U.S. Troops Coming Home from Syria
Re: U.S. Troops Coming Home from Syria
Hey Echo, long time no see. Hope you have a nice holiday.
There is no fire like passion, there is no shark like hatred, there is no snare like folly, there is no torrent like greed. - The Dhammapada
Re: U.S. Troops Coming Home from Syria
Hmm?
I get the idea that you think trump had another motive for his abrupt troop withdrawal but so far that's just a guess.Is there some unwritten rule that all threads in the political forum morph into Orange Man Bad threads? Can you establish a separate OMB heading so as to keep all those needing a safe space to rant on the POTUS?
There is no fire like passion, there is no shark like hatred, there is no snare like folly, there is no torrent like greed. - The Dhammapada
Re: U.S. Troops Coming Home from Syria
Irony. I get that.Credo ut intelligam wrote:Thank you, Professor, for pointing out the way some here continue to act in bad faith--or just plain error--in their compulsive need to justify their disdain for the President and anyone who might support him
Mattis has been hailed as a great pick for Trump by Trumpistas, but now that it turns out he has differences with Trump he becomes "guys like him."
The compulsion is for Trump supporters to support Trump no matter what.
This country of the United States was not built by those who waited and rested and wished to look behind them.—-JFK
-
- Posts: 713
- Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2018 3:27 pm
Re: U.S. Troops Coming Home from Syria
I would agree with the "right thing in the wrong way" part. Unfortunately, that's how he operates sometimes, even to the chagrin of his supporters, seemingly snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. I would chalk up the James Comey firing to the same mixed bag.Vilepagan wrote:In short I think trump did the right thing in the wrong way and for all the wrong reasons.
Considering, though, the alternative of a perpetual mission-without-end in Syria, I'll live with the mess for now.
Merry Christmas.
Re: U.S. Troops Coming Home from Syria
I would say that's his standard operating procedure. He's two years into the job and he's still clueless.
There is no fire like passion, there is no shark like hatred, there is no snare like folly, there is no torrent like greed. - The Dhammapada
Re: U.S. Troops Coming Home from Syria
The primary question was whether we should be there or not, and how making good on a campaign promise 2 years later would qualify as "sudden". Note the follow up comments as being critical - not only of the president, but anyone who doesn't immediately agree with the criticism. Hard to find any political threads that start off as interesting subjects, that don't quickly devolve into opportunities to reiterate ad nauseum that Orange Man Bad. In fairness, much of the commentary here prior to Nov 2016 was centered around Black Man Bad, and that was equally boring.
Despite what we read, we aren't privy to what's really going on behind what's being reported, and yet so many take very strong opinions regardless.
I don't know what went into Trump's decision. But being in the role of a decision maker, I do make decisions that may come off as sudden and unpopular that I had contemplated for some time, and finally make when a favorable opportunity to do so materializes. And in full disclosure, not all the decisions I made worked out. In fact, some were downright busts.
While I don't agree with everything Teddy Roosevelt said or did, I think he was spot on with his Man in the Arena passage. It's with this filter I evaluate the president's actions - of which I both agree and disagree with. But I will almost always first give the president, Orange-Black or White, the benefit doubt when making an assessment. It doesn't seem like many here, including Vile, will do that, and that makes for a hurdle I'm no longer willing to negotiate when trying to discuss the underlying issues.
Does that help?
Re: U.S. Troops Coming Home from Syria
Agreed, but that's a situation that will never change so I don't think it should affect our debates here much.
Fair enough. Let's assume trump has been contemplating this decision for two years or more...what was the "favorable opportunity" that arose that made him execute his decision now? Any ideas? Any explanations from trump?I don't know what went into Trump's decision. But being in the role of a decision maker, I do make decisions that may come off as sudden and unpopular that I had contemplated for some time, and finally make when a favorable opportunity to do so materializes.
You want me to give the benefit of the doubt to a man who has earned no such benefit IMO. You may do it because he's the "man in the arena" but I think the guy in the arena should demonstrate that he's at least worthy of my respect before I give him the benefit of any doubts.
There is no fire like passion, there is no shark like hatred, there is no snare like folly, there is no torrent like greed. - The Dhammapada
-
- Posts: 713
- Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2018 3:27 pm
Re: U.S. Troops Coming Home from Syria
Rand Paul clearly explains why the U.S. cannot continue these endless missions in Muslim lands.
Re: U.S. Troops Coming Home from Syria
Coupled with Erdogan's recent suggestion we leave Syria, along with his subsequent assurance Turkey could drive out any remaining ISIS elements in Syria if we would give them logistical support, I'd say that is likely the primary reason for the timing of the announcement. Does this seem unreasonable to you?
https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/23/politics ... index.html
I believe it's in the best interests of our country to evaluate the actions of the POTUS objectively. This requires us to first dispassionately understand the the issues before passing judgement on the actions of the man in the arena. Whether or not we like the person has no bearing on the actions, and the best interests of the country. So within that context, yes you should first give him the benefit of the doubt, and then let the chips fall where they may.
Re: U.S. Troops Coming Home from Syria
No, but it apparently did seem unreasonable to the people advising trump. What am I to make of that?Bick wrote: Coupled with Erdogan's recent suggestion we leave Syria, along with his subsequent assurance Turkey could drive out any remaining ISIS elements in Syria if we would give them logistical support, I'd say that is likely the primary reason for the timing of the announcement. Does this seem unreasonable to you?
I agree, but unfortunately my objective opinion is that trump is completely untrustworthy and incompetent. Those in whom I have more confidence in their competence have been overruled.
Look, I don't know who's right any more than you do, but I just have no confidence in trump's decision making. IMO, at best he's just winging it.
There is no fire like passion, there is no shark like hatred, there is no snare like folly, there is no torrent like greed. - The Dhammapada
Re: U.S. Troops Coming Home from Syria
"Now they are mad because he is STOPPING two wars."
The wars are not stopping. That is not true.
The wars are not stopping. That is not true.
Stay loose, and be a little afraid.
quando omni flunkus, mortati
quando omni flunkus, mortati
Re: U.S. Troops Coming Home from Syria
Trump is less of a hawk than Gen Mattis?
Mattis thinks there is a victory to be had in Syria, and Trump thinks there isn't?
Mattis thought he had more autonomy?
Whatever the reason, there was a clear disconnect between them. This falls on the shoulders of the guy at the top - either a bad hire or poor communication of mission. Or maybe Trump felt he had served his useful purpose with the hawkish persona from the get go. Regardless of the reason, it shows very poorly to have your hand-picked SecDef resign under these circumstances.
My uninformed opinion at this point, is Syria had the makings of yet another military quagmire with no clear objective / end in sight. Beyond any humanitarian mission, our being there flies in the face of my more traditional view of constitutional authority for military deployment limiting to direct threats or securing our borders.
Trouble with your approach is it prioritizes WHO over WHAT. I'm way more concerned with the WHAT. Because you lack confidence in Trump's decision making, whatever he decides would be, by your definition, wrong. I wouldn't consider that objective.Vilepagan wrote: I agree, but unfortunately my objective opinion is that trump is completely untrustworthy and incompetent. Those in whom I have more confidence in their competence have been overruled.
Look, I don't know who's right any more than you do, but I just have no confidence in trump's decision making. IMO, at best he's just winging it.
Re: U.S. Troops Coming Home from Syria
Indeed, and it undermines my confidence in trump's decision-making.
My uninformed opinion agrees with yours. Sadly, it also seems to be as uninformed as the guy in the Oval Office.My uninformed opinion at this point, is Syria had the makings of yet another military quagmire with no clear objective / end in sight. Beyond any humanitarian mission, our being there flies in the face of my more traditional view of constitutional authority for military deployment limiting to direct threats or securing our borders.
As am I, but again, I don't think the guy in the Oval Office shares our views. I don't think he's concerned with anything except how he looks.Trouble with your approach is it prioritizes WHO over WHAT. I'm way more concerned with the WHAT.
Not wrong, but suspect. It is as objective as I can be with a guy who has no history of making good decisions. Do you have confidence in trump's decision making, and if so why?Because you lack confidence in Trump's decision making, whatever he decides would be, by your definition, wrong. I wouldn't consider that objective.
There is no fire like passion, there is no shark like hatred, there is no snare like folly, there is no torrent like greed. - The Dhammapada
Re: U.S. Troops Coming Home from Syria
So do I. Having your top military adviser and the civilian coordinating the effort in against ISIS resign tells me it was a bad decision. Contradicting the statements Bolton and your administration over the need to stay in Syria tells me it was a knee jerk decision by Trump. Trump said in his visit to Iraq that the Generals wanted to stay but Trump claiming that ISIS was defeated it was time to leave. All experts say that is false reasoning.
Re: U.S. Troops Coming Home from Syria
I'm not sure what you mean by this. We are in agreement with Trump for wanting to leave Syria, but we're all wrong for disagreeing with the top military advisers?
Trump's financial success and the fact he's POTUS would serve as a strong rebuttal to the hyperbole of your contention he has no history of making good decisions. But to answer your question directly, I'm ambivalent. I have neither complete confidence or no confidence in his decision making ability, nor do I think it's important to make that distinction. In fact, I think it's lazy. It's a lot easier to accept or dismiss things out of hand because of WHO is saying it, than it is to objectively evaluate WHAT is being decided.
I'll go further as it ties into Broman's earlier question of Orange Man Bad. The underlying absence of objectivity pretty much leaves the person's character as the primary / solitary discussion point, or serves as the imaginary Trump card (pun intended) in these discussions.
Step back and look at what each side has done to denigrate the past 3 POTUS. It boils down to 2 points that all attacks are based on with increasingly large mountains of "evidence" to support them:
POTUS is incompetent
POTUS is a liar
Nearly 2 decades of this paradigm with no end in sight. And like all quagmires, we won't move our country forward in any substantial way until we get out of it. That's the primary reason for asking the OMB stuff be limited to those titled as such, and then leave topics like this for the people who can bring themselves to find some measure of objectivity to discuss.
Re: U.S. Troops Coming Home from Syria
Let me be clear about my "agreement" with what trump did. I want the troops to come home, because generally war is a bad thing and we don't want to be seen as "occupiers". There may be good reasons to keep the troops there a while longer and those kinds of decisions are best left to those who know what the situation is on the ground locally.
On the contrary, his financial blunders and past history of dubious deals, scams, and outright fraud serve as evidence of his bad decision making.Trump's financial success and the fact he's POTUS would serve as a strong rebuttal to the hyperbole of your contention he has no history of making good decisions.
So your argument is that you have no opinion on trump but I'm intellectually lazy for having one. Perhaps I can be forgiven for thinking that I'm not the lazy one here. It would indeed be easy to dismiss out-of-hand any of trump's statements without objectively evaluating WHAT was being said, but since we're having this conversation I'm sure you don't think that's what I do.But to answer your question directly, I'm ambivalent. I have neither complete confidence or no confidence in his decision making ability, nor do I think it's important to make that distinction. In fact, I think it's lazy. It's a lot easier to accept or dismiss things out of hand because of WHO is saying it, than it is to objectively evaluate WHAT is being decided.
Alas, I fear the problem is that we're talking about trump, a man whose character (or lack thereof) seems to be the driving force in his presidency.I'll go further as it ties into Broman's earlier question of Orange Man Bad. The underlying absence of objectivity pretty much leaves the person's character as the primary / solitary discussion point, or serves as the imaginary Trump card (pun intended) in these discussions.
There is no fire like passion, there is no shark like hatred, there is no snare like folly, there is no torrent like greed. - The Dhammapada
Re: U.S. Troops Coming Home from Syria
You'll also find that Johnson, McNamara and their other military experts thought it was a great idea to stay in Vietnam despite believing it was not winnable. The irony here is that Nixon is widely regarded as a bad guy, while LBJ gets a far more favorable treatment historically despite the loss of so many US lives he caused by keeping us in a self-described unwinnable war.broman wrote: Having your top military adviser and the civilian coordinating the effort in against ISIS resign tells me it was a bad decision. Contradicting the statements Bolton and your administration over the need to stay in Syria tells me it was a knee jerk decision by Trump. Trump said in his visit to Iraq that the Generals wanted to stay but Trump claiming that ISIS was defeated it was time to leave. All experts say that is false reasoning.
As it relates to the middle east, we're fighting a "war on terror" - basically a euphemism for radical islam, or an ideology that's native to that region. In other words, that's a civil matter within that sovereign country, and none of our business unless that country (ies) is asking for our help.
This piece on Gen Mattis written 2 years ago is prophetic, and provides some insight as to the conflict between him and both Obama and Trump, and whether or not he was a good hire for SecDef in the first place. In fairness to him, I haven't read his reasoning for wanting to keep our soldiers in Syria.
https://warontherocks.com/2016/11/i-lov ... as-secdef/I have long thought of Mattis as a “break glass in case of emergency” type of leader. He was uniquely suited to his roles in the early years of the War on Terror. He is a warrior and a leader of men in the application of violence. He is not, however, a man for all seasons. Many in defense circles have been so overjoyed at the prospect of a qualified secretary, that they seemed to have forgotten to stop and ask if Mattis would, in fact, be right for the job. He is not a politician, or a wonk, or a bureaucrat. To ask him to be any of those things would be like trying to keep a wave upon the sand.
As with all nominees, there are tradeoffs to Mattis running the Defense Department. He is a strategic thinker with a strong sense of history — his library is one of those aforementioned legends. He is a well-regarded leader who inspires fierce loyalty. But I fear Mattis may be wasted atop the vast expanse of the Pentagon. There are ultimately three primary reasons why we shouldn’t hope Chaos becomes secretary of defense.
1. Mattis a recently retired general and is therefore statutorily prohibited from serving as secretary of defense. And while a legislative solution is possible, this law exists for good reasons and overriding it bodes poorly for long-term civil-military relations.
2. Warfighters rarely make good bureaucrats. The Pentagon is one of the world’s largest bureaucracies, and Mattis has shown little patience for management and administration.
3. His boss won’t listen.
We should not dismiss these tradeoffs. They require serious thought, and I don’t expect everyone will conclude as I do. An ideal secretary of defense would have many qualities: strategic thinking, effective leadership, knowledge of the personnel and procurement systems, experience with the interagency, commitment to the warfighters, and steely loyalty to civilian control. It is unlikely we will find all those features in one nominee. But we should be clear-eyed about what Mattis would and would not bring to the office.
- John Q. Public
- Site Admin
- Posts: 27490
- Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:56 am
- Has thanked: 24 times
- Been thanked: 66 times
Re: U.S. Troops Coming Home from Syria
Those of us who had skin in the game give Nixon full credit for that. The difference being that Nixon made his intentions known a full two years before we left and had a plan for the drawdown before we did. Donald did nothing that even resembles that.
Don't look at me, I just work here.
Re: U.S. Troops Coming Home from Syria
At some point the advise that Trump received from those who wanted to stay the course in Syria was translated into a challenge of Trumps authority and decision making. So he put his foot down, simple as that. 
