Mitch McConnell joins other Republicans in rebuking Trump’s Syria withdrawal

  
Via:  krishna  •  2 weeks ago  •  43 comments

 Mitch McConnell joins other Republicans in rebuking Trump’s Syria withdrawal
“A precipitous withdrawal of U.S. forces from Syria would only benefit Russia, Iran, and the Assad regime,” McConnell said in a statement Monday. “And it would increase the risk that ISIS and other terrorist groups regroup.”

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


512

Photo: Tom Brenner/Getty Images

President Trump faced a swift torrent of Republican criticism Monday as lawmakers rebuked his plan to withdraw troops from northeast Syria, a move Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said would undermine U.S. national security and potentially bolster Islamic State terrorists

McConnell (R-Ky.), in a rare public split with Trump, said that a supermajority in the Senate disagreed with the president’s abrupt withdrawal announcement, raising the specter of veto-proof action to oppose the decision.

“A precipitous withdrawal of U.S. forces from Syria would only benefit Russia, Iran, and the Assad regime,” McConnell said in a statement Monday. “And it would increase the risk that ISIS and other terrorist groups regroup.”

While Democrats also roundly criticized Trump’s decision, the outpouring of opposition from the president’s party stood out.

Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
Find text within the comments Find 
 
Krishna
1  seeder  Krishna    2 weeks ago

McConnell’s statement, in which he called on Trump to “exercise American leadership” and reconsider his plan to   withdraw troops   from Syria’s border with Turkey, echoes the comments of other Republicans who have condemned the president’s decision Monday.

Several senators said Monday that Trump's move would abandon U.S.-allied Kurdish fighters ahead of a long-threatened Turkish offensive into northern Syria.

"This betrayal of the Kurds will also severely harm our credibility as an ally the world over," Sen. Patrick J. Toomey (R-Pa.) said in a statement. "President Trump should rethink this decision immediately."

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
1.1  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Krishna @1    2 weeks ago

all it does in , as usual, is benefit Putins' Russia

 
 
 
Krishna
1.1.1  seeder  Krishna  replied to  igknorantzrulz @1.1    2 weeks ago
all it does in , as usual, is benefit Putins' Russia

Actually withdrawing the tiny contingent of US troops in Syria would benefit Turkey's genocidal dictator (Erdogan)-- as well as Syria's genocidal dictator (Assad) as well as benefitting the barbaric terror group Hezb'Allah-- and allow ISIS to regroup!

In addition it would send a clear message to our allies that they can't count on us....

And a withdrawal wouldalso  hurt the Syrian Democratic Forces ("SDF")-- mainly pro-democracy Kurds but also a small number of pro-democracy Muslim Arabs and Christians-- many of whom would be massacred by Erdogan's forces :-(

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
1.1.2  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Krishna @1.1.1    2 weeks ago

yea but besides that, it's a great idea, no ???

.

I agree with your assessment, but, i can't help but notice and point out how so many of Trumps' foreign policy decisions, always seem to benefit Putins' Russia.

.

Definitely the biggest damage being abandoning the Kurds, who have fought so bravely against ISIL's  as our troops on the ground.

They don't deserve this and what group will trust US Again ?

 
 
 
Krishna
1.1.3  seeder  Krishna  replied to  igknorantzrulz @1.1.2    2 weeks ago
They don't deserve this and what group will trust US Again ?

Exactly!

But, as usual, Trump tries to put his own personal interests above that of America, and above our bond with our allies. :-(

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
1.1.4  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Krishna @1.1.3    2 weeks ago

Well,

he is consistent, he does have that...actually he is consistently inconsistent

as he changes his mind, sometimes mid sentence. He is a walking Paradox ,

and conflicted Oxymoronic super intelligent potUS as declared by him, the ever humble conceited smarter than all, knows more than the generals, and only hires the best and brightest as he drains the swamp to find the best of the worst to appoint to head depts, they are most likely the least qualified for, or qualify due to them being a lobbyist trying to change that agency so as they and or the ones they represent with mega money could further benefit monetarily while water and air gets polluted as they litter up an already broken system with so much more corruption, you know, that same corruption that Trump is suddenly concerned about occuring in Ukraine, and it only took 4 answers as to why the call was made to hold back $390,000,000 for Ukraine.

Moscow Mitch, takes a stand, and contradicts Trump, 

that doesn't happen often, but is , here, a good thing

 
 
 
Krishna
2  seeder  Krishna    2 weeks ago

While Democrats also roundly criticized Trump’s decision, the outpouring of opposition from the president’s party stood out. Trump, who is facing an  impeachment inquiry , is relying on support from Republican senators to remain in office. Trump has publicly lamented the lack of unity among Republicans during the impeachment process.

Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), who has called impeachment attempts “ridiculous,” blasted Trump’s Syria decision Monday.

“So sad. So dangerous,” he said on Twitter. “President Trump may be tired of fighting radical Islam. They are NOT tired of fighting us.”

"This betrayal of the Kurds will also severely harm our credibility as an ally the world over," Sen. Patrick J. Toomey (R-Pa.) said in a statement. "President Trump should rethink this decision immediately."

 
 
 
Kavika
3  Kavika     2 weeks ago

But Trump stated that he would obliterate Turkey if then did something that he didn't like.... 

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
3.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Kavika @3    2 weeks ago

I want to know what he meant by "I've done it before."

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
3.1.1  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @3.1    2 weeks ago

?

 
 
 
Kavika
3.1.2  Kavika   replied to  Paula Bartholomew @3.1    2 weeks ago
I want to know what he meant by "I've done it before."

I asked that question on another article. His imagination is running amuck as usual.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
3.1.3  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  igknorantzrulz @3.1.1    2 weeks ago

When he said he could wreck Turkey's economy.  He said he's done it before.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
3.1.4  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @3.1.3    2 weeks ago

Well of course he has, it's not like he ever would exaggerate or LIE about a claim, on say, about anything and everything, cause

Trumped is the notion that Trump can't achieve any and all by those with minds, to too small, as he's not talkin bout destroying    Chicken 

he actually stated he would/could destroy Turkey  and we all know his base Gobbles that stuffinn up, as he pulls and rips their legs open, and they just let him, so he fondles their breasts till the skin is golden brown, so when he's done, he can send them back across the border, cause just like his daughter, he loves to Fck turkey with his own special Turkey baster inserted with two splints to keep him erect as Korney as it may sound, his gravy train ain't coming

round the bend, as he artificially inseminates all he berates as he makes them all sewer grates, yet again, just like American Apple Pie , that he attempts to bang for dessert cause he's a silent pied piper, cause he lost his flute at band camp, where he's now banned, like rubber with ribs to suck on ,  while passing out skimpy tips for those waiting

for reservoirations , that are only the tip

of the ribbed rubber he attempts to dip in many Fowl pornstar playmates, as well as Turkey, cause 

he ain't chicken,  just Fowl.

 
 
 
devangelical
3.1.5  devangelical  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @3.1.3    2 weeks ago

he'll build a trump tower there and stiff all the local contractors

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
3.1.6  igknorantzrulz  replied to  devangelical @3.1.5    2 weeks ago

like a Fowl Turkey he will!

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
3.2  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Kavika @3    2 weeks ago

I have a feeling that Turkey isn't exactly shaking in their shoes.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
3.2.1  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @3.2    2 weeks ago

that would be the country of Chicken

 
 
 
Tacos!
4  Tacos!    2 weeks ago

We're talking about maybe 1,000 people total. Do people imagine that these thousand are going to hold off somebody's army? What is it people think they're accomplishing there beyond maybe being a target for something awful? Why keep these people in harm's way?

Trump campaigned on promises to bring our troops home when they aren't needed to safeguard national security.  So none of this should surprise anyone.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5  JohnRussell    2 weeks ago
We're talking about maybe 1,000 people total. Do people imagine that these thousand are going to hold off somebody's army? What is it people think they're accomplishing there beyond maybe being a target for something awful?

Turkey will not attack the Kurds with those 1000 American troops there. 

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
5.1  igknorantzrulz  replied to  JohnRussell @5    2 weeks ago

bottom line

 
 
 
Krishna
5.2  seeder  Krishna  replied to  JohnRussell @5    2 weeks ago
Turkey will not attack the Kurds with those 1000 American troops there.

Exactly!

Those troops aren't there to make a major difference in the battles-- after all there are major Syrian force (the entire Syrian military under Assad)-- and large numbers of battle hardened Shia terrorists (Heab'Allah) as well as theirmother enemies, the Sunni terror groupmISIS. Plus some remaining Al-Qaeda. And there are also Russian forces fighting there-- as well as Iranians.

1000 U.S. troops would not make a significant difference in majorbattles.

But that's not really why they're there-- there are there because we know that Erdogan wouldn't attempt to massacre those Kurdish fighers if it meant killing any Americans.

 
 
 
Tacos!
5.3  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @5    2 weeks ago
Turkey will not attack the Kurds with those 1000 American troops there. 

First, you can't guarantee that. Second, when did it become America's responsibility to be bodyguard to Kurds? Third, how long would you like us to guard the Kurds? a year? 10 years? 100 years? 1000 years? Fourth, if any of those countries - Turkey, Syria, Iraq, whoever wants Kurds slaughtered, they don't need to get all official about it. They can slip a bomb under the table to some terrorists and then pretend to wring their hands over the tragic event.

 
 
 
Snuffy
5.3.1  Snuffy  replied to  Tacos! @5.3    2 weeks ago

no, you are correct in that nobody can guarantee that Turkey would not attack the Kurds anyway. But our troops on the ground might give them pause. But Turkey has wanted to eliminate the Kurds for a very long time.

I think this is a wrong decision. It's not just abandoning the Kurds, it will impact future relations if nations stop trusting that the US will stay on the ground with them. And I believe it allows Iran to get another foothold closer to Israel. Nobody likes an endless war and nobody I know of likes wasting the lives of our troops. But at the same time nobody took the oath so that they could spend their time on the golf course,  everybody who puts on that green tux knows what might be required. I think this is a wrong decision and I can only hope that Washington is able to talk Trump out of this.

 
 
 
Tacos!
5.3.2  Tacos!  replied to  Snuffy @5.3.1    2 weeks ago
it will impact future relations if nations stop trusting that the US will stay on the ground with them

Impact it how? Like the Kurds would never accept our help again? Of course they would.

We can't keep troops all over the world all the time. For many reasons. 

I expect Republicans to bitch because for that party, there is no such thing as too much money spent on the military or too many men in the field. 

Democrats, on the other hand, should welcome this news, but they won't because then they would have to actually support something Trump wanted to do. And they'd rather tear out their own eyeballs than do that. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.3.3  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Tacos! @5.3.2    2 weeks ago
Impact ithow?Like the Kurds would never accept our help again?

I think you got things wrong. They helped us and not the other way around. 

IexpectRepublicans to bitch because for that party, there is no such thing as too much money spent on the military or too many men in the field. 

The Kurds actually saved us money by doing the heavy lifting there.

Democrats, on the other hand, should welcome this news, but they won't because then they would have to actually support something Trump wanted to do. And they'd rather tear out their own eyeballs than do that. 

Or maybe it's just wrong to leave an ally to die after they spilled their blood helping us. You know that little thing called ethics.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.3.4  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Snuffy @5.3.1    2 weeks ago
I think this is a wrong decision. It's not just abandoning the Kurds, it will impact future relations if nations stop trusting that the US will stay on the ground with them. And I believe it allows Iran to get another foothold closer to Israel.

Exactly!

 
 
 
Tacos!
5.3.5  Tacos!  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.3.3    2 weeks ago

How long would you like us to stay in Turkey, huh? Gimme a year when we can pull out. 2020? 2030? 2100? 3019?

How many people should we have there. I need a number. 1000? Was that the perfect number already? Would 500 be ok? Maybe we need 50,000. Let's have a number. Everyone is soooo certain that Trump is fucking this up royally, somebody here must have a really solid idea about how many Americans we need to babysit this population.

I hear sooooooo much about Trump breaking up families at the border. He's about to unite a thousand or so American families and you'd think he lit a puppy on fire.

How much more money would you like to spend in Turkey? Why am I hearing nothing about our budget today?

We can't bring everybody home, but if we can bring these guys home, we should.

leave an ally to die

Gosh, how did they ever survive without us? And yet, they did. I think they'll manage. And I also think that if Turkey - or anyone - suddenly decides to start up with some genocide, there will be a reaction.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
5.3.6  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.3.3    2 weeks ago

Spot on target with every statement Perrie.  Those 1000 troops are the tripwire that keeps Turkey and Syria from genociding the Kurds. 

I expect Trump to change his instructions today now that he's been take to the woodshed by the GOP senators.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
5.3.7  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Tacos! @5.3.5    2 weeks ago

Our troops there have the exact function of our 30,000 troops in South Korea.  We are a trip-wire that prevents an escalation.  A 1000 troops there to preserve peace on the cheap?  Yes Tacos.... It is worth every penny.  Our troops are mostly advisors at this point.  You talk about money...... How much would it cost us in blood and treasure to put heavy hardware and twenty times the number of boots on the ground?  Damn.... think through the two ROIs would you.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
5.3.8  igknorantzrulz  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @5.3.7    2 weeks ago
Damn.... think through the two ROIs would you.

ROIs  would be ?

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
5.3.9  igknorantzrulz  replied to  igknorantzrulz @5.3.8    2 weeks ago

return on investment  s     ill have to summize

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
5.3.10  FLYNAVY1  replied to  igknorantzrulz @5.3.8    2 weeks ago

Getting someone else to spill blood on our behalf to eliminate ISIS for the cost of shoulder mounted weapons, some artillery rounds, and some air delivered precision munitions. 

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
5.3.11  igknorantzrulz  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @5.3.10    2 weeks ago

Trumps foreign policy is dictated by Trumps' own financial interests, and for those to be more valuable than the lives of a people that have been such a great and effective  allie, is just fckn ridiculous , yet again. 

Republicans that have yet to call out this mental midget dwarfing all other mental midgets while wrestling his conscience in a box of paper bags, where as if he had only chosen plastic, he could have actually truly have made America Great Again, as they might possibly asphyxiate all that is wrong with US All, but no, they are silent co-conspirators that have allowed this stain to remain, when it should be thought of as a   crazy train, going off the rails of steps printed with feats, climbing our descent to fall

and fail, due to a failure, that he and Putin had created by duping the ignorant into an unbalanced equinox turn all admission, that really pisses him off every night, as he dreams of calling Russian girls, but call girls are busy, if they had call waiting, without millions, he still be masturbating, instead of getting pist upon, but

just another wet dream . 

Just as a peeing prostitute with a prosthetic penis for he,is a wet dream, we always have the artificial reality of him wrestling in that plastic bag death match, lit to enlighten, those who can't see, what it is he, has been doing to "our country tis of thee".

But, we can always dream, 

sorry, not attempting to speak for you, but there are quite a few who also have similar dreams, just dryer

 
 
 
Ronin2
5.3.12  Ronin2  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.3.3    2 weeks ago
I think you got things wrong. They helped us and not the other way around. 

Really, you think the Kurds didn't help the US as it was beneficial to them? What other country was jumping at the chance to arm, train, and provide air support for them in Iraq and Afghanistan?

The Kurds actually saved us money by doing the heavy lifting there.

We could have stayed out of Iraq and Syria and saved a hell of a lot more money. Iraq's government is loyal to Iran. Iran sent a large amount of their trained militia into Iraq to fight on the ground- they could have provided air support as well.  In Syria, Russia, China, and Iran all have assets there they want to protect- I am sure between the three of them- and the Syrian government they could handle ISIS/ISIL.

Or maybe it's just wrong to leave an ally to die after they spilled their blood helping us. You know that little thing called ethics.

Ethics is great. What are our ethics about invading a country we are not at war with, and maintaining a military presence there? We have no UN Security Council Resolution to be in Syria. Syria is not even a NATO venture.

 
 
 
Ronin2
6  Ronin2    2 weeks ago

How about all of these chickenhawks in the House, Senate, and rampant talking heads all quit their damn jobs and take their families to Syria and fight along side the Kurds? I am sure they have more than enough money to buy whatever they need to arm and equip themselves. Hell, take more. Anyone supporting US troops staying there should have no problem signing up with the Kurds.

1) ISIS/ISIL is no longer a military force in Syria or Iraq.  They have moved on to greener pastures in Libya, Lebanon, Afghanistan, and Africa. The US is fighting a war in the wrong damn country if they wish to diminish the ISIS/ISIL threat.

2) The reason for being in Syria is gone. We have no legal standing there; except Obama's misguided idea of removing Assad somehow. That ship sailed long ago when Russia, China, and Iran entered to protect their interests in Syria. We are now engaged in a bottomless pit proxy war. US troops are not dying now. Staying puts them at increasing risk as we have no right to have troops there. The UN will not back us. There is no UN Security Council Resolution for US forces to be anywhere in Syria. Obama put us there under the misguided war on terror.

3) What is anyone's solution in Syria. There are only 3 choices. Push on with the expanding proxy war; and hope it doesn't end in WWIII. Go to war and pray that Russia, China, and Iran back down and we can remove Assad. Or we can finally pull out of Syria and stop wasting resources we need elsewhere.

4) None of the actions we can take will save the Kurds. If we go to war with Russia, China, Iran, and Syria Turkey will still invade northern Syria to get at the Kurds. We will be too busy fighting everyone else to deal with them. Besides, Turkey is a "ally" of the US and NATO member.  There is no Kurdistan to defend. The UN doesn't recognized Kurdistan. Turkey, Syria, Iraq, and Iran will never give up territory for a Kurdistan to exist.

5) Nothing we do will defeat ISIS/ISIL. You cannot defeat an ideology. We have removed them as a military threat in Syria and Iraq. They simply switched countries on us and are still a terrorist threat. Of course we aren't fighting them in Libya, Lebanon, or Africa; but those are minor details to the moronic meme for staying in Syria.

How about we get NATO (minus the US), EU, the rest of the ME, and Russia, China, and Iran who have troops, bases, and interest there to deal with ISIS/ISIL and Turkey. We can provide political pressure and sanctions against Turkey on our end; and NATO can threaten to kick them out. If the Kurds are that damn important let the rest of the world step to the plate for a change.

We have been stuck on stupid when it comes to foreign policy forever. We enter into engagements with absolutely no exit strategy, or sometimes no strategy at all; and then are shocked at the results.

I feel bad for the Kurds, I really do; but they supported the US as it was in their best interests to do so. But it is time the US looked out for ourselves for a change.

 
 
 
Krishna
6.1  seeder  Krishna  replied to  Ronin2 @6    2 weeks ago
How about all of these chickenhawks in the House, Senate, and rampant talking heads all quit their damn jobs and take their families to Syria and fight along side the Kurds?

I wonder if you would have said that about the members of Congress during WWII?

But that's not the point. This isn't the war in Iraq where we had YUGE numbers of troops fighting-- and YUGE numbers of casualties. There are only 1000 US troops (and remember-- this is a volunteer army-- they volunteered).

And their role is not to make any difference in battles-- but rather keep the Turks from attacking our allies.

 
 
 
MUVA
6.1.1  MUVA  replied to  Krishna @6.1    2 weeks ago

I know guys deployed there it is more like 150 guy doing the fighting I agree with you a point but there is no reason the EU and some of the other countries couldn't help more. 

 
 
 
Ronin2
6.1.2  Ronin2  replied to  Krishna @6.1    2 weeks ago
I wonder if you would have said that about the members of Congress during WWII?

We were attacked by the Japanese military at Pearl Harbor. If you cannot see the difference I cannot help you.

But that's not the point. This isn't the war in Iraq where we had YUGE numbers of troops fighting-- and YUGE numbers of casualties.

Bush Jr fucked up. Where have you seen me defend him? Please point it out. I have stated repeatedly he was too weak in Afghanistan to prevent NATO from sucking the US into nation building through the UN. It should have been search and destroy all the way. I also stated he could have continued Clinton's no fly zone and embargo on Iraq forever. We had UN support for both. Invading Iraq was an asinine move and destabilized the region.

There are only 1000 US troops (and remember-- this is a volunteer army-- they volunteered). And their role is not to make any difference in battles-- but rather keep the Turks from attacking our allies.

Seems everyone has forgotten there is a bloody civil war, and proxy war going on in Syria.

It doesn't matter how many troops we have in Syria. They are there illegally. We have no UN Security Council resolution or authority to be there, period. This is not even a NATO operation. If our troops come under sustained attack we have no political backing. It will be the US against whomever is attacking them. Better hope it is not Russia, China, Iran, and Syria. You know, the one whose country it is, and those that are there legally.

I feel bad for the Kurds, I really do; but this is a world problem- not a US one.

 

 
 
 
Krishna
6.2  seeder  Krishna  replied to  Ronin2 @6    2 weeks ago
I feel bad for the Kurds, I really do

If you really supported them you wouldn't advocate withdrawing American troops-- which would lead to a wholesale massacre of Kurds!

 
 
 
Ronin2
6.2.1  Ronin2  replied to  Krishna @6.2    2 weeks ago
If you really supported them you wouldn't advocate withdrawing American troops-- which would lead to a wholesale massacre of Kurds!

If you supported the US troops you wouldn't want them in the middle of a proxy civil war; with no legal standing if they come under attack.

 
 
 
Krishna
7  seeder  Krishna    2 weeks ago

I was curious as to when U.S. firces first entered Syria so I googled it:

Late 2015: The first American ground troops enter Syria — initially 50, growing to the current official total of about 2,000. They recruit, organize and advise thousands of Syrian Kurdish and Arab fighters, dubbed the Syrian Democratic Forces, and push IS out of most of its strongholds.

So they've been there 4 years.

Then I googled to see how many casualties wour troops suffered-- 9 killed. So that 2/year,

Even one death is too many-- but they are fulfilling a vital mission (supporting our allies who are on the front line fighting terror. And they volunterred to join the army.(I wonderhow 8 deaths in Syria compare to the number of soldiers killed in accidents in the last 4 years?).

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
7.1  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Krishna @7    2 weeks ago

It's all about return on investment.  Our troops there to keep the Kurds fighting to keep ISIS on the run is worth every penny.  Much less expensive than if we were having to fight ISIS ourselves. 

 
 
 
MUVA
7.2  MUVA  replied to  Krishna @7    2 weeks ago

I agree with most of your post you are a bit cavalier about the death of our troops. 

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

dave-2693993
Heartland American
loki12
Paula Bartholomew
Dignitatem Societatis


101 visitors