monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

I guess I just don't like people who commit genocide.

Not unconstitutional at all. Neonazis do not have any right to be schoolteachers.

Why do you feel all the other countries with troops in Syria are so insignificant. Why is that?

xIt's fundamentally a LAND dispute, not a religious one. The Israelis That's what set the whole thing in motion and keeps it boiling.took Palestinian land, kicked most of them out, and refused to give it back or make any sort of restitution.

It is Islamic intimidation(which does not work on Israelis) and terrorism.

Nonsense. Israeli intimidation and refusal to give the land stolen back, and continuing malappropriation of more of it through illegal-under-international law settlements.

The Secretary of Defense submitted his letter of resignation to Trump today. Trumps feckless decision to withdraw from Syria to benefit the Russians, once again give up a position without getting anything in return. Apparently It was too much for Mattis, Trump prefers advice from Fox Tv and the Turkish President ( Trump didn’t get anything from Turkey either for his recent light bulb moment).

Right there is an admission that Israel's only goal in Syria is a resource grab. Using the might of the US military for their foreign policy agenda has long been the stated intention of AIPAC in using US money to bribe US congress men and women.

When are you people going to realise how badly that nation is using you?

#45 is doing you a favour here, but you're quoting a Jewish journalist to show your concerns about this?

Anna may be Canadian, but she's working for the Jerusalem post.

Nice try, but no banana, again.

Interesting kick in the teeth for big pharma, and a boon for big farmer.




source

U.S. to Withdraw About 7,000 Troops From Afghanistan, Officials Say
nyt

As with the exit from Syria, this is one of those actions which, under different circumstances, could've actually been a good thing. Instead it looks premature, reckless, and impulsive. Is Trump making these decisions completely on his own, following his often referred-to "gut" feelings about the matter? Who's guiding his policies here? Any adults left in the room?

EDIT: The Afghan government is putting forth a brave face on this, saying the troops are only involved in training and that their loss shouldn't affect security. So, let's see.

Didn't read your own link, didja?

Seventeen years protecting a drug industry? Afghanistan is not a threat to US interests. Pakistan, maybe.

It didn't explain the strategy behind the pullout. (fixed the link) Maybe there's some behind the scenes deal being made with the Taliban. I'm sure Putin will approve.
nyt

Apart from the early days, when the CIA armed the Mujahedin to defeat Russia's incursion into the nation, the Taliban have always been their own bosses. It's the opium that's been the interest keeping your troops there.

Turkey primed to start offensive against US-backed Kurds in Syria
President Erdoğan’s planned attack on militias he sees as terrorists risks row with Trump

Bethan McKernan and Martin Chulov

Wed 12 Dec 2018 14.01 EST Last modified on Wed 12 Dec 2018 18.11 EST

The Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, has said that Turkey will launch a military operation against the Kurds in northern Syria within days, in a decision that could signal a shift in Turkish-US relations and have far-reaching consequences for Syria’s future.

Long frustrated by US support for Kurdish militias that Turkey views as terrorists, Erdoğan has threatened to push deeper into north-eastern Syria since sending Turkish forces into the Kurdish enclave of Afrin in February.

The president said during a televised speech in Ankara on Wednesday that the operation was imminent. “We will begin our operation to free the east of the Euphrates [river] from the separatist organisation within a few days,” he told MPs. “Our target is not the American soldiers – it is the terror organisations that are active in the region.”

Erdoğan also expressed disappointment that US-backed Kurdish fighters in Syria had not left the town of Manbij, as agreed in a US-Turkish deal brokered this year. “The Americans are not being honest; they are still not removing terrorists [from Manbij],” he said. “Therefore, we will do it.”

Ankara has repeatedly said that Turkey will do what is necessary to protect its security, but has not yet attempted to cross the river, on the eastern bank of which 2,000 US troops are stationed. On Wednesday, a Pentagon spokesman said that any such move would be “unacceptable”.

“Unilateral military action into north-east Syria by any party, particularly as US personnel may be present or in the vicinity, is of grave concern. We would find any such actions unacceptable,” said Cmdr Sean Robertson.

The Kurdish YPG military was the target of February’s Operation Olive Branch: the border town of Afrin was emptied of Kurds and Arab proxy forces installed as custodians.

Rojava, the area east of the river, has remained more problematic for Turkish leaders, who have prioritised curbing Kurdish ambitions ahead of all other elements in the Syrian war, including the international campaign against Islamic State.

The YPG and its backers, the militant PKK, or Kurdistan Workers’ Party, are entrenched in Rojava and have been prominent partners in the US-led fight against Isis, managing to confine the militants to pockets of the frontier with Iraq.

With Isis ousted from much of the north-east, the US’s Syria policy has switched focus to other concerns, primarily preventing Iran from capitalising on any power vacuum in a strategically vital corner of the region.

Paramount for Turkey is countering any claims by the Kurds for autonomy and stopping any momentum stemming from their successful campaign against Isis, which it fears may amplify the Kurdish insurgency inside its own borders.

Washington and Ankara have been at odds throughout the US partnership with the Kurds, and Erdoğan has repeatedly threatened to send his forces to confront its Nato ally.

Ties have been further strained by Donald Trump’s firm backing of Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, whom Turkey accuses of ordering the murder of dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul.

The US president has been exploring ways to placate his Turkish counterpart, and Erdoğan’s claim on Wednesday that US forces in Rojava are not seen as hostile suggests an accommodation may have been reached.

Last month, the US Department of State put bounties on the heads of three senior PKK leaders, despite partnering with the group in Syria. The move was seen as a gesture to Turkey, which has long viewed the organisation as a terrorist group.

Erdoğan called on the US on Wednesday not to allow deep disagreements over their Syria policy to impede future cooperation between the two countries.

Residents of Kurdish towns east of the Euphrates have been bracing themselves for a Turkish attack after several months of shelling and cross-border fire that has killed several civilians.

We have had progressives begging Obama and then Trump to end our culpability in these unnecessary, genocidal wars since we entered the fray.

Why is exiting this morass wrong only under the circumstance that trump makes the decision?

Because Putin also prefers it? That was always the case.

Instead of sharing guilt, we should participate with the U.N. to put an end to this catastrophe. If it weren’t Trump at the helm, this would be seen as the right thing to do.

Since trump’s election, the Democrats have strangely flipped to a pro-war stance. It’s so transparent and ugly.

25th Amendment beckons.

That's the trouble. We have an international system based, at its foundation, on the threat of effective military power. As you know, the ties between the military, the corporations, and the state — from the obvious to the clandestine — form long entangling tentacles which reach into society and affect people and civic institutions at the day-to-day level. That's why we have all these treaties, understandings, and agreements, with allies and enemies alike, to streamline the channels of communication, share appropriate data, work out practical considerations on the ground, etc. There's always been an obvious military aspect to war but in the contemporary world there's a military angle to peace as well and I don't think Trump knows how to wield this power.



Because Trump's decision is unguided by anything other than putative "promises" he claims he made to his base.

Look, the US started the damn war when it chose a military response to bin Laden. If the US want to end the war, give up its impossible mission , that's fine with me. I didn't think we should have gotten into a ground war in Afghanistan in the first place. But, having started the conflict, I'd rather see the US actually take the responsibility of ending it, not just slowly reduce its forces there (and put more pressure on NATO allies). The US should bring all parties together and negotiate a decent and orderly withdrawal. There's a problem with that, too. We'll be watching from the sidelines as radical Islamists conquer the hornet's nest we spent 17 unsuccessful years trying to turn into a peaceful country modeled on say, Oklahoma.

Just because Trump's being criticized doesn't mean that his critics are "pro-war". Trump isn't "wrong" to bring half of our troops home, but again, I don't see what his plan for the war is, other than let other people fight it; he'll be leaving our allies with a bigger share of the burden and he'll have done nothing concrete to end the conflict. And we have yet to see the consequences of the Mattis departure. But maybe Kushner's holed up in some cave negotiating his ass off with a bunch of warlords and will emerge waving a comprehensive peace treaty. Then maybe I'll give Trump some credit.