Posted on 10/08/2019 2:35:50 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin argued that President Trump might be making a politically savvy move by withdrawing troops out of northern Syria.
"Isn’t it true that the public, not 100%, is more with Trump than with the politicians on this one?" Toobin asked Monday on CNN. "Do you think there’s an enormous desire for our troops to be over in Syria for years more, to be in Afghanistan for almost 20 years? I think the president may have his finger on the pulse. I don’t know if it’s in the national security interest, but I don’t see this as a political negative for the president at all."
Toobin's defense of Trump was in contrast to the rest of the panel, which condemned Trump's move.
CNN host Wolf Blitzer noted that Trump's troop withdrawal was "very consistent" with a foreign policy view Trump has been promoting for 20 years.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
Does anyone know how many troops Trump is withdrawing? I thought it was pretty few.
Thanks if you can help
Something like 50 troops along the Northern Border of Syria with Turkey...That will cause the whole house of cards to fall I suppose...
Well, the question is - is he exposing the Kurds there to an attack for Turkey.
Trump himself said 50 on a presser.
Syria is an intelligence operation. They give guns and money to people in order that they shoot at the right people. Just watch, the news does not report anything now about Syria. But as soon as the troops come home, there will be several news stories about every death in Syria. We will know more about Syria from CNN than we know about Chicago.
Fifty troops is too many to lose and not enough to win anything without massive escalation. I am not a military expert.
Exactly...Anyway, that was the number I heard being bandied about by the President...As to us having any other troops in Syria...I do not know.
From what I can gather, those 50 troops were basically human shields. They were there to prevent turkey from attacking fellow NATO soldiers
No more of our children’s blood should be spilled so that neocons and the fascist left can make their millions. President Trump should hold a national emergency broadcast and announced that he is unilaterally pulling troops out of all conflicts that are not in the strategic interests of America. He should then challenge Congress directly by stating that “If Congress wants a war then they will have to declare war by an act of Congress like the Constitution stipulates. I also warn you that if Congress declares war on a country then I will prosecute that war to total victory and the rules of engagement will be to win at all costs.”
I’d love to hear the President say that.
Sure seems like it. Why are we helping the Ottomans expand the Caliphate? What is the point of fighting ISIS if we enable the Turkish terrorist regime? Sort of like fighting in Afghanistan without countering Pakistan.
So the USA DID basically green light Turkey to invade?
So the USA DID basically green light Turkey to invade?
The Hawks/Neocons cannot answer one simple question to my satisfaction; what is America’s interest in the region? Yesterday Senator Graham was saying that this is a huge win for Iran and Russia. Really? What are they winning other than a big headache that we are leaving behind? You would think Ryssia would ge reluctant to return to the area given their experience in Afghanistan in the 80’s.
Half of a platoon = 50 soldiers.
But the real power behind those 50 is not their rifles.
It is the fighter aircraft support they can call in.
And Trump is keeping the air support nearby in tact.
Which means the Kurds can call it in as well if needed.
I THOUGHT that’s what he said. Thanks!
So all this fuss is about 50 troops?
Another question is - how long are WE expected to defend the Kurds?
The Middle East has a long history of trying to kill each other. This is the past, the present and the future. Actually you can blame the Brits for this. As the British Empire collapsed after WWII they drew up nation boundaries that did not reflect religion nor ethnic regions. The Brits set the table for unrest in the Middle East and Africa post WWII.
Unless we have a strategic reason of self interest for our nation we should not be there. There are regions in the Middle East that we do have strategic reasons for our presence and they are few. Let them get on with killing each other and not sacrifice one drop of American blood least it be an area that is vital to our strategic interests both militarily and economic.
If an area in the Middle East becomes an extensional threat to our nation simply kill them from the air. Kill them with extreme prejudice. Take out their air defenses and carpet bomb them with B52s. Do not rebuild them but let them suffer the consequences of their stupidity. This stupidity will be followed by disease, hunger, death and misery. Repeat as necessary.
This is the Russian way, but we are much better at it, if we so decide to do so.
No American blood should be shed unless it is in our strategic interests.
Forgot to add this. My son was a combat medic in Iraq for two tours. His Sergeant was blown up by an IED in the vehicle ahead of my son. My son did everything possible to save his life but his Sergeant died. He was beyond saving even if in a hospital. My son still grieves for his Sergeant years later.
Why did his Sergeant need to die in this insanity? I give this one to George W Bush’s stupidity. We went to war in a war that was not needed. I am not a democrat nor leftist. I am a right wing libertarian. His Sergeant died due to the stupidity of our leaders in Washington. His Sergeant is just a name on a cross today in a military cemetery. Those that sent his Sergeant to war with rare exceptions still live.
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.