Posted on 12/29/2018 11:30:13 AM PST by rintintin
Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) added her name to the long list of lawmakers to publicly oppose President Trump's decision to pull U.S. troops out of Syria. She minced no words during her appearance on "Face the Nation" over the weekend.
"I am deeply, deeply concerned, and I oppose strongly the president's decision apparently to withdraw troops from Syria, the apparent decision that we're now going to be looking to withdraw troops from Afghanistan," Cheney said. "I think the president has done a lot of very good things in terms of beginning to rebuild our military, getting out of the Iranian nuclear agreement, but these two decisions would be disastrous. They would really in many ways hand victories to our enemies, to Iran, to ISIS in Syria, the Taliban, Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. It's a very dangerous path to go down, and we shouldn't be going down it. We need to make sure that we keep our troops there in order to prevent the establishment of safe havens for those groups that want to attack us."
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
FTA:
“[B]ut these two decisions would be disastrous. They would really in many ways hand victories to our enemies, to Iran, to ISIS in Syria, the Taliban, Al Qaeda in Afghanistan.”
Liz, please tell me how our leaving Syria will “hand a victory” to ISIS in Syria when the Syrian army, with more than enough resources to obliterate ISIS and us no longer secretly supporting ISIS, is right now taking our
place and is supported by our ally, Saudi Arabia.
His picture is next to all of it in the dictionary.
Liz — we pull out and if they pop their head out of the box and threaten US interests we send the military back to break stuff again. You know — pull out, put back in — the same stuff Dick used to do with you.
Somehow we need a military that can remotely and precisely break things that need breaking with minimal risk to US lives, i.e. send in the drones.
“Rep. Cheney should recommend a declaration of war so that the U.S. can justly use its full war capabilities and resources to bring the enemy to unconditional surrender or total annihilation.”
And after we did that, just exactly what would we say we’ve accomplished except the likelihood that we will have suffered more casualties and pi$$ed away more money that we really don’t have in the first place? I am a fan of Israel! That said, other than making sure it survives, what exactly to we gain by being there? We now have more oil than the Saudi’s, so I’d like to know just who’s interests are being served by being there at all. I am way, way more concerned about Putin and the Chinese being in our hemisphere than what goes on in the ME and Africa, starting with “fixing” Venezuela, El Salvador, Guatemala, and most of the rest of the dictator-run mini-$hit hole countries between Mexico and Venezuela.
“If U.S. military action is truly needed in Syria (and not just to enrich the military-industrial complex) then Rep. Cheney should recommend a declaration of war so that the U.S. can justly use its full war capabilities and resources to bring the enemy to unconditional surrender or total annihilation.”
She should also specify against whom, ISIS being mostly defeated and the Syrians doing what looks like a perfectly good job of mopping up.
“We’ve done it her dad’s way (it’s also Hillary Clinton’s way and Barack Obama’s way) since 2001. It’s cost us trillions of dollars and has resulted in us trying to aid Islamic radicals who hate us to overthrow a dictator who also hates us. Liz and the other foreign policy establishment types really need to learn how to learn.”
You left out our most precious “commodity,” our young men and women in our military. Tell f*cking LIz Cheney to agree to send her family members first if she wants to continue this madness. I watched my Aunt and Uncle grieve for the loss of their son in Vietnam until their deaths. We had no business in Vietnam either, but we managed to get 50,000 of our mostly young men killed there for NOTHING!
You left out the first part of my quote: "If U.S. military action is truly needed in Syria (and not just to enrich the military-industrial complex)..."
Well at least a Bushy new world order globalist has for once said why we need to be in Syria. You see, of we leave it will make it possible for various bogeymen to find safe havens. Of course, by that logic we need to be there forever. And everywhere else to, for that matter.
Sorry, Liz. Iraq, Israel, Bahrain and 5 wargroups tend to discount your theory.
The ONLY thing I’m concerned about are the Kurds and would HOPE that we make sure Turkey knows they are off limits.
Our troops in Syria were there in an advisor and training capacity. Trump was advised by CIA, Joint Chiefs, Military intel, his own NSA, et al that we could pull out and still have eyes and ears on the ground and, if need be, we still have forces on the ready in Iraq.
Trump is someone who is cognizant of expense and efficiency and obviously came to the conclusion our interests could be best served by a pullout.
So far, Trump has been right on the money in every major decision.
I think it's safe to say we can trust him here to do the right thing after having heard all the options.
It's not like he's making a decision in a vacuum. He has the best intel in the world and the best advisers.
Unfortunately, I believe Liz, her Daddy Dick and the rest of her family understand very well where they're trying to steer US and World Government.
Firstly, they have worked with a long list of predecessors to see the US Government taken away from the citizenry, replaced with those beholden to the international Illuminati, that wishes all countries to give up their sovereignty and rule as they believe is their divine right, from the seat of the British Monarchy, by the time the Duke of Cambridge has become King (after the heir apparent, Prince Charles, might succeed).
They've also worked to assure that members of the 13 families continue to grow their wealth and leverage over the common folk. Wars have been particularly effective toward that end (as you've noted), but also oil, gold &banks, and drugs have worked so well for the Rockefellers, Rothschilds and Bushes, respectively.
We common folk get to see our children and grandchildren used for cannon fodder.
Liz Cheny: advocate spokeswoman for the Military Industrial Complex
Well, there's a motley crewe.
WE HAD A WHOLE 2000 TROOPS THERE.
At a cost of 150 billion???
WE HAD A WHOLE 2000 TROOPS THERE.
At a cost of 150 billion???
[A real war is way easier - you can beat them and go home. These low-intensity asymmetrical conflicts are way harder.]
The Colombians have been fighting an insurgency for 50 years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colombian_conflict The last Indian campaigns ended in the early 20th century, after almost 400 years of off-and-on insurgent campaigns against European settlers and their descendants. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Indian_Wars There are quicker, low-tech, low-budget ways to resolve this. But that would involve punitive massacres along the lines of Lidice, where 5,000 Czechs were killed in reprisal for the assassination of Reinhard Heydrich. Czech partisan operations were never the same after that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Anthropoid
NeoCon daoughter of NeoCon
“Another warmongering Fredocon.”
What? Because she disagrees with one decision? She even gives our President kudos but GOD forbid should she voice ANY disagreement EVER about ANY policy then she is this classification or that classification or fill in the blank term of the week.
You know your nation is lost when you can’t voice any disagreement over certain policies and must be lock step 100% out of fear of reprisals. Did we become sheep?
Since liz is so hot on staying in syria, perhaps she should fly her sorry ass over there to do the fighting.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.