Syria doesnt want us there. Turkey doesnt want us there. Why should we be there?

Thats plenty of reason to leave. Its also reason we never should've gone, but making a mistake is not reason to continue making it. Why do people want us to stay there?

(Same goes for Afghanistan, ftr)

 

We don't. Only want to ensure the safety of those who helped us win the war against ISIS. You remember them, don't you?

 

Because we want us there.

Remember Trump's inauguration? "From now on it's going to be Syria and Turkey FIRST"

 

WTF are you talking about?

 

That would require us to stay there. Forever. Do you want us to stay there or not?

 

We didnt win any war against any ME terrorist group, let alone ISIS.

But, we are abandoning those who sacrificed for us, thinking we would add the stability we promised in return

We're creating a record of failing to hold any direction - Iraq, Afg, Syria, Turkey, LIbya, Iran, etc.

Even when we make agreements, we then just walk away.

 

If we EVER want an ally to fight along side us as the Kurds have done,we should not throw them under the bus as Dirty Donald is more than willing to df course his heavy financial ties to Turkey have nothing to do with his kissing up to Erdogan?????YEAH RIGHT!!!!

 

If we can keep 50 special operations people in that border area, which prevents a war that would kill thousands...then I'd say "indefinitely." But, that could have been negotiated. The U.N. kept people in the Sinai for years and years. And, there are U.N. peacekeeping forces around the world. Not saying that would have worked...but rolling over so easily for Turkey was a betrayal to those who helped us defeat ISIS.

 

Protecting the Kurds would require a permanent military presence. Is that what you're advocating?

 

Agreed. He's the proverbial "bull in the china shop." It's time for him to leave the office.

 

So you don't want us to leave. Ever. You could've started with that.

 

Not nessecarily but if we can't even keep a NATO ally from attacking the Kurds and what/was is sovereign territory than that's a problem. It's not really an issue to keep a few (50) peacekeeping forces at the border if they it were negotiated and allowed by the current controllers.

 

This was pointed out over and over again during the Bush administration before we embarked on this crazy venture.

Documents show that our administration WAS ready to stay in Iraq (for one example) forever. That's why we started building large US military bases there. The plan was for huge US military presence in the center of the ME theater.

Trump chose Bolton, who was a strong champion of that plan!!

Now, he's flipping - without consulting the military or the serious analysts that have worked on US strategy options forever.

And, he made the decision immediately after talking to the leader of Turkey!!

There is no threat to US foreign policy from ANYWHERE that is remotly as serious as the threat from Trump.

 

I said indefinitely...and I didn't say I "wanted" us to remain forever. But, we should remain long enough to facilitate a solution to the border problem and the safety of our allies.

 

Arguments that involve infinity just aren't acceptable.

 

If keeping a force of 50 military there who are not even involved in fighting helps the Kurds keep Isis from re-establishing the Caliphate, sure... why not.

 

I'd point out that this isn't just about the US. This issue fits the brief of the UN - it's an issue of borders. Having a UN presence would include support by multiple nations and would reduce the argument that the US is working for our own advantage rather than a rational resolution.

And, even if it were determined that our best approach is to leave, walking away on day of war commencing is not acceptable.

 

A force of fifty makes our forces nothing but hostages. They are essentially defenseless. I don't like the idea of leaving the Kurds, but neither do I like the idea of having only a force of only fifty. It should be either much more or none.

 

Too late. We should have asked "WHY SHOULD WE BE THERE?" before we got tangled up in the Middle East. If there was an original reason it has been lost to the ages. Oil? Israel? Sand?

 

What does it say about the US that we would flip on our allies and walk away on the very day they are attacked?

I really want to know.

 

They're a tripwire. The border doesn't get crossed because we're there and neither side wants to kill Americans.

 

Call them whatever you want, but depending on both sides not wanting to kill Americans is a prescription for disaster.

 

When this was discussed in Iraq, our military said they required 10 or 20 thousand trained fighters (can't remember the term) in order to carry out independent military operations in Iraq.

I don't know what would be required in this case, as Turkey is a NATO country and there would surely be major ramifications for them attacking a US force.

But, it sounds like this wasn't even discussed with our military!! And, NOBODY can consider that acceptable.

 

No...not when one is a member of NATO and the other far, far weaker than either the other side or you, whom they depend upon. It worked in Western Europe throughout the Cold War.

 

I don't care if you put more. But risking having to start the fight with the Caliphate all over again is idiotic.

Trump should never have been President. This is one of the clearest examples. And it's imperative that we remedy that mistake before he does much more damage.