US military to maintain open-ended presence in Syria, Tillerson says

fox news ^ | January 17, 2018 | MATTHEW PENNINGTON

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

Speaking at Stanford University after being introduced by former top diplomat Condoleezza Rice, Tillerson said the Trump administration was determined not to repeat President Barack Obama's "mistake" when he withdrew U.S. troops from Iraq in 2011. Republicans for years have argued the withdrawal created the opening for IS' rapid expansion....
Securing a successful U.N. peace process, getting Syrian President Bashar Assad to leave power, ridding Syria of Iran's influence and eradicating all weapons of mass destruction in the country.

[Parley Baer]

It is not President Trump’s goal to oust Assad. His goal is to kill all ISIS and others of that ilk. By leaving we may open the door for them to rebound.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

I think Assad can handle what’s left of Isis. But Tillerson really wants a pipeline.

[Glad2bnuts]

We have 12 bases within Syrian borders, get them out NOW. President Trump, you vowed to not engage in the same activity as Obama and GW. No more nation building, Syria is just fine the way it is and is NONE OF OUR BUSINESS. We took Libya from a stable country, to one that is filled with ISIS and AlKayda. The weapons were looted and moved into the wars in Iraq and Syria. In fact, ISIS is USUS. We partnered with moderates, who immediately after being trained by our CIA put on the black outfit and went after Assad.

[Glad2bnuts]

It is the policy of the US State dept, and the President to cut off a portion of land to give to the Kurds, we will then be in violation of the UN and international laws. Might does not make right. Leave the Middle East alone. Besides, the biggest enemy in the ME is Saudi Arabia. THEY are the ones building mosques around the world. THEY are the ones who are radicalizing fighters. THEY are the ones who really were responsible for 9-11-01. THEY are the true enemy of all that is good and true in that region of the world.

[Dagnabitt]

Agree. Saudi Arabia should have eaten about 5 nukes after 9-11. Unfortunately they had their own cabin boy, the stuttering drunk George Junior, in the White House. He obediently scarified a few thousand American lives to rid the Saudi royals of their non-911-involved enemy Saddam Hussein - while young Saudi men lounged around in shopping malls.

[morphing libertarian]

I think when the King kissed him and held his hadn’t W had a King-crush.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

This is a good idea, I repeat this is a good idea!! The only problem here may be international law (I’m sure Assad does not want us there). As long as our troops are not dying (as they are not) what does it matter if we station troops in Iraq and Syria? We need to keep a lid on the crazies and this is the way to help stabilize the region. No more ISIS or it’s next generation.

As an aside, if international pressure (it may be unlawful) forces us to get out, we need to keep troops in the area such as Iraq and Kuwait to be a rapid response force to meet potential issues rising. At any rate, we need to stay there to continue to help our only real allies in Syria, the Kurds.

The best way to not fight the next war there is to keep a sizable amount of troops there with the ability to go on the offense rapidly.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

I agree. GWB, Obama, and Hillary demonstrated the wrong way.

[Theoria]

'As long as our troops are not dying (as they are not) '

We've lost troops in Syria since 2016.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

Tillerson says get rid of Assad. Look what that kind of meddling has done so far. Why can’t Assad handle what is left of isis without US ground troops?

[robroys woman]

I listen to NPR for comic relief.

However, that got old early last year. The only reason I’m listening now is that I’m commuting in my winter car. I’m stuck with CD’s and radio. :(

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"We've lost troops in Syria since 2016."

No doubt, but the fighting is all but over and we are not losing troops now. The subject is after the war is over do we keep troops stationed there. I say yes and you only have to go back to Obama pulling our troops out of Iraq. I denounced it then and we saw what happened. Do you want that to happen again?

Having troops there means they are stationed there and on a base. They are not out on patrol and are not engaged in active operations. They stay on base and conduct training and stay ready and are used as a deterrence and a rapid reaction force in case the crazies start to get out of hand.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"Tillerson says get rid of Assad. Look what that kind of meddling has done so far. Why can’t Assad handle what is left of isis without US ground troops?"

I don't think it's possible to get rid of Assad now that Russia got involved. That ship has sailed and I don't think Trump has said that. I'm not advocating we continue offensive operations against ISIS. If all that is left is mop up operations, fine someone else can do that. However, we need troops there to prevent a future outbreak much like what happened here in the first place. We leave and our Kurdish allies will most likely get wiped out. What kind of message does that send to our allies around the world, you can't depend on the U.S.

[Theoria]

'Do you want that to happen again?'

So what? What part of the Constitution are our guys protecting in Syria and Iraq?

This illusion of having foreign welfare to Iraq and Syria, is only holding out the inevitable actions that should play out.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"So what? What part of the Constitution are our guys protecting in Syria and Iraq?"

Preamble of the Constitution:

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, PROVIDE FOR THE COMMON DEFENSE, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

I can make a very good case that it is in our National interests (or provide for the common defense) to have a stable Syria/Iraq. If you want to get into that conversation that's a whole other thread/post.

"This illusion of having foreign welfare to Iraq and Syria, is only holding out the inevitable actions that should play out."

You must be responding to someone else because nowhere did I talk about giving foreign welfare to Iraq and Syria. I talked about having bases there to keep stability and provide rapid reaction forces in case the next ISIS pops up. I never talked about building roads/schools/etc... Let the U.N. do that.

[BeauBo]

“Do you know how many troops do we have in Syria?”

Numbers have varied from a few hundred to a few thousand. Some of the larger units that supported the offensive against the ISIS Capital of Raqqa, like the Marine artillery unit, have since come home.

Last month (Dec 17), the Washington Post put the total at 2,000.

[SunkenCiv]

Iran's President Hassan Rouhani, Russia's Vladimir Putin and Turkey's Tayyip Erdogan meet in Sochi, Russia November 22, 2017. (photo credit: SPUTNIK/MIKHAIL METZEL/KREMLIN VIA REUTERS)

[SunkenCiv]

There are somewhere between 500 and 5300 US troops in Syria, drawn from a single small force (about 5300) serving in the failed states of Iraq and Syria, shifting back and forth across the "border" as needed.

[Texas Fossil]

I read the same number. I think we did pull out the Marine Howitzer units, or are about to.

We may have moved in more staff for training the security forces. Not sure about that.

[Trumpisourlastchance]

We elected Trump to defeat ISIS. Not to remove Assad from power in Syria or occupy Syria. He promised the opposite on that score.