Trump's frontrunners for Pentagon job likely to share Mattis' views on Syria, Afghanistan

Fox News ^ | December 21, 2018 | Lukas Mikelionis

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"John McCain did many times! Did that make him an “expert” we should have listened to?"

On pulling 2000 troops out of Syria, yes.

[familyop]

"A land war of attrition in Asia was insanity and nation building and spreading democracy in the middle east without trying to reform or eliminate islam is like pissing in the wind."

I've often said the same in regards to doing that where needed. It would be great, if our nation and allies were willing.

Denazification, cumulative review. Report, 1 April 1947-30 April 1948.
http://digital.library.wisc.edu/1711.dl/History.Denazi

[faucetman]

“I don’t know why everyone is assuming the next Secretary of Defense will be a military person. Mattis is actually a rare breed in that post.”

Ah hah! A voice of reason! No more Generals!

[GreyFriar]

Well said in all of your posts in this thread. We saw the result of Obama’s pull out of Iraq and the same will happen in Afghanistan. I’m speaking on this as a retired Army officer and as a former Army historian. I was not enthusiastic over us going into Syria, but we needed to pursue ISIS there.

[central_va]

Well you shouldn't. He is not going to defend our border and he will hide behind the Posse Comitatus lie. He is deep state snake.

Those who invoke Posse Comitatus as a reason not to defend our border do so because they're looking for an excuse not to defend the border at all. Their claims are based on a complete distortion of what Posse Comitatus means (i.e. not using the military as a police force). It's just as specious an argument as the idiotic refrain we keep on hearing about illegal immigrants: "Well, we can't deport them all [so why bother deporting any of them]."

--ek_hornbeck

[GreyFriar]

LS, you posted:

“I’m even in favor of greatly reducing—though not removing-—the number of bases in Germany.””

Unfortunately, 95% of the Cold War US Army and USAF bases in Germany have been CLOSED. The Army has only 2 combat brigades left in Europe, one at Grafenwoehr/Vilseck, Germany and in Vincenza, Italy. The USAF still has a couple of combat squadrons at Ramstein AFB, but all of the other US Air Force bases in Germany are now closed, and only 1 or 2 still exist in Great Britain & Holland. US ARMY Europe headquarters, now a skeleton organization moved from Heidelberg to Wiesbaden 3-4 years ago.

This link shows a couple of dozen Army posts still open in Germany, but they have only small logistical support elements there, not combat units. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Army_installations_in_Germany

[faucetman]

Defense Secretary is a POLITICAL job. It is NOT a military job.

The military is for DEFENSE!

Get OUT of Syria and Afghanistan NOW! We have no business there any longer.

I see all those heroes on those commercials for “Wounded Warriors Project” etc. and my heart breaks for them. I think “for WHAT?”.

NO MORE NEED TO SACRIFICE ONE DROP OF BLOOD FOR SYRIA OR AFGHANISTAN or an arm or a leg or both arms or both legs or both arms and legs or an eye or both eyes or a face or a mind.

We should have turned Kabul into a glass parking lot and been done with it! (not too late)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3edi2Wkr5YI

Dr Strangelove (55 seconds)

[Rashputin]

A hundred plus billion US dollars and twice that many Saudi dollars are what got us ISIS, not premature anything.

[petitfour]

Maybe Divine Providence is his guide. Maybe not.

[LS]

That’s probably as much as we need, though I’d favor the Donald Trump Base in Poland.

[lodi90]

Actually, I think he should pick one of the freepers on here that are all for pulling our troops out of Syria and Afghanistan. These ‘experts’ (most of whom have probably never stepped foot in the Middle East) should be able to do that job quite well.

People need to wake up and smell the coffee!! Yes, I like President Donald J. Trump. That does not mean that I will slavishly follow him over the cliff. On these foreign policy decisions he is dead wrong!! On this issue he is out of his league and needs to listen to his advisers.

On a side note, I had to crack up watching Nazi and Chucky almost well up in tears talking about the departure of Gen Mattis. I guarantee these two probably can’t stand him but will take any moment to preen for the camera how Trump is ruining this country. Gen Mattis will be a big loss and will be missed, however no one is irreplaceable. There are a number of good candidates to get however they will all counsel him that this is a bad move playing into Russia and Turkey’s hands. He needs to pick a good Defense Secretary and quietly pull back on doing this. President Trump is not making any friends in the military by doing this. The military wants to complete the job, not pull out knowing they will be causing a new mess for future soldiers/sailors/airmen/marines.

---

And I’m sure you’ll still be tooting Mattis’s horn when he is VP on the Democrat ticket in 2020. You, my friend, are the one that needs to wake up, smell your coffee and stop your hero worship of Mattis.

Mattis has allied with America hating Democrats and damaged this country resigning in the manner that he did. You need to accept that.

[kabar]

As much as our association with the Kurds has been effective militarily, the US must avoid being sucked into the long held political objective of establishing a Kurdistan that encompasses parts of Turkey, Iraq, Syria, and Iran. It is a no-win for the US.

[Jarhead9297]

The secretary of defense is in every service member’s chain of command. Yes a civilian but every part of the military as is the President.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"I was not enthusiastic over us going into Syria, but we needed to pursue ISIS there."

Yes, as soon as they became a caliphate and had huge swaths of territory they controlled, much in Iraq, we had no choice. It should have been done constitutionally though with a vote in Congress. If we wouldn't have pulled out of Iraq, we would have never had to go in in the first place. ISIS may have been created, but there would have been no mass sectarian violence in 2011 and 2012 in Iraq, ISIS would not have invaded Iraq and if they had tried the Iraqi forces backed by our supporting arms would have drove them back across in Syria not run like they actually did. We could have contained them in Syria and let them and the Russians and the Syrian Army blow each other up.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"And I’m sure you’ll still be tooting Mattis’s horn when he is VP on the Democrat ticket in 2020."

I'm guessing you probably first heard General Mattis name when Trump was looking to nominate him to be SecDef. The reason I say that is you truly do not know what kind of man General Mattis is. He will not be running as VP on the Democratic side. You can take that to the bank. If he ever pops up again it will be as SecDef/NSA/etc... in another administration but don't even count on that.

I have no hero worship of General Mattis but I respect the hell out of him and men like General Kelly. For an example, listen to this speech that General Kelly gave about two Marines to a gold star family group:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvKo6SK-Jwc

He gave this speech only a few days after his own son died in Iraq and he became a gold star father. He didn't talk about his own son, he talked about these two Marines under his command.

There are a lot of Men and Women I respect highly. I could go on and on about Men I have met that I have/had the greatest respect for. That doesn't mean hero worship, it means respect and I try my best to pattern myself after them and live in ways that these type of men would approve of.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"As much as our association with the Kurds has been effective militarily, the US must avoid being sucked into the long held political objective of establishing a Kurdistan that encompasses parts of Turkey, Iraq, Syria, and Iran. It is a no-win for the US."

I agree with you and while I support that happening it should happen organically without our help. Fortunately, I have not seen anyone discuss that as a U.S. policy or objective. The Kurds deserve their own country and I hope someday they get it.

[Alberta's Child]

It's been a long travel day. LOL. But I'm back and ready to go!

1. Complete the destruction of ISIS by supporting our Kurdish allies in wiping out their last small stronghold around the Euphrates River.

First of all, this idea of "Kurdish allies" is fraught with all kinds of problems. The Kurds are an ethnic group spread across multiple sovereign nations -- one of which (Turkey) actually is an ally of the U.S. The Kurds, in fact, have been engaged in a decades-long insurgency within the borders of Turkey. How does a country like the U.S. possibly maintain an "alliance" under these conditions?

Secondly, ISIS only exists because the U.S. bungled the Iraqi invasion, occupation and half-assed "rebuilding" since 2003. Telling me that the U.S. must maintain a military presence in Syria to fix a problem that we created is a terrible argument to make.

2. Ensure that Iranian troops leave Syria.

What if the government of Syria wants them there? Is that OK?

3. Support our Kurdish allies by ensuring that Turkey pulls out of Northern Syria and leaves the Kurds alone.

See the first part of my answer to #1 above. The decision by the U.S. to treat a group operating outside any legitimate government structure as an "ally" was one of the dumbest decisions anyone in Washington could have made. The U.S. treating the Kurds as "allies" is like Mexico treating ethnic Mexicans in the U.S. as "allies" -- and acting accordingly. How's that working out for us?

Now, I get to ask you a question. Why does it bother you and others that we keep 2000 American troops in Syria to secure our National Interests? They are not in any immediate danger, they are not getting killed and they will only be pulling back to Kuwait or Iraq, not coming home.

A. The "national interests" you listed above aren't national interests at all. They sound more like Kurdish interests.

B. This apparently comes as a shock to a lot of people here on FreeRepublic, but some of us actually expect the U.S. to operate based on standards and principles. Syria is a sovereign nation, and the U.S. has no business occupying a sovereign nation this way. See Item (C) below.

C. Putting U.S. military personnel in foreign countries without a formal declaration of war by Congress is a violation of our founding principles, is a blatant violation of the U.S. Constitution, and would have been considered utterly repulsive by the men who founded this country. Is there any reason beyond this that even needs to be discussed?

You can hold both beliefs you know. Secure our border and not pull out of Syria.

And yet you never hear about people who hold both beliefs -- at least not in Washington. The dopes who always pushed for these endless military campaigns -- like Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio -- were always the same dopes pushing for open borders. Did you ever ask yourself why?

I'll tell you why: None of these people think of the United States of America as a nation at all. To them, this "country" is nothing more than the home base of a global empire that has no borders, no national identity, and whose "government" is simply an administrative apparatus for this empire of theirs.

No thanks. I voted for Donald Trump because I'm sick of that sh!t. MAGA.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"Putting U.S. military personnel in foreign countries without a formal declaration of war by Congress is a violation of our founding principles, is a blatant violation of the U.S. Constitution, and would have been considered utterly repulsive by the men who founded this country. Is there any reason beyond this that even needs to be discussed?"

Alberta, I'll address this one first. First off, Article 1 Section 8 give the Congress the power to declare war. I have to talk about this a lot on here. It does not say a formal declaration of war. It does not mean that the President has to go down to the well of the Congress and ask for a declaration of war like President Roosevelt did. I agree they should have declared war. The Constitution does not tell them how to do it. If they wanted some official declaration against ISIS fine but an authorization for the use of force against ISIS in Iraq and Syria would have done quite nicely. I agree they should have done this and get these pols on the record as voting for or against it. It's in the Presidents best interest politically as well. However, that's water under the bridge and Obama didn't do it. I said at the time he should have done it and I say it now. We are dealing with 2018 and so let's not rehash the past. President Trump in his speeches said his goal was to wipe ISIS out. They still hold ground in Syria, wipe that out and then we can start going home.

"one of which (Turkey) actually is an ally of the U.S"

Yes, wonderful ally. This would be the ally that wouldn't let us use them as a staging area to go into Iraq (a war which did get congressional approval). They also wouldn't let us fly missions out of Incirlik to support the mission. This is an ally that held Pastor Brunsen illegally for about two years. This is a NATO ally who has become a dictatorship in all but name. They don't help us out one iota so I don't really care what Turkey wants. They are not our true ally. If they were our true ally they would have been fighting to wipe out ISIS along with us. Did you know unlike our 'Ally', the Kurds has long recognized Israel as a sovereign state?

"Secondly, ISIS only exists because the U.S. bungled the Iraqi invasion, occupation and half-assed "rebuilding" since 2003."

So instead of learning from mistakes, we should continue to repeat them? Iraq was very stable in 2009 - 2010. We pulled out, sectarian violence shot up and this gave rise to ISIS. So now before we actually finish the job while we have them on the ropes, we should pull out. Yeah, that makes sense.

"What if the government of Syria wants them there? Is that OK?"

Russia, Turkey and Iran are holding talks on Syria right now. The Iranians will be pulling out but if we pull out and lose our leverage they most likely won't. My opinion, that guarantees an eventual showdown between Israel and Iran in Syria sending the Middle East further into chaos and most likely dragging us back in. All because you want to see 2000 troops who are not in harms way pull out of Syria.

I think I covered it all Alberta's Child. If I missed something you felt important, feel free to bring it back up.

[Alberta's Child]

All good responses. I'll address key points one by one.

1. Be careful about letting Congress off the hook for declaring war as a condition of using military force. Look what is happening here now: Members of the same Congress that never authorized anyone to conduct a military operation in Syria are complaining that President Trump is pulling those 2,000 troops OUT of Syria. If you're suggesting that these troops should be left there simply because it's "water under the bridge," then let's just dispense with Congress and let the President and a military junta run the damn country.

2. A declaration of war is a formality by definition. There's a reason for this: It is legal proceeding as much as anything else, and is accompanied by all kinds of legal formalities that govern everyone who is involved (diplomatic ties, military operations, prisoners of war, etc.). It also means the President of the United States must act as commander in chief to defeat an actual ENEMY -- which is the main reason why Congress will NOT declare war (the U.S. is not fighting an enemy in any of these actions; we're taking sides in civil wars).

3. Turkey may not be a great ally, but as fellow NATO members the U.S. and Turkey have mutual defense obligations to each other. That's probably the perfect definition of an "ally" in international affairs. A mutual defense obligation, however, does not obligate Turkey to assist a U.S. military campaign against a country that never attacked the U.S. If you want to make the case that Turkey and the U.S. no longer have mutual defense interests, then let's work on getting them out of NATO so they can be treated like any other Islamic dump over there.

4. The U.S. pulled out of Iraq at the end of 2011 because that's when the U.S. and Iraq agreed to have all U.S. combat troops leave Iraq. You can read the U.S.-Iraq Status of Forces agreement signed by George W. Bush in 2008 for the details.

5. Needlessly pissing away thousands of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars isn't a smart way to "learn from mistakes." I'm not sure why anyone would believe this line of thinking makes any sense. "We didn't do it right before, but you must let us try it again somewhere else."

6. Why do so many Freepers keep posting things that suggest countries like Russia and Iran are hostile occupying forces in Syria? They'll stay there as long as the Syrians want them there. What "leverage" are we supposed to have there? How about we send a family of Mexicans to move into your house when you're away for a few days -- just so they have "leverage" to make you call your Congressman to get the whole neighborhood turned into Section 8 housing?

7. If 2,000 U.S. troops in Syria are the only thing keeping the region from descending into chaos, then I'm go out on a limb here and suggest that the region isn't about to descend into any more chaos than it's already facing.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"Be careful about letting Congress off the hook for declaring war as a condition of using military force."

I'm not letting them off the hook. I'm saying they were wrong. What I am saying is I don't want to rehash that, it does no good and is a pointless debate exercise. We should be concentrating on the situation in 2018. I can't change what Congress should have done in 2014 or 2015.

"A declaration of war is a formality by definition."

And it's not a requirement per the constitution. The Constitution says in Artile 1 Section 8 that the Congress has the power to delare war. It doesn't tell them how to do it. However they do it, they should vote on it and be accountable for their votes. If they are smart they put the objectives in the bill so they can hold the President to it.

" If you want to make the case that Turkey and the U.S. no longer have mutual defense interests, then let's work on getting them out of NATO"

I'm all for it. First we have to work on re-deploying our Airbase out of Incirlik and then lets work on kicking that rising Caliphate out of NATO.

"The U.S. pulled out of Iraq at the end of 2011 because that's when the U.S. and Iraq agreed to have all U.S. combat troops leave Iraq"

You know that Obama wanted out of Iraq. The Iraqis wanted anywhere from 10,000 - 20,000 troops to stay in the new SOFA agreement. Obama offered somewhere around 3,500 which was a joke. Maliki knew this would do nothing and he had to look elsewhere for his support and cut the U.S. loose. Obama got to say, hey I tried they didn't want us there and he got what he wanted, troop pullout.

"If 2,000 U.S. troops in Syria are the only thing keeping the region from descending into chaos, then I'm go out on a limb here and suggest that the region isn't about to descend into any more chaos than it's already facing."

You are taking my words out of context. I said those 2,000 troops are there to eliminate the last pocket of ISIS resistance, protect and finish training our Kurdish allies and put a check on Iran and ensure they get out. If Iran stayed there, that would destabilize the region eventually. With the Turkey, Russian, Iranian talks going on right now and the Kurds starting to eliminate those last ISIS members, I imagine we could have pulled them out sometime next year. It's like we spiked the ball on the five yard line before going in for a touchdown.

It's all a moot point now as the news is out that Saudi and UAE are sending troops in to protect the Kurds and assist them. This is good news and will ensure our national interest objectives are met.

I've ignored your argument comparing us going into Syria like Mexico going into America. It's specious and your better than that. Syria was in a civil war and gassing it's own people. They had no control over the areas we are in and ISIS claimed itself as a sovereign state there. You could say we weren't going into Syria but the ISIS caliphate. They had large swaths of Iraq and Syria. Iraq wanted us in and after ISIS fled into Syria do you think they would just stay there if we don't go after them? To use your metaphor, if a robber comes in your house and you manage to chase him out and kill one of his friends, they might come back. You're gonna want to ensure that never happens.