T. Belman. Sen Graham is right to rail against a full troop withdrawal from Syria. But I think that he is wrong to suggest that 200 personel would be enough to leave there. It appears that Trump is behind the full troop withdrawal idea. He couldn’t be more wrong. He should not squander US control of east Syria. It costs so little to maintain.
ABOARD A MILITARY AIRCRAFT — Acting Defense Secretary Pat Shanahan had a rocky meeting with U.S. senators at a security conference in Munich, Germany, over the administration’s plans on Syria, that could affect his chances to become President Trump’s permanent defense secretary.
At one point during the meeting, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who was leading a delegation of U.S. senators and lawmakers to the security conference, told him, “That’s the dumbest f-cking idea I’ve ever heard,” according to several who were in the room.
Another senator allegedly told him, “You just lost the Senate.”
The meeting happened inside the Bayerischer Hof Hotel, a luxurious five-star hotel where world leaders and officials gathered for the three-day annual conference to discuss world affairs and hold official meetings on the sidelines. More than 50 members of Congress attended, as part of several delegations from the House and Senate.
The meeting with Shanahan took place Saturday morning at the hotel in a meeting room with more than a dozen members of Congress, both from the House and Senate, Republicans and Democrats.
Several members of Congress recounted details of the meeting to journalists from Breitbart and the Washington Post, as they flew home from Munich aboard a military aircraft.
The exchange was centered on the Trump administration plan to withdraw all U.S. troops from Syria by April 30.
Graham’s goal at the conference was to convince key military allies to leave a couple hundred troops in Syria each, to prevent the reemergence of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. If successful, Graham would report back to Trump and possibly get him to do the same.
“So I came in and sat down, and said I’m sorry I’m late, but I got a question, ‘Are you telling all of our allies that we’re going to go to zero [troops in Syria] by April 30th?” Graham recalled.
“Yes, that’s been our direction,” Shanahan said, according to Graham. “And I said, ‘That’s the dumbest f-cking idea I’ve ever heard.’”
Graham said he asked Shanahan whether he agreed that if all 2,700 U.S. troops were pulled out of Syria, that ISIS would come back, Turkey and the Kurds in Syria would start a war, and Iran would gain more power in Syria.
“He said, ‘That could very well happen.’ [I asked] ‘Do you agree with me that if a couple hundred of us were committed to this buffer zone it would change everything?’ And he said, ‘Yes.’”
Graham said he told him, “‘Well, if the policy is going to be we’re leaving April 30, I am now your enemy not your friend … I’ll be your adversary. I’ve been busting my ass going all over the world trying to get Turkey to make this happen.’”
Shanahan then asked him, “Well what do you want me to tell people about you being an adversary?” Graham responded to Shanahan, “That you own it.”
At that point, another senator allegedly told Shanahan, “You just lost the Senate.”
Graham said there was a moment when all members present chimed in with support of the plan.
“‘For 200 people you could pull this off, may have the best chance I know of pulling it off,’ and that’s when everyone jumped in basically unrestricted — ‘Yea!’ And it was overwhelming — [Democrat Rep. Tom Malinowski (NJ)] — everybody…it was a real moment,” he said.
Several sources at the meeting said Shanahan “sat there like a deer in headlights,” in addition to other unflattering characterizations.
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), the top Democrat on Graham’s delegation, added, “I’ll just say he did not have a very good meeting,” he said.
But Graham did express some sympathy for Shanahan on the withdrawal plan. “He’s just telling us what the plan is,” he said. But, he said, the meeting was the “defining moment of the trip.”
The Pentagon disputed that the meeting went badly. “They had a very constructive and positive meeting, and beyond that we just don’t comment on his private conversations,” said Acting Pentagon Press Secretary Charlie Summers.
Another government official also disputed that it went badly. The official said the meeting covered a range of topics, that Shanahan presented the Defense Department’s position on Syria and informed senators that it is generating options, and that the meeting ended on a positive note.
The official said that in fact, Shanahan generated agreement on the issue of China. Another source said Graham seemed satisfied by the end of the meeting.
However, more clashes on Syria are likely to come between Shanahan and Congress, as the military drawdown continues.
Graham said leaving a small stabilization force in northern Syria would prevent ISIS’s comeback, prevent a new war between two U.S. allies who are bitter enemies — Turkey and Kurdish forces, and to prevent Iran from gaining a deeper toehold there.
The stabilization force would consist of 1,500 forces, including 200 U.S. forces on the ground. Graham has also been arguing for leaving a small U.S. force at al-Tanf, a small military base in eastern Syria, to prevent Iranian proxy forces from establishing a presence there, and creating a long-desired corridor from Tehran to Beirut.
Graham, who has become a close ally of Trump, said he has discussed the idea with the president, who has indicated he would be receptive to leaving 200 U.S. troops there if allies committed forces, too.
“The Trump way is some of us, most of them, they do the fighting. That is a narrative that shows he’s a capable commander in chief that can get results that eluded others,” he said.
However, Graham said allies would not commit unless the U.S. did first. Thus, Graham and others viewed Shanahan’s message to allies that the U.S. would go down to zero troops by the April 30 deadline as counterproductive.
Lawmakers said there was broad — if not unanimous — bipartisan support from members of Congress present at the meeting for Graham’s plan.
They also said the U.S. commander of NATO forces and European Command Army Gen. Curtis Scaparrotti also expressed support, as did U.S. envoy to Syria Amb. Jim Jeffrey. Graham said that, despite the testy exchange, Shanahan did ultimately express support for the plan.
Shanahan said little about the meeting with reporters afterwards, mostly commenting on his meetings with allies:
What I was told is that this was a very productive one in that the type of dialogue and discourse was very frank and I have to say it felt like we were making progress on plans going forward on Syria.
…
So to me that was a very, very valuable time spent there. Then just a whole host of interactions with Congressional members, a number of bilateral and now it’s on this trip home, kind of wrapped together all the action items so that on Sunday I can do my laundry, head into work and kind of start working down the list. Good trip I think.
The trip to Munich was Shanahan’s first time attending the security conference as acting defense secretary and was seen as part of his “debut” on the world stage. He arrived in Munich on Friday after a trip to Afghanistan, Iraq, and a NATO defense ministerial in Brussels, which went off without a hitch.
While Shanahan has never said he wants the defense secretary job permanently, his performance as acting defense secretary is widely seen as an audition for the role, and so far, Trump has said positive things about him.
A senior White House official told Breitbart News on Tuesday: “Acting Sec Def Shanahan is widely liked in the White House.”
Shanahan can serve as acting defense secretary for an indeterminate time, according to laws governing the Pentagon, but if he were nominated for the position permanently, he would have to be confirmed by the Senate.
Before being tapped by Trump as acting defense secretary in December, Shanahan had served for 17 months as James Mattis’s deputy. Prior to that, he worked in the defense industry at Boeing for more than three decades and developed a reputation as a “fix it guy.”
Shanahan, however, has faced comparisons to Mattis, who was revered around the globe as a tough general and experienced statesman. Before Shanahan left for the trip, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Jim Inhofe (R-OK) told reporters that Shanahan was not as “humble” as Mattis.
Inhofe later clarified that he was joking, and made it a priority to see Shanahan in Munich, after he arrived separately from Graham’s delegation. He told a Breitbart News and a Defense News reporter that he liked Shanahan.
“We’ve known each other for a long time. I’d be happy to have him as a secretary of defense and could work with him very well. And I think we’ve accomplished that,” Inhofe said after his meeting with Shanahan. Inhofe later tweeted a picture of himself and Shanahan at the conference.
Whitehouse also acknowledged that “following Mattis was a hell of a job,” but said he did not know Shanahan well enough to have an opinion about whether he was qualified for defense secretary.
Inhofe said he had liked former Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl (R) and Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson, but said they had been “eliminated.”
Graham has personally endorsed retired Vice Chief of Staff of the Army Gen. Jack Keane, who helped architect the successful surge in Iraq during the George W. Bush administration that turned the tide in the war.
A former senior administration official cautioned against judging a defense secretary based on one issue.
“So the question is, what does the secretary of defense have to do? The secretary of defense is responsible for making sure our men and women in uniform and our civilians … have the capabilities they need to do their job across the world,” the former official said.
“You have to be able to lead a bureaucracy that is very complicated, that has many aspects to it, whether you’re talking about cyber, or the development of advanced weapons, whether you’re talking about personnel policies. Shanahan brings a lot to the table having led complex organizations and from the time that he spent as deputy.”
Michael S Said:
Yamit, you disappoint me. Instead of a brain, you seem to have only a plexus that blames Donald Trump, America, Christians and God for all your problems. When you stop this blame game, maybe you will grow up.
PS, Ooh — I forgot to include Bibi as one of your many tormentors.
Michael S Said:
You for sure!!!
I was referring to Turkey
Turkey has the strongest military in the ME and Erdogan wants to restore the Ottoman Caliphate.
The country of Iraq is an artificial construct drawn up by the Brits….The Kurds deserve to revive their own ethnic (non Arab) independent state. The region is officially governed by the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), with the capital being Erbil. Kurdistan is a parliamentary democracy with its own regional Parliament that consists of 111 seats. Masoud Barzani, who was initially elected as president in 2005, was re-elected in 2009. In August 2013 the parliament extended his presidency for another two years. His presidency concluded on 19 August 2015 after the political parties failed to reach an agreement over extending his term.
The new Constitution of Iraq defines the Kurdistan Region as a federal entity of Iraq and establishes Kurdish and Arabic as Iraq’s joint official languages. The four governorates of Duhok, Erbil, Silemani, and Halabja comprise around 46,861 square kilometers (18,093 sq mi) and have a population of 5.8 million (2017 estimate). In 2014, during the 2014 Iraq Crisis, Iraqi Kurdistan’s forces also took over much of the disputed territories of Northern Iraq; the total area under the control of the Kurdistan Regional Government contains some 8 million inhabitants. I believe If The Kurds declare independence the other clans will fall in line. Turkey Iraq and Iran have played a divide and conquer policy with the Kurds. Being landlocked is negative for them.
You did not answer my contention that Trump is leaving Israel vulnerable which could precipitate Gog u Magog
@ yamit82:
Hi, Yamit. Let me try to address your comments, point by point:
“Turkey is hated by Sunni Arabs even more than they hate Israel.”
I see no evidence of this. ISIS, Al Qaeda, the SLA — all these have used Turkey as their main conduit for men and materiel. The Turkish government is Muslim Brotherhood — very compatible with Sunni Muslims.
“Stupid Trump”. WAY off the mark. The US President has a higher IQ than me, and probably than you.
“There is no sound geopolitical exigency for America to support Turkey.”
Other than that we are bound by treaty to do so if they are attacked. Except for that provision the US President and his advisors have given little comfort to the Turks. In fact, we have been working hand-in-glove with their enemies, the PKK-YPG.
“[The Americans] are not a reliable NATO ally the Europeans hate them.”
For all intents and purposes, the US is the most reliable NATO ally. Compared to all the contributions the other allies make, the US practically IS NATO. I wear the fact that the Europeans hate us, as a badge of honor.
“The Kurds based on their largely pro American sentiment in Iraq and Syria give the Americans leverage in both Iraq and Syria,”
There is no common “Kurdish” people or leadership. The President of the Iraqi KRG HATES the YPG. This is not a “people” — it is a collection of mutually antagonistic clans.
“Erdogan will flirt with the Russians but that would only reduce Erdogan’s power and influence and threaten his own position of power down the line. He needs America more than America needs him.”
I would not trust Erdogan, any more than I can throw him — and with my current age and state of health, that is not very far. At the moment, he is useful to us, as he hosts the US base at Incirlik; but he has lost favor in just about everything else. Having said that, he is far less of a nuissance to us than the Russians, Syrians and Iranians.
“The Kurds of Iraq are sitting on most of the Iraqi oil reserves and they are pro American and pro-West,”
WHICH Iraqi Kurds? The Barzani clan? The Talabani clan? Gorran? The pro-Iranian factions? The PKK? The KRG are under Baghdad’s thumb domestically, and impotent pawns of the Turkish troops that roam freely in the region. They have been pro-Russian, pro-Saddam, pro-Ayatollah and pro-American, all the while fighing and bickering amongst themselves.
“The Kurds know they can’t trust Assad and the Russians to protect them for long against Turkey.”
The only Kurds who trust Assad, are the YPG/PKK Northern Kurds living in Syria. Until 2011, they were completely at ease with the Assads; and since the “Arab Spring”, they have had a cooperative relationship with them. The relationship already exists, and is strong.
Whether or not the Russians want to get bogged down supporting the Kurds against the Turks is another matter. Russia has been doing a very uneasy dance the past year or so, with Turkey, Assad and Iran — a dance in which every partner wants to dance by its own music. At best, they try to avoid stepping on one another’s toes.
“The only thing preventing an Israeli Nuke preemptive Attack in Syria Lebanon and Iran is a credible American presence in Syria and Iraq”
First of all, I think the resolve of the Israeli leadership is more of a factor than US troops in the Levant. If and when Israel does use nukes in the near future, it will most likely be against Iran itself. I’m fairly convinced that none of the factions in Washington are in love with that idea, which may be why the current US Administration is committed to an extended presence in Iraq.
I don’t expect Iran to be a substantial threat to Israel for very long. Cf:
“Zarif bows out amid desperate regime bid to save Iran’s economy from meltdown”
— https://www.debka.com/zarif-bows-out-amid-desperate-regime-bid-to-save-irans-economy-from-meltdown/
Trump-Kushner policy lately has been in the direction of forming a great alliance against Iran. Turkey, meanwhile, is waiting in the wings.
That’s how I see it.
Michael S Said:
I made no reference to the Kurds….but since you did let’s put it this way no country in or out of the ME will trust or work with any American admin who threw their ally under the bus especially to the hated Turks… Turkey is hated by Sunni Arabs even more than they hate Israel. There is no sound geopolitical exigency for America to support Turkey. Stupid Trump views every situation as a business deal and Turkey is a major buyer of American weapons… They are not a reliable NATO ally the Europeans hate them, the Arabs hate them. Iran Hates them and their economy is now in the toilet. The Kurds based on their largely pro American sentiment in Iraq and Syria give the Americans leverage in both Iraq and Syria, Turkey is not. Erdogan will flirt with the Russians but that would only reduce Erdogan’s power and influence and threaten his own position of power down the line. He needs America more than America needs him.
The Kurds of Iraq are sitting on most of the Iraqi oil reserves and they are pro American and pro-West,,, Unlike the dominant Shia Arabs in Iraq now under the thumb of Iran. The Kurds know they can’t trust Assad and the Russians to protect them for long against Turkey.
The only thing preventing an Israeli Nuke preemptive Attack in Syria Lebanon and Iran is a credible American presence in Syria and Iraq. When Israel does attack America will be drawn in at some point and the costs in lives and treasure cannot be calculated…. Think if Israel nuked all the Iraqi and Syrian oil fields you would have a nuclear winter where thousands of burning wells and millions of tons of sand in the atmosphere blocking out the sun for months if not longer.
I can’t know what the trigger will be but when it happens you can credit the withdrawl of America from Syria as a precursor.
“For want of a nail the shoe is lost, for want of a shoe the horse is lost, for want of a horse, the rider is lost.”
WINNERS AND LOSERS
There is the possibility of all the disparate ME factions aligning against Israel putting aside for a brief respite their internal hatreds and regional ambitions of hegemony.
Michael S Said:
If this is true I can name a hundred locations of American military forces with much larger footprints and in more danger than the few K in Syria. Using your logic all the others around the globe should be returned to the borders of America. It would cut the American defense budget in half at least. There are no power vacuums!!!
@ yamit82:
HI, Yamit. You said,
“I see no reason why America should cede the ME to Russia and Iran… Why do you?”
I do not see that at all. Do you think the Turks want to cede NE Syria to the Kurds?
Turkey has brazenly supported ISIS, Al Qaeda and other anti-Assad forces in Syria — forces which you say the US was supporting. If that were true, it would be a no-brainer, for the US to partner with Turkey in overthrowing the Kurds in order to keep the oil-rich area out of Assad’s (and Russia’s and Iran’s) hands. But the Turks have bitterly opposed the US in that area. I think the main reason Trump announced he was quitting the area, was that he was fed up with unprofitable confrontations with Turkey.
I have said elsewhere, that if the US stopped supporting the YPD and PKK, those Kurds would very likely align themselves with Assad and the Russians; and this is indeed the direction they seem to be heading. Do you think that will restrain the Turks? I do not. With ISIS crushed, there is only one force in the region that stands with the Sunni Arabs; and that Is Turkey. Iran will not be given a free pass in the area. Israel is fixated on Iran; I am not. The Syrians will be fighting one another, the Turks, the Iranians and the Russians for a long time to come.
Makes sense to me for the USA to be fighting the jihadis in the middle east as to minimize the threat of the jihadis killing more American Civilians in its homeland. Preventing the next 911, Boston or San Bernardino attack on Americans in the USA. Doing this while working with Kurds, friendly Arabs and other allies in this international battle being fought in the middle east.
Iran is the biggest danger because if it obtains nukes it can shrink to put on the head of a missile it would be able to able to attack the USA by just exploding a nuke above it and causing electro-magnetic pulse explosion potentially devastating the USA infrastructure.
Pretending this is someone else’s battle alone is not an accurate read of the situation. The Vietnam syndrome of isolation is a mistake and Vietnam is not analogous to the dangers facing the USA from the jihadis who want to attack the USA and have.
The nuclear potential of Iran must be eliminated, the sooner the better. They are now ramping up their nuclear capabilities.
@ Michael S:
ISIS LIKE al Queda are part of the radical Muslim Brotherhood as is Hamas. It was the Brits who created the MB as a way to block the Jews from gaining control of Palestine and as a means of controlling the ME and preserving control of the Suez Canal and ME oil fields. Originally the plan of the American CIA British MI6 and the Saudis was to topple Assad in Syria using ISIS and diverse anti-Assad groups. They betrayed Gaddafi and used al Queda to topple his regime to get their hands on his store of weapons to be shipped to anti-Assad groups. Similar to failed Iran-Contra generation earlier.
Obama allowed the anti-Assad regimes to be decimated by Russians, Iranians and Hezbollah, especially after the Iran deal Obama pushed thru. When Trump gained the Presidency he was faced with Rusian and Iranian control of Syria and Iranian near control over Iraq… meaning a straight line from Iran to Lebanon and the Med coast. In shaping Syrian future America is left out in the cold with no say or power to determine outcomes. Leaving a few K American troops where they were actually blocked complete Iranian takeover of the route to Lebanon thru Syria and the Americans decimated an incursion of some 3=500 Russian mercenaries trying to evict the Americans by force. No American losses in that one and hundreds of Russians went home in body bags.
In the four years of American troops in Syria almost no casualties they work with and train the Kurds an important mission and since the Jurds have done most of the fighting and dying against ISIS seems like a small price to pay for major gains.
I see no reason why America should cede the ME to Russia and Iran… Why do you?
Hezbollah has now over 100k missiles aimed at Israel. Syria a similar #, Russia has put some of their most lethel anti-aircraft and missle weapons in Syria and threaten the same to be shipped to Lebanon. Iran has thousands of RG troops in Syria and in Lebanon all threatening Israel. Add the tens of thousands of missiles that Hamas and IJ has in Gaza we are in a pincer if all Hell breaks loose. A few thousand American troops in strategic areas in Syria gives Israels enemies pause from direct attack against Israel and or delays Israeli preemptive attacks that could directly involve Russia, Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas with potential impact against Israel by Turkey and China (who have commandos on the ground in Syria)
Since ISIS has lost the territorial Caliphate 20-30k ISIS fighters will gravitate to other countries in the ME and Europe they are not dead. Keeping remnant of ISIS alive and fighting in Syria against Assad and Russia seems not logical but essential in the Americas and Israel’s strategic interests,,
Israel lacks capabilites of the Americans and will have to rely on nukes where America can handle with conventional weaponry. Once we begin hard to fathom ultimate fallout (pun intended)
Russia releases nuclear ‘hit list’ of US targets – Pentagon is on it
Tehran: Iran launches cruise missile from sub during drill
@ adamdalgliesh:
Custer would have won the battle if he had F22s, F35s and F16s to call as his backup. Comparing battles in the 1800s with military warfare today is actual, let me be polite not relevant. Then if you think it is entertaining go right ahead.
Perhaps a Saturday Night Live Skit could be written around it. Maybe it could be combined with ancient fortune cookie predictions about the end of times, what do you think?
@ yamit82:
Hi, Yamit. As is often the case, it’s hard to tell where you’re coming from and where you’re headed. In one post, you seem to advocate keeping 200 US troops on the ground in Syria; in the next, you seem to advocate letting ISIS take over. My personal opinion in the matter, is that sooner or later, we will have to abandon the Kurds in Syria; and that the longer we keep GIs in that country, the more vulnerable their position becomes. I favor pulling them all our ASAP.
Then you asked,
“Are you waiting for and supportive of Armageddon?”
I am certainly “waiting for” the various end-times scenarios described in the Bible (OT AND NT). But do I SUPPORT them??? That seems like a silly question. Here are the major events I see prophesied:
1. a Turkish attack on Israel, supported by Iran, Libya and Sudan. This is spelled out in Ezekiel/ Yechezkel 38-39. This is nowhere called “Armageddon”. My position on the matter, is that Israel should prepare for the attack, and not be fooled into alliances with Turkey. The Bible says Israel will win this one handily, and of course, I am in favor of that.
2. Zechariah 14 predicts an attack on Israel by the United Nations of the world. I believe this attack DOES correspond with the attack on Armageddon mentioned in Revelation. As the foremost world nation, the US will almost certainly lead that attack. I certainly would not support my government in doing this; but it seems unlikely that US citizens will have much of a choice in the matter. I expect Christians in the US and elsewhere, to be hunted down and attacked at the same time that Israel is.
According to Zechariah, this attack on Israel will be devastating. It will include the rape and pillage of Jerusalem. This is the battle wherein God says He will intervene directly and miraculously. The nations of the world, meanwhile (including the US) are slated to suffer the effects of a nuclear war. And who will perpetrate the war? Zech. says “brother will fight against brother”. It will be a free-for-all.
That’s all I know about the matter. The rest isn’t very clear to me.
@ Edgar G.: But still, know a little military history. G.A. Custer attempted to attack a force of several thousand Sioux warriors with only 200 men. Custer relied on what he considered the superior military training and fighting qualities of his men to compensate for the numerical inferiority of his force. And indeed, his men were well trained, disciplined, had high morale and excellent fighting qualities. But he misjudged the determination and courage of his enemies.
It would not be good for either America or Israel for a small U.S. force in Syria to suffer another “Custer’s Last Stand.”
And the Iranians, with quiet Russian support, have been putting together and training a large Shiite army of Iranian, Iraqi and Afghan fighters inside Syria. We cannot be sure they won’t be able to wipe out a small American force, no matter how well trained, the way Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse’s warriors did.
@ adamdalgliesh:
It obviously would NOT be a “scratch force” but consisting of expert technicians and expert heavy weapons operators. There will also be another 200 troops in South Eastern Syria likely of similar composition. And they can call troops in Iraq into action immediately.
Neither you nor I is qualified to comment on these mysterious military dispositions.
America maintains 28k troops in S-Korea many along the DMZ… Those Troops would be wiped out in the North Invades…. They are there to send a message that any attack on our Troops would mean total war against the USA and guarantee the end of NoKo. The same holds to both China and Russia were they to aid or join the North. Those Troops stationed in S-Korea have cost the US more since 1951 than all the wars involving America since the end of the Korean War. Besides Rand Paul there are no populist, pacifist calls to remove those troops, despite the fact that the South is strong enough and rich enough to defend themselves and could do a lot more should they choose.
It makes no sense to declare Iran a rogue state and the worlds largest purveyor of Terror and their main surrogate Hezbollah a terror org. Russia a main adversary of America and Assad an illegitimate head of state and a war criminal but allow all of the players a free hand while threatening America, and America’s main allies in the region. That’s in line with the Obama policy.
Hard to justify American presence in Afghanistan. Those Pashtun Israelite Tribes have never been defeated. The beat Alexander The Great, the Mongols, Napolean, The Brits, the Russians and now the Americans.
Israel should make supreme effort to bring those15-20 million Israelite tribesmen (Bani Israel) back into the Jewish family. They could be a major asset in the future.
Pashtuns are Israelites: Reality or a Myth? Live Debate on The Pashtun Times
Beni Israel origin of Pashtuns
US Syria Withdrawal Risks Vital Strategic Interests
The U.S. withdrawal from Syria may bring to a close an open-ended and strategically unclear military commitment, but it will also likely put at risk vital national security interests. VOA’s Brian Padden reports that move could increase the threat of terrorism at home, emboldened Iran and Russia, and lead to conflict with Israel and even a regional war. Listen to Voice America report on subject https://www.voanews.com/a/us-syria-withdrawal-risks-vital-interests-/4748589.html
@ Michael S:
C- You don’t know WTF you are talking about
1- The American military is not only an extension of American foreign policy and interests they are in many cases the spearhead in executing policy-interests of the USA.
2- ISIS was a creation of the CIA the Brits and the Saudis. Some include the Mossad?
3- Looks like they went rogue?
4 very few Americans have been casualties either dead or wounded in Syria and certainly many more have been killed due to accidents and suicides.
5- ISIS should have been left alone in Syria to attack and fight the Syrians, Hezbollah, and the Russians. They were never a major threat to Israel. Syria, Iran and surrogates and the Russians are a threat.
6- If Israel decides it has no choice we will invade and conquer Lebanon, Attack Iran with all we can inject and that certainly includes nukes. I assume by them the Saudis and GCC along with Jordan will be supportive and the Americans will surely be involved along with Russia in opposition.
Are you waiting for and supportive of Armageddon? Removing a few thousand small footprint American special operators from Syria could eventually lead to some form of the Armageddon context.
@ yamit82:
Yamit,
You seem to be pretty quick to shed American blood. Syria means nothing to the US. If you think it’s important to Israel, then ISRAEL should be sending troops there to help the Kurds fight the Turks.
That is what YOU’re talking about; and I know it quite well. Have you saved your old uniform?
Michael S Said:
A-You don’t know WTF you are talking about
B- You don’t know WTF you are talking about
@ Bear Klein:
Bear,
You are discussing the matter of pulling US troops out of Syria, as though all America were in the military. We are not.
Employing our military is an EXTREME use of national power, to secure our interests, when we have expired the use of more peaceful means. President Trump used our military in Syria, in order to ensure the elimination of ISIS as a state actor. Because the Syrian government was too weak to effectively control its own territory, we inserted troops there to get the job done. ISIS was a threat to the US, and having a permanent base in Syria for leadership, recruitment and training purposes posed an immediate threat to the security of US Citizens. Now that they have been largely neutralized by the actors there (primarily the US, NATO allies, Russians, Kurds and Iranians), we have to weigh the benefit of saving US lives because of our presence there, against the danger to US lives (civilian and military) that we would incur by staying there. It is not just a matter of exposing aircraft and artillery spotters to hostile fire; it is much more a matter of exposing US citizens, in and out of uniform, all over the world, to retaliatory strikes from ISIS and its allies.
I served in the military during the Vietnam War, a war that dragged on for some ten years thanks to lies by Gen. Westmoreland and others to the US President and public, lies that did much to lead to the loss of 58,000 US lives. In the end, we lost the war (Vietnam fell to the Communists) but won the peace that followed (We have a profitable relationship with a non-belligerent Vietnam).
The Syrian government has demanded that we evacuate our troops from THEIR country. They are absolutely in the right there — just as the Vietnamese people were in the right to demand we leave THEIR country. Both of these were civil wars. When we pulled out of Vietnam, we allowed the Vietnamese to recover their national sovereignty and begin the process of rebuilding — just as the Spanish did after their civil war, the Russians did after their revolution and the US did after its civil war. The transition was not seamless and without suffering in any of these cases; but the ultimate end was a return to normalcy. The same will happen in Syria, if we let it happen. It is not in the interests of the US to risk American lives in meddling.
@ adamdalgiesh:So the military commanders that have asked Trump for permission to keep some troops (special forces most likely) behind likely have the following things in mind:
1. Need forces on the ground that can act as laser painters for air force to hit exact targets.
2. Need forces to lead and train Kurds against ISIS and other enemies
3. Need own eyes on the ground for intelligence
4. Need forces to work in conjunction with other allies on the ground
Small amount of special operators can accomplish many mission critical assignments.
@ Bear Klein: Bear, I must confess that I have not.
Bear, I must confess that I have not.
@ adamdalgliesh:
Adam, did you ever serve in the military?
@ adamdalgliesh:
“If the force were to be wiped out or captured, all the people who are demanding that the soldiers stay would blame Trump.”
I agree wholeheartedly, Adam; and the 2020 Election campaign is already in full swing. Leving one American soldier in Syria would be stupid.
I am skeptical that 200 soldiers can accomplish much. Certainly the lives of such a scratch force will be in deadly peril. If the force were to be wiped out or captured, all the people who are demanding that the soldiers stay would blame Trump.
Where is John Bolton???
Why has he TOTALLY fallen off the screen?
Does anyone have a clue?