• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

US to let Turkish forces move into Syria, abandoning Kurdish allies

Page 20 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
19,695
10,797
136
They can meet with their Turkish counterparts. Do US Presidents meet with every VP delegation of foreign countries ?
Or your wannabe dictator could end his little military adventure. Someday your country is going to have to stop treating the Kurds like shit.
 

AtenRa

Lifer
Feb 2, 2009
13,553
2,533
126
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
15,949
4,067
136
So glad Trump straightened us all out. Gosh, I thought the Kurds were one of the few friends we had in the middle east.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

VRAMdemon

Diamond Member
Aug 16, 2012
4,798
4,149
136
Lol..."strategically brillIant" - That's the so-called president of the United States right there. Apologies, rest of the world.
 
Feb 4, 2009
28,359
8,917
136
A poorly written and sloppy letter to the urdeon (spelling) Turkey leader guy.
Ends with I’m enclosing this private letter from this other guy.
Best mind, best words, from the leaky Viper Pit the White House.
 

amenx

Platinum Member
Dec 17, 2004
2,761
508
126
I think the reason Erdogan is not worried about Trump is that he knows Trump to be a confused, uncertain fool. A fool who is paranoid about doing anything in response that would make things only worse and sink his re-election hopes. Trump already knows he blundered bad but is doubling down to avoid the appearance he is prone to blunders and stupid actions. Its not working and never will.
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
15,949
4,067
136
Lynsey Graham is very very angry with Trump and is going to be his worst enemy if he let's this stand. Lindsey must have gotten his spine out of hock.
 

Homerboy

Lifer
Mar 1, 2000
29,176
2,880
126
Lynsey Graham is very very angry with Trump and is going to be his worst enemy if he let's this stand. Lindsey must have gotten his spine out of hock.

Graham told CNN in an interview Wednesday morning that Trump "will have American blood on his hands if he abandons Kurds because ISIS will come back, and if any American is killed anywhere because a resurgent ISIS, it will fall on the Trump administration like it did (former President Barack) Obama."
He added, "I blame the terrorists, I blame (Turkish President Recep Tayyip) Erdogan for the violence, but I do look to President Trump to fix it."
Graham's comments followed a Senate Foreign Relations Committee meeting on Capitol Hill. He also called out what he said was a pattern of not listening to advisers and that the President is virtually acting on his own.

"He's not listening to his advisers, he's not," Graham said. "He's making the biggest mistake of his presidency by assuming the Kurds are better off today than they were yesterday. That is just unbelievable."
 

VRAMdemon

Diamond Member
Aug 16, 2012
4,798
4,149
136
Turkey ‘effectively holding 50 US nuclear bombs hostage’ at air base amid Syria invasion

On the plus side, the PAL system should prevent anyone from using them without authorization.

On the downside, all it takes is a call to Trump, and it's possible he'll gladly give up the codes in exchange for flattery and an attaboy.

This report on German TV said how the Syrian government troops were delighted to find the abandoned US bases so well functioning and equipped after taking them. They proudly showed the working facilities and stuffed fridges. They called it a gift. Nuclear arms are just a bonus.

https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/syrien-tuerkei-manbidsch-105.html


Als die amerikanischen Soldaten Manbidsch verließen, waren sie offenbar in Eile. Ihren Stützpunkt bauten sie nicht komplett ab. Zelte, Feldbetten, Telekommunikationsmasten, Bulldozer, Fitnessgeräte und vieles andere ließen sie zurück, wie ein Internetvideo eines russischen Reporters zeigt, der einen Rundgang durch die Basis machte. In der Kantine stehen Tische und Bänke, halb abgegessene Teller, eine Mikrowelle - und Kühlschränke, die noch gut mit Getränken gefüllt sind. Der Abzug der Amerikaner aus Manbidsch ist der neueste Triumph für Moskau in Syrien - errungen, ohne dass ein einziger Schuss fiel.

[translation]

When the American soldiers left Manbidsch, they obviously were in a hurry. The didn't dissamble their base completely. They left behind tents, camp beds, radio poles, bulldozers, work out devices and much more, as an internet video of a Russian reporter shows, who made a tour through the base. In the canteen, there are still tables and benches, half eaten plates, a microwave - and fridges that are well equipped with drinks. The retreat from Manbidsch is the newest triumph for Moscow in Syria - achieved without a single shot fired.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,527
13,534
136
Lynsey Graham is very very angry with Trump and is going to be his worst enemy if he let's this stand. Lindsey must have gotten his spine out of hock.
He'll have his chance to make a difference when the Senate receives the upcoming writ of impeachment. Not likely.
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
14,899
5,087
136
Lynsey Graham is very very angry with Trump and is going to be his worst enemy if he let's this stand. Lindsey must have gotten his spine out of hock.
Yea, I see that ... and I dont believe it. Some kind of theater with an objective not readily understood yet. Probably something with polling numbers, he will reverse later.
 
Feb 4, 2009
28,359
8,917
136
I’m starting to believe this and what follows in the next week or two could really determine if the President is impeached or not.
The President will never admit to being wrong, it’s highly unlikely he will change his plan because that would be admitting the first plan was bad, he will never concede, he will keep throwing bombs at all Senators who even suggest he change direction.
At some point I’d imagine they’d say enough is enough. Even Lindsay appears to be getting there.
 

PlanetJosh

Golden Member
May 6, 2013
1,458
55
91
How far are Democrats willing to go in bipartisan agreement with Republicans who are against the U.S. troop withdrawal? Would the Dems go for big increases in military spending if it hurt social programs in order to fight against ISIS?

Eh you'll probably tell me it's too big of a stretch and doesn't even fit in the thread or something like that. Go ahead just get it over with.

And what if ISIS has a significant increase in the Philippines for example? Have several divisions of U.S. troops shipped there? My point being this could continue on and on and with non ISIS Arab terrorist groups. And the Dems are going to support sending large numbers of troops for every single one? Come on you know some of them will be selective just like Repubs are selective as to which wars they support. And don't try saying saying sending a limited number of troops will work. Look what happened in Iraq in 2003 and years after because of that.

In a sense i'm saying as a few have already said in the first few pages that it's all messed up. Just offering some reasons as to why not that they're anything new.
 

amenx

Platinum Member
Dec 17, 2004
2,761
508
126
How far are Democrats willing to go in bipartisan agreement with Republicans who are against the U.S. troop withdrawal? Would the Dems go for big increases in military spending if it hurt social programs in order to fight against ISIS?

Eh you'll probably tell me it's too big of a stretch and doesn't even fit in the thread or something like that. Go ahead just get it over with.

And what if ISIS has a significant increase in the Philippines for example? Have several divisions of U.S. troops shipped there? My point being this could continue on and on and with non ISIS Arab terrorist groups. And the Dems are going to support sending large numbers of troops for every single one? Come on you know some of them will be selective just like Repubs are selective as to which wars they support. And don't try saying saying sending a limited number of troops will work. Look what happened in Iraq in 2003 and years after because of that.

In a sense i'm saying as a few have already said in the first few pages that it's all messed up. Just offering some reasons as to why not that they're anything new.
There is a difference between an ISIS cell that may consist of a few terrorists in one country vs a larger one that is of several thousands under a larger command structure in another place. You prioritize your fight (and support to those fighting them) accordingly. Maybe you shouldnt have gone to Afghanistan, fought Qaeda or Bin Laden, since they also existed elsewhere to varying degrees and numbers in other countries? I guess we should leave ISIS alone till the next big 9-11 type attack, then argue about sending troops to some far flung place to deal with them?
 

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
17,655
1,808
126
How many actual troops were removed from Northern Syria.

From what I have heard and read it was only 50.
What was 50 US troops going to do against thousands of Turkish troops and supporting equipment?

If the phone call with Turkey was a warning to the US that they were coming period which I also heard/read somewhere. I would rather that he did pull them out rather than leave them to the Turkish troops.

I would have rather not have our people in Syria to begin with.
 
Last edited:

ASK THE COMMUNITY