Senate Passes Bill Opposing Syria, Afghanistan Troop Withdrawals
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
The Senate on Tuesday approved a Middle East-policy bill including a rebuke of President Trump’s decision to withdraw all U.S. troops currently stationed in Syria and about half of those in Afghanistan.
In a bipartisan 77 to 23 vote, the upper chamber passed and sent to the House the Strengthening America’s Security in the Middle East Act, which includes a provision from Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell warning against a “precipitous” withdrawal of troops from the area.
“It would recognize the dangers of a precipitous withdrawal from either conflict and highlight the need for diplomatic engagement and political solutions to the underlying conflicts in Syria and Afghanistan,” McConnell said of his provision to the bill on the Senate floor last week.
On December 19, President Trump promised to withdraw the approximately 2,000 troops currently stationed in Syria and about half of the U.S. troops in Afghanistan, announcing that the Islamic State had been “defeated” in the region.
The move drew bipartisan criticism, including from usually staunch allies of the president such as Senator Lindsey Graham, who called the decision an “Obama-like mistake.”
This is bizarre to me on multiple levels.
First, Congress is dictating strategy to the Commander in Chief? Has there ever been a time when Congress tried to tell the president to put troops in the field when the president didn't want to? Constitutionally, unless they declare war, I don't think they have the power to make anything happen in this regard. They can be annoyed, but that's about it.
So, second, will Congress now be declaring war? Against what country? How are we going to have long-term troop deployments in Syria or Iraq against their wishes without declaring war?
Third, what is the mission? The reason they were sent there was to drive back ISIS. They did that. Are they supposed to stay there indefinitely to make sure they never come back?
Fourth, has anyone in the Senate considered what permanently stationing unwanted US troops in other countries does to our relationships with those countries?
Fifth, how will American military families react to having their loved ones stationed in Syria because "just in case?"
Sixth (or F) there has to be some time when we want to bring troops home, doesn't there? This only started as like 50 people and gradually grew to 2,000. It's not like a massive presence is needed. Why are we going to have a big political throw down over a couple thousand troops in Syria?
Seventh, keeping people in Syria isn't free. As of last April, we were already spending about $15 Billion per year to keep that small force going, but it's beyond the pale to spend a third of that on some border fencing right here at home.
Or Germany, Estonia, Korea, Japan, Alaska, Guam, Africa etc?
Sounds like Vietnam, eh? and many lesser known exercises.......
Are our troops under direct threat from Russia, China, and Iran in Germany, Estonia, Korea, Japan, Alaska (a US state by the way), and Guam? Africa is the same as the ME. Trump should be looking to get our troops out of there as well. No more supporting tin horn dictators; rebels that will turn on the US as soon as they "win"; or "moderate" anythings.
Except in Vietnam there wasn't an every day danger of confrontation with Russian and Chinese war planes occupying the same air space; or a ground conflict between US, Russian, and Iranian forces that could quickly escalate.
So far I actually agree with Trump on foreign policy. Our allies need to be treated like the enemy for taking advantage of the US for all of these years; and, we need to speak to our enemies; but not give them anything until they offer something substantial in return. Talk is cheap, and can go on forever. No one sided BS deals like Clinton had with N Korea.
My point was that an individual joins the service, and is stationed anywhere the system sends them for any reason, including "just in case" and
the general grade officers in charge don't really care what the service members reactions are, let alone their families.
If those issues are important to the service member he or she gets out of the service.
It happens everyday.
I completely agree with you on all points.
Obama was criticized when he pulled troops out of Iraq and was then accused of creating ISIS because of it. What do you think is happening here ?
Was Obama rebuked by Congress by a bill? If so please provide a link.
TDS is rampant on both sides in Congress.
This is about throwing a hissy fit because Trump is giving up on flipping Syria. Sorry, Congress can take a flying leap in the eternal abyss of hell along with Obama, Clinton, and the rest hawks in the pentagon. No WWIII over a piss ant country like Syria.
The nice thing is we all learn from our mistakes. It was a mistake to go in and, kill Saddam Hussein, he should have been left in power as a buffer in the region, yes, he should have been sanctioned for his genocide of his people but, he should have been left in place, this I put on Clinton since she was in Congress at the time and, the other members who voted for the war in Iraq, I also blame Bush and, Cheney, especially Cheney, for lying to Congress about WMD's in Iraq. I blame both Bush and, Obama for the pull out in Iraq, that was a mistake as well, we shouldn't have left a vacuum there the way we did, Bush signed the agreement that forced the pull out, Obama carried it out without trying to get another agreement in place of it. Now, since we can learn from our mistakes, we are about to make another, pulling out of Syria at this time, according to the Intelligence community is a huge mistake, it will open up the region not only to Russia but, to a resurgence of ISIS within 6 months, I don't think any of us want this, it will also give Turkey a chance to wipe out the Kurds, our allies against ISIS in the region, the trust we have earned in the Middle East because of this alliance will be wiped out at the same time, no one will trust the U.S. as allies in the ME after that which will make it easier for Russia to take over the ME. I don't believe any of us want any of this to happen.
I guess that's at least part of the reason McConnell sat through a great deal of the SOTU without rising or clapping for many of the President's remarks.