his party just moments ago, the Turkish President said he would continue the operation in northern Syria, adding that if Europe criticizes his military moves, he would open the flood gates and allow 3.6 million Syrian refugees to travel onwards.

    Erdogan also claimed that so far 109 "terrorists" have been neutralized in northern Syria since "Operation Peace Spring" began Wednesday.

    CNN's Clarissa Ward, reporting from northern Syria, said: "He is making it very, very clear that he is not going to tolerate any criticism from the international community despite the bloodshed, and despite real questions about where this military operation ends and how many more civilians will die."


    Russia's Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Thursday that Moscow will seek to promote discussion between Damascus and Ankara, as well as between Syrian authorities and Kurdish organizations, state news agency TASS reported.

    "Now we will seek the need to establish a dialogue between Turkey and Syria. We have reason to believe that it is in the interests of both parties. At the same time, we will negotiate that nevertheless the contacts will be established between Damascus and Kurdish organizations that reject extremism and terrorist methods activities," Lavrov said.
    Lavrov also said the situation in northern Syria could be resolved on the basis of current agreements.

    “From the very beginning of the crisis in Syria, we have always drawn attention to the fact that we understand the Turkish Republic’s legitimate concerns about the security of its borders. At the same time, we have strongly emphasized the need to resolve these concerns within the framework of the agreements that exist between Damascus and Ankara, the so-called 1998 Adan Agreement," Lavrov said, according to TASS.

    He continued, "Unfortunately, the effective implementation of this agreement, which involved joint efforts to curb terrorist attacks on the border between Turkey and Syria, was complicated by the Americans and their coalition on the east bank of the Euphrates."
     
    You have finally arrived where you need to be, however unwittingly. Both choices are equally bad because of decades of foreign policy failure.

    No, we should not abandon our allies. We also should not engage in warfare with no purpose or end.

    Your choice, because Trump, is to continue a military presence that serves no purpose to US national interests and only increases the likelihood of major conflict in the region.

    You think our presence in Syria served no purpose to US national interest? And increased likelihood of major conflict in the region?

    I’m not super up on the ME, but I’ve seen a lot of people from both sides of the aisle making pretty much the opposite points in the news lately.

    One that I recall said that our policies in Syria were one of those times where we were actually fairly successful in our objectives. We had a small “footprint” with relatively few US casualties, we had successfully eliminated the Caliphate, our efforts were keeping Russia from exerting a greater influence in the region. These efforts were successful across two administrations, until the seemingly rash decision was made by Trump without consulting his military, state department, or anyone else, really.

    It’d be hard to convince the Kurds that our presence was increasing the likelihood of major conflict in the region.
     
    say a prominent politician, her driver, members of Kurdish security forces and several civilians were killed by Turkish-backed militants in Syria on Saturday, after videos circulating online appeared to show the killings.

    https://us.cnn.com/2019/10/13/middleeast/syria-turkey-kurdish-politician-intl/index.html

    Turkish-backed militia fighters appear to shoot Kurdish prisoners
    https://us.cnn.com/videos/world/2019/10/13/kurdish-syria-graphic-video-fighters-shooting-vpx.cnn

    And in response after having told Turkey NOT to attack the kurdish people Trump does this...
    President Donald Trump is ordering most of the remaining US forces out of northern Syria, Defense Secretary Mark Esper said Sunday.

    https://us.cnn.com/2019/10/13/politics/us-troops-syria-turkey/index.html

    Why would anyone ever trust the US government again?
     

    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.

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom