Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1176410)

If the big concern is 10,000 ISIS prisoners, find a way to secure them.

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1176407)

"They were there to defeat Isis"

Which I believe they did. Months ago.

"10,000 of those nuts are housed in make shift prisons"

Lots of ways to deal with that. How



It's not necessarily that Trump isn't listehbing to anybody (though that's possible). It's that he's listening to people like Rand Paul and this Marine Captain, and all you hear on MSNBC and CNN is that the move is stupid. You don't hear from any thoughtful, caring people who are on Trumps side. Not on those stations. Only that Trump is evil. A marine captain does not set policy he has no vision or information beyond the company he commands

"Debate" involves listening to thoughtful people on both sides, not just one side. seem the mirror is Trumps only debate partner

When Bush decided to double down in Iraq with the surge, he was called a neocon war monger.

When Obama pulled out of Iraq (possibly allowing the bad guys to eliminate gains we made), CNN and MSNBC said bringoing troops home was the right hting to do.
Keep repeating this lie I have corrected you all ready on the History of why we left . angin facts need not apply

When Trump decides to being troops home, he's an idiot.

again your missing the bigger picture

Soo it seems to me, the only consistency in terms of response and messaging, is that the Republican is always wrong, he democrat is always right.

no that's your take on everything reguardless of facts

Yeah, yeah, whataboutism. Yeah, yeah, Iraq and Syria aren't exactly the same.

I'm not saying I support Trumps decision or that I hate it. I don't know. I do like General Mattis and would tend to believe he's right more often than he's wrong, and he wanted to stay. But Bolton also wanted to stay, and he could care less how many Americans get killed there. I don't know.

WHat I am pretty sure of, is that much of this is political. If Hilary made the same decision, she'd be hailed as a genius. shes not POTUS false equivalency

Originally Posted by scottw (Post 1176422)

give them tents and fly them to California

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1176432)

The method is what bothers people and our allies (aka TWEET ) not the reason Trump has given .. which is complete BS by the way ...

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1176198)

Nikki Haley
@NikkiHaley
· 2h
We must always have the backs of our allies, if we expect them to have our back. The Kurds were instrumental in our successful fight against ISIS in Syria. Leaving them to die is a big mistake.

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1176237)

Here are some comments from Brent McGurk, President Trump's former Special Presidential Envoy to Counter ISIS

Donald Trump is not a Commander-in-Chief. He makes impulsive decisions with no knowledge or deliberation. He sends military personnel into harm’s way with no backing. He blusters and then leaves our allies exposed when adversaries call his bluff or he confronts a hard phone call.

The WH statement tonight on Syria after Trump spoke with Erdogan demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of anything happening on the ground. The “United States” is not holding any ISIS detainees. They are all being held by the SDF, which Trump just served up to Turkey.

Turkey has neither the intent, desire, nor capacity to manage 60k detainees in al Hol camp, which State and DoD IGs warn is the nucleus for a resurgent ISIS. Believing otherwise is a reckless gamble with our national security. Background here https://thesoufancenter.org/wp-conte...pen-Letter.pdf

The Turkish proposed “safe zone” would effectively extend Turkey’s border 30km into Syria, including areas of Christians, Kurds, and other vulnerable minorities. Our diplomats were working on a plan to forestall such a debacle. Where’s Pompeo?

Indeed, US officials signed the SDF up to a “security mechanism” plan by which it removed all defensive barriers on the Syrian side of the border to forestall a Turkish incursion. EUCOM issued this just yesterday. Was Trump ever even briefed on this plan?

Trump made a similarly impulsive decision when I was managing the policy. I resigned over it and stand by every word in this op-ed. Tonight is a sad replay but seems even worse as US officials had since convinced the SDF that we planned to stay.

There’s a similar defect at the core of US foreign policies across the board: maximalist objectives for a minimalist president combined with no process to assess facts, develop options, or prepare contingencies. Our personnel are left exposed at the slightest moment of friction.

Bottom line: Trump tonight after one call with a foreign leader provided a gift to Russia, Iran, and ISIS. FWIW, I warned of this here in Foreign Affairs https://www.foreignaffairs.com/artic...d-truths-syria and recommended alternatives given the hard realities on the ground and in this White House.

PS I didn't have any idea what TDF's children identified as but given his post earlier and the image he identified with, you likely can understand the confusion.

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1176304)

If only life were so simple.

Read some news from outside Trumpworld and don't feel limited to the few clips I post.

Just keep believing Putin's Puppet and his great and unmatched wisdom.

The Irish Times and remember we "were" THE world power.
In Britain and the US, the idea that the EU could aspire to be a superpower is usually treated as either ludicrous or sinister.

So when Guy Verhofstadt, a prominent member of the European Parliament, recently made the case for the EU to be part of an emerging “world order that is based on empires”, there was a predictable backlash. At the Conservative party conference a few days ago, his words, taken from a speech to their anti-Brexit enemies the Liberal Democrats, were cited as evidence of the dangerous imperial ambitions of the EU - and proof that leaving the bloc is the UK’s only safe option.

Mr Verhofstadt can be arrogant. But, in this case, he also happens to be right. The rise of China and India, and the America First policies of Donald Trump’s US, makes it more important than ever that European countries defend their interests collectively.

The EU once dreamt that the whole world would move towards a law-based system, similar to the EU method. But a world order, shaped by Xi Jinping’s China and Trump’s America, will be based on power rather than rules. The outbreak of a global trade war underlines that small European countries can no longer rely on international rules to protect them. They need the bulk and heft that the EU provides.

The former Belgian prime minister’s choice of the word “empire” - with its connotations of conquest - was unfortunate. The EU is an empire by invitation. Nobody is forced to join. And, despite the difficulties of Brexit, any member is free to leave. It would be more accurate to say that the EU can and should aspire to be a superpower - one of four or five major global powers, capable of shaping the world order.

The Telegraph from the UK
Donald Trump has abandoned Syria for short-term political gain. We will all pay a terrible price for his folly

Financial Review from Australia
EU, too, needs to flex its muscles under the new world order
The EU once dreamt the whole world would move towards a law-based system, but a world order, shaped by Xi Jinping’s China and Trump’s America, will be based on power rather than rules.

From the BESA center Israel
The American withdrawals from the agreements with Russia and Iran are but two examples of a far broader breakdown in adherence to international law, norms, and procedures fueled by President Donald Trump’s disdain for key pillars of the US-led, post-WWII order.

Trump has walked away from the Paris accord on climate change as well as the Trans-Pacific Partnership and cast doubt on the US commitment to multiple other multilateral arrangements, including the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the EU, and the G7, which brings together the West’s largest economies.

America’s rivals, China and Russia, as well as Iran, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia, have countered US unilateralism with calls for a strengthening of multilateralism – albeit one in which they can use the arms trade to leverage their geopolitical weight and fight wars with absolute disregard for the human consequences, and brutally repress minorities of any ethnic, religious, or political stripe.

Trump’s “America First” approach has emboldened leaders backed by Russia and China, including Erdoğan, to more aggressively challenge the existing order and more blatantly violate its underpinnings.

The Korea Herald from South Korea
This year marks the 75th anniversary of the Bretton Woods Agreement, which laid the foundation of the liberal economic order in the post-World War era and led to the establishment of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank.

But it is also likely to be remembered as the turning point in history when leading economies essentially confirmed the denial of liberalism, regressing to nationalist and populist ideals.

The rise of Donald Trump as US president signaled the end of the liberal world order that had prevailed for most of the 20th century, as the Council on Foreign Relations President Richard Haass wrote in his landmark column “Liberal world order, R.I.P.” in March 2018.

As noted in its recent set of policies, the world’s most powerful country has been gesturing to depart from its long-held role as guardian of liberalism.

The Trump administration’s anti-liberalism actions included scrapping the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran, and withdrawing from the Paris Climate Agreement, Trans-Pacific Partnership and UNESCO.

As for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the US president labeled it “obsolete,” denying its function as a forerunner institution in the Western liberal-democratic world.

“The liberal world order cannot survive on its own, because others (than the US) lack either the interest or the means to sustain it,” Haass wrote.

“The result will be a world that is less free, less prosperous, and less peaceful, for Americans and others alike.”

Confirming Haass’ pessimistic analysis was the Group of 20 summit held in Osaka, Japan, in June this year, where the world’s major economies failed to include the issue of trade protectionism in their final communique, mainly due to disapproval from the US.

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1176448)

Pete, see what I'm doing? It's OK when you cite sources who aren't people who set policy, as long as those folks are bashing Trump. But if I cite a non policy-making source who supports Trump, well he's not credible, because he doesn't set policy.

Again, the logic is crystal clear. liberal=good, conservative=bad.

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles (Post 1176452)

I don’t know how to sign but will attempt to wreck havoc.👍🏿
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1176451)

Are you arguing with me about something WDMSO posted perhaps?
You’ve shown many times that your crystal clear logic is Jim=good, contrary = (bad, therefore liberal)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1176465)

Pete, can you point me to any of the many threads you've started, which give credit to republicans? .

Originally Posted by Got Stripers (Post 1176459)

There he is, thank God I was worried you were suffocating with you head either so far up your own Arse or the sand, you wouldn't make it through the day. Like a breath of fresh air your always there to point out one of my world damaging auto correct mistakes, Mr. Irrelevant strikes again. Your contributions here are so deep and thought provoking.

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1176465)

Pete, can you point me to any of the many threads you've started, which give credit to republicans? I don't need to go crazy when a republican does something stupid or unethical (though it does disappoint me), I haven't gone all-in on either side.

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1176444)

'How "

Build a secure prison. The world pays for it.

" marine captain does not set policy "

Who the hell said he sets policy? You don't quote people who aren't in the federal legislature? You only quote people who set policy? He had an opinion about the possible upside to what Trump is doing. Some people, clearly not you, like to hear both sides before they make up their mind.

"seem the mirror is Trumps only debate partner "

Where you get your news, I'm sure that's what you think. So if Trump never listens to anybody, and every decision is his alone, can we assume you give him sole credit for the insanely low unemployment we are enjoying?

Here, let me answer for you: "a, duh, uhh, I mean, Obama did it all"

"no that's your take on everything reguardless of facts "

Oh, I'm factually incorrect when I say that you guys only care about making the Republican wrong? OK, then please point me to a post you started, where you praised a Republican for doing something great. You've started hundreds of posts since Trump took power, show me one that praises Trump, or any conservative. If you can't do that, then I'm 100% correct.