The mission in Syria was one of the best run and most efficient operations in recent US history. We didn’t have a lot of troops there or need to leave them in perpetuity. We were in position of strength to negotiate with Turkey regarding the fate of the Kurds like what happened in northern Iraq. Instead though we’ve pulled out haphazardly where we even had to bomb our own bases and have next to no leverage with Turkey or anyone else. Also this idea that we got our goals done and the Kurds are no longer our problem isn’t just short sighted over a longer term but has immediate negative consequences. Thousands of ISIS prisoners are free again to take up the fight and that means that the possibility we might have to return to deal with a resurgent Islamic State is now more likely. Rather than bringing our troops home we might’ve just guaranteed that in the not too distant future we have to deploy again. Next time we deploy though it’s going to be harder find allies willing to fight with us. The Kurds don’t trust us. Turkey doesn’t trust us and we can’t trust Assad, the Russians or Iran.
Care to put a date on it? I haven't seen anyone do that. Everything I've seen is we cannot "abandon" or "betray" the Kurds. So, now, many of you would have us assume the role of the Kurds protectors in perpetuity. When do we get to go back to not being the Kurds protectors? When do we get to leave northern Syria, aka "abandon" the Kurds or "betray" the Kurds? Won't leaving the Kurds of nothern Syria to the Turks or Assad's mercy be a "betrayal" and "abandonment" in 6 months? 6 years? 6 decades? So, what you and others are advocating for is the permanent establishment of a U.S. military presence in northern Syria to not "abandon" or "betray" the Kurds with no timetable for ending that commitment. Did we promise the Kurds a nation-state? Did we promise to protect the Kurds from all enemies forever? I don't recall that.
They are not coming home. Actually trump has brought in more troops in the Middle East since he became president. Another lie that his supporters have eaten up
Ok then the US made a deal with the Kurds you fight isis and dismantle the defensive structures along the border with Turkey and we will make sure turkey doesn’t invade northern Turkey. We betrayed the Kurds no way around it
no we made a deal with the Kurds protection from turkey’s invasion that why the us told them to dismantle the Kurdish defensive fortifications along the border
This is just not a well reasoned take. How would we protect the Kurds if we didn't leave troops there? Of course we would have to leave troops there and for how long? That's the question I haven't seen you or anyone else answer. You don't want to "abandon" or "betray" the Kurds right? Well, that means protecting them forever then. Because if not, you're going to be "abandoning" or "betraying" them at some point in the future. Ok then, now that we've committed ourselves to being the Kurds protectors how do we accomplish that? We either have to 1. leave a military presence in the region to effectuate the protection/deter attacks from foreign aggressors or 2. Come to some sort of negotiated settlement with those would be aggressors. You claim, "we were in a position of strength to negotiate with Turkey regarding the fate of the Kurds" - nonsense. The Kurds-Turks have been in perpetual conflict for 40 years. The Kurds want a nation-state. To effectuate that, Syria, Iraq, Turkey and Iran or some combination of those countries are going to have to give up territory for that nation-state to be created. None of those countries have the slightest inclination to do that. You would have the United States jump right into the middle of an unsolvable middle eastern geopolitical disaster and firmly entrench themselves with no way out. Military's frequently have to destroy their own installations when withdrawing from a theater of operation. It's NBD but morons eat the news up. Thousands of ISIS prisoners are now free. Is that true? Even if it is, I haven't seen anyone take any real steps towards addressing that disastrous situation. How long had those ISIS prisoners been in Kurdish custody and what was going to happen to them? Nobody would do anything or take responsibility for them. They were escaping from porous, inadequate facilities before the Turkish operations. That's a failure on everyone. Resurgent Islamic State? Maybe. The single most important factor in the rise of the Islamic State was the Syrian civil war. Assad has won that war. That doesn't mean he really full controls the country but certainly he is a much better position to exercise his authority over the country then he was in 2014. The situation has changed markedly. Won't be able to find allies? You clearly don't understand the situation. The Kurds weren't sitting on the sidelines of the conflict with ISIS. The Kurds weren't doing us a favor. The Kurds fought ISIS because ISIS threatened to destroy their homeland. If ISIS reconstitutes itself in that region, and threatens the Kurds again, we will find willing allies in the Kurds. Why? Because they don't want to be destroyed by ISIS.
I don't believe the United States ever promised to protect the Kurds from Turkish or any other countries aggression. The Kurds were fighting ISIS because ISIS threatened to overrun and destroy their homeland. Not because they like us.
Btw it only took 50 troops to protect the Kurds from turkey. If Trump wanted to with draw troops why did he add over 2000 to protect the saudis. Who has the 3rd or 4th biggest military budget in the world
I'm not familiar with whatever you're talking about here. I have seen nothing to indicate the U.S. had made promises to the Kurdish authorities regarding protection from the Turks. I'd be happy to read anything pertaining to that if you have it. You'll have to ask Trump about that. We have 800 military bases in over 70 countries. We have 170,000 active duty military deployed in 150 countries across the globe. Some of them are in Saudi Arabia. I generally advocate for a reduction in U.S. military commitments around the world and reduction in our defense budget.
Really? The congressional house vote 354-60 to condemn the President. Why do you think over 80% didn’t just disagree with the President but voted to condemn his action. Why did the pentagon get him to at least half the troops there? Further ISIS isn’t defeated. Our own intelligence community is reporting we told the Kurds to not worry leading up to the Presidents decision. General Votel has even talked on this issue, that we sold the Kurds and we lied to them. We told the Kurds months ago to dismantle their defenses and they did. They blew up tunnels and fortified areas because we promised them we would protect them. The Kurds have every right to not trust the USA and the handling of the situation by the President is embarrassing.
Respectfully, if you want to comment on something like this please educate yourself. It has been reported numerous times and from numerous sources within the government that we told the Kurds we had their backs if they took down their defenses and encampments. They did as we asked and then weeks later the President (after speaking to Erdogan) calls for the immediate retreat of forces in the area and leaves the Kurds with their flank exposed. All the while the President shifts troops to Saudi Arabia. It is immoral and was completely unnecessary and people are dying completely at the whims of a jackass that actually wrote a letter telling a world leader “don’t be a fool”.
Don’t tell an ally in September you have their back if they tear down their defenses at your request and then in October sell them.
If you have proof of such a "guarantee" or "promise" I'd like to see it. So many sources you can't link one here? I suspect you're misrepresenting facts and therefore don't want to post any. You ignored my question from earlier because you don't have an adequate answer: What did they expect the U.S. to do? Stay in Northern Syria forever, fight the Turks on their behalf and force Iraq, Turkey, Iran and Syria to cede them territory to create a nation-state? It's a disservice to this country to commit to defend the Kurdish people from foreign aggressors. We cannot solve their problems. They want a nation-State and will keep fighting the Turks until they get one. They have been in conflict with the Turks for 40+ years. That is a fight between the Turks and the Kurds. We do not "owe" them anything. I couldn't care less if the majority of Congress or the military doesn't like it. The majority of Congress/the military got us into the disastrous Afghanistan affair. The majority of Congress/ the military sent us into Iraq. The majority of Congress/ the military perpetuates a military industrial complex that costs the tax payers $700 billion dollars a year. The majority of congress/ the military is fine with us having 800 military bases spread over 150 countries with 170,000 active duty soldiers spread across the world. Trump says lots of dumb ****. I hope he didn't promise the Kurds anything regarding protecting them from foreign aggressors. If he did, he shouldn't have. We shouldn't be doing that. If the Kurds put their faith in Donald Trump. They are morons. You embarrass yourself. You provide no solutions. You just complain. What do you want us to do for the Kurdish people exactly? Promise them we will protect them forever? Send our military over there to force Syria, Iran, Iraq and Turkey to give them territory to create a nation-state? You're an idiot.
I would not expect the U.S. to sell the troops to the Saudis as body guards. But yeah the 1000 troops that we’re to be withdrawn from Syria. Not back home; but to Iraq instead. Seriously you need to really think things though before you post the stuff you just typed. That’s unless you are a troll then I don’t know what’s worse between the two.
First you were not even aware that we asked the Kurds to take down their defense fortifications against the Turks. Second you didn’t know that we assured the Kurds we had their backs if they took down their fortified areas. They relied on our word and did as we asked. A month later the President (against everyone’s better judgment) decides he is withdrawing. The Kurds have every right to feel screwed: Second it has been pointed out to you by numerous posters that the number of soldiers involved in miniscule. Yet it has become this massive need to withdraw right now... while sending more troops to Saudi Arabia. How long does the USA stay? Set a private and internal timeline with Kurdish leaders. Be it a year or whatever. The cost is very small relative to everything else. Give them time to build up there defenses.. you know, the ones that the USA told them to destroy 6 weeks ago. This is all shameful. No one is asking the USA to stay forever (although we will just end up going back after the thousands of ISIS prisoners have been released) but the way we handled it unacceptable and that is why almost everyone around the situation has criticized the President including some of his staunchest allies. At the end of the day you just want “Nooo morrrez military!” regardless of not even knowing all of the circumstances. The options are not only stay forever or leave right now. At this point it doesn’t matter because Mistake In Chief already embarrassed him out and screwed over people we promised to help less than two months ago. We have an obligation to be ethic when possible... and we wonder why most the world hates our foreign policy.
Again this view is very short sighted and limited in thinking. The impression I get from this post and others is that for you and others the only way we can protect the Kurds is by remaining in perpetuity. First off as noted this is a very small force and considering how many troops we still have stationed in places like Germany and SK the amount of troops used to aid the Kurds is minuscule. The next part though is that we don't need to remain in perpetuity. Turkey isn't immune from diplomacy and as a NATO ally with other interests there is pressure we can make in the long term. Further the Kurds aren't static. Given time they can build up their own capabilities especially with further training from the US. If we look at how the part of Iraqi now known as Kurdistan has done it has been relatively successful with little commitment in US troops. Even resisting the ISIS blitz while many of the other parts of Iraq such as Mosul collapsed. With things like this diplomacy and other methods take time and more than a juvenile letter or threats. Just withdrawing haphazardly in the face of Turkish demands short circuited any serious opportunities to explore options that could've addressed things without a routing of the Kurds. If destroying your own installation with airstrikes to prevent them from imminently falling into the hands of non-friendly forces is SOP I would be interested in hearing more examples of that. Yes it is widely reported that ISIS prisoners are now escaping due to the Turkish offensive. This is from a week ago. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/14/isi...om-camps-in-syria-amid-turkish-offensive.html The fact that you aren't aware of this along with many other issues such as the Kurds promise to dismantle defensive positions for US protection does make me question how much you are informed about what is going on there. Regarding the holding of ISIS prisoners this has been a big issue since Raqqa fell months ago and it was brought up many times before the Turkish offensive that given that the Kurds were already stretched thin they wouldn't be able to keep holding prisoners while facing a Turkish onslaught. It is one of the most baffling and aggravating things about this that Trump completely dismisses that problem. You're claiming others don't understand the situation yet have shown ignorance regarding several key parts of the situation. I agree ISIS rise was due to the Syrian civil war. That War isn't over and as you note Assad doesn't control the country. That said the Kurds have already made overtures to Assad and to the Russians so they are looking for their own allies. Given that neither of those parties have our interests at heart that is a problem for the US. Further the Turks are aligning themselves with other hardline Syrian militia groups. Some of which are carrying out atrocities such as murdering civilians against the Kurds. We're counting on groups who have no love for us to act in our interests and in a way that is responsible for global security. We've seen this story before when we helped the Mujahadeen and then abandoned Afghanistan. Unfortunately we know too well what happened after we left that region to itself.
I understand the desire not to be continually engage in foreign conflicts. I too believe that Pax Americana needs to end and we need different ways of dealing with global conflict. We can't undo or ignore history though and this is a Powell "You break it you own it" situation. This mission also was one of the most efficient and limited missions we've had. It was very different than the invasion of Afghanistan or Iraq and frankly was a compliment to the Trump administration. It's a mark of the chaos, lack of focus and short sightedness of this president that we've come to this
