TRUMP BETRAYS ALLY

[ShAArk92]

That's the point. We should be willing to defend it.

if it was really necessary for them to be there. Which wouldn't have been if we hadn't had Obama's "pullout" and ISIS.

I"m less concerned about what other nations think of us than what we think of us. America First ... that is what Trump campaigned, and I think he's pretty well doing that ... plus or minus a standard deviation.

 

[Mr. Deez]

if it was really necessary for them to be there. Which wouldn't have been if we hadn't had Obama's "pullout" and ISIS.

And if my grandmother had balls, she'd be my grandfather. Obama did pull out. It was a mistake. We can't do anything about that now, except make the right moves now. Taking it in the garage from the Turks isn't the right move.

I"m less concerned about what other nations think of us than what we think of us. America First ... that is what Trump campaigned, and I think he's pretty well doing that ... plu

I don't care what other nations think. I do care about undermining our troops' efforts and needlessly turning over territory to a hostile power.

 

[ShAArk92]

I don't care what other nations think.

understand.

we'll soon see and even my reversion to the oath of office will be revealed to have been "undershot." Not necessarily back then when I was looking through the glass of my avatar ... but just now.

Being the big gorilla is good, if you're the big gorilla ...not just walking next to the big gorilla. How long can we be the big gorilla?

 

[Joe Fan]

Times change

 

[Joe Fan]

As you might have expected, the Kurds have worked out a deal with the Syrian Govt. This swill allow Assad and the Kurds to unite to halt the advance of the Turkish Army (and the Syrian Army has already begun to move north). From there, they can work the rest out within internal Syrian politics.

One thing Trump tried to make clear was that we weren't responsible for Turkey's behavior. Thus clearing the US from any NATO entanglement if things get heated with Syria.

 

[Monahorns]

Of course, if we followed that consistently, all of Europe (including the West) would be controlled by Marxist-Leninist one-party states, and the Soviet Union would almost surely still exist, but that's fine.

C'mon Deez. The USSR and other communist states failed because communism fails and it is oppressive and nobody who really experiences them wants to live under them. The US didn't use military force to free East Germany, the USSR, Hungary, Poland, etc. Those states crumbled because the economics of it CAN'T work. It's called the calculation problem.

 

[Monahorns]

IDK what the right answer is for the ME, specifically. When to get involved and when to let it go ...

ShAArk. The initial question has to be what is the US interest overall in the ME. What is the correct stance for US relations with any nation in the area. What is the fundamental America ideal we are upholding or trying to accomplish. Then for any specific case what is the cost and probability of success that our actions accomplish what we want?

If the answers to those questions are cloudy or uncertain. Don't do anything. It will only lead to mass death and spending millions and billions of dollars.

 

[Monahorns]

I doubt it. We can what if all day ... but we have Obama removing thousands of troops from Iraq which allowed for the installment of ISIS, right?

No ShAArk. Obama gave weapons to Al Qaeda in Iraq. That is who became ISIS. ISIS wasn't created through US inaction but US action.

 

[Monahorns]

As you might have expected, the Kurds have worked out a deal with the Syrian Govt. This swill allow Assad and the Kurds to unite to halt the advance of the Turkish Army (and the Syrian Army has already begun to move north). From there, they can work the rest out within internal Syrian politics.

I expected it because Scott Horton was talking about this months ago.

 

[mchammer]

I'm not using it as a baseline. Just because we threw one ally under the bus doesn't mean me should throw another ally under the bus. It was stupid to do it then, and it's stupid to do it now.

Your argument is based on the situation at hand. They happened to be allies. The ally thing on its own has no merit.

 

[Monahorns]

One thing Trump tried to make clear was that we weren't responsible for Turkey's behavior. Thus clearing the US from any NATO entanglement if things get heated with Syria.

Joe, this is the whole point. The US needs to get out of places where we don't want to be seen as responsible for the carnage. Now, if we really need to start the carnage for reasons that directly defend US civilians, then things must be done.

However, the US can't be the good guy when we are 1000s of miles away from our country shooting people and raining missiles down on cities and killing people on accident at weddings. Right now that is the reputation of the US and the only way to reset is to get out.

 

[LongestHorn]

I expected it because Scott Horton was talking about this months ago.

Link?

 

[Monahorns]

Stick your link up your ***. If you are curious enough, go find it yourself.

 

[Seattle Husker]

Times change

That clearly means all Syrian Kurds should be executed.

 

[Mr. Deez]

C'mon Deez. The USSR and other communist states failed because communism fails and it is oppressive and nobody who really experiences them wants to live under them. The US didn't use military force to free East Germany, the USSR, Hungary, Poland, etc. Those states crumbled because the economics of it CAN'T work. It's called the calculation problem.

Lol. Communism may fail, but it doesn't always fail right away. How others react to it definitely makes a difference. Furthermore, it can adapt to become less communist but still really bad and thrive for many years. (See China.) I do like how you don't deny that you'd have let Western Europe get taken over - only that they wouldn't be communist today, which is laughably speculative. To hell with the Brits, French, Belgians, Dutch, Danes, Norwegians, Spaniards, Germans, Portuguese, and Italians. **** 'em. Let them die.

And of course, all of this presumes that you crackpots would have entered WWII in the first place. I definitely don't see any reason why you would intervene in Europe. Everything you say about the Middle East was true about Europe at the time. That means the German invasion of the Soviet Union would likely have succeeded, so instead of being under communist rule, the people in those countries would live in occupied territories of a Greater Greater German Reich. Maybe some of them would have been better off, but it sure would suck to be Jewish.

There's an argument that you might have gone after Japan, but you wouldn't have had a US presence in Hawaii or the Philippines, so there would be no Pearl Harbor to attack. You would have waited for Japan to attack the West Coast. But then again, why would that be a problem? You surely wouldn't have annexed Texas, so there wouldn't have been a Mexican-American War. That means the West Coast would have been Mexican territory. Damn, if only we had listened to you guys, we could have pawned off the burden of fighting the Japanese onto the Mexicans. We could have just cowered on the East bank of the Mississippi River and hoped and prayed the Japanese never got that far.

 

[Mr. Deez]

That clearly means all Syrian Kurds should be executed.

At least Musburger, Jr. (Monahorns) is consistent. He says this **** no matter who's in charge. The rest of the folks were generally interventionist until about ten minutes ago. They gave Obama flack for pulling out of Iraq and for not being loyal to Israel. Now that it's Trump cutting and running and screwing an ally, they're basically saying, "what's an ally? **** the Kurds."

 

[Monahorns]

Lol. Communism may fail, but it doesn't always fail right away. How others react to it definitely makes a difference. Furthermore, it can adapt to become less communist but still really bad and thrive for many years. (See China.) I do like how you don't deny that you'd have let Western Europe get taken over - only that they wouldn't be communist today, which is laughably speculative. To hell with the Brits, French, Belgians, Dutch, Danes, Norwegians, Spaniards, Germans, Portuguese, and Italians. **** 'em. Let them die.

And of course, all of this presumes that you crackpots would have entered WWII in the first place. I definitely don't see any reason why you would intervene in Europe. Everything you say about the Middle East was true about Europe at the time. That means the German invasion of the Soviet Union would likely have succeeded, so instead of being under communist rule, the people in those countries would live in occupied territories of a Greater Greater German Reich. Maybe some of them would have been better off, but it sure would suck to be Jewish.

There's an argument that you might have gone after Japan, but you wouldn't have had a US presence in Hawaii or the Philippines, so there would be no Pearl Harbor to attack. You would have waited for Japan to attack the West Coast. But then again, why would that be a problem? You surely wouldn't have annexed Texas, so there wouldn't have been a Mexican-American War. That means the West Coast would have been Mexican territory. Damn, if only we had listened to you guys, we could have pawned off the burden of fighting the Japanese onto the Mexicans. We could have just cowered on the East bank of the Mississippi River and hoped and prayed the Japanese never got that far.

Lots of false assumptions about me and my views in there.

 

[Joe Fan]

It's kind of weird that the same people who have a cow about the effect of the US withdrawal from this region never have anything to say about the death of American citizens at the hands of illegal immigrants. Why is that? Why do you care more about the death of someone 7,000 miles away than the death of your neighbor? Here is one theory - it's not really about the Kurds. What it is instead is just more daily Trump-hate. Complaining about Americans killed/murdered by illegal aliens does not let you went that hatred, so you just ignore it.

 

[Mr. Deez]

It's kind of weird that the same people who have a cow about the effect of the US withdrawal from this region never have anything to say about the death of American citizens at the hands of illegal immigrants.

That's not applicable to me. I've said plenty on illegal immigrant crime and have supported at least parts of Trump's immigration agenda.

What it is instead is just more daily Trump-hate

Again, not me. I've defended him on many occasions here. As I said when he got elected, I will be fair to him, and I think I've been fair to him. When he's right, I'll defend him. When he's wrong, I'll criticize him. He's wrong on this.

 

[Monahorns]

At least Musburger, Jr. (Monahorns) is consistent.

That hurts Deez.

 

[Mr. Deez]

That hurts Deez.

Consistency is a compliment. It shouldn't hurt.

 

[Joe Fan]

That's not applicable to me. ..
* * *
Again, not me. ...

You remind me of my neighbor's kid. No really, it wasnt about you

 

[Mr. Deez]

You remind me of my neighbor's kid. No really, it wasnt about you

Just out of curiosity, whom was it about?

 

[Joe Fan]

That hurts Deez.

It does seem to me you have been unfairly attacked today. Some days they just spew in all directions. You cant do anything about it and thus cant let it bother you. Treat it as a compliment.

I am acquainted with one guy who says every time he sees the 'horns down' he thinks of it as a friendly wave. Whatever works.

 

[Joe Fan]

Just out of curiosity, whom was it about?

The thread starter first but also just generally. I cant say I actually read all the replies so it was not to anyone else specifically. I often just grow tired of the 'daily outage!' There is little thought put into this stuff (the Syria issue is a good example). It's almost all emotion driven - for whatever reason, in this era, people really enjoy being outraged. It gives meaning to their lives. And tomorrow there will be a new daily outrage. Would you little to wager me on that?

 

[Mr. Deez]

It does seem to me you have been unfairly attacked today. Some days they just spew in all directions. You cant do anything about it and thus cant let it bother you. Treat it as a compliment.

Since tone is sometimes difficult to communicate in writing and to avoid misunderstanding or hurt feelings, let me just make this clear. I like Monahorns. He's one of the most solid and thoughtful people here. Even when he's wrong (which is pretty much only when he talks foreign policy), his thoughts are always intelligent and well-reasoned. He is an ally, not an enemy.

 

[ShAArk92]

It's kind of weird that the same people who have a cow about the effect of the US withdrawal from this region never have anything to say about the death of American citizens at the hands of illegal immigrants. Why is that? Why do you care more about the death of someone 7,000 miles away than the death of your neighbor? Here is one theory - it's not really about the Kurds. What it is instead is just more daily Trump-hate. Complaining about Americans killed/murdered by illegal aliens does not let you went that hatred, so you just ignore it.

That's not applicable to me.

Again, not me.

You remind me of my neighbor's kid. No really, it wasnt about you

Just out of curiosity, whom was it about?

The thread starter first

Hey Joe ... I think you're confused, bro. I am the thread starter and I've NEVER cared more about deaths 7000 miles away of foreign nationals by an aggressor/terrorist more than my neighbor here in the States by an illegal alien.

That ideal IS on this board, but it's not in this thread and certainly not by me. adjust your target picture. focus on the front sight.


To reiterate ... Trump campaigned on exiting endless wars. IDK if that's even possible at this point, but it's a nice idea and efforts to effect that are appreciated. Again, we return to the "how does a single battalion level force prevent an invasion?"

"by the threat of air power behind 'em."

"Why do we need boots on the ground to enforce a restriction of operations?" Operation Southern Watch was that very thing. No aircraft south of the 38th, and no republican guard. Did it with air power, no boots on the ground in Iraq at the time.

We need ground troops to occupy, not defend ... and not really to advance either.

Moving 50 troops to avoid being in a crossfire that's apparently coming ... no brainer. With all the training and arms the Kurds have received in the last 7 years ... they shouldn't need our 50 spec ops troops anyway.

 

[Mr. Deez]

And tomorrow there will be a new daily outrage. Would you little to wager me on that?

There will be a new outrage tomorrow, and it'll probably be absurd. However, just because everything isn't outrageous doesn't mean that nothing is.

 

[Mr. Deez]

Again, we return to the "how does a single battalion level force prevent an invasion?"

"by the threat of air power behind 'em."

We're not going to bomb Turkish forces. That's a much riskier and more antagonistic move than simply leaving 50 guys where they were.

Moving 50 troops to avoid being in a crossfire that's apparently coming ... no brainer. With all the training and arms the Kurds have received in the last 7 years ... they shouldn't need our 50 spec ops troops anyway.

If we left the 50 troops in place, there's probably a 99 percent chance that there wouldn't be a crossfire, because Erdogan doesn't want to die.

 

[old65horn]

We need ground troops to occupy, not defend ... and not really to advance either.

This is just a curiosity question: based on your statement:

Then why do we need ground troops in Germany, South Korea and Japan? Are we occupying those countries?