We are MORE likely to be caught in two front war over that oil between Turkey and Russia/Syria/Iran than over the Kurds. Before, we already held that oil AND a front between Assad, Erdogan and the Kurds. And that status quo had reached a stasis. We had little extra to do to keep it, and its leverage. Now, fighting will spread in Northern Syria as it did before, in a mutli-friend multi-foe fashion between Assad/Russia/Iran, ISIS again (aided as before by Turkey as Turkey’s surrogates against Assad), the Kurds and now Turkey, and it will spread via any “winners” to the oil fields; which you can bet, when the chips are down, Trump will not deem worth protecting in that malestrom with U.S. lives. In the reality of possible lost American lives your leverage theory will go pffft.
I don’t believe Trump will go crying home to mommy at the first drop of blood. There’s no more certain way to assure endless, pointless warfare than to have America’s enemies believe its President is gun shy. They’ll then attack American troops wherever they’re found, believing this will precipitate more withdrawals. That was Saddam’s strategy after Baghdad fell, and to Bush’s credit, he held firm. If Trump set up shop garrisoning and holding the oil fields, that’s either where he will stand, or he’s incoherent.
He first “abandoned” the Kurds, then brokered a cease fire, then came around the back from Iraq and grabbed the oil fields, and says it’s to keep it out of the hand of the ISIS fighters recently freed, and use it to help US allies, such as the Kurds. Now he’s looking to send in armored support. This is either some sort of elaborate football play, a “Hail Mary” or “Statue of Liberty Pass,” or something, or it makes no sense at all.