- Joined
- Jan 8, 2010
- Messages
- 72,131
- Reaction score
- 58,867
- Location
- NE Ohio
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
“Are we so weak and inept diplomatically that Turkey forced the hand of the United States of America? Turkey!?”
Romney Speech said:“It’s been … suggested that Turkey may have called America’s bluff, telling the president they are coming no matter what we did,” said Romney, of Utah. “If that’s so, we should know it. For it would tell us a great deal about how we should deal with Turkey, now and in the future.”
“Are we so weak and inept diplomatically that Turkey forced the hand of the United States of America? Turkey!?” Romney said. “I believe that it’s imperative that public hearings are held to answer these questions, and I hope the Senate is able to conduct those hearings next week.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ses-very-troubling-theory-about-trump-turkey/
Its known the president got rolled by Turkey and completely bungled the situation. However, this makes me wonder if this is the way out for the GOP where they can protect their brand yet consider voting for removing Trump from office for reasons their base can accept.
My hope is Pelosi is smart and includes the facts about Turkey in the articles of impeachment.
Viewpoint: Syria could be beginning of end for Trump
.......................................................
When Erdogan told Trump in a recent phone conversation that he planned to send forces into Syria to eliminate the possibility of an autonomous Kurdish region along Turkey's border, it's likely he anticipated that Trump would offer minimal resistance.
After all, in another conversation in late 2018, Trump signaled his strong desire to withdraw US forces from Syria, reportedly telling Erdogan, "OK, it's all yours. We are done." Secretary of Defense James Mattis resigned as a result, one of the last national security "adults in the room" willing to contain Trump's impulses.
Ten months later, when Erdogan decided to act, he knew he was pushing against an open door.
While Trump's policy has elicited bipartisan criticism, even from Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, many Americans are weary of Middle East wars and support bringing the troops home.
But Trump did it in just about the worst possible way.
The relatively small US contingent, together with British and French counterparts, were there to prevent a resurgence of the Islamic State and act as a buffer pending a diplomatic process to chart how Syria would be reconstructed and governed going forward.
Despite his business background, Trump ceded whatever leverage the United States might have had to shape a new and improved Syria to Russia, Iran, the Assad regime and even the Islamic State.
War hawks. Always willing to sacrifice other people to achieve their goals.
There were what, 24 soldiers located in that area at the time?
Turkey already had troops there, and let us know their intent. What exactly would those 24 men have been able to do?
Die nobly so we would then have another war, this time with Turkey? Surrender, and then be turned over to the US, but by doing so create an incident leading to cries for intervention anyway?
Or best case scenario, simply be ignored by the Turks who would go about their business doing what they intended anyway unconcerned by 24 "guards"?
It seems to me that what those of you and the war hawks in Congress wanted was for us to send MORE troops into the area to serve as a "body barrier." Yep, send more troops into a place we should not have been in in the first place!
That's the ticket! :doh
What is it with people in our country and their willingness to put OTHER Americans in harms way for political theater?
I'm on record calling for the USA pulling out of a situation we should never have gotten into in the first place. IMO and despite all the hooplah in the MSM seeking to make this Trump's fault, it really isn't.
The man promised to get the USA out, and he has been trying to do just that. Figuring out reasons to not only stay but increase our military presence? I don't agree with that at all.
IMO he did the right thing in this situation. Period.
If people really want to talk about how bad Trump has been for Turkey, the Kurds and Syria I just want to make sure that we're talking about the WHOLE story.
Syria has been an absolute mess for more than half a century. When the Ba'athists took over in the 1960s the nation went to hell. They tried to invade Israel. The did invade Lebanon. The Syrian government has been killing their own people since the 1980s. When the current Assad took over for his father the country started hosting Islamist training sites and Saddam sent truckloads of military gear into Syria before the US invaded. The current civil war, which is kind of an extension of various uprisings since the 1970s, was supported by efforts of the Obama/Clinton State Department and has resulted in MILLIONS of Syrians fleeing the country.
The problems with Syria go back more than 50 years every single US administration since then has had to deal with something related to Syria or ignore stuff Syria was doing. There are no easy answers to Syria, Turkey the Kurds and other factions in the area. The primary goal really has to be stomping on militant jhadists and terrorists but every administration in the US and Europe has failed to come up with a good option.
If people want to blame Trump for everything that's fine. He hasn't come up with a solution either but it's REALLY unfair to lay 50 years of suck and failure at his feat when he's only been in office 3 years.
Turkey said they were coming in even if they had to harm Americans to do so?War hawks. Always willing to sacrifice other people to achieve their goals.
There were what, 24 soldiers located in that area at the time?
Turkey already had troops there, and let us know their intent. What exactly would those 24 men have been able to do?
Die nobly so we would then have another war, this time with Turkey? Surrender, and then be turned over to the US, but by doing so create an incident leading to cries for intervention anyway?
Or best case scenario, simply be ignored by the Turks who would go about their business doing what they intended anyway unconcerned by 24 "guards"?
It seems to me that what those of you and the war hawks in Congress wanted was for us to send MORE troops into the area to serve as a "body barrier." Yep, send more troops into a place we should not have been in in the first place!
That's the ticket! :doh
What is it with people in our country and their willingness to put OTHER Americans in harms way for political theater?
I'm on record calling for the USA pulling out of a situation we should never have gotten into in the first place. IMO and despite all the hooplah in the MSM seeking to make this Trump's fault, it really isn't.
The man promised to get the USA out, and he has been trying to do just that. Figuring out reasons to not only stay but increase our military presence? I don't agree with that at all.
IMO he did the right thing in this situation. Period.
Right wingers try at all times to leave the impression Putin and Assad don't exist.
And that they care about our troops so much they want to bring 'em home.
To give 'em surrender pay.
Is surrender pay another Tangmo fantasy?
When are the troops due home?This is wild! So many of these people just a bit ago wanted to 'end the wars' and 'bring the troops' home, but now want to continue the wars and keep the troops at risk.
War hawks. Always willing to sacrifice other people to achieve their goals.
There were what, 24 soldiers located in that area at the time?
Turkey already had troops there, and let us know their intent. What exactly would those 24 men have been able to do?
I'm on record calling for the USA pulling out of a situation we should never have gotten into in the first place.
Why should we support the PKK?
When are the troops due home?
Will they be home in time for Christmas?
...When the President of the United States basically says that our security guarantee is worthless, that makes us less safe. When the President of the United States demonstrates to partner forces that they are better off not fighting on behalf of the United States (allowing us to conduct large campaigns with minimal deployment of U.S. troops) that makes us less safe. And when the President of the United States lets himself get rolled by a two-bit thug in Turkey, resulting in the abandonment of a partner and the release of thousands of ISIS fighters, that's also embarrassing, as well as making us less safe.
Good point. It's not like ISIS or AQ have ever attacked the West, after all.
This is wild! So many of these people just a bit ago wanted to 'end the wars' and 'bring the troops' home, but now want to continue the wars and keep the troops at risk.
Hyperbole. We should never had gone into Syria in the first place. Not into Afghanistan before that. We have other methods of finding and eliminating small groups without going to war for YEARS over their actions.
Whose actions created ISIS in the first place?
Seems like OUR ongoing interference in the ME is the root of all the problems we see today.
As for 9/11? We went to war because a group of terrorists
How would you like it if say, some nutter-fanatic Americans went to Russia and blew up the Kremlin.
Would Russia have a valid reason to declare war on the USA?
Hyperbole. We should never had gone into Syria in the first place. Nor into Afghanistan before that. We have other methods of finding and eliminating small groups without going to war for YEARS over their actions.
Whose actions created ISIS in the first place? Seems like OUR ongoing interference in the ME is the root of all the problems we see today. The chickens coming home to roost.
As for 9/11? We went to war because a group of terrorists organized a successful plot.
How would you like it if say, some nutter-fanatic Americans went to Russia and blew up the Kremlin.
Would Russia have a valid reason to declare war on the USA?
We need to stop constantly over-reacting, and start acting sensibly with a response that punishes the actual guilty and does not end up punishing us instead.
We... don't?
Several US generals and admirals expressed their disgust and bewilderment at Trump’s decision. Adm [Ret.] James Stavridis, former supreme allied commander of Nato, told MSNBC that it was a “geopolitical mistake of near epic proportion”. He said its long-term impact would be to cast doubt on the reliability of the US as an ally.
“It’s hard to imagine how one could, in a single stroke, re-enable Isis, elevate Iran, allow Vladimir Putin the puppet master to continue his upward trajectory and simultaneously put war criminal chemical-weapon user Bashar al-Assad in the driving seat in Syria.”
On the same channel, the former four-star general and battlefield commander in the Gulf, Barry McCaffrey, said the Syrian withdrawal was “inexplicable”. “Mr Trump seems to have single-handedly and unilaterally precipitated a national security crisis in the Middle East,” he said, adding that the president had put the armed forces in a “very tricky situation”.
Trump’s former national security adviser, HR McMaster, agreed that the decision would destabilize the region and intensify the Syrian civil war.
General discontent: how the president's military men turned on Trump | US news | The Guardian
How's the borscht today.
I ask a relevant question because you asked an idiotic question.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?