Trump orders American troops to retreat

...

Good post for review and further research by the several armchair wingnuts here.

 

I understand Trump is now going to leave sufficient forces in Syria to protect the oil.

 

Trump claims to want to end “endless wars” while doing nothing of the sort. His surrender order in Syria started a war. "It's time to bring our soldiers back home." — Trump said at a news conference on Wednesday. He was lying.

Fox News reports, "All U.S. troops leaving Syria as part of the withdrawal plan recently announced by President Trump will be stationed in western Iraq, Defense Secretary Mark Esper said Saturday."

The U.S. departure from Syria will take “weeks not days,” Esper said, and involve both aircraft and ground convoys as about 1,000 troops relocate, Reuters reported.

Does this mean there won't be any pullout at all? I am a retired Marine officer and a amateur military historian. It does not take weeks to withdraw 1,000 troops and their equipment. Is the Pentagon countermanding Trump's order? It has happened before.

Suddenly, Trump changed his mind, or the Pentagon changed it for him. The Times reports, "Trump is leaning in favor of a new Pentagon plan to keep a small contingent of American troops in eastern Syria, perhaps numbering about 200, to combat the Islamic State and block the advance of Syrian government and Russian forces into the region’s coveted oil fields, a senior administration official said on Sunday."

Fox added, "In addition, the U.S. military will continue its efforts to prevent a resurgence by Islamic State group (ISIS) terrorists, he said."

More evidence Trump is backing down from his dishonorable surrender order that betrayed an ally. Trump's order resulted in the Turkish invasion of Syria to annihilate the Kurds and forcing the survivors to leave their homes. In the process, thousands of ISIS terrorists were allowed to escape. Now because of Trump's order, we are forced to fight them again.

It doesn't take genius to figure out that the U.S. can't fight ISIS terrorists in Syria if our C-in-C foolishly orders our troops to go to Iraq.

Conclusion: As a result of the Pentagon's order to the troops and Trump's belated change of heart after much of the damage has already been done, the troops are staying for the reasons provided by Esper.

Trump's obvious attempt to turn the region over to Russia was a bit too obvious. Trump has about as much discretion as a pit bull.

 

History is not going to frown too much on Trumps pulling out of Syria - and perhaps not so much at all - that book has not been written yet.

Your argument from history seems to be summed up with "It doesn't take genius to figure out that the U.S. can't fight ISIS terrorists in Syria if our C-in-C foolishly orders our troops to go to Iraq"

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that the claim that we are in Syria to fight terrorists - is borderline ludicrous - unless - accompanied by the context that we are the ones responsible for arming and supporting the terrorist proxy army in Syria.

It is this action that History is going to frown on - Arming and supporting a proxy army of radical Islamist extremists - in violation of international law - and US Law - at the time - an action which led to the deaths of over 400,000, war crimes - crimes against humanity.

The above chapter has been already written - History of Obama.

 

Hmmm...agreed. His "bone spurs" saved him from the embarrassment of being dishonr

Obama armed both Syrian rebel forces and the Kurds to fight ISIS...a policy continued by Trump...and that was largely with the encouragement of Republicans such as the late John McCain and Lindsey Graham.

 

it's so sad, we asked the Kurds to fight ISIS for us, told them we would protect them from Turkey, then after they kept their word, we break ours (well republicans broke our word)

next time we ask for help, will people back us?

 

That is what SecDef Esper said. Pay attention. I am the one who ridiculed the statement.

 

Now CBS is reporting, "Pentagon had developed a plan that would let them keep about 200 soldiers in eastern Syria to help SDF units protect oil fields — to prevent the lucrative infrastructure falling into the hands of ISIS militants."

That same story was on Fox today. It doesn't make sense. First, Trump reduced the U.S. force in Syria from a 1,000 to 200, and, as a direct result of that decision, thousands of ISIS terrorists escaped prison.

Second, now this reduced force of 200 is tasked with protecting the oil fields from Assad's Syrian national army, supported by the Russians, and fight the ISIS terrorists all over again with the help of the SDF.

The SDF are the Kurds Trump betrayed. They were the ones throwing rotten potatoes and rocks at retreating Americans.

The Trump administration and the Pentagon are really screwed. Part of the problem is SecDef Esper is trying to protect a deranged President who has no idea what he is doing.

 

By the time Trump got into office Al Qaeda and ISIS had been defeated in most of Syria. The area where they remained was in the area controlled by the US... and Yes .. Goblins such as McCain and Graham were involved in the arming of radical Islamist extremists - including Al Qaeda and ISIS - in Syria - under Obama.

 

Ahh .. my bad ..

 

Once again, Trump supporters should be commended for not using Trump's statements to defend Trump. In defense of his Syrian decision, Trump's statements are filled with lies.

Among numerous lies, he imagins what his critics are saying, then he criticizes them based on what he imagined. "We never agreed to protect the Kurds for the rest of their lives," Trump said today in a cabinet meeting. That is quite true. On the other hand no one has ever said that. His detractors have said he betrayed the Kurds who eliminated ISIS terrorists for us and the Western democracies.

With this and other nonsense, Trump totally embarrassed himself at his cabinet meeting. At one point, like the promoter that he is, Trump bragged about the amenities at his Doral resort, confirming that he is profiting off his Presidency, confirming that he is in violation of the emoluments clause of the Constitution.

He further embarrassed himself by saying a part of our Constitution is phony. “You people with this phony emoluments clause,” Trump said as he took questions from reporters during the Cabinet meeting.

It should be noted, however, that Trump supporters rarely defend Trump. They largely avoid what Trump says and does. Can you blame them?

 

I am not going to teach modern history to you.

 

Another joke of a post - in response to History that your brain can't handle

 

You're confused. We were fighting ISIS, not arming them, although it's possible some American weapons fell into their hands.

 

You must be new - and basing your opinion on MSM propaganda.

That we armed Al Qaeda - and other groups of the same Saudi inspired radical Islamist Jihadist ideology right from the beginning of the conflict in late 2011 - is a matter of historical fact.

Arming these Radical Islamist Jihadists - who were fighting a "Holy War" to turn Syria into a Strict Sharia Totalitarian Nightmare - was a massive effort conducted by numerous Nation States - US - leading the charge - Saudi's and gulf states, Britain and other EU nations, Bulgaria and other eastern European nations, Turkey, Israel, Jordan.

What - did you think a few bands of Rebels showed up with AK-47s and within 2 years took over most of Syria ? It took tens of thousands of tons of sophisticated military equipment - Tanks, Howitzers and so on.

It takes a large amount of heavy and sophisticated weapons to defeat a nation state.

After taking over most of Syria - many of these Jihadists coalesced into an Islamic State in 2013 - and we continued to support the "Islamic State" IS - ISIS for a number of years after that.

13 Bipartisan in Congress co-signed the "Stop Arming Terrorist Act" because that is what we were doing.

https://gabbard.house.gov/news/StopArmingTerrorists

The Islamic State - and Al Qaeda almost won. The Russians intervened and the tide of the war turned in 2015. By the time Trump showed up the Syrian Army had taken back most of the cities that were once controlled by the radical Islamist Jihadists.

The only significant Al Qaeda and ISIS presence left was in US controlled areas - as we were blocking the Syrian army from getting to these locations.

I hope this clears up some of your confusion.



.

 

Interesting...but the bill never got out of Committee. There were assorted factions fighting one another in Syria. The U.S. was being encouraged to support a vaguely defined anti-Assad democratic group by the Israelis, Graham, McCain, et al. There was also remnants of Al Qaeda who moved into Syria from Iraq, who seem to have morphed into ISIS. Why would the United States be secretly supporting the people who we were publicly fighting?

 

The bill was defeated in the House - by people who want to continue supporting terrorist groups when it suits us. How does this change the fact everything stated below is True ?

"Under U.S. law it is illegal for any American to provide money or assistance to al-Qaeda, ISIS or other terrorist groups. If an American citizen gave money, weapons or support to al-Qaeda or ISIS, he or she would be thrown in jail. Yet the U.S. government has been violating this law for years, quietly supporting allies and partners of al-Qaeda, ISIL, Jabhat Fateh al Sham and other terrorist groups with money, weapons, and intelligence support, in their fight to overthrow the Syrian government. The CIA has also been funneling weapons and money through Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar and others who provide direct and indirect support to groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda. This support has allowed al-Qaeda and their fellow terrorist organizations to establish strongholds throughout Syria, including in Aleppo"

What part of "direct and indirect support to groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda" is giving you trouble ?

I told you the groups that coalesced into an Islamic State - it was not "ISIS in Iraq" - Sure there were foreign fighters from Iraq and the Leaders of ISIS in Iraq became influential in the new State - but they represented only a small part of the Islamic State in Syria. Foreign Jihadists from all over the world poured into Syria. One of the largest groups in Syria was the Islamic Front - not "ISIS of Iraq" - Some Al Nusra (Al Qaeda in Syria) members joined the Islamic State but Al Nusra was maintained as a separate entity.

Regardless - these were the two main groups - the others being the same ideology under a different name -

You probably heard the "moderate rebel lie" - aka State Propaganda - and believed it. There were no "moderates" of any significance after the first year of the war - and even this claim is dubious.

The moderate rebel lie came about after our dog ISIS in Syria went off its leash and went into Iraq in 2014. We were then supporting ISIS in Syria - on the same side of the war but, fighting them in Iraq.

The "Moderates" in the war in Syria were the people fighting for Assad - .. not the radical Islamist Proxy Army - fighting a Holy Jihad to turn Syria into an Islamic State.

Rand Paul described this conundrum on CNN's Sunday Morning program "State of the Union"

http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2...-my-son-into-that-mess-on-the-crisis-in-iraq/

Paul does not say ... "Gosh .. we tried to arm these "moderates" and the bad guys got the weapons" - - Paul states that we armed ISIS and Al Qaeda - we fight along side them - on the same side of the war.

The same thing is stated by the 13 "Bipartisan" Co-sponsors to the "Stop Arming Terrorist Act"

Do you think these 14 in congress would lie about such a thing - and go into such detail ?

There are lies going on here ... such as the moderate rebel lie - and a whole lot of cover up by the MSM - including forgetting their own previous reporting on the war - reporting which stated that there was no moderates.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/w...-create-dilemma-for-us.html?pagewanted=all&_r=

This same thing can be found in numerous other sources with titles such as "where are the moderates". After 2014 - The times and our MSM forgot their previous reporting and supporting the Establishment Propaganda narrative.

Our own Defense Intelligence Agency said the same thing .. this is from 2012 - shortly after the conflict started.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-con...12-DOD-Release-2015-04-10-final-version11.pdf

Good question. Indeed we did support the people who we were publicly fighting - including the 911 Terrorist group - Al Qaeda.

 

Interesting...but get back to me when you have the answer to the last question.

 

I thought you were going to take a stab at that one ?! Have you no thoughts ?

 

I believe you are sincere, along with the Congressional sponsors of the bill. I also believe that in that region of the world it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to determine who is doing what to whom and for what reasons. But, in that environment, personal loyalties may supersede all else and I believe we probably gave the Kurds some on-the-ground personal assurances that we wouldn't let them down...and we did.

 

I agree we let the Kurds down ,, but the Kurds have nothing to do with the issue at hand = knowingly arming Al Qaeda and ISIS.

It has nothing to do with being "sincere" and everything to do with demonstrable reality. This was a massive effort involving many many nation states ... not a few sacks of arms moving across the border. Hundreds of Tanks - thousands of military vehicles.

You don't smuggle thousands of howitzers across the border in a knapsack - or transport them thousands of miles from Eastern Europe - and then have these weapons magically fall into the hands of radical Islamist Jihadists.




It was not extremely difficult to know the nature of the Anti Assad forces. It was reported by hundreds of journalists. How many articles would you like ? Try doing a little research - google "moderate rebel lie"

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...king-anti-assad-islamist-groups-a6697226.html

Did you not understand what our Defense Intelligence Agency was saying ?

http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-con...12-DOD-Release-2015-04-10-final-version11.pdf

Don’t rely on Syria’s ‘moderate’ fighting force. It doesn’t exist
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-rely-syria-moderate-fighting-force-anti-isis

The Myth of Syria’s Moderate Rebels https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-myth-of-syrias-moderate-rebels/5403472

How about this one from "American Conservative" - aptly titled
How America Armed Terrorists in Syria

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-america-armed-terrorists-in-syria/

Is this starting to sink in - 400 Howitzers (like the one in the above pic) - in one (1) shipment.

So if there were no "moderate rebels" ... who was this stuff going to ?

 

For all I know the Israelis were furnishing the arms. There were a lot factions fighting one another in Syria. I do remember reports that the CIA had set up a training program for the "moderates," but it didn't work, because they couldn't find any. McCain and Graham were calling for more arms. Obama was reluctant to supply them. Reminded me of a scene from "Lawrence of Arabia," wherein Lawrence crosses the Sinai and returns to Cairo, to try and obtain arms for the Arab Army against the Turks, from General Allenby. He's going through a list...rifles, OK; explosives...OK; artillery...No. Guns make revolutions; artillery makes nations.

 

Of course the Israelis were involved .. as were the Saudi's, Brit's, Qatar, Turkey and numerous others. It was a major coordinated effort by numerous nation states.

Do you not believe the Defense Intelligence Agency ?

Do you not believe Rand Paul and the 13 Bipartisan cosigners to the "Stop Arming Terrorist Act"

You seem to be desperately clinging on to some illusion that we didn't support the Islamist Jihadists .. but we did

 

So...you are defending whom? The Syrian government? The Russians? The Iranians? Who did the DIA say was supplying the arms?

 

I The DIA said the CIA - The 13 Bipartisan in congress said "WE were" what more would you like ?

I am defending the people of Syria - 400,000 dead, horrible atrocity, war crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity - by the proxy army that we supported and armed both directly - and indirectly working through our various partners in this crime.

The history books will not be kind to Obama.

Why do you support arming Radical Islamist Jihadists ? Who are you defending ?