The issue at hand isn't whether or the extent to which we should stay involved in these countries, which is a legitimate and complex issue.
The issue is that our international and military strategies are being determined by someone completely unqualified to do, whose motives are questionable or worse, and who refuses to even learn about the details involved or consult experts who understand them.
That method of "leadership" is not visionary or courageous. It is stupid and dangerous.
21
It is always interesting to hear... I agree with what you do or did but not how you did it.
The democrats are suffering severe back pain from twisting to lionize past President Obama and the slobs that shackled the US militarily, economically and socially for self-service but attack President Trump for freeing it.
The drum beat from media panderers at the behest of elites is monotone and choreographed and reminds one of the awkward June Taylor Dancers of TV infamy.
9
Even the NeoCon Heritage Foundation says,
“It’s not really clear what the plan is in Syria. It’s not clear how we protect our interests after we leave, and it’s not clear how it fits into our regional strategy.”
The debate about this debacle couldn't be stated any more succinctly. Get out now!
9
What does Mark mean, that the withdrawal order "puts off debate?" There's plenty of debate. What didn't happen was a lengthy, publicized consideration by the cabinet and other staffers before a formal decision was made. But apparently, Trump and the military had been going back and forth on this for at least a year, on both Syria and Afghanistan. The guy's mind was made up, and has been for awhile, and he finally issued an order. He's the Commander in Chief. The former Syrian ambassador has it about right: we aren't accomplishing our stated goal of getting Assad to offer concessions, we aren't likely to with just 2,000 people there, so there's no rational justification for staying. Obama's "red line" was the last realistic chance to get rid of Assad, and we blew it. The place usually isn't big on second chances.
6
To all the men and women in the United States Armed Forces. How's that 10% pay raise working out for you? I'm sure you were all so surprised.
Your Commander in Chief lied to you. Imagine that. Do you really think this man has your back?
This man is shredding the Constitution, a Constitution you took an oath to defend. Think about that very hard and seriously.
Good luck and God bless you all. Thank you for serving the country.
10
Had Trump gone to Vietnam as an American soldier with his obnoxious demeanor and his big mouth; he would have been "fragged" by his own fellow soldiers.
This man has no redeeming qualities. He's a failure and a liability.
4
Mr Mir says the United States can't be seen as being defeated by the "rag tag" Afghans. This outrageous remark reminds me ominously of LBJ's refusal to admit the Untied States was mistaken about Vietnam. I had hoped we had recovered from WW2 induced hubris. This comment by Mr Mir indicates some have not. I've reread this article 3 times and I still may be missing it, but I cannot find who this Mr Mir is. Who is Mr Mir?
2
I’m fairly left wing which explains why I applaud Trump for having the guts what both the far left and far right have been saying. End these wars. What is the point of staying there? What is the end goal? What is victory?
Trump is right here. End these wars, save the money and use it to fund some form of single payer health care.
10
Were one to take the pulse of the American public (and I mean a wide cross-section of the public, and not simply "Trump supporters in a rust belt diner", which has been the Times's version of "the public" for the past two years), rather than that of establishment figures, I imagine one would get a much different picture than that painted in this article.
It has been revealing to behold the political and media establishment - across party lines - go apoplectic about Trump's decision to scale back the Forever War. They've tolerated unprecedented corruption in the White House and breathtaking human rights abuses on our border, but daring to step back from an almost two decade long military adventure that has yielded nothing but further war....well, that's the straw that might break the camel's back. Gobsmacking.
Since our Middle Eastern forays began early this century, the American public has seen broken countries, torture, expanding war and chaos, countless civilian deaths, and thousands of broken down war veterans. It's a rolling disaster with no end in sight. Somehow, however, the establishment insists that we must stay the course. Absurd! This is the first Trump decision I've supported. Here's hoping he follows through...but I fear the War Party might have the upper hand. Who really rules the US, huh?
8
Football players like to play football
and singers like to sing, generals
like to fight. As the saying goes
the war is too serious a matter to
leave to the generals. The critics
need to spell out how long the troops
need to stay. Taliban always said
America has the watch and we have the time. How long American military
should be in Afghanistan--10 yers,
100 years. We have the habit
to go into the countries with the
military without strategy. Al Qaeda
attacked and we decimated al Qaeda.
Goals achieved and military should
have been withdraw. Where ever we
intervene the mission creep occurs.
Taliban had no part in attack on 9/11
and yet we declared them enemy and
decided to pulverize the, didn't
happen. We need to learn from
experience. Deep down no nation
wants to be occupied even if we
act like a benign occupier. They will
resist. A few corrupt government
officials like Karzai,Ghani and Abdullah
who take the money and look the
other way doesn't mean Afghans
at large are happy with our occupation.
Trump has been questioning the military
presence for some time. It was not
an abrupt decision as portrayed by
some. His basic premise is either we
win or get out-no quagmire please.
5
I know what would get citizens attention, a war tax on gasoline. Think that would result in a national debate?
1
Why would any American member of the armed forces even want to be in the same room with Donald Trump? He demeans them and lies to them on a regular basis. They are toys to him. What a despicable failure he is.
6
Unable to express my disgust at seeing "soldiers" jostling to take a "selfie" with Trump, a man who doesn't value their lives one jot. Like children in need of being patted on the head. If they were given orders to mow us down in the streets, they would.
3
The US must never abandon the Kurds. Not EVER!
3
"If someone has a better idea than we have…" Taliban "are not losing." (General Joseph F Dunford)
May be a good way to start is to study the Vietnam War. Gen. Dunford could be able to see that the main reason why the Vietnam War finished in a total collapse was that the USA supported corrupted politicians whom lined up their pockets and wallets, sold drugs, pillaged their own country,... and of course the South Vietnam Republic had no or little support from the population. Gen. Dunford should learn from it and act accordingly.
2
Trump's decision so soon after his call with Erdogan, makes me think the Turks have something on the Trump family concerning the murder of Mr. Khashoggi....We are giving Erdogan the Kurds on a platter....something they have wanted for a very long time....
2
On this issue Trump is right and Congress is wrong
6
Glad to hear I'm not the only one who's noticed:
"The Democratic Party is becoming the war party."
8
It is hard to believe all the letters supportive of the president here. Yes, I want to withdraw from these endless and futile conflicts that should never have been started in the first place and go to support the obscenely bloated military and armaments industry. So I agree with that part and the sooner or better. But do it smart. Instead we have chaos, disorganization, betrayal, trashing of trust and mostly mass confusion, all hallmarks of the Trump brand.
5
"unite the left and right against a plan to extract the United States from two long, costly and increasingly futile conflicts."
What "plan".....?
He brought us together - in opposition to him.
3
There are two distinct types of "forever war" supporters:
1. The "pragmatists," who insist it's in the US' interest to stay involved in Middle East wars.
2. The "humanitarians" that Bannon spoke of, who just want to protect downtrodden foreigners from some bad dictator or other, not to expand US territory or influence.
To the first group, I say: "You're naive to think the US has any 'influence' over there; our "allies" like us as long as we send them blood or treasure, and not a moment longer." To the second group, I say: "Spend your own money doing good deeds, not mine."
5
Why the heck are liberals objecting to withdrawing from Syria and Afghanistan? Liberals excoriate these interventions as pointless blunders. Why compound the mistake by remaining? The notion that 2000 troops should remain in Syria to protect our Kurdish allies from the Turks is both unrealistic (the Turks and the Kurds will still be there at each other's throats no matter when we leave, meaning there will never be a good time to withdraw) and insidious as a pretext for perpetual war with no other purpose than the care and feeding of the military-industrial complex. Beware of the military-industrial complex's"unwarranted influence in the councils of government."
9
To the "forever wars" types who say we should instead have a "public debate" about foreign policy goals: We already had that debate. Your side lost. The American people long ago made clear that we're sick and tired of "forever wars," sick and tired of having the US pretend it's the world's policeman.
Think up something else: that debate's already occurred.
10
The headline is much more negative than the actual story. “Trump keeps campaign promise” could as easily have been the title.
7
My biggest reservation on the withdrawal of troops from Syria is the support President Trump is apparently getting from Putin and Erdogan. If, for instance, Russia goes on to become a prime presence in Syria, then incursions by Syria to neighboring countries will be incursions by Russia. I do not want us to begin a war with Russia. I totally opposed our war with Iraq. I wish we had never destabilized the area. And I want out with a lower Pentagon budget. But not at the price of a possibly greater war.
1
That's OK with me!
"It will be years, if ever, before America can have trustworthy standing with long-time friends ... "
Our "friends" have been counting on us to continue intervening in foreign wars because -- well, that's just what we do. They should get used to that NOT happening.
7
"Declare victory and leave", advice given during the Vietnam war may apply here. There is no clear choice other than constant occupation of a small area around Kandahar as the Russians found in the late '80s. They were smart to cut their losses then and get out creating a quagmire for the US to eagerly jump into. The Taliban will never surrender their areas and attempts to force them to negotiations will only cost more lives from all countries.
8
Interesting. Once you get past the knee-jerk tirades against Trump (the man and the President), most NYT commenters seem to be in reluctant agreement with him about the fundamental soundness of re-thinking the US military adventurism around the world and our state of perpetual undeclared war. However muddled or impulsive his thinking, whatever expedience behind his true motivation, most people in the US, including the "liberal" readers of the NYT, want to have a serious debate that acknowledges the malign influence of the Military Industrial Complex (about whose dangers the warning by Eisenhower was about the last useful thing done by a Republican).
7
The proxy war in Syria has been embraced by the corporate news media and both political parties and has shown what a farce the 2006 political repudiation of Bush's war in Iraq was. The neo cons are riding high with full blown anti Russia hysteria in full throat. The NYTs reports that Assad will support the Kurds against Turkish invasion. The problem is to reconstitute the country so that and Iran and Russia can leave. This would encourage many of the Syrian refugees to return to Syria. The west could use reconstruction money as a lever to pressure Assad for political reform. All this strategic neo con mumbo jumbo about peace meaning war and the like is based on a Manichean ideological obsession.
3
So we're to believe that without those 2,000 troops, the Islamic State will "regroup" and Syria will be "ceded" to Iran and Russia?
No, what really has supporters of endless war irate is the thought of DECREASING our military presence anywhere in the world.
And sorry, the Democratic Party protest of the decision to withdraw the troops does not constitute the "left". The real left has always been against the nonsensical projection of Washington's military might into that region.
The Democratic Party is becoming the war party.
56
@Ed Watters
Just ask Hilary. War monger par excellance, now less popular than Trump for we have her number now.
13
@Tullymd hey buddy, Hillary is not in office, nor is she running for office. This obsession with Clinton is absurd.
14
While America spends blood and treasure on hyper militarism, others are making fortunes on trade. What have our military actions brought our nation in the last decades? How have our entanglements in the Middle East improved those places? How have they improved US? Who benefits?
44
@Hector
Who benefits? Corporations and the military industrial complex. And so it will ever be till we soon meet the fate of all dying empires. Our fate is sealed. Sit back and watch. There's nothing effective now to be done it's too late.
8
(Correction)
Sorry, my previous post had a small error in the link. I have corrected it here.
There has been so much negativity around Trump I decided to do some research on his 2018 accomplishments. I then compared them to the Times "2018 in Review:Trumps Ups and Downs" by Mikayla Bouchard yesterday. It lists six Ups shown below and 91% of the 64 events listed were negative reflections on President Trump. I was more interested in the achievements that weren't inc!used that can be seen at the "corrected" link below:
Link: https://nyti.ms/2GKnlyV#permid=29900991
The six accomplishments below should be added to the 25 additional ones the link includes. Or a total of 32:
1) SCOTUS (Gorsuch & Kavenaugh)
2) "First Step" crimminal justice refor. bill that passed the Senate
3) Re-negotiated NAFTA-USMCA benefits U.S.farmers & others
4) Meeting with North Korea Kim Jong-un. Dialogue.
5) U.S. embassy moved to Jerusalem
6) Unemployment dropped to 3.7%
Note: SOTUS should be two events and achievements. Total = 32
I would appreciate your candid feedback and thoughts. I also encourage you to read the Bouchard Editorial. She lists as Downs:
"Anonmous Op-ed admin. writer" and Africa as "___ holes"comm.
Link: https://nyti.ms/2GKnIyV#permid=29900991
2
Since 2003, the US has been trying to impose democracy at the point of a gun by invading, overthrowing, and subverting governments throughout the MidEast and the wider world. This has not worked for many obvious reasons. Trump was elected in part because he and most Americans realize this.
So let's applaud Trump's bringing home our troops while opposing his wall, his withdrawals from the nuclear deal with Iran and from the Paris agreement on climate change, his breaking of our arms-control agreement with Russia, and his stupid tariffs.
6
Trump must have previewed the new Cheney biopic movie.
That is why he is doing the RIGHT THING
Get out!!!
Take the Kurds side and help them only.
Bring the support teams home too. Stop nation building now.
Vote 2020
No more war
Military is an entrenched sub culture
Remember Eisenhower warned against the “military industrial complex “
Our forever wars are why.
His administration knew what was happening.
Gilded age wealth passed down was rearing it’s ugly corporate head again in a new way.
Workers with unions thought they were protected. Bright futures were predicted and then both entrenched parties got very greedy
Btw Koch brothers are investing heavily in Revere Mass. to encourage cannabis tourism hotels. Shops etc.
This from my developer cousin .... a beneficiary.
So we here in the USA cannot make up our minds about anything normal these terrible days. The government “ speaks from both sides of its bloody mouth “
Neither party is currently a Dove advocate.
Hawks all the way top down.
2
Yes, all of Washington is against not having unnecessary wars.
What is Trump to do?
The deep state relies on foreign conflicts as one of its key fleecing strategies.
We are the only country that still goes around invading other countries and wasting outrageous sums on the nonsense. Our bureaucracy is built around militarism.
It will take a man like Trump to stop the stupidity, even if the warmongering bureaucrats whine.
7
So now the Kurds, who cannot be blamed for wanting to be in another Turkish holocaust are looking to ally with Assad in Syria. The Kurds would bring a windfall to Assad in the form of motivation to fight Turks, they have American training, and American weapons. And, they share the Assad interest in getting rid of terrorists.
The Middle East is a tar pit where many well and ill-intentioned nations have seen generations and treasuries disappear. We broke Iraq, and as General Powell said, we bought it; all for the wrong reasons. Our erstwhile ally Turkey will be fighting our strong allies the Kurds, making enemies of our friends while ensuring the mass-murderer Assad a survivor in the newest version of "The Apprentice" where the host should be fired.
Strategy is not a long or short term consideration in the White House, it is a bizarre bazaar where no goods are found in the persons for sale, no repeat business is to be sought, and no price too low for turning on one's friends.
It will be years, if ever, before America can have trustworthy standing with long-time friends, never with the blood-feuding parties where land is a layer of the disputes over the never-seen but much believed-in next world pontificated over by long-dead prophets. Today's prophets are the profiteers of the arms industry and cloaked holey (not a misprint) men.
1
Remarkable or Sad?
When the FCC ended the fairness doctrine in 1987, the American public no longer had access to contrary views about the important topics facing the nation especially foreign. Mainstream media did not have to present an “honest, equitable, and balanced” presentation. You had to seek it elsewhere, or not at all. And as the majority of news followers showed, they were unwilling or unable to receive a complete picture.
That this coalesced with the rise of an aggressive foreign policy outlook that captured MSM, pundits, politicians, and government has proven to be dangerous. Lessons learned from Vietnam had the military carefully control combat information and pressure to convince the public of unquestioned support became the mainstay.
The run up to the Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria failed to give the public news that ran contrary to the prevailing decision making.
“…Even a glimpse of right on the other side is admitted, the cause for doubting one’s own right is laid.”
Trump proposes a modest reduction or our 21st century wars, and there is united outrage? Rationalizations raised to oppose any lessening in our “carbon footprint” on the world says much about America’s transformation. Light on the Hill or World Hegemony?
The quote comes from Adolf Hitler and should be a warning that when only one argument is dominant bad decisions can be made. Thousands of deaths, massive destruction, and $6 trillion spent just by us apparently no longer matter.
2
I think the "united" opposition to Trump's action is greatly overstated. Other commenters have correctly pointed out that a temporary alignment of the two extreme ends of the spectrum of people with political power is a far different thing than a reflection of the large majority of US citizens, who are already united in their distaste for permanent endless war. Of course the Military Industrial Complex, which includes politicians of both sides who like having the perks of power, are in favor of keeping the war machine operating full time. Most people who are just trying to live their lives don't see it.
6
Yes, the withdrawal plan was bungled. But let’s not kid ourselves that a more meticulous one would’ve had any more congressional support. Fact is, Eisenhower’s fear of a military industrial complex have come true. Both parties are beholden to companies such as Boeing, Raytheon, Blackwater (now renamed Z)...fact is war is very profitable business unfortunately.
4
With the move to pull 2000 troops out of Syria, the President is essentially telling the foreign policy establishment that the "emperor has no clothes". The response by said establishment is telling. Now, we need to have a debate about America's role in the Middle East? Or how about the response of the Pentagon? The article admits that the Generals could "slow walk" this. Can we get the names of those in the Pentagon who are violating their oath and undermining our democracy so that they can be held accountable?
17 years of war and America's "experts" still cannot concisely outline a military strategy or metric for victory. It is time for us to leave the Middle East.
7
Why hasn’t there been a national debate? Because most Americans have no ‘skin in the game’. So policy makers in Congress and at the Pentagon feel little if any pressure. Have you noticed any material changes in your life, either financially or personal loss directly connected to Syria and Afghanistan? People fighting in the mud and the blood volunteer for these wars without end and economy is strong. So ‘what me worry’.
5
This is an issue where the American public has a lot more sense than the talking head politicians. The people strongly support getting out of Afghanistan. Veterans support it even more strongly. Poll link below. It’s been 17 years and getting close to a trillion dollars spent. There are so many better ways to use those resources.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rt.com/usa/440932-poll-veterans-afghanistan-fatigue/amp/
2
Citizens of Afghanistan and Syria may want Freedom, Liberty, and Unification the way Americans did and died for — American Revolution, War of 1812, and our Civil War — but they don’t appear to want it badly enough. Is this a false assertion? Can any Veteran of these Middle Eastern Wars comment?
1
If the swamp is against it, then it must be good policy.
4
All these wars are phony and represent a giant draining of the treasury to benefit the few.
5
$1,000,000,000,000 (Trillion) Builds/Replaces many schools... paves miles of roads...etc. There may be justifiable wars. History will tell us Afghanistan was not one of them.
4
If anything the people are united by their desire to get out of these endless foreign wars. There has been not goals set in public of what winning means. You still hear of troops dying and killing and for what objective? Afghanistan is winning the war on America by producing the heroin that is cut by the fentanyl from China that has become one of the leading causes of death for Americans under 55. If our troops have been there 17 years and in that time we have not even stopped the heroin production that is harming the world then what are we doing there? Who are we helping? Are we creating generation after generation of future terrorists by our way of helping them?
4
The law of unintended consequences applies just as surely to "ending" wars as it does to starting them.
Trump is, himself, a walking, talking (nonsensical) unintended consequence. It's a shame his mother didn't miscarry.
3
This article is just further proof that we have a One(1) party system. They take turns playing good cop bad cop, while fulfilling the wishes of their big donors, whether from the Adelsohn, AIPAC, protect Israel at any cost camp or the Cheney neo con defense industry, oil interests, make big profit camp, its clear they both want continual war just for different reasons. The whole thing is a charade and the American people are the losers as our young men and women die for special interests and the fiscal health of our nation suffers for those same special interests. They did the same thing to President Obama when he promised to pull out. Trump is right this hasn’t been our war anymore than Vietnam was our war: assuming 9/11 wasn’t a set up we should have bombed The Saudis not flown Bin Ladens mother out of the country on a special flight and then bombed Iraq based on lies. The time for us to stop playing policeman to the world is long overdue. Israel’s right wing and those who profit from continual war don’t want change. I didn’t like Trump, I liked Hillary the Hawk even less, I was a Bernie Bros but Trumps right on this one. and he’s right to enlist the aide of other regional strong men you may hate them but there is no alternative to these tribal interests, does anyone need more proof than the disaster in Iraq that resulted from Hussein’s removal or the short lived Arab Spring that replaced Mubarak with Sisi after a couple of weeks of Democracy for Egypt. Wake up.
4
I can't imagine any true "Lefty" would be for our military staying in any of these countries and I know a lot of pro Trumpsters who also don't want the military in the Middle East. So for once I am united with Trump in getting out. And with the money saved he could build his silly wall.
6
Perhaps WE THE PEOPLE need to use our legislative (through HONEST elections) process to limit the powers of a Commander-in Chief...particularly one who has no military experience or understanding of global diplomatic impact.? Not saying he shouldn't have a voice, but people he did not choose (especially with a president who has a personal agenda) should have to be a part of these decision making policies, instead of him being able to just fire them. We are very close to allowing Trump dictator/monarchal powers. Wake up GOP, it is YOUR Constitution and Democracy as well that is being threatened!!!
2
Steve Bannon characterized Trump's troop withdrawal as a "pivot away from the humanitarian expeditionary mentality of the internationalists. "
For the U.S. to drop international humanitarianism flies in the face of our long-time defence of freedom and democracy, and is a philosophy devoid of justice.
Steve Bannon is still stuck on destroying the world order, and he sounds an awful lot like Putin.
I'm not a warmonger. But we must protect Europe and the Middle East from Putin's aggression. Look at a map. Turkey borders Syria, Iraq and Iran, and is a sometime Russian ally.
Conveniently, they also border Greece and Bulgaria, E.U. nations. Turkey is not an E.U. member, but it continues to hope, principally for trade advantages.
They are a key gateway for Russia to attempt conquest of the Middle East and Europe.
Putin applauds Trump's troop withdrawals. Trump doesn't like or care about what happens to Europe, despite NATO. He despises all Middle-Easterners, except the Saudis and Israel. It's clear he's giving Putin an open door for attack.
Europe will fight hard against Putin. I don't know about the M.E.
While Putin lusts after a very large chunk of real estate and it's resources, humanitarianism, abiding by treaties, diplomacy, defending the helpless is vanishing from the U.S. agenda under Trump.
Trump is giving the world to whoever wants it. He hasn't considered that Putin's world can turn against us, too.
3
what the heck was bannon babbling about when he said
"This is not about a return to isolationism,” Mr. Bannon said. “It’s the pivot away from the humanitarian expeditionary mentality of the internationalists.” ??????
humanitarian expeditionary mentality? what?
2
That means imperialism disguised as humanitarianism
3
The chaos in leaving is only exceeded by the chaos and stupidity of entering the war and sending our young people into harms way in the first place. Just like Vietnam.
9
Authoritarianism.
Fascism.
Indoctrination.
5
@s.whetherThe K street mouth pieces for Corporations and Banks have succeeded where other World Dictators have failed in the destruction of the country as we knew it!
Trump is not worthy of any political office period. He treats everything like a transaction and everyone like a Kleenex. The ONLY people who are willing to work in his administration are D players whose self esteem is low and share his racist isolationist view. He’s a cowardly racist whose lies are getting worse.
4
@Omega Mon
Interesting analysis. Last I checked President Obama won 2 elections with the exact same strategy. He drew a red line in the sand about chemical weapons but had the sense not to pull the trigger even though the Syrians crossed the red line. Defeated Mrs Clinton in the primary on his way to victory about the votes on war.
1
I get it everyone hates Trump, and this withdrawal order could've been handled in a more professional manner. But why is no one (other than some libertarian Republicans in Congress) asking the question what are we doing over there? The supposed anti-war Left (who lost all of their clout by staying silent when Obama attacked Libya for no serious reason) have also stayed silent about Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq. Why is there no real discussion about what are our goals in the Middle East that put American lives at risk? I didn't hear the war mentioned once during the mid term elections.
This is one policy of Trumps I support. We need to drastically curtail American military involvement around the globe.
9
Syria is lost to Putin. Abandoning the Kurds (to be exterminated by Turkey) that bravely did the ground fighting is nothing new for the US leadership. We used them, now we move on. In the first Gulf war, HWBush promised the people against Saddam Hussein liberation if they revolted inside Iraq. Then he abandoned them, cancelled the 'no fly' order and allowed Saddam to slaughter them.
Afghanistan has been a dead loss from day one. It was the Saudis that financed and executed 9/11.
Iraq has the second or third largest oil reserves in the world, which may be why US troops are staying there.
4
The Donald is not a functional representative of constitutional democracy. Whatever his legal problems, therefore, he should be impeached by the House of Representatives and brought to trial in the Senate, a comprehensive trial, the proceedings of which should be broadcast - live - to the nation.
The Constitution was written to account for human disfunction such as his and it should be employed accordingly. There are no substantive reasons for daily bouts of mania to destabilise the Country's governance. Let us proceed with the constitutional remedies called for and quit pretending that 'news' -- of any sort -- comprise a substitute.
8
Withdraw troops from Syria is a good thing. It saves life, money, and national security. We can use the money and manpower to build our infrastructures, improve our education, soften our healthcare headaches, and reduce the deficits. Those are our future problems that require immediate attention.
6
Less money, $700,000,000 for military spending, a trillion $ if you count the add ons, 1 trillion in nuclear spending in the net 10 yrs. We have ZERO accounting for what w spend it on. ZERO. Left n the hands of the military, we will still be spending for aircraft carriers for groups of 10 or 20 'terrorist cells', and we will still have listening devices for large nations, China, Russia. The budget is beyond scrutiny, and with no stat department, we only get belligerents ensuring maximum spending for questionable gain.
3
Remarkable or Sad?
When the FCC ended the fairness doctrine in 1987, the American public no longer had access to contrary views about important topics facing the nation—especially foreign policy. Mainstream media did not have to present an “honest, equitable, and balanced” presentation. You had to seek it elsewhere, or not at all. The majority of news followers were unwilling or unable to receive a complete picture, relied solely upon the MSM.
This coalesced with the rise of an aggressive foreign policy outlook that captured decision makers. From Vietnam, the military learned to control combat information and to convince the public of unquestioned support.
The run up to the Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria failed to give the public news that ran contrary to the prevailing decision making. “…Even a glimpse of right on the other side is admitted, the cause for doubting one’s own right is laid.”
The quote comes from Adolf Hitler and should be a warning that when only one argument rules debate bad decisions will be made. Thousands of American casualties, tens of thousands civilian deaths, massive destruction, and $6 trillion spent just by us are signs of failure, not success.
Trump proposes a modest reduction or our 21st century wars, and there is united outrage? Rationalizations raised to oppose any lessening in our “carbon footprint” on the world says much about America’s transformation from Light on the Hill to World Hegemon.
3
Correction, this move has united the liberal Democrats and the conservative Republicans. Both have supported these wars while neither has fulfilled their constitutional obligation to declare war.
The left, the real left, not the version portrayed in the mass media has consistently called for a withdrawal from Afghanistan. Remember President Obama ran on a promise to do just that?
In Syria we invaded a sovereign nation without debate or any pretense or justification. "Hot pursuit" of ISIS would have been allowed under international law. But our troops went in after most of the ground fighting was over. We simply occupied part of the country because we had the military power to do so.
The left has and does oppose these military adventures. And even career military men have criticized our continued presence in Afghanistan because the mission keeps changing. No sooner do they prepare for one than the administration gives them a different reason for being there.
If congress had any moral or legal sense they would propose a way to end these wars. We are not "fighting terrorism."
We're fighting the people who oppose our occupation and simply call them terrorist. The solution to this "terrorism" is to remove our troops from their country.
6
Like a broken clock, President Trump can take correct decisions for the wrong reasons.
I support getting out of all wars.
I do not have children but ask any parent who's child is a soldier.
Noting good comes from sending your people to fight foreign wars (except in rare circumstances like WWII/WWI).
4
U.S. global power devolves from the international system created under U.S. leadership out of the destruction of the two world wars and the intervening Great Depression. As the primary power in the world it is in the U.S. national interest to ensure security and stability of the global system. Preceding 9-11 Afghanistan descended into a failed state as a result of the proxy war fought on its territory between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. The government that emerged in Afghanistan after the Soviet defeat sought modest aid from the U.S. which was refused in contrast to the hundreds of millions in weapons poured into Afghanistan. This failure to address stabilization resulted in the chaos from which Al Qaeda emerged. Obama correctly observed that stabilization of Afghanistan was the priority to address which had global support.
The Bush administration chose to invade and occupy Iraq which made stabilization of Afghanistan more difficult and led to even greater chaos in Iraq and later Syria spawning the greater threat of ISIS.
Trump is correct, the U.S. is not the world policeman. Institutionally, that role was to be filled by the Security Council. However, the U.S. bears a heavy responsibility to contribute to the stability of countries that its actions have destabilized.
Obama advanced the idea of leading from behind -- regional powers address regional conflicts with U.S. intervention in cases like the ISIS breakout. Trump appears to be discovering a similar principle.
3
May I recommend the latest issue of Smithsonian magazine, "America At War." Just look at the map as to where we have stationed troops around the world. "I am not one of those who believe that a great army is the means of maintaining peace, because if you build up a great profession those who form parts of it want to exercise their profession." -Woodrow Wilson, 28th US president, Nobel laureate (28 Nov 1856-1924)
4
To the title of the article, it’s not that difficult to do. Any decision Trump makes will be viewed by most on the left as satan’s work. On the right neocons will react negatively to any non ideological decision. I’m hoping for more of these reactions and a center developing in Washington- I know naive but it happened with WJC.
1
During Trumps visit to Iraq he posed with members of Seal Team 5 and he posted the photo on twitter. Pictures of Seals faces who are serving in a combat zone (and even elsewhere) are usually blurred out for security reasons because it endangers them and even their families. Trumph has been criticized for this misstep.
Maybe the Navy seals didn't object because they like publicity unlike the Army's Delta force who typically shun it.
1
I have been opposed to Western (including Canadian) military endeavours in the Middle East and Afghanistan for years, and I continue to be. Simply because Trump is awful and his motivations are suspect does not change that. I welcome the withdrawal of American troops from Syria and Afghanista and hope the same thing happens in Iraq.
5
Just going to quote the second half of the article because it seems that no one read past the first few Trump bashing paragraphs.
“While Mr. Trump’s critics would shrink from that language, military analysts, former officials and diplomats acknowledge there is a case for withdrawing from both conflicts.
Open-ended but limited troop deployments are not likely to alter the battlefield in either Afghanistan, where the Taliban now holds more ground than at any other time since 2001, or in Syria, where the Islamic State’s territorial grip has been broken and President Bashar al-Assad, with the help of Russia and Iran, has largely stymied the rebellion.
Announcing troop withdrawals will force the United States to rethink long-term military commitments that have little public support and are no longer effective. It could also force the Afghans and Syrians to confront their own deep-rooted problems, without the presence of foreign soldiers who often delay the day of reckoning.
“I, for one, think the decision to withdraw is sound and wise,” said Robert S. Ford, the last American ambassador to Syria.”
5
Syria needs to fight their own battles and pay for it as well. No more US troops and money for people that wish us harm and resent our help!
Bring them home!
3
Getting troops and US bombs out is the right policy in both nations.
5
Trump is right to pull our troops out of Syria.
And, this newspaper and the Washington Post - in April 2018 - 8 months ago - that Trump ordered the DOD to prepare and present a plan to withdraw our troops by year-end.
They didn't do it.
The withdrawal was not an impetuous, knee-jerk action. It was decided months ago. And this newspaper knows that.
We, and many othe rnations, have a long and well documented history of using proxy wars to frustrate our adversaries and Syria is the perfect place for such a (cynical) construct.
There is nothing there worth American lives. We can rain missiles and bombs when necessary and let someone else who is better suited to the task do the leg work.
Afghanistan is a wormier problem; failure to act by several presidents allowed Al Qaeda and the Taliban to grow more than they should have.
Keeping troops stationed there and expanding air base facilities is probably sensible from a strategic standpoint. But the whack-a-mole situation should be discarded in favor of a more Realpolitik approach.
There is no "victory" possible in a war of ideology. And our leadership doesn't have the political will to solve the problem the way the Central Asians would solve it.
Nation building could actually work in a place like Iraq, but it can't in Afghanistan without first engaging in widespread massacre of the zealots, their extended families, their herds, and their pets.
That's what Tolui Khan did and it worked.
1
As long as somebody else pays for it and somebody else’s kids are dying I’m all for staying in the Middle East.
3
Good grief ... until last week lefties howled that we should disengage from the " forever wars " of the Middle East. Suddenly the Party Line has shifted to the opposite point of view. What next ... Marines helicopter assault into Damascus?
3
What Trump and many people who are in favor of the withdrawal of US troops and personnel from “hot spots” like Syria and Afghanistan, do not understand is that the US is not “over there”... to affect a change of a foreign Government or Society ... but to prevent hostile non-state and state actors, ... such as Al Qaida, ISIS, the Taliban and Iran etc. who seek to to do harm to the US and its allies, affect their nefarious designs...
I remember 9/11 ( since I was actually there at the WTC on that date ) when terrorists flew planes into the Towers resulting in the deaths of over 3,000 Americans...on “American soil”...
...then there was the Korean conflict Peal Harbor and WWII and WW I before that....
Prior to each of those occurrences, the US tried to “Isolate” itself from World affairs only to be drawn in and to pay a heavier price in the long run...I shudder to think what a victory by our enemies, especially the Nazis and the Communists, would have meant to the way of life of America and its Allies in Europe and Asia...
What people have to understand is that the United States is the indispensable nation ( by virtue of our values, abundant resources and military might) which keeps the free World, free.
- If not us, who ?
What Pres. Trump and others should understand is that the resources that the US spends to bolster and support our Allies is not only a “one-way street.” - The US itself greatly benefits...
No Wall - no matter how high- will keep our enemies away
6
All I can add is that it's encouraging to read that 99 percent of the comments here support Trump's pullout decision rather than towing the line of the journalist who wrote this, or the idiotic DC reptiles like Ben Rhodes whom he quotes.
4
Did you forget "deplorable?"
"Many [Trump supporters] are alcoholics and it is common that many, even most, alcoholics consider themselves the smartest people who ever lived. And they are unsung. They identify with Trump. He speaks for them. And they will support him no matter what ... "
Can you imagine? Deplorable alcoholics who want to bring US troops home from Syria?
I'll drink to that!
3
They really should do a study on this. I think you’re on to something. Maybe they are not all alcoholics but they all do have certain personality traits in common; and they are malleable too.
1
Where are the voices of the Left in this article? Feldman? Rhodes? This is a "News Analysis" piece with the headline "Trump Unites the Left and Right, Against His Plans in Syria and Afghanistan" where the headline writer either did not read the piece or fundamentally cannot analyze news. The headline should be changed, and in the long term, it would serve the Times's audiences to include voices from the Left.
3
Everyone who wants to continue spilling American blood, and wasting American treasure (borrowed money at that) in these endless wars to keep Sunnis and Shiites from killing each other, or keep the Saudi family in power, is a fool.
Thank you President Trump.
4
It's so obvious what is happening. Blackwater is coming back and will be fighting these wars for a profit or piece of the mining rights.
6
The US has found out in Afghanistan known by Britain and Russia for the last 150 years. No outside force has conquered their tribal system. Leave ASAP.
Syria is another unstable quagmire. Get the symbolic groups out now.
Reduce the military budget by 30% and invest savings in America for a real return of tax dollars.
9
This and most outbursts are distraction tactics because the republic is getting close to the truth.
3
An out of control, impulsive, ignorant Commander in Chief. He is a bigger threat to the national defense than our most aggressive foreign enemy.
3
Trump treats our military troops as if they were stupid.
They knew what underhanded methods he was using on a captive audience.
2
In other words, Donald Trump figured out a stupid way to do something smart.
6
It's beyond time for the United States to re-evaluate its military presence around the world. These discussions should be bipartisan and led by those with experience to bring to the table. And there should be an immediate end to Trump's Twitter diplomacy by Congressional censure.
6
"Some analysts said they believed Mr. Trump’s orders would not even be carried out — at least not on the 30-day timetable he imposed for Syria. The Pentagon has slow-walked his orders before, and already there is talk of a more gradual withdrawal given the complications that would probably arise from a hasty pullout."
How much is this military reticent attitude compatible with the legal and constitutional order of the USA? How is it acceptable to rigorous analysts and observers?
They might say that it is convenient for the good reasons!!
What about possible future military lax or contrary positions, which might reveal being not anymore convenient to the American general interests?
2
I have mixed feelings about Trump's order to pull out troops from Syria. During his recent Iraq visit, Trump said that American military might cannot be used by others for free. This line of thinking is very good. But the problem is, his predecessors should have understood this truth and they should not poked their nose in other countries. I can understand fighting in Afghanistan (though I feel Osama/Al Queda is creation of America and so is ISIS). But why Iraq? Why Libya? Why Syria? By pulling out of Syria, Trump has handed over victory to Assad, Putin, Turkey and Iran. ISIS is going to regroup and unleash its atrocity in the areas which it occupied. Trump should have waited for some more time till military has fully destroyed ISIS.
In short, pulling out of Syria is a good decision, taken at a wrong time.
3
Eventually, the U.S. needs to extract herself from the tribal wars in the Middle East; but the key is 'eventually.'
It is not just about the war or our own soldiers. Like it or not, the U.S. has dragged her allies into it. And the military has built relationship with the locals. Both have serious repercussions if she withdraws abruptly. Even in Nam, Nixon and Ford have done something to take care of these two issues. Saying "we won" doesn't make it so.
Call it enlightened self-interest but both the right and the left at least understand our reputation is at stake here!
3
Well if you support isolationism then you support Trump. Chamberlain appeased Hitker And was an isolationist. Good thing Churchill took over and defeated the Nazis. In Syria we only had 2000 troops and this was a line that defended Israel. Now Syria is dominated by Iran, and Russia that are arming the Syrians and Palestinian extremists with advanced weapons and they will push for the Gokan Heights. It was a huge mistake. Conflict will increase . Troops had already been severely decreased in Afghanistan, and conflict will grow with our retreat. Without a doubt Trump is helping Putin.
2
"I both agree and disagree. ... But ... we can't just turn our backs and walk away from allies ..."
When the US invaded Iraq, only two other countries sent troops: Poland and the UK, home (collectively) to roughly 1% of the world's population. We picked up more "allies" later, especially among groups that wanted something from us (not to mention names, but the name of one of those groups starts with a "K").
We CAN turn our backs and walk away from our "allies," and that's exactly what we should do here. Trump has said for years that he thinks the US should pull back from its "forever wars," especially in the Middle East. He's simply doing now what he's always promised to do. If he deserves criticism, it's for not doing it sooner.
4
OK, I THINK I get it: Afghanistan was good; Iraq was bad; Syrias was bad because of how Obama handled it but it coulda been good.
There!
Another way of looking at those three wars is this: The US should just stay out!
8
Trump says to Erdogan: "It's yours", handing over our Kurdish allies. That remark will live in infamy.
4
The war in Afghanistan, should have ended years ago! The Taliban, like the Vietcong will fight forever, if necessary. We are fighting a losing war! Let's bring our Troops home from Afghanistan! All of them!
Syria, is much more complex. And Donald is giving Syria to Putin! Disgusting.
1
We should pull out of every country. Our military is useless, always losing
8
We need to get out of no win wars for basically Israel's prime interest of keeping the region destabilized. We are going on 8,000 U.S. solders dead with 60,000 maimed for life with hundreds of thousands of local dead and over a million maimed for life. For what? 18 years is the longest war in our history, for what? There were no WMD's. Billions upon billions... over a trillion spent that could be used to secure our border, put into education, housing, our space program, jobs, etc. Few seem to know that there are 63,000 Russian troops with 70,000 Iranian ones all backed up with supplies from China, Russia, Iran, UAE, Egypt, Vietnam, the DPRK, Turkery, Cuba, etc. Does it smell like another form of the Vietnam conflict? You betcha it does but more insidious due to our foreign policy in the region being unduly influenced by the Israel lobby and the military-industrial primarily mercenary force that is first and foremost a military JOP and not "patriotic" in a sense of "protecting our freedoms" ... rotfl! They want us OUT! Millions of us get that. We need to support Assad as a secular counterbalance with Iran to Israel's mad schemes of dominating the region. It needs to stop for humanity's sake.
9
I thoroughly disagree with almost all of this administration’s policies, but DT is right about this. Our endless wars have to end. But what in the world is DT’s foreign policy (forgive the pun)? He doesn’t have one, and that’s the real problem. That America needs to wake up and act like a benign superpower on the world stage, using its soft power of innovation and humanitarian agency is, I think, quite beyond his ken. And you know that the grifters around him won’t support any policy where they and their friends don’t see an advantage to profit from whatever crises or opportunity arises.
5
The US military industrial complex has gotten bloated and out of control. It works on behalf of the oil and gas industries, and countries like Saudi Arabia, not on behalf of democracy, anymore. We don't own Syria, Libya, Iraq or Afghanistan, and should never have been in any of them from the get go. Let's be clear: sending big money and weapons to al-Qaeda affiliates in Syria, as Hillary Clinton did, is and was a crime. Think of the consequences if you or I did anything remotely like that. I may not love Mr. Trump, but these moves are in the best interests of the US, if not the world. I suspect Ms. Clinton, hawk that she is, would have been starting new wars, not ending them. Think about it.
8
Its beyond time to leave.Withdraw everyone as soon as possible.
8
Whatever goes wrong, just blame it on Trump and/or Putin.
3
"the Democrats want us to stay in Afghanistan...Looks like it is, and will always be, the party of Lyndon Johnson."
And of Hillary Clinton.
She opposed the Vietnam War 50 years ago, but since then she voted FOR war (in the Middle East each time) three times out of three -- Iraq (where she voted for the war, in support of Bush the Younger), Libya (where she pressed Obama to intervene more forcefully (how's that working out?), and Syria (where she vowed to establish a "no fly zone" over the entire country -- which means we'd be shooting down Russian planes (when was the last time, after all, that you heard about a "rebel plane" flying around in the Syrian skies?)
Yet Hillary Clinton is thought of as a peace lover. Why? Trump brings US troops home -- as he should. Hillary Clinton would have sent more. Why in the world should she be thought of as a peace lover. She's just not, and hasn't been for a very long time.
Maybe Hillary Clinton is wise to be a war monger, but let's at least acknowledge that that's what she is. And Trump may be a pompous buffoon, and far from the brightest star in the firmament, but let's give him credit where credit is due: it's long past time to bring US troops home from Syria, and to cut sharply our forces in Afghanistan and Iraq. Trump is doing that, and Clinton would not have. Simple as that.
5
I can’t stand his presidency but I support 100% our immediate withdrawal from Syria.
Operation Timber Sycamore. We armed ISIS to take out Assad. Once you learn about it you will understand, we owe Syria a big apology. Huge.
8
huh? after losing so many sons and brothers and fathers and sisters and mothers and daughters?
Could not dislike trump anymore than I do but even a broke clock is right twice a day and this I feel is one of those times. The way it was done is the problem yet he is correct that we are not going to achieve our strategic goals there.
Yea it pains me but he is right about this one.
I don’t have easy answer about the Kurds though but maybe continue air support and promise to come to their aid.
7
America’s capitalist economy profits from its never ending warfare. It is no coincidence that America made the Muslim world its enemy the very minute that communism came to an end. The real nature of America’s wars is obvious in its decision to abandon the International Criminal Court and give itself the right to commit war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide with impunity. Those of us who are not Americans hope that someday Americans will realize that peace is better than war. There is not one international dispute that cannot find a diplomatic solution in the United Nations, but the United States has vetoed more United Nations’ resolutions than any other country. Give peace a chance.
8
The history of the United States, like that of most countries, has many a dark chapter. But simplistic denunciations like this get us nowhere. Even during the dark days of the Iraq war, the United States did not hold up the Muslim world as its enemy. Indeed, unlike Trump, Bush the Younger emphasized that the United Stares was not at war with Islam. And given his unsavory friendship with the Saudis and Erdogan, even Trump has begun to steer clear of the crusading rhetoric we heard during the Cold War.
As for genocide, go back to the 18th and 19th centuries and you will find an appalling record of atrocities against Native Americans in the United States, as you will in Canada. But turn to the 20th century, turn to our own times, and who are the victims of genocidal violence? Armenians slaughtered by Turks, Jews slaughtered by Germans, Tutsis slaughtered by Hutus, Bosnian Muslims slaughtered by Bosnian Serbs. The whole world has dirty hands. Pointing the finger at the United States may be cathartic, but it does nothing to ease our pain.
Finally, it isn’t the United States that has vetoed the most United Nations Security Council resolutions. That distinct honor belongs to Russia and the Soviet Union.
Should the United States withdraw its remaining 2,000 troops from Syria? Perhaps. But before we answer that question, we should do something that Trump has never done, and that is think clearly.
1
Get out and stay out! Unless we are providing medical, nutritional or education support to either of these countries, we don't belong.
I suspect we've made things worse in the long run, by initiating a war in Iraq - an unconscionable aggression that destabilized the region.
I'm sorry for the Kurds, who will be betrayed by this withdrawal. I'm sorry for the troops that have sacrificed for an ambiguous aim with no target to hit or end in sight.
4
Great optic.
Donald protected from the troops by a concrete security barrier.
Pretty much sums him up.
Maybe they werent all GOP plants as I suspected. Maybe he was at real risk.
Or was it to stop them being drowned if the fake tan melted......
3
"The generals will never accept this, but the ground troops all know the truth. Cut our loses, and just get out. After 17 years ...."
Remember why we went into Afghanistan 17 years ago? To get the Taliban out of power (even though we'd just given the Taliban government $30 million), to push out Al Qaeda, and to kill or capture Osama bin Laden. Haven't we accomplished all three goals? Didn't we accomplish all three of them many years ago?
When we first went into Afghanistan 17 years ago, if someone had suggested we'd still be there 17 years later, wouldn't you have crossed to the other side of the street so that guy couldn't drool on you?
6
I wonder when folks are gonna figure out that it matters how we do what we do; that retreating from the world endangers us; that some of these ugly little wars and police actions are like maintaining the lawn; that however we got there, we cannot just leave our people in the lurch.
1
Little wars?
2
President Trump ceded a strategically vital country to Russia? I'm shocked, shocked.
2
We can't ced countries to Russia.
We don't own countries and peoples.
2
Pardon me for insisting that we all face reality here, but:
"[Trump's pull-out decisions were] so lacking in a cogent explanation to allies or the public ... "
I guess it would have been better to announce it a year ahead of time -- especially after 17 years! (You kind of owe it to the other side to give them advance notice way ahead of time, so they can properly adjust.)
Seriously, Trump has been saying consistently, for several years, that he wanted to scale back US involvement in Middle East wars. All he's doing now is keeping his promise.
It's Hillary Clinton, not Donald Trump, who's pressed for more war -- in at least Iraq, Libya, and Syria -- and yet, for reasons that escape me, she's invariably labeled the "peace candidate" in comparison to Trump. It must be her opposition to the Vietnam War, 50 years ago.
4
Yes. The warlike tendency of HRC means that those who oppose endless and pointless war have no party and no candidate. That's why Trump could easily survive for 8 years.
4
"We were in those places for far too long."
Putting 2,000 US troops in Syria simply painted targets on their backs, and we had to spend even more blood and treasure to keep them safe.
As for Afghanistan, keep in mind that only half of them are coming home. The other half are staying -- as I think they should. Bagram air base is very well-positioned against both China and Russia, and I'm sure the US isn't going to be giving that up any time soon. In the 17 years we've been in Afghanistan, Bagram has grown steadily. It's now over two miles long. We aren't going to give that up any time soon.
1
All of the Republicans who supported the invasion of Iraq are the exact same Republicans who voted for Trump and now claim to be pacifists. According to a certain infamous political treatise written by Ann Coulter, everyone who opposed the Iraq War is guilty of Treason. Can't remember the title of that book at the moment. I think it began with a T. According to Coulter, Donald Trump is guilty of Treason. Just like every other Republican who was alive at the time, she loved and worshiped President Bush. Every single Republican believed that any criticism of Bush or the Iraq War was an act of Treason and a threat against our country. Yet every single one of those Republicans (with the exception of a handful of retiring senators) is now a pacifist. Every Republican now believes Bush was a terrible president. Every Republican now believes we never had any business in Iraq. You don't have to play the game anymore, Republicans. Trump has already come out and admitted that winning is all that matters. There are no more principles. There is no more patriotism. There is no more guiding vision. In a few years Trump will be gone, whether by election, impeachment or coronary, and all of the Republicans will be moaning about what a terrible president he was and how he ruined our country. By then, you'll all be riding the latest new bandwagon. Maybe it'll be a return to neoconservatism. Maybe it'll be something new, something so hateful and simplistic that it makes Trump look decent.
5
If Trump were intelligent, thoughtful and loyal to America, I would be happy for the pull out of the troops. Unfortunately, we don't know Trump's true motives because he lies about everything and his loyalty to this country is questionable because of the very high probability he is a victim of Russian kompromat. That said, the pull out could have included negotiations to achieve some ends, as protecting the Kurds. Trump is wasteful in many ways, including opportunities to achieve good goals.
3
Only inside the Beltway are both sides united against the withdrawal of troops. It's the right thing to do!
3
You left out one part:
"The solution, I guess, is to ,,, keep American forces in Afghanistan and Syria and Iraq -- for decades if need be -- until the situation is 'just right' for withdrawal."
And then, of course, to announce our withdrawal about a year in advance, so we don't look "precipitous" and everyone has time to adjust!
4
Why do I get the sneaking suspicion that the decisions to pull out have more to do with the backdoor privatization of the war machine than with national security. Prince, DeVos’s brother, shares his sisters penchant for profiting off of the common weal. We’ve seen how that ends. The Blackwater brand was dumped after they massacred civilians and has gone through two rebrandings, so far. The apples don’t fall far from the Amway tree. Sickening. Once national security is outsourced, say goodbye to your empire. I’m no scholar but the Romans learned that the hard way and the lesson was not lost on Machiavelli. Gen. Mattiss, the warrior monk, will hopefully weigh in, to all of our edification.
4
"two long, costly and increasingly futile conflicts.". FULL Stop, you just answered your own question.
America can not create peace and democracy in regions that lack an interest in both Peace and democracy.
Syria became an American / Russian proxy war. Russian ties to the Asaad regime are long standing. Given that using American troops to topple Asaad can not happen, the only logical decision was to leavw the defence of Syria from ISIS to Asaad and the Russians.
4
They only unite stupid people who want us to continue to be the world's policeman, not those that elected this president. We need to have that debate, and come up with how and why we will use our resources in a broad way.
3
We have spent 990 Billion on the war in Afghanistan and what do we have to show for it?! Dead Americans and a country still as backwards as it was 15 years ago. Syria is a civil war and we don’t need to stay. The Middle East is a political, social and religious cesspool and poses no threat to us. Our main ally is Israel and our efforts should be to support them. We don’t need Saudi oil any longer and if the Sunnis and the Shia want to slaughter one another then we should let them. They’ve been at it for 1300 years.
6
The root of the problem is this:
Donald Trump ["DJT"] doesn't know how to lead—However, he does know how to obstruct. And he's good at it.
—
And that's exactly what he's doing--
He's actively hindering the operation of our Government [on purpose?], by not permitting the foreign policy establishment to make plans for our next steps in Syria and Afghanistan.
--
Indeed, DJT seems to be in the habit ,of exercising his Constitutional prerogatives to sabotage any number of foreign policy initiatives, making himself the proverbial, “Engineer, who runs the train right off the tracks(!).”
—
And since there is no higher authority, the only way to stop DJT from doing more damage is to remove him [Constitutionally] from Office.
—
It goes without saying that the longer we wait, the worse things will get. Because this man is *not* about to improve, or "get better."
In fact, DJT has become a practical menace to *all* our interests, foreign and domestic. And I for one am beginning to think he likes it that way.
--
Therefore, my New Year's resolution is simply this:
…To do my civic duty, by helping in any way I can, to rid our society [Constitutionally] of this man as soon as possible…!
2
Good to see Ambassador Ford’s “…the decision to withdraw is sound and wise ….”
Andrew Bacevich has become a historian of America’s new found love for war, his The New American Militarism: How Americans Are Seduced by War describes how we got to a state of perpetual war and concluded someday a leader will say enough. Trump in his clumsy manner may be that leader. The opposition is not surprising but open the dialog for thoughtful responses from those who one way or another are not in the business of War. It is not a handsome business.
4
This is an excellent collection of quotes representing various points of view and providing good insights.
We absolutely need to have this kind of dialogue. And as was pointed out in the article, we then need to ACT on our decisions. For the first time in my life, I agree with Steve Bannon in that Trump has been "slow-rolled" by his military advisors.
Ever since opposition to the Vietnam war in the late 60s Democrats have been the party that was skeptical of military interventions. I hope they will return to that tradition. The last 17 years of our involvement in the Middle East have been absolutely disastrous to our ethical standing in the world, to our economy and to the lives of our young people, who have been killed there.
4
I am surprised that the headline of this article is so divergent from what the story actually says.
For starters, what has united left and right is he did not "consult" with them implying they could not veto. So, it is more a personal grievance than a policy matter - call it an ego.
The folks who support this policy quoted here - have been directly involved in this area for some time. And they are unanimous in supporting POTUS.
Fact of the matter that for our POTUS to fly in a surreptitious manner in Iraq after we have sacrificed our soldiers, spent Treasury - to me, a clear indication - time to get out of Iraq also.
Leaders in this region talk a lot about sovereignty, moving away from America - well, they need to start walking the talk.
And to help them, we need to take crutches away.
2
I can answer that:
"Are those ... who are now applauding Trump’s pullout-without-a-plan willing to own the consequences of those decisions?"
Answer: Yes.
2
@MyThreeCents Are they willing to pay the price for owning those decisions?
Answer: No.
Are they happy to have me and mine pay the price?
Answer: Oh, yeah.
1
I'm of two minds on these withdrawals. They are abrupt but necessary,
Trump is correct to say get out of Syria. without delay or procrastination. Syria and its allies are winning.
In Afghanistan, as in Vietnam, we are stalemated. Why like his predecessors he is playing musical numbers, seems political. Tactically it makes no sense, except as a prequel to withdrawal.
Afghanistan is stalemated, a no win situation; and we have lost it, strategically, in Syria.
I dislike Trump politically, but his assessments in Syria and Afghanistan seem contact. (Art of War?)
3
There is no nice way to lose a war (Afghanistan). There is no nice way to conclude that the only realistic goal of your presence is to make life hard for other people and that you better leave (Syria).
The problem in Afghanistan is that US influence is limited to a very small segment of the population. Most of these people know in their heart that they will lose in the end and so they focus on enriching themselves. The logical answer would be to involve neighboring countries that have deeper contacts. But given who these are (China, Iran, Pakistan, Russia, India) it looks like the US would rather let the Taliban win.
America's Syria policy was always full of contradictions. It advocated negotiations - but left no doubt that Assad should go and hand over power to the insurgents. It used ISIS as an excuse to get into Syria but did nothing when ISIS conquered Palmyra. It claimed that fighting ISIS was its only goal and then came with other goals when ISIS was almost beaten.
The US has neither a shared vision what it wants to achieve nor loyal government employees who are prepared to implement it. As a result the US leaves Syria the same way it entered it: by a controversial presidential decision that is shrouded in secrets and vagueness.
2
I find NYT's coverage of Trump baffling.
Had this been Obama announcing the withdrawal of troops from a civil war that had caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, and displacement of many more, NYT would have applauded the move. Yet no, NYT can't cover this move objectively and discuss the overwhelming reasons for the US to disengage from Syria. By all means this needs to be done thoughtfully (Trump has neither the patience nor intellect for that) but we need to be out of Syria. We do need assurance from Turkey that they will not massacre the Kurds.
Assad won this civil war and we never had any business intruding.
Now we should take a very hard look at Afghanistan. The correlations to Vietnam are spot on.. If we wanted to wipe out Al Qaeda we should have gone in with appropriate force and then left. Now, we just need to leave. This is not our war...
History will show that we destabilized the world when we went into Iraq and the Afghanistan it is time to leave and I for one am grateful that Trump will do some thing right....
6
There is another way to break down reaction to Trump's decision to remove some troops from Afghanistan and Syria. The Times manipulatively asserts that left and right both disagree with Trump's direction. More instructive is that the pro-war Republicans and Democrats oppose the decision and the peace movement supports it. It is clear that those who consistently support the Military Industrial Complex and all the imperialistic wars are raging against Trump. And those who have long fought against the merchants of death, the numerous aggressions, assassinations, regime changes, the vast network of military bases - endorse not only removing the troops but removing the mercenaries, the allies, the support for jihadists, the drones and bombings - that is the murder and mayhem the US has committed for many years. It is instructive that the Times censors out the peace movement. Peace is not profitable to the .1%.
5
Has anyone else noticed?
Two or three days ago, the standard refrain was that Trump should have listened to his generals -- and, of course, Mad Dog Mattis, his Secretary of Defense -- all of whom wanted the US to keep US forces at current levels in Syria and Afghanistan. That' seems to be shifting a bit, if these comments are any indication: Now, it seems, most commenters DO think Trump's order was the right thing to do -- way too "precipitous," to be sure, and goodness knows he should have paid more attention to the views of Mad Dog Mattis and other generals, but nevertheless not a bad idea.
A step in the right direction ...
1
Are you sure that both "left and right" oppose these withdrawals?
We've waited 30 years for the US to exit from anywhere. We spend 53% of our national revenues on war. We don't even bother to audit the Pentagon. Just a fraction of that money would ensure that everyone in the US was fed and housed.
You are correct that we need to have a serious and shared conversation about the modalities of withdrawal, in order to do the least damage to ourselves and others. But the time to have started that was yesterday, and in the meantime, we could stop killing people.
5
How did U.S troops even end up in Syria in the first place?
After withdrawing from Iraq and scaling down in Afghanistan, public sentiment was very much against involvement in Syria. There was no vote I remember in Congress and President Obama was firm in his official public announcements that there would be no boots on the ground.
When and how did that change?
4
While we're at it, let's get out of Iraq too. That is a place we never should have entered.
I do wish that Trump would be more orderly about the process. But Bannon is right. (This is the first and probably last time in my life I agree with him.) The military and our political establishment have been "slow-rolling". I had hoped Obama would extract us in 2008, but he got talked into (or strong-armed?) keeping us as deeply entrenched as Bush.
4
Here's the thing. Usually, US presidents are brighter and better informed than most of the populous. They are able to make reasonably prudent decisions given the facts and be consistent. That's not the case with Trump and that's the difference.
5
Lacking in wider debate and vital inputs from the foreign and security experts the Syria/Afghanistan policy announced by Trump could be anything but a policy in real terms which reduces the decision to merely a fad of an unstable mind hell bent on turning the issues of war and foreign relations into subjective whims.
2
After 17 years of ME involvement we are ready to move on. We did what we could. There are no benefits to remaining and most Americans agree we cannot reshape the ME in our image.
The Trump presidency seems to herald a new era of nation-building at home. We have a chance to save our country from disintegration - what we couldn’t accomplish in the ME we have chance to accomplish at home. The stakes are higher and we have no time to waste.
6
I am tired of constant intervention. But analogy is flawed. And we don’t just abandon allies to their fate....
2
I can usually tell when I’m being hornswoggled at. It’s the phrases like, “herald a new area,” that do it.
1
Seeing all these comments putting Syria in the same defunct foreign mission as Afghanistan, reminds me how very little people understand what we are doing there. We are making a massive impact in holding back ISIS, Russia, Iran, Assad, and Turkey, with a relatively small contingent of troops, with the full support of the local people. It is about a million miles from Afghanistan, or Iraq for that matter.
6
It is not true to say that both left and right oppose Trump's abrupt ending of one of America's several endless wars in the Middle East. The real left, which is not the Hilary Clinton wing of the Democratic Party, has opposed needless imperialist wars since Vietnam. Anti-war progressives have opposed the invasions and occupations Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria, understanding that these trillion-dollar wars have served to widen the breach between the one percent and struggling American workers. Kudos to Trump for doing the right thing for once!
10
If there’s one thing I know about for-real leftists, it’s that none of them support trump on a single blessed thing.
Trump didn’t decide to being the boys home or stop the war. He decided to see how much he could get us chasing after his lunacies.
And yes, it does matter why we do what we do.
1
Nope. I think that when a break a china shop, you have to stay and pick up the pieces. What we are doing (will do) with the Kurds is shameful and wrong.
1
This shouldn't come as a surprise. When Trump was campaigning, the one thing he said that wasn't a lie was that these wars were a disaster. Of course he turned a momentous decision into a publicity stunt but that's the way he operates.
8
Would that be before, during or after he supported the Iraq War, screamed at Obama about troop withdrawals, tripled our troops in Syria, and demanded an expanded Gitmo?
1
The question is, how many more years needed in order to make such a decision , no US general has a clear answer /picture
Pulling out the troops abruptly like this is the risk worth of taking.
5
I both agree and disagree. I agree that the wars in the Middle East have dragged on for too long. When we entered the Middle East (I am talking about Afghanistan specifically here) in 2001, we had a very clear reason to be there, and that was to fight terrorism. But now that bin Laden is dead, the Taliban have been removed from power, al-Qaeda has been greatly weakened, and a new government has been installed; I no longer can clearly say that we have a clear mission in Afghanistan (or Syria for that matter) that is worth all the blood and money. But at the the same time I think that we can't just turn our backs and walk away from allies and others who we would leave behind if we just left. ---- The big issues here is that government policy like "Build a Wall!!" or "No more war!", or other policies that can be summed up in one sentence will never really be effective.
4
United we stand, divided we fall
PS: No fan of Trump (Bernie voter) but he tackles issues previous administrations swept under the rug.
8
I do not think that Bernie would have handled the withdrawal in such a capricious way.
1
You’re a Bernie voter but you want to support Trump because “United we stand”?
Very few Americans insist that the US simply stay out of foreign wars.
But the bar should be set very high. Neither Syria nor Afghanistan (nor Iraq nor Yemen) clears that bar. That means we shouldn't be there.
Not that we'll ever actually "leave" Afghanistan, of course, The Bagram air base is way too big (close to 2 miles long now -- check it out on Google Earth) and too well-positioned against both China and Russia. We won't be giving up that base any time soon.
And, frankly, I don't think we should. We should, however, winnow down our forces in Afghanistan to what's necessary to operate and maintain that base -- no more than that.
4
"and ceding a strategically vital country" What even is that supposed to mean? What I say is that Trump is correct in pulling out of Syria.
5
As an ardent, adamant hater of the entire concept of Donald Trump, a reality TV game show host, as the so-called president, this may be the very single decision he’s made I agree with. There is no easy way of withdrawing. There will be consequences related to the haste. But perhaps it is better to rip the band aid clear off. Anti-war liberals would be wise to think critically about Trump’s decision here rather than knee jerk reaction against it. No one would be surprised if President Bernie announced the same thing.
The whole misadventure in Iraq from W resonates as the worst foreign policy decision in American history. More Americans died in Vietnam sure, but it seems the invasion of Iraq did so much more to destabilize the entire Southwest Asia region, spill over and disrupt so many other countries, cause massive civilian casualties and have such major reverberations like empowering Iran and Russia. It has created implacable political divisions domestically and not to mention it has cost Trillions of dollars, and sunk our country into irredeemable debt. Maybe enough is enough.
5
Actually I would be extremely surprised if Bernie did the same thing in such a sudden and unplanned manner. Especially without having an exit plan for the Kurds.
1
I have been wondering for quite some time who all these supporters of Trump, his “base,” might be. And then I saw a clip of an All-Star Wrestler talking to an interviewer and he was saying “I’m the greatest wrestler in the history of the world, I’m the all-time greatest man who ever lived!” And there it was. That was Trump. And there are all these millions of men, and women, who watch All-Star Wrestling and identify with those stars. They are lost in a world that ignores them. Many of them are alcoholics and it is common that many, even most, alcoholics consider themselves the smartest people who ever lived. And they are unsung. They identify with Trump. He speaks for them. And they will support him no matter what the lies or instability or, actually, insanity, because HE is THEM. He represents them. And what is worrying, what is frightening, is what that means for our democracy.
4
I wonder if pulling out of Syria includes offering asylum to the Syrian Kurds, translators, labourers and others who made the American deployment possible. If so, we should expect a large number of largely Muslim immigrants. If not, we have betrayed our friends with an immoral, catastrophic decision worthy of the Trump administration.
7
@The Dog you're in Toronto and Prime Minister Trudeau has been clear that all are welcome in Canada. Will he follow through?
What left and right in America? Perhaps Trump is the end result of failed US policy in the Mideast and a form of globalization that leaves American working people unnecessarily exposed ?
1
The Kurds are a fierce fighting force. If Turkey or Syria or anyone else thinks they are going to defeat the Kurds, they better think twice.
@al
Kurds are beautiful strong people.
Their fighters should not be abandoned
Send the soldiers from our southern border
to help the Kurds.
Send the inept lazy United Nations forces there too.
A mess of our own governments’ greedy murderous military culture.
Do not listen to the “generals”
Peaceniks
Vote 2020.
Gutsiest decision Trump has made so far and every bit worth my vote in 2016.
5
We were in those places for far too long. But we should have had an orderly plan for withdrawal. In addition, I think it says a lot about Trump that he is willing to abandon our allies. I'm sure Putin is pleased with how things are going in the Middle East and the United States.
4
"the president’s move short-circuited what many say is a much-needed national debate about the future of America’s wars"
We don't need to talk about it any more. We just need to get out.
We've talked for near two decades, while the hawks just fight on. End it. Now. Talk later about lessons learned.
Next time, talk before starting the war, not after starting but before ending it.
6
So the Democrats want us to stay in Afghanistan. 17 years of a no win situation is apparently not enough.. I thought we went in there to find Osama Bin Laden. He has been found, killed, and dumped in the ocean. Or hadn't they heard about that yet?
Looks like it is, and will always be, the party of Lyndon Johnson
15
It's interesting to watch the partisan confusion on this issue. I hate our being in Syria and Afghanistan, but if Trump is ending it it can't be a good thing, so here are the reasons we should stay. or Our great enemy ISIS isn't as threatening as a crowd of women and children seeking refuge from violence, so lets concentrate our energy on keeping them out, and a wall is the only, only, only way to do that – those middle easterners can solve their own problems, we need to keep out those people who have been told that this is a land of freedom and opportunity.
Is ending our involvement in Syria/Afghanistan a good thing or a bad thing?
Is ISIS still an existential threat, or yesterday's news?
Will the Border Patrol start getting their salaries again?
How can I tell what side I'm on?
Stay tuned.
9
We have to accept that the UAE move to re-open its embassy in Syria is a transformative development in the possible end of hostilities at long last in the war torn country.
1
The solution, I guess, is to invoke the Goldilocks Plan: keep American forces in Afghanistan and Syria and Iraq -- for decades if need be -- until the situation is "just right" for withdrawal.
2
There's the constitution -- and then there's reality:
"The constitution requires Congress to do their job and declare war. They represent us; we don't need a referendum."
Most dead American soldiers died in wars that Congress never declared (Korea and Vietnam, for example -- in fact, every US war since World War II). Congress is supposed to declare war, but it has long preferred to punt that decision to the President (aka the "Commander in Chief"). That's reality.
6
By asking the president to think strategically, we would be asking him to act far beyond his capacity. The president is all impulse and no forethought. Sometimes the country can get away with such poor leadership without getting too badly burned, but usually it cannot. In this case the long-term consequence remains to be seen.
8
Make no mistake.
The aftermath of withdrawing U.S. troops will be a bloodbath in Afghanistan. The Taliban will repress women’s rights, prevent little girls from going to school, slaughter members of the current regime, hold mass executions in soccer stadiums, and blow up cultural treasures.
In other words, it will be back to the pre-2001 normal.
So be it.
It’s their country, or more specifically, their set of family and tribal loyalties.
They had a 15 year opportunity to create a stable democracy. The fact that they didn’t seize this opportunity is proof enough that a majority of Afghans just aren’t that interested in a stable democracy.
Let’s respect that decision.
9
Sigh, why is it necessary to remind over and over: 1) there is _no_ "left" in the U.S.--at least not any that registers on the radar, alas. As Gore Vidal would put it: "In America, we have one political party, the business party, with two right wings." 2) Anything that offends the corporate Democrats and Republicans and enrages the national security state...is probably a good idea.
9
Cheney, Powell, Rumsfeld, and Condoleezza Rice all urged Bush to go into Iraq after the short bombing of Afghanistan. And Bush was all for it. Bin Laden knew drawing the US into Afghanistan was the perfect storm to weaken the west. He was right. What is the war figure now 17 years later how many trillion? No country has been victorious in Afghanistan, Read “The Great Game”. But ending our military presence there should be very measured and widely consulted of all affected parties. They do need to step up to the plate. BTW ask Cheney where are the roses.
6
Many Democrats are complaining that Trump needs to change his mind about increasing border security. Trump is criticized for being too rigidly concerned about persons entering the US illegally. Simultaneously these same Democrats are criticizing Trump for changing his mind about American military involvement in Syria and Afghanistan. They want him to rigidly stand by his statements made a decade ago that the US should maintain a presence in the Mideast to combat terrorism. But some conditions there are different now. So do Democrats want a President who is willing to accept changes or one who will not? Maybe Democrats only like change they believe in.
4
This is ridiculous. Look at the title of the article you are commenting on, please. This is not just a Democrat issue. It is an issue for both sides. The issue isn’t that President Trump decided to pull out. The issue is the way it has been done. I’m in support of withdrawal; however, this should have been thought out and organized, not a haphazard tweet.
I’m so sick of people making everything a Democratic issue or a Republican issue. How about looking at what’s right from wrong and just leave it at that.
2
Interesting how the liberal opposition is pro-military now whereas in the past they were peaceniks.
10
More interesting how the right wing forgets their screaming at Obama for not nuking Syria.
1
As long as Russia and Iran keep the ISIS defeat, the real concerns should be for a solution to help Kurds resettle away from Turkey and steps to make Syria leadership accountable to Syria’s inhabitants for their wellbeing.
2
Trump lies to the military about their raises, he angers Iran and those around them, and he left a government shut down by him because he cannot get "his way." What are the Republicans going to do about him; he is theirs!
3
Let our mid-east allies pay for their own security and wars. And remove our US troops from that region, sensibly.
Let our far-east allies pay for their own security and wars. And remove our US troops from that region, sensibly.
Let our European allies pay for their own security and wars. And remove our troops from that region sensibly.
Rachet down US economy, from a military industrial complex, and a mercenary economy.
Rachet up US investment in infrastructure, sustainable technologies, high tech technologies, education at all levels, health care and so forth. That is, precisely - mimic what our first-world allies do across the globe. That is, invest in our own citizens.
Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq- no more US dollars, military.
US allies - foot your own bills, and put your money where your mouth is.
6
I support the decision to pull US troops out of Afghanistan. That was never our business. Syria is a different story.
We are there to oppose ISIS. The fact is George W. Bush, our dumbest president, created ISIS, Islamic State in Syria and Iraq, by deposing Saddam Hussein, the dictator who led and held together Iraq, based upon the outright falsehoods that Iraq had involvement in 9/11 and that Iraq possessed WMD's.
We created that problem, we should see its resolution all the way through.
2
A left that wants war is no left at all.
7
A Right that wants war is pretty much what I expect; a Left that attacks our soldiers and cowers before fascists is even worse than useless.
"...Trump Unites Left and Right Against Troop Plans...
The center, though, is quite encouraged by this move...
4
There is NO winning in Afghanistan. Just like Viet Nam, there is no winning this war. We MUST accept this. We must. The generals will never accept this, but the ground troops all know the truth. Cut our loses, and just get out. After 17 years, if the Afghan government and the Afghan military can't protect themselves then they are beyond saving. I truly feel badly for them, but it is just not our fight to fight anymore. We went there to destroy al Qaeda and kill Osama bin Laden and we have done that. It is time to get out. We have spent close to a trillion dollars with thousands of our kids either killed, maimed or psychologically affected. The neocons and Republicans want this war, and shockingly, the "liberals" seem to want this war too, if only to oppose anything that Trump does. And of course the corporations that profit off this war, the donors to these two corrupt political parties we have, have a vested interest in keeping this gravy train going. We look back at the Viet Nam War and think why did it go on for so long when everyone knew it was a lost cause. It was because no one in power had the courage to end it. I don't care why Trump wants to get us out, I'm just glad he is trying.
147
@FXQ
These endless extended wars world wide that America is involved in should not be judged upon them being unwinnable, but on the lies told and spread by our own government that started all these wars,
including the wars in Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria.
Not to forget the wars in Central
America that were all based on lies by Republican and Democratic governments.
Trump has put his own stamp into present day war involvements, Syria, Yemen, Ukraine etc but solely supporting the dictators/friends that are involved in all these new wars.
He probably thought no more than a few minutes to make a decision that the lives of the Kurds in Syria, the lives of ordinary Yemeni, Palestinians, are meaningless im comparison to his dictators who have promised him train loads of money.
Put the blame on where it really should be, America’s arrogance and greed
24
"The U.S. has spent nearly $6 trillion on wars that directly contributed to the deaths of around 500,000 people since the 9/11 attacks of 2001." And while we've been involved in useless tragic wars and military adventures, China has gone around the worlds--inked deals for natural resources and precious minerals, built strategic alliances, constructed major seaports, and invested in and modernized infrastructure in country after country.
https://www.newsweek.com/us-spent-six-trillion-wars-killed-half-million-1215588
24
@FXQ You definitely have a point. The Russians not to mention Alexander the great were unable to prevail in Afghanistan. That said, it's questionable that ISIS, al Qaeda, etc. are truly defeated. If they aren't and given these groups' hatred for us, it can be argued that completely eradicating them and any splinter groups is in our national interest. Vietnam was a different situation. It was an atrocity fueled by LBJ, a president whom today might be charged as a war criminal. Ho Chi Minh and his brethren posed no pressing threat to the US itself. He and his sympathizers did not crash planes into buildings nor carry out terror attacks against the West and that's the difference.
3
Riddle:
What does one do if one is in favor of reducing US troop levels in the Middle East, as Trump has just ordered, but is reflexively anti-Trump?
Simple:
Assure your audience that you're not challenging the substance of the pull-out decision -- just the process. Insist that the decision was "precipitous," for example, and ignore the sensible protestation that far-in-advance announcements dangerously telegraph US plans to its enemies. Ignore the obvious points that (a) we should never have been in Syria in the first place; (b) we've been in Afghanistan for 17 years, far longer than double the length of World War II or the American Civil War and a whopping seven years after Osama bin Laden (remember him?) died in neighboring Pakistan after having quietly walked across the Afghanistan/Pakistan border in late 2001.
Perhaps above all else, insist that political leaders should "listen" to their military advisers -- which, of course, may require that you choose a descriptor other than "advisers" -- but insist that you're not (indeed:perish the thought!) suggesting that the generals should get to decide such matters (again: say only that military "advisers" should be listened to and that their advice should not be rejected "precipitously").
If that seems like too-fine a line to walk, consider just saying this: It's a damn good thing we're leaving Syria and Afghanistan, and the sooner the better -- no matter what Mad Dog Mattis or any of the other generals may say about it!
4
The need to protect the US from attacks by Jihadists is not a "war". That's a misnomer. There is no uniformed enemy, no nation state to defeat. We are fighting an ideology. The idea that we can just go home from Afghanistan is naive. It's a failed state, and will continue to generate legions of Jihadists. We need to maintain a quick response military capability on the ground there for the indefinite future to contain the ongoing threat to national security from the Taliban and ISIS. Just as we have done for the past 70 years in Korea and Germany. Defeating radical Islam is a very long reach. Any chance of such success depends in part on finding ways to restore property and civil rights to the Palestinians, and creating employment opportunities for youth in the Middle East. When people are pissed at us and have nothing to lose...
3
“The whiplash of the decision, and total lack of clarity around U.S. objectives in Syria, is more problematic than the underlying notion of drawing down forces,”
It’s so rich that Ben Rhodes, former deputy national security advisor to president Obama is now demanding clarity about US objectives in Syria, 4 years after Obama, without authorization from congress authorized attacks that precipitated US engagement there. As I recall, the US objective as proffered by president Obama at the time was regime change. Assad was evil and had to removed from power. Obviously that objective has not been achieved. One might even argue that his grip on power has actually been enhanced as a result of the Obama/Rhodes folly.
Supporters of that folly can bemoan president Trumps decision to withdraw from the endless foreign engagements they demand but one can’t help but notice that none of them define the ‘objective’ Mr. Rhodes demands, let alone a means of achieving it. President Trump, to his credit has called them all out. To their discredit they have all failed to provide either.
10
The assumption: The world is static. Doesn’t work.
2
Exactly. This should had been easy. The Right and Left want to get out of long running wars, but NOOOooooo, Trump wants to show he knows more than the generals.
1
How about instituting national a national referendum when whether or not we enter a conflict. Overall, there is not much trust in Washington. The powers that be get us in these endless affairs, while at the same time the approval ratings of Congress are abysmal. Don't see much of a price paid by those who get us what turns out to the wrong way to go or even a mess. Remembering too, just one slight mention, during the Presidential Primaries and Presidential Debates, of the, ongoing even to this day, the huge suicide problem of our soldiers who went to fight. Please, don't wanna hear "..that's just the price you have to pay" for freedom etc.
4
@Jim
The constitution requires Congress to do their job and declare war. They represent us; we don't need a referendum. Well, they haven't been doing their job. They're afraid of making important war and peace decisions that might negatively affect their ability to get re-elected. If they did, then we wouldn't have presidents making unilateral decisions to get us into and out of wars and conflicts.
10
There is a referendum process—it’s called voting.
2
I am in favor of having national referendums from time to time. We always talk about democracy but we don’t really have much of it. I would always vote no on military actions that did not involve defending our borders or our allies borders.
2
"plans in syria and afghanistan"? he HAS NO plan. that is the problem and that is why mattis resigned in such a prominent fashion. he has deserted the kurds in syria, he has snubbed the iraqui government by leaving them completely out of his recent visit to the troops. the world knows what trump voters do not: he is completely unreliable. don't count on the US to honor any agreement as long as he is in the white house.
7
@coale johnson
you have it backwards. It was Mattis who didn't have a plan; Trump did. That was to get the troops out when their job was done. It's done. We never promised the Kurds to nation-build for them, only to help beat up ISIS which threatened them.
3
@Alan Klein..... i see... a general in the marines with a military career of 50 years had no plan but donald bone spurs trump did? my advice is for you to enlist. donald needs you.
2
Nearly all Americans want our military involvement in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria ended. The question has always been how to do that while preventing Afghanistan from again falling under Taliban control, while protecting our Kurdish allies in Syria from another slaughter, and preventing the resurgence of ISIS. Trump has offered no answers to these questions. Are those on the right and left who are now applauding Trump’s pullout-without-a-plan willing to own the consequences of those decisions?
10
Those things will happen whether we stay for one hundred years. Our presence in Syria and Afghanistan has added to their problems, not solved them. If it takes a crazy man to get us out of endless war, so be it.
2
@fbraconi
"... Are those on the right and left who are now applauding Trump’s pullout-without-a-plan willing to own the consequences of those decisions?"
Well, Mr. fbraconi, we're willing to own them if you're willing to own the consequences of staying there forever.
Are you?
1
Are those on the right and left who got us into the wars going to own the consequences of those decisions?
America must use its power without having wars.
The best fix to the Middle East problem long term is to take the oil money away by addressing human-induced climate change. This removes the source of money to fund the spread of Islam and finance terrorism and eliminates the region's global strategic significance.
Thereafter, the Middle East will continue to be shaped by Islamic ideology, tribalism, artificially imposed borders and terrorism targeting Muslims or minority groups driven by Islamic fundamentalism. Forget democracy and segregation of religion and the state - Islam does not tolerate dissent, diversity or the western view of human rights.
Middle Eastern countries will then have one of:
(1) No stable Government and a state of near continuous civil war;
(2) Islamic Governments enforced by adherence to religious mantra and backed by State security organisations ( eg Iran ).
(3) Monarchies or dictatorships ruled by strongman leaders backed by State security organisations ( eg Saudi Arabia; eg Syria once Assad regains control ).
The State security organisation's purpose is to crush all forms of dissent that threaten the power of the elite.
It will continue to be necessary for the West to impose economic sanctions and conduct military operations to limit the ability of Middle East Islamic States to develop dangerous weapons and also to support Israel.
There will also be no escaping the wider geopolitical competition between the major powers for influence.
3
At some time we have to know when to hold ‘em and when to fold ‘em.” For 17 years we have been trying to impose Western nationhood on the Afghan people, as did the British and Russians before us. Every nation has a right not only to be wrong but, when it exploits other nations, it ought to fail. President Trump has concluded that our investment only was “throwing good money after bad.” We ought to applaud his decision.
While it may be an “abrupt order” “uniting the left and the right,” it cannot also be, as critics like Mark Landler view it from his ideological bias, “...condemned across the ideological spectrum.” As though Trump’s cup is always half-empty if it’s Trump’s half-filled cup.
But Trump’s view is that we have no right to use local wars in undeveloped country for shooting practice under the cover of our fight against terrorism. Our democracy cannot let our Deep State usurp Presidential authority to decide where our military force protects our national interests.
At the cost of massive numbers of innocent human lives in Syria, Iraq and Afghansitan we have only turned their civil wars into military opportunities to develop our military skills. Ending these cruel interventions, Trump will have done something that commends him as a human being. Unlike Barack Obama, Trump has really earned a Nobel Peace Prize.
11
I love how the one thing our DC political hacks on both sides of the aisle can agree on is that we need to be involved in constant foreign interventionist quagmires.
What a world...
9
"Experts" and generals are not elected. They don't answer to the voters like a President and Congress do. In any case, war is an extension of politics. Bush ignored his generals and added troops to Iraq for the surge. Obama ignored his generals and pulled troops out of Iraq in 2011. So now, Trump ignores his generals and says were done in Syria and pulls out the remaining troops. We can go back to President Truman who fired 5-star General MacArthur during the Korean War. That General wanted to use nuclear weapons on North Korea and Communist China.
The idea that we listen to generals was never a position Democrats, liberals and people on the left ever took. Nor has the NY Times. It seems like Trump changes everyone's previous political beliefs just because he's, well, Trump.
10
I am a progressive that supports Sanders, AOC, Omar, etc. and I am ecstatic that Trump is pulling out of these wars that enrich the industrial military complex and hurt the lives of brown people across the Mid East with our bombs. ISIS and others like it were created because of Western Imperialism and intrusion in these areas; it's time we stop it. Thank you, President Trump.
7
I'm not sure what makes you consider Middle Eastern (a Eurocentric term in and of itself) people to be "brown" though I think I get what you're aiming at.
But take a look: Many, many, many Arabs have pretty light colored (and pinkish) skin, many have light eyes and hair, including red hair. In Persia (Iran) this is less true.
I wouldn't be surprised if Rand Paul had had some influence on President Trump's decision to withdraw from Syria. The two have become rather close lately and he probably convinced the president it was time to withdraw our troops. This seems like a wise decision as it is time for the Syrians to start fighting their own battles. How much longer could our soldiers stay and defend their country. They would let us stay there indefinitely but it is time they fended for themselves.
7
"I say we leave 'em in there and get the job done!" - from a set of George Carlin about Vietnam.
There's never going to be a time in the foreseeable future when there's going to be no threat or menace in the region, and we'll be able to say, "Ah, well.. thank goodness there's peace and stability. We can go home now."
There are degrees of isolationism or interventionism, and if the US makes a few big steps in the direction of isolationism it will still be by far the most interventionist power in the world. American exceptionalism is like the bad guest of our foreign policy that never knows when it is time to pack it in.
Instead of complaining about these pull-outs, why don't liberals think of just how much success we have had with our military interventions, and at what cost? The reason we can't afford healthcare for all, like most other developed countries certainly could be put at the feet of being the only one of those countries that has been continuously engaged in obscenely expensive, and otherwise dubious, to say the least, wars in arenas all over the globe. Enough.
I welcome dialing back our military machine, whether by someone I admire or someone I don't.
15
Our military leadership has said victory is coming in six months for the last fifteen years.
12
Trump bringing US troops home should bring joy to the world. Especially when they should not have been there in the first place. When is a good time to bring overseas US troops home? Long long time ago would have been my preference by any time from now on would be a consolation.
How many years ago since Saddam was hanged, Osama shot dead, Gaddhafi stoned to death, Assad forced to fight of rebels who tried to overthrow him while his country was devastated and the Taliban rule a good part of Afghanistan? As an independent with exclusive allegiance to the United States of America and not to the Republican party or the Democratic party or to the war mongers in congress and the supporters of the military industrial complex, I say let us end all wars on our planet at least now that it has been 100 years after the end of world war I, when all wars aught to have ended.
Iraqi parliamentary and militia leaders want US troops out of Iraq. Not that there will be harmony after US troops leave. As the British generals when leaving India told the Indian leaders you will have problems if we leave. Gandhi and Indian leaders said. "Fine they will be our problems not yours" Let the ungrateful Iraqi leaders deal with their problems and let US stop making their problems our problems. Frankly Saddam was the kind of leader that those divided Iraqis deserved. If there is one sentence I would like to be remembered for saying. It is that democracy is not optimal for all countries of the world.
12
The defining book about American wars of aggression is still Retired Marine General Smedley Butler's "War Is A Racket." That was the Monroe Doctrine first proclaimed in 1823. U.S. foreign policy since then is simply applying that doctrine to the rest of the world after World War II in the attempt to maintain our domination in world affairs.
8
I'm going to make this short and sweet with my premise being Trump cares only about Trump and fears Putin. It's not complicated folks. Any questions? I rest my case.
3
People hate Trump. He could call for universal health care tomorrow and most NYTimes readers would be against it. This is likely our only chance to get out of these countries. Those saying it should have been handled differently occupy a different reality than I. In my world, the oil and defense industry lobbies wield as much power as the medical industry lobbies - they will never allow a withdrawal unless we are simultaneously invading somewhere else. Until we rid ourselves of corporate democrats who sell out their base (like Clinton, Obama, Pelosi) we will have pseudo universal health care and endless wars.
18
This decision to pull out of Syria and draw down troups on Afghanistan was really to change the headlines from Trumps legal troubles to something else - anything else. That he was blunt, thoughtless, and will cause the deaths of brave fighters who have to carry on is secondary to his need to stop the headlines about Cohen, Mueller, Flynn, et al.
4
I think it is entirely naive to believe that Trump’s action were a happy outcome for the right, and inadvertently a surprise for the left. He doesn’t do anything, not a single thing, without a plot where he’s the star. He is a modern Machiavelli: a scheming, unethical power monger to the last breath. His actions of pulling troops out of Syria are, I fear, part of a devilish plan. Dread comes over me thinking he is laying the groundwork for a war. Seem like a pacifist today and start a war tomorrow. Then claim sainthood. Conditions on the ground will turn to turmoil, ISIS will surge, the Kurds will be devastated and Trump...? He can then start a war, call out the Troops he’s just flattered and then claim he just “hadta” do it. This is just one scenario. In any case I fear his diabolical mind will conjure up some dramatic and dangerous action where he can be the hero...(before he’s impeached). This man is desperate and will not go quietly.
7
So the Left supports Endless War?
Sure, I already new that, but it is nice to get confirmation.
14
It is remarkable to have both the left and the right united in the cause of the MIC. The war party is so entrenched in our culture that it frightens me. Military jet fly overs at football games are revolting. I have come to the conclusion that the Pentagon doesn’t view Afghanistan as a war but more like a permanent training exercise, a laboratory of war, to train the officer corps and test the latest weapons. They care nothing for the lost lives and the broken minds and bodies.
11
Mission First!
The US operations against ISIS in Syria has always been limited to disrupting ISIS attacks against Northern Iraq. Mission accomplished.
Time to withdraw US Forces.
7
There are few things more sickening than the pretense that a US presence is needed in either Afghanistan or Syria. Oh no! Our beloved generals, ever determined to see American dollars wasted in a foreign war insist that we must stick it out. Just a little while longer. We will leave they say, just not today. We have seen this sick game before in Vietnam. The point of having a civilian commander in chief is to have someone who can see the big picture and in this case it is clear - we have lost these wars which were never ours to win. Those we help are tarnished as collaborators every day we stay. If we truly wish to help either people - send aid from home and leave - yesterday.
11
There is only one place our troops belong in the Middle East, and that is standing on the border of Palestine to prevent any further Israeli incursion. That would be such a game changer that we wouldn't need them anywhere else.
11
Trump's foreign policy is the "Tail-Between-The-Legs" approach. "Please be nice to me. Take what you want."
This may actually prevent state sponsored terrorist attacks against the US by authoritarian regimes while he is in office. But woe to the USA in the future, and even now, as ground and advantage is seized from our control.
1
Trump's decision to pull out of Afghanistan seems like an afterthought designed to keep people from asking why getting out of Syria was suddenly in Trump's best interest? So, I am still asking "Why is it suddenly so important that Trump pull the US out of Syria? Giving ISIS freedom to do---what?" What does ISIS do? One of things that ISIS does is kills Kurds. Turkey hates the Kurds. Does Turkey know more about administration involvement in the death of Khashoggi than it has revealed publicly? Is Trump being blackmailed? The fact that he would go to such extreme lengths to make the press stop talking about Syria has me convinced that Syria--and Turkey--- is the real story.
6
Why hasn't Bolton resigned in protest yet?
And where does this leave Israel -- a country that just a few months ago idolized Trump for moving the US embassy to Jerusalem?
The ironies . . .
3
Withdrawing US troops from Syria is not Trump’s only plan. Since this announcement he has mistakenly leaked or deliberately revealed at least 2 major actions associated with this policy change that seemed to have not been caught on anyone’s radar and are not be addressed by press or politicians.
1. Recently he issued a self-congratulatory tweet that claimed “Saudi A” will pay for reconstruction in Syria. This is concerning because of the possibility of SA spreading Wahhabism to a country that was more western in daily living than most other Muslim countries in the Mid East.
The Saudi’s have denied this but both cannot be lying.
2, In Iraq he said that the US will be able to nimbly respond to any ISIS upsurge from a base in Iraq. How is this possible if the US mission in Iraq is training? Will US servicemembers, intelligence support and equipment be built up to operate a reactionary force? Does the Iraqi government know about this? Doubt it based on the fact that the Iraqis refused to meet with him.
A policy of withdrawal, whether good or bad, is not sufficient to propel the SecDef and the Special Envoy to resign. As this article suggests the Pentagon could delay the withdrawal.
Trump has more up his nefarious sleeve than “we the people” have been told.
2
"Endless war" slogans ignore the strategic and political advantage US involvement can offer.
For example, invading Afghanistan removed a training ground for terrorists blowing up NYC skyscrapers. Understandable to fill that vacuum. But Invading Iraq was stupid, removed counterbalance to Iran, there were no WMD except those given to Iraq by the US.
Obama erred by not going in to Syria with planes to counteract Russia's support of the dictator Assad and to support non-ISIS forces who were anti-Assad. Obama could have pulled out after Russia did.
For example, WW2 was good for the US.
For example, Vietnam was bad because McNamara fundamentally did not understand that the US was getting involved in a civil war.
The bottom line from all this is, the US Commander-in-Chief has never been a military nor international geopolitical expert, and we should make sure that Congress is able to use the war powers act to authorize any engagement in ADVANCE. Like the law says. The President is a politician elected based on politics and he needs experts to advise him, even if those experts limit his choices. It is stupid to call these experts the "deep state". They are professional experts that the US needs. The President is not a dictator that decides things on his own.
He needs independent experts, an independent Congress, and an independent judiciary to keep the US strong.
98
@Will Hogan "invading Afghanistan removed a training ground for terrorists blowing up NYC skyscrapers". Except that in 911 there was not a single Afghan involved... Why wasn't Saudi Arabia invaded instead? Lack of AIM?
25
@Will Hogan
You seem to forget that the people who brought down the towers were not from Afghanistan, nor did they train there. Their leader sought refuge there after the fact, & ultimately lived for a long time in Pakistan. So our long-term involvement in Afghanistan is dependent on emotion, not fact.
Obama did not go into Syrian because the Republican-controlled Congress would not agree to it.
You also seem to forget that the current occupant of the Oval Office wants to be a dictator who decides everything on his own.
So exactly who do you think will heed your advice?
22
@Will Hogan
Regarding Viet Nam, it could have been seen as a civil war between north and south. But there was a greater intelligence failure. Chinese and Soviet goals were two different animals. We were afraid of Soviet-style expansion and applied it to the Chinese. As we saw, with 20-20 hindsight, the Chinese did not take over all of Southeast Asia, weren't a threat to Japan and didn't find their way to Hawaii and the U.S. mainland.
11
“So chaotic was Mr. Trump’s decision-making process.”
No doubt about it but it may serve as a reminder that we cannot leave decisions about deploying US military personnel in overseas’ countries in the hands of the Generals.
When 500,000 American troops were in Vietnam after the 1968 Tet Offensive, General Westmoreland was asked what it would take to finish the War. 200,000 more troops was his reply.
Wrong answer.
8
If anybody thinks that Trump will pay a political price among the great majority of American voters, right, left or center, for withdrawing, however precipitously, from either Syria or Afghanistan, they will be mistaken. The reverse is much more likely.
16
Please don't refer to the mainstream of the Democratic party as "the left." These folks are part of the foreign policy establishment. The "left" is generally antiwar and welcomes bringing home troops, especially from such nebulous and shifting rationales as we've employed for this Syrian adventure. Of course, Trump isn't doing this from a place of wisdom, but that doesn't make it wrong. I urge you to find more sensible uses of the terms "left" and "right" that reflect the real political spectrum in the U.S., not just the spectrum occupied by your sources.
19
There's a limit to everything. After passing our limits years ago now, it's long time we asked: What exactly have we accomplished in Afghanistan since 2001? If we helped some people there try to have civilization - great. You can't breathe and think for someone else. And you can't build a country for another people. They have to do it themselves.
9
As awful as Trump is, the left should welcome the withdrawal of American imperial troops in Syria and Afghanistan and call for similar withdrawal from Iraq. For those who look towards challenging the power of the business class, and working to increase democratic political investment in social programs and taking over key power nodes of private capital, massive cuts to military spending is essential. Certainly, the strengthening of competing imperial forces, such as China and Russia, are collateral effects of the withdrawal of American military forces. That is something we cannot really control. Our emphasis must remain in changing the system in the US, itself.
6
In the eloquent words of Thomas Friedman:
"(America) has always paid extra to stabilize the global system from which we were the biggest beneficiary and has always nurtured and protected alliances with like-minded nations."
When Trump talks about America paying money to aid defend and stabilize the world outside of the US, he does not include and fails to account for the commercial benefit America reaps from a stable outside world.
4
Surely those hawks from the left and there right are out of touch with most Americans. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have raged on for almost two decades and there has been no national security interests justifications offered that are intellectually honest. Let those hawks from the left and the right take up arms and go to fight in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria, then the howls from the armchair warriors will vanish.
11
Why is it that when one of our leaders, be it Presidents Bush, Obama, and now Trump, visit the troops in Iraq, it's always a "surprise" visit? I can only guess that it's because our leaderships, from both parties, understand that our troops enjoy a surprise much more than the feeling of anticipation they would have knowing that the president is on his way for a visit. It could not be for security reasons. We have been fighting over there - thankfully not here - for 15 years now, certainly it must be safe, after all these years for the president to visit? If not, I'm sure the members of the press would let us know that. While the president is there, will he be meeting with Iraq leadership or the people of Iraq? Perhaps he could walk the streets of Baghdad, and feel the love that the Iraqi people have for their liberators? Maybe he's going to pick up a big oil check to pay for the liberation? Fox News could cover it all just to make sure it's all on the up. and up.
1
I am all for an exit strategy from middle east conflicts the US is embroiled in, but the operative word there is "strategy", which means it needs to be well thought out. The problem with Trump is that he does not, or cannot, do his homework to build such a strategy, and then he cannot, or will not, work to sell it to allies and the American public. His style is to ram whatever pops into his head down the throats of everyone else, and that is why he has no business being in the White House.
5
Every politician has one main goal... to get re-elected. Trump is checking the boxes off of everything he promised to show his base he delivered. Nothing else to his strategy. It’ll probably even work.
3
You can’t win an election with 30%.
What a sad day it is if what unites the left & right it outrage against slowing down the Bush-Obama foreverwars.
Or perhaps a more careful look is in order. The Bush neocons have always been pro war at every turn, but also on the right you have the libertarians who, despite partisan rhetoric, are not simply more extreme Republicans but rather have some ideological differences most relevant being they're largely antiwar. The Clinton & Obama neoliberal "centrists" have also been pro war at almost every turn in actions despite their rhetoric, but also on the left has always been a strong antiwar view mostly people who now identify as progressives.
The parity between neocons and neoliberals is a strong pro business view which includes accepting massive "donations" from war profiteers and thus equate more war as good for the economy and Trump reducing deployments even a tiny amount as "dangerous" though only to profits.
Meanwhile much of the public, both left and right, has always been against perpetual war. Why are only the warmongering views being considered as representing the left or the right?
10
One really must look at Afghanistan as both a war one, then lost and reignited. Remember the times post 9/11? The US sent a significant enough fighting forces into that country and seemed to be winning. Remember the purple thumb voters?
Then we took our eye off the ball and went foolishly after Saddam even though we called his bluff and UN inspectors surmised there were no weapons of mass destruction. So much for Afghanistan, lets just clobber Iraq. And once we were done there, and we are not, we re-focus on Afghanistan and have doing so ever since.
So I ask those in power, what happened to those purple thumbs?
2
I see no evidence -- and there's none in this article -- which demonstrates any truth to the matter that the left and right are united against removal of troops from Syria and Afghanistan. Citing unnamed analysts and inside-the-beltway individuals with vested interests is not the same as public opinion -- it is Washington's opinion.
There are zero people on the left who believe that keeping troops perpetually in Afghanistan is a good idea -- ZERO. Where did NY Times get the notion that this is a non-zero number? Oops, forgot that Trump has set the new bar for truth, which means you can say whatever you want, find a couple people out of millions that agree with you and call that a majority opinion.
If anything, we're seeing a lot of pushback on troop withdrawals because the Military Industrial Complex never volunteered to end a war and Senators and Reps will continue to fund forever unwinnable wars so they don't get tagged as the people that "lost the war" and get voted out in the next election.
We would have seen the same pushback if Jesus himself were president and suggested the same.
9
I haven't seen a single comment here from the U.S. mentioning American allies who have fought and died over there. And are still there. This withdrawal with no notice will be remembered by them when the next adventure begins.
3
@Terry, isn't it time we stopped hiring proxy rebel groups to fight on the front lines of our wars anyway? And if a bill supporting congressional war authorization can't be passed, maybe that's a sign we shouldn't be on such an adventure in the first place.
1
I'm not sure which story is more emboldened...Macbeth or Trump? Something dark, I fear, will close the cover on the latter.
1
Trump will absolutely force Congress to try to impeach him -- he will not resign. The reason is that as soon as he is no longer President, his legal vulnerability instantly comes crashing down on Trump and the family. He will likely be indicted the day following his leaving office.
Trump greatest fear in life is jail, and that's where he and his sons are likely headed. Money laundering, falsifying taxes and federal filings, obstruction of justice, RICO violations, and last but not least from an historical perspective, his actions could be treasonous.
2
The decision was rash but I feel it's a good one. We've spent way too much blood and treasure overseas.
9
Withdrawing from these areas while retreating on climate change and clean energy ensures that we will be back to start the process over from scratch. Energy efficiency can free us from Middle Eastern oil. His rejection of raising fuel efficiency of our autos will make them unsalable in foreign countries and delay moving us to greener energy. He is countering his own ideas and showing what a fool he is.
2
Here we are again saying that Trump’s antics have a measure of credibility. Whether it is holding China accountable for stealing our technology or demanding Allies assume more responsibility for defense or renegotiating trade with allies that is more favorable to the US, or meeting the needs of the forgotten values and injustices collected by his political base, or retreating from military commitments, Trump is destroying the democracy and the government.
Trump’s primary agenda is disruption and division of the country. He is the most dangerous and destructive president America has ever had. Whether Republican or Democrat, liberal or conservative, we must recognize that regardless of any apparently credible or desirable outcome, he is tearing the country apart.
2
Yes, you're right.
The Left and the Right are both opposed to Trump's pull out from Syria.
But Trump's not doing this for America, Trump is doing this for Trump.
And for Erdogan.
And for Putin.
And for the Saudi Crown Prince.
Please let me explain.
Trump has given the green light to Erdogan to slaughter the Kurds.
In exchange, Erdogan will let Trump expand his properties in Turkey, and Erdogan will ease up on the condemnation of the Saudi Crown Prince. ( the Pennsylvania cleric will have to wait for another time.)
The Saudis are also letting Trump and Kushner line their pockets, in exchange for silence on Crimes Against Humanity.
And as for Putin, he wants American troops out of Syria because they are getting in his way.
American Special Forces have already killed a number of Russian Mercenaries, and Putin wants them out of country.
And as we've seen first-hand over the years, Putin OWNS Trump.
Mueller has learned about the Money Laundering, Tax Evasion, and Conspiracy To Commit Tax Evasion.
Putin has known about it for decades.
So you see, America might not like the Syrian pullout.
But in Trump World, it's a Win/Win/Win/Win situation.
1
For me the most reprehensible part of this whole episode was the President's use of members of our military as background props in a political propaganda video clearly intended to play to his base as he begins his 2020 campaign.
6
By all means, let’s quit these distant conflicts and bring the troops home. Just remember, though, that those abandoned conflicts have a funny way of following us home, as they did on 9/11. And a funny way of leaving behind desperate erstwhile allies to be slaughtered or sent into flight, as they did in SE Asia. Maybe we could at least have the decency to admit Afghan and Kurdish refugees fleeing massacre this time around - but I wouldn’t hold my breath, least of all from today’s Republicans.
4
These three wars were never winnable given the approach which was eerily parallel to our approach in Vietnam. In Iraq and Afghanistan we supported kleptocratic elites who could never win over the minds and hearts of the people. In Syria we had one hand tied behind our backs and then the Russians came in (See China in the Vietnam and Korean wars) and there was way too much risk for us to escalate that conflict. We need to get out and get out now. Let those countries develop on their own politically. We can protect Israel if we need to and we can certainly destroy terrorist camps from time to time as we find them. We could have avoided 9/11 if the congress had not chose to focus on Clinton's sexual predation actitivies while president. No one looked at Al Qaeda - we don't have to make that mistake again.
4
Those of who want America's worldwide multi-trillion dollar war machine to get out of all foreign countries are glad Trump is removing troops from Syria, even if he is doing it for the wrong reasons or without asking the masters of war (the generals) what they think.
In fact, he ought to close down most of the hundreds of American military installations in more than 85 countries worldwide, and bring almost all military members home to put them into careers that heal the world rather than promote war.
The USA has huge problems right here at home. We never benefited from invading Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Iraq, Syria, etc.
I want Trump impeached immediately, but I totally support his removal of troops from everywhere.
Hegemony and empire are just plain wrong!
5
I don't think so. There are a lot of people on the Left, as well as the Right, using those terms the NY Times chose, who oppose this state of permanent war our country has been in for decades now. No, our troops should not be in Syria, it is an illegal occupation under International Law, uninvited by Syria and supporting factions oppose to that country's government. No, we should not be in Afghanistan any longer, we have been there long enough and no end in sight to that country's problems. No, we should have never invaded and destroyed Iraq and our troops should get out there too. We should stop promoting regime change in countries so that they become our puppets or for whatever untold reasons there may be. We should be making friends and influencing people and upholding International Law, we have the power to do so. We have bases in so many countries I've lost count, afraid to give an exact number, but even Trump proudly acknowledged it not too long ago. I don't know if Trump is sincere or not, if the troop withdrawal will actually take effect or if there is less to this announcement than meets the eye. I'll believe it when I see it. But I support his stated intentions, even though I have never ever supported Trump or most of his policies. I guess there are powerful forces interested in maintaining a bellicose, imperialist policy. Even something as the thought of withdrawing a few thousand troops from Syria infuriates them.
5
I fail to read who represents the 'Left' in this article that claims that my comrades object to Trump's withdrawal from Syria and partial withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Perhaps the author is facetiously using the President's own broadly authoritative narrative voice.
5
Every one of those soldiers is well aware especially in that moment that their Commander-in-Chief couldn't care less about them. They're just waiting patiently for his dismissal to come down the pipe like the rest of us. As a matter of fact, they're the most patient among us. The most respectful, the most diligent, and the most patient.
3
The US only brought chaos and violence to these two countries. Opium production which had virtually stopped during Talibans exploded after US invasion. There was no plan to rebuild the country. Supporting corrupt US puppets, like Karzai, in order to get strategic benefits at a low price was a failed policy.
The same can be said about Syria. The US had no legal ground to get there in the first place because no one invited it. The phony pretext of fighting IS cannot fool anyone. After more than 1 year of "fighting" Daesh, the terror organization more than doubled its territory. They were allowed to cross the desert in their Toyotas and no US plane bothered to bomb them. They were smuggling oil in Turkey by hundreds of trucks which "miraculously" remained invisible to American satelites surveiling the area or to American troops in Incirlik. And then the Russians came in and it took them only some months to swipe the IS all over the place. So any fear that the IS might regroup once the Americans leave is misplaced. It were the Russians and Syrians who defeated the IS (and the other jihadis) and now they have the chance to finish them off.
And third, the Americans were illegally occupying a part of the Syrian sovereign territory, which represents a naked military aggression. Getting out of there is a return to legality.
4
Maybe having the mainstream left and right united against president Trump is a sign of how radically he is challenging the failed, interventionist approach to foreign policy. Undoubtedly, President Trump’s approach to policy making is deeply flawed. However, the underlying policy he’s trying to implement—abandoning our current interventionist approach—should be applauded. For decades now, America has toppled democratic governments, supported autocratic regimes, and wreaked havoc around the globe all in the name of “freedom.” President Trump may be wrong on everything from climate change to gay rights, but on the issue of whether America should send young men and women on crusades to the far reaches of the Earth he is absolutely right.
7
Enough with strategery — we’ve had two presidents with eight years each who couldn’t extricate us from these wars that were popular with just about no one. All the media and general public has done to put up with it for most of that time was pretend it didn’t exist. For a good decade there was a virtually news blackout on anything happening in Iraq and Afghanistan, to say nothing of Syria. Now, suddenly, it takes Trump to get us out of there and what do you know: suddenly everyone wants to stay.
120
@PL Not everyone wants to stay. Some of us want a thought out process that factors in important variables. Who could be against that? Let's just go through a thoughtful process.
24
News blackout?! There's plenty of news about Afghanistan. In fact, Obama wanted and did bring many of our Troops home. That's the war George W. Bush started after 9/11! Donald wanted to increase Troops in Afghanistan!
Donald should withdraw from Yemen! But he won't leave his Saudi overlords!
28
@PL - don’t make it that simple. It isn’t people want to stay, it’s we want our national security policy debated properly and not announced on a social media platform by a chaotic liar trying to distract from the impending indictment.
30
Withdrawal from Syria and partial and gradual withdrawal from Afganistan is a good idea. However, doing it without the consultation from experts in the field by a not so bright President is not a good idea. Doing it to please Mr. Putin is even worse.
5
@Surya
So it's a good idea that the President came up with despite the wrongheadedness of his generals and experts. So why would you want him to trust his generals
and experts to give him proper advice? If he did, the troops would remain. Your arguments oppose themselves. They're illogical.
Osama Bin Laden thought that the United States prevented the restoration of an Islamic state, so he sent 20 people to the U.S. to intimidate the U.S. into either retreat or overreactions which would enable him to create that state. He launched his attacks from an unstable country run be religious fanatics like himself. Osama Bin Laden is dead but people like him are at work around the world, exploiting unhappy people and manipulating their ignorance to initiate violence around the world. They are not going to leave us alone until they lose their ability to do so. Just leaving Syria and Afghanistan will not end our wars with these people.
1
We still know where to find the bad guys.
We just need the courage to engage them when we don’t have troops already deployed.
Actually, when we have known where are the bad guys we have gone after them. But that is not what counter insurgency is all about. Convincing populations from who insurgents come to oppose them is the means to end insurgencies.
@Casual Observer
Who are American troops suppose to aim their rifles at?
I'm on the left, I'm a liberal, not a neo-liberal. Enough of the neoliberalism around the world. Trump gets credit from me for leaving behind the mistakes of the last 15 years. Somebody always gets hurt in a divorce. The Kurds are going to have to take a hit. Stop kow towing to the American war machine.
5
Not "15" years...it has been 17 years in Afghanistan. We should leave Afghanistan. Syria, is Donald's gift to Putin!
1
True. But couldn’t he do this a little better?
Sounds like he had another hissy fit and just reacted. We deserve more from our commander in chief.
1
@S
He didn't have a hissy fit. He's been saying for 18 months that he wants to get out of Syria once it makes sense. It makes sense. We've defeated 99% of ISIS.
The exit from Syria will be reversed. The exit from Afghanland would be propitious. We must be in the ME. Give afghanistan to the taliban and then negotiate terms for our benefit and their’s.
1
It would not be good for the US to pull out of Iraq as long as Iran wields so much influence there. The Iran-backed Asaib Ahl al-Haq militia that fought key battles against ISIS in north Iraq needs to be dismantled so that Iran's influence is removed in parallel with that of the US.
Yet another problem caused by Cheney's manipulation of Bush Jr that led to the Iraq war which generated huge profits for Cheney's Haliburton stock which Cheney REFUSED to divest when he became Vice President. The US is CORRUPT, and there is far more corruption on the Republican side than the Democrats....
2
We should not have taken on Iraq, destroyed their army (they moved to Syria and Joined ISIS) but we did. Of course Syria is a proxy war for the Sunni v. Shi'a war that has been going on for centuries. Also the work of Sykes, Picot, Balfour and Lawrence trying to reward friends and re-create the "biblical" Middle East as depicted in their childhood bibles, they also eliminated Kurdistan lest there be another Saladin to kick the Christians out. The place has been a Hot-Mess for over a century.
The problem is that we Americans are there now and yes, we are the police force for the planet and that gives us the right to call-the-tune.
Yes, we can pull-out and let the long simmering problems boil over or maybe see Russia, China, or some other country start calling the shots as America slinks into isolationism.
Internationalist only means that we recognize that we all have to live on this planet together, solve our problems together, or die together.
The foul seeds planted over 100 years ago are bearing fruit and it is toxic.
"I have nothing of worth to add. Anything I say here will be uninformed, emotional bilge and I and yourselves are better served if I remain silent, for as long as is necessary or as long as I can manage, leaving you to work things out, as you always have."
Now THAT's my idea of a Tweet!
2
"President Trump managed to do something remarkable with his abrupt order last week to withdraw all American troops from Syria and half from Afghanistan: unite the left and right against a plan to extract the United States from two long, costly and increasingly futile conflicts".
That's classic Deep State for you - there is no "left" or "right", just a total commitment to keeping the perpetual war going and American troops stationed in foreign lands. Full credit to Trump for challenging that monstrosity. But the beast would not just lie down and die – it will kick and scream until its last breath.
7
"the president's move short-circuited a much-needed national debate about the future of America's wars."
If Mujib Mashal saw a debate forming in the U.S. that was short-circuited by the president pulling the plug on Syria he was the only one who saw it coming.
Not a whimper was heard from Congress when we got into Syria and now they are demanding an investigation for getting out.
If the President is acting foolish, he is one among many.
4
I disagree with Trump on many things, but he's right on this one. We will never 'solve' the problems or bring 'peace' to the middle east and southwest Asia.
These endless wars are a waste of blood and treasure.
5
Like any other major endeavor, democracy requires infrastructure. The presence of U.S. troops in other countries is supporting established or nascent democracies, helping protect the infrastructure that enables people to engage in participatory government. By stupidly making irresponsible decisions to remove our troops, Trump is not only condemning the allied troops suddenly set adrift. He is also killing their movements toward democracy and international trust of the United States.
4
"We're not the suckers, any more",
What a heartening message to those soldiers and their families who have fought and sacrificed all these years.
Cadet Bone Spurs would never understand that kind of sacrifice. He only sees zero sum; the money can be more well spent giving oligarchs tax breaks on condominiums.
3
It always seemed to me that one of the main motivations, among political and military leaders, for the second war in Iraq was the desire/need to create more of a buffer between terror-sponsoring, soon to be nuclear armed, and rabidly anti-American and anti-British (and anti-Jewish Israel and anti-Sunni Arab) Iran on the one hand and the strategic land and sea access it would gain by increasing its presence and control in Syria and Lebanon, not to mention control over some of Israel's and Jordan's primary water sources.
So, to all the soldiers and others who fought or worked in Iraq these last 17-18 years, it seems that Trump, for whom many of you probably voted, is by precipitously retreating from Syria devaluing your service and the sacrifices you, your families and your buddies made in Iraq. At least that how it looks and feels from here.
1
America should pat President Ghani on the back, wish him luck, and GET OUT OF AFGHANISTAN. Ultimately, civilization will arrive in Afghanistan, and when it does, we can exchange ambassadors.
4
Our initial goal in Afghanistan was to kill or capture Osama bin Laden & friends. Took a while but we accomplished the goal. And in that process, we had to fight the Taliban. Now the reason for fighting the Taliban no longer exists - since bin Laden is kaputski. So....?
3
The American people don't like these wars. Trump may have united the right and left -- but only in their opposition to these useless, costly wars that are a burden to our nation. Trump is right -- we are not longer being used anymore. Let the Israelis defend themselves. Period.
5
To see such a Coward go to the Troops is humiliating to those of us who really honor the men and women fighting for us. And, to depend upon this guy to determine what is best for our National Safety is scary. It seems as though all the good Generals have been fired and the GOP is scared of Trump. We are in deep trouble.
1
There are two problems in the Middle East that cause so much grief for the entire world today and Iran is not one of them. Oil and Islamic Terrorism: They both point to Saudi Arabia.
Any peace process involving Saudi Arabia will only happen when the Oil runs out.
With hindsight, US policy in Saudi Arabia was flawed from the start.
This is a country that refuses to work for a living, that imports all their labor. Not exactly American values.
Why do US voters, more than half female and predominantly Christian, continuously elect politicians who back this anti-female, anti-christian, undemocratic and authoritarian monarchy that regularly organizes public hangings to entertain their largely uneducated population?
Saudi Arabia is at the very core of political disruption in the Middle East, while the US needs to be held reponsible for the refugee movement pouring out across the world, and the starvation left behind.
Selling weapons to Saudi Arabia is probably the stupidest move that the US has ever made. The day they run out of oil can not come soon enough.
3
This is the headline for this article: "Trump Unites the Left and Right, Against His Plans in Syria and Afghanistan"
This is typical of the way the New York Times has helped normalize Trump's misgovernance of this country. The left and right are not united against Trump's plans. They are united against Trump's LACK of plans. A lot of people would be in favor of the US lessening its fruitless military commitments overseas. But the vast majority of those people want a coherent disengagement policy. Trump does not have that. A bunch of tweets and statements do not make for a plan.
The Washington Post quoted the Commandant of the US Marine Corps as saying they have not actually received any orders regarding any withdraw. While visiting marines in a combat zone, in response to a junior officer asking about the president's tweets, he flat-out said he had no idea what was going on.
As this article body acknowledges, Trump's decision-making was "transparently chaotic" and based on nothing more than "appeal to his coherent base." In other words, he has no plans.
NYT, stop normalizing the Trump administration. Your attempts as presenting neutral headline is actually helping conceal facts and spread falsehoods.
3
#BenedictDonald failed to meet with any of the democratically elected Iraqi government when he visited this sovereign country. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi citizens died in their fight against ISIS. This has united the Iraqi parliament in a desire for US troops to leave. Another stoke of genius.
1
So which radio host talked Trump into troop withdrawal...Limbaugh or Coulter.
Maybe they should join forces and primary Trump/Pence in 2020. They already seem to be running the country.
Limbaugh/Coulter 2020!
Make America White Again
2
We should not be in Syria, or in Iraq. These endless wars only kill thousands of people and create chaos. They have never done any good. Stop attacking Trump for everything he does. It’s ok, he can be right sometimes. The neo-con agenda pushed by the New York Times during W’s disaster in Iraq is the product of a fruitless, impossible ideology determined to create new markets for large American corporations. Out now. Same as Vietnam.
4
Trump is clearly playing to his base in time for the 2020 election...
... the base being Putin
3
Liberals have not and are not leftists they are as much of an enemy as the conservatives. Both of them want imperialism to continue and they are no good for any progressive change. Even those who claim that they are against imperialism (both conservative, liberal and those who claim to be "progressive") would never do it because they can't remove the underling system which need imperialism as much as a drug addict needs his dose.
3
I'm unable to express my disgust at seeing "soldiers" jostling to take a "selfie" with Trump, a man who doesn't value their lives one jot. What children.
1
trump is going with his 'gut' rather than with thought. Unfortunately, his gut is twisted with undigestible rage at things such as a government shutdown of his own making and a roiling stock market caused by his rash tweets. Inevitably, the result is uncontrolled piles of 'stuff' spewed in all directions--a real mess.
I think the Left is upset because he didn't consult Michele Obama.
Aside from the power elites living in Washington D.C., New York, and California, who really wants endless American wars in the Middle East?
Let all of the MSM\Hollywood/Wall Street advocates & D.C. Lobbyists form up and go fight in Syria, Iraq, or Afghanistan if they wish. Leave the rest of us out...please.
5
I miss Larry Eisenberg. He’d have had a great limerick for this one.
6
I second that! Lovely Larry.
This is lazy journalism. I don't know what Left Mr. Landler is referring to, but for readers seeking a view from outside the Beltway, I recommend Matt Taibbi's (as always) trenchant analysis in an article subtitled "Nothing unites our political class like the threat of ending our never-ending war." https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-syria-withdrawal-772177/
6
Why on earth is Steve Bannon considered an expert on foreign policy? Why do reputable newspapers go to that bellicose human pustule for comments?
9
We never left Japan or Germany after WWII...
4
We gave them the wherewithal to become like us us. . .
So the man posing as a woman (Laura Ingram) now governs our US policies and Lord Putin now governs our foreign policy decision-making.
Donald Trump aka The Manchurian candidate.
6
Donald Trump is not cognitively qualified to be president of a Florida retirement trailer park HOA, much less president of the United States. His crass, bellicose ignorance is a depressing exigent danger to the world.
7
Opinion: Bannon, student of authoritarianism and friend of Nazi "white" nationalists. Figures. If Trump's not doing Putin's bidding, Bannon's the next best bet.
7
why the nyt wants to lament an exit from syria and afghanistan after 17 years is asinine. by any means necessary this should have happened a decade ago.
15
FYI: Donald isn't talking about withdrawal from Afghanistan. Pres. Obama began downsizing Troops in Afghanistan. Donald wants to add!
1
A plan to extract the United States from two long, costly and increasingly futile conflicts. One would think the lefties would be celebrating.
12
Those poor Kurds can't ever seem to catch a break. They should have their own country, of course.
6
FYI: Obama is the one who began to withdraw Troops from Afghanistan. Donald wanted to add! We've been in Syria for a short two years, only 2K Troops on the ground. Syria, is being offered to Putin!
2
There has been so much negativity about Trump I decided to do some research on his 2018 accomplishments. I have listed them here but look forward to your candid feedback. The Times yesterday in an Op Ed only listed six?
httls://nyti.ms/2GKnlyV#permid=29900991
I hope this works, it's my first time using a comment Share link.
Thanks.
1
@Frank Leibold the rollback of 80 environmental protections?
One can despise Trump and still support pulling troops out of the endless war.
24
Just as one can identify important humanitarian and national security reasons to have the US military stay a bit longer in Syria, without being a war monger.
If the left and right are so united against pulling out of Afghanistan and Syria, then Congress should easily pass a formal declaration of war or explicit authorization to use military force in both countries.
At a minimum, Congress can vote to block any withdrawal of soldiers from these and other countries.
Do they have the votes?
If not, perhaps there is less unity than the article suggests.
10
@John Of course, there's less unity than the article suggests, largely because the author doesn't get out of the Beltway much.
For readers seeking a view from outside the Beltway, I recommend Matt Taibbi's (as always) trenchant analysis in an article subtitled "Nothing unites our political class like the threat of ending our never-ending war." https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-syria-withdrawal-772177/
3
In 2011, President Obama argued for the withdrawal of most American troops from Afghanistan by 2012. In 2015 and 2016, Trump and many others criticized that decision, saying that withdrawal should be predicated by progress, not timeline. Nothing has changed in Afghanistan since 2011, except for the additional cost in resources and lives, yet the people cited in this article praise Trump's decision to withdraw from Afghanistan. I suppose it takes some people much longer to figure out what the right answer is. The withdrawal from Syria, without an agreement on the safety of the Kurds, has the potential to cause great harm to a major ally while enabling the resurgence of ISIS. It will be the second grand betrayal of the Kurds by the US government, the first being their abandonment at the end of the Iran-Iraq war. The sad truth is that this is not because of some foreign policy decision that Trump and his advisers came up with. The simple explanation is that Trump believes that the US should not be spending money fighting wars, when the money can be spent at home to make him look good.
8
It's interesting that NYT took Trump's decision to withdraw our troops from Syria as uniting the left and right in their condemnation of the decision, when what I saw was largely the opposite. I've seen more liberal journalists write the words "Trump is right" over the course of the past two days than over the course of the past two years. And I've seen a great deal of acceptance as well--acceptance that we can't change a group of people whose culture is so different from our own.
The withdrawal also cuts at something deeper than just the conflict in Syria. With a few extreme exceptions, poll after poll has shown that Americans of all demographics have been opposed to foreign military intervention, both today and throughout our history. Now, one could make the argument that our elected officials and military personnel understand the long-term effects of non-interventionism better than the average American civilian does, but at the same time, democracy is, at its core, about serving the people's interests. If the American people have made it clear time and again that they oppose foreign military conflict, than perhaps it is time for the government to listen.
20
@Autumn
"And I've seen a great deal of acceptance as well--acceptance that we can't change a group of people whose culture is so different from our own."
Just curious, is the "group of people" you're referencing the President's hardcore supporters?
6
@Autumn
The NYT has an agenda: Get rid of Trump at any cost.
5
@Brad Blumenstock
No, what I meant was that in many of the articles I've read over the past few days about the conflict in the Middle East, a number of journalists who support the decision have written about how hoping to change the political or social structure in various countries overseas is futile. As foreigners ourselves, we can't force other people to change.
1
Let those countries upset by the withdrawal of 2000 US troops replace them with their own troops and money. If not, why not?
16
Suddenly Neo-Cons are in. During the debates Trump put Jebb Bush in his place when he insisted his brother had “saved America.” In fact, aided by Democrats, GWB needlessly got us into war with Iraq. Democrats should be celebrating Trump’s recent actions, but, as usual, they prefer to be Neo-Con Lite. Knowing how opportunistic they are, they try to preserve deniability when the political climate starts to shift. Remember Hillary’s excuse, “We didn’t know it was a lie.” Own it, Democrats. Trump may be unconventional, but the contempt he shows for the establishment is well justified. What did they ever get right? The same goes for our traditional allies. The NYT has lately given in to nostalgia for post-WEII understandings and agreements with our allies, but they only look out for themselves. True to his campaign promises, Trump puts America first.
14
Aided by Democrats? Were you even an adult when the Iraq War started? Did you know that the only Congressperson to publicly stand up against starting that war was a Democrat?
5
@Edward
Trump puts America first and is MAGA? If there is even a whiff of truth in that claim, it is only in the very short term, not long-term. Let's see what you think if Iran and/or ISIS or Al Qaida gain control of parts or all of Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, etc. it seems so far away to you in remote HI, but when you factor in Iran's and the Syrian government's rather close relationship with nuclear North Korea, maybe not so much. I hear that ballistic missiles, that can carry any number of deadly things on board, have quite the range. It's not something I'd want to gamble on or see.
1
If he keeps withdrawing troops then we won't need that ridiculous military budget which about 40% gets wasted...right?
20
Yes its wasted!
3
@JML
Wrong.. The U.S. military maintains over 800 bases and installations in over 70 countries. Pull 2000 troops out of Syria, they'll just be moved to another base. The U.S. war machine will never run out of places to squander tax payer dollars.
2
Unrelated to the article, but related to the image. Are those military service members in the main image (Al Asa Air Base)? They look like a bunch of disorganized school children. Some of hats, some have fleece caps, and some have patrol caps worn like baseball caps. Some are in uniform and almost all have phones. What a hodgepodge. Thanks for your service.
2
Cheap Shot at those who serve us 24 /7
God bless you all serving our Country .Safe Home
Bill Connor
Ridgewood NJ
3
“This is not about a return to isolationism,” Mr. Bannon said. “It’s the pivot away from the humanitarian expeditionary mentality of the internationalists.”
Steve Bannon's meaningless word salad as he still tries to sound relevant.
23
trump would have a little more credibility if he pulled us out of Yemen at the same time.
Otherwise he is just a hypocrite who will do anything to protect the Saudi investors in his, and Kushner's, real estate properties.
14
Prior to Bush, Cheney & Rumsfeld's abominably stupid invasion of Iraq, I believe it was Hosni Mubarek who told them the result would be an entire middle east destabilized and in flames, other wars would ensue, refugee populace would be overwhelming and it would take decades to contain if ever. He was right. Enter ISIS.
Now trump in his infinite ignorance green lights Saudi, Turkey, UAE and others to join in the killing and destruction of innocents.
There is no good answer to the ongoing bloodshed and destruction. But for the US to leave the Kurds, the few good guys in this mess, subject to slaughter is criminal and beyond shameful. And people still ask "why do they hate us?".
19
" if the Taliban returned, it would haunt the Americans “that they were defeated by a ragtag force after 17 years of fighting them.”
So why does Vietnam and the rationale for staying there come to mind?
Sometimes ya gotta know when to hold'em and know when to fold'em...
USN 1967 - 71
Vietnam 1968
8
You state that "those who believe the United States should get out are not speaking up."
That is nonsense and I expect that from a main stream media (MSM) person. Many outside of the "main stream," from very smart individuals to non-mainstream media ('RT Nework, Jimmy Dore, Richard Wolff, etc.) have all spoken of the wisdom of getting out of Afghanistan and Syria. You finally bury in your article about 20 or 30 good reasons for also doing so.
You do not mention that the MSM have all gone along with an anti-trump pull-out and pretend it is due to the Method by Which he Did so.
No. You are just part of the MSM and you must go along with the MSM "narrative"what the "system," in Washington, which represents the military industrial complex. The MIC. In other words your newspaper is part of the propaganda machine for the MIC. As Noam Chomsky states it, you are "Manufacturing Consent" for the MIC. Putting out propaganda for the people to support the MIC. But at least I can thank you for burying about 30 reasons for getting out of Syria and Afghanistan in this article. WE NEED TO GET OUT! It has little to do with our security and deals mainly with supporting the MIC and the MSM.
12
Gee, I wonder why Vlad the Putin’s RT network favors this. Hilarious to see it called non-mainstream, though.
2
Didn't this fool denounce President Obama for announcing military maneuvers in advance? It alerts our enemies to our movements months in advance he said. He was a poker player, he said, a brilliant negotiator, he said. Now he tweets our withdrawal with all the subtlety of a bull horn at volume 11. We are not safe with him in charge at the White House and that would apply even if he were only in charge of the cafeteria at the White House.
16
Individual 1's decisions to withdraw from Syria and Afghanistan may be valid, but the way he has done things is so impetuous, wrong-headed, and precipitous that the content of his decision matters less than the process. Very few of us want a president who is so disruptive that you would rather have a bull in a china shop than the president. Chaos is not a good policy.
8
I despise our president for innumerable reasons, but as a pacifist I’m happy to see us withdrawing troops from these futile war games in far-flung foreign lands. This however is surely not the way to do it. There should be a measured withdrawal, carefully orchestrated among our military leaders and allies, not a sudden policy change in which our president unilaterally decides to suddenly pull troops after a phone conversation with the autocratic leader of Turkey.
249
@Dabney L The Kurds get hurt. I've seen enough of George Bush's wars.
6
@Dabney L
How exactly would you perform a "measured withdrawal" on the 2000 troops we had in Syria, ten at a time? A hundred?
How many would you need to withdraw so that the troops left behind would be safe? Which strategic locations of our troops, if vacated bit-by-bit, would you suggest we leave first? Or last?
If our own President can't withdraw our own troops "unilaterally", who might you suggest take on that job?
7
@JBC
The President is not supposed to get the U.S. into wars. I favor withdrawal from both countries (and Yemen, and Niger, and ...), but it should not be on a Presidential whim any more than entering a war should be. It should be thought through and planned.
9
Dear American Friends,
Bush II's decision to invade Iraq in 2003 set everything in motion for the mess that you and your allies have been trying to clean up there and in Syria ever since. Republican or Democrat it makes no difference, the policy of endless war continues. As for Afghanistan, Canada and most other allies in that venture packed up and went home in 2014 yet you have remained and created the longest war in your history.
I completely understand the concerns that Israel may be endangered and that Afghanistan may once again become a haven for terrorists to plot against you and the rest of us in the West. All the more reason for a thoughtful plan to extricate yourselves from these wonderful places. I could not care less who the president is that gets your men and women in uniform home but in this case Agent Orange is proceeding as usual, with no thought nor listening to anyone else's advice on how to do it without blowing everything up. Like almost everything Trump, there is something in here that makes sense but without careful consideration and planning you are inviting disaster.
God speed to you.
7
Liberals and Democrats who support endless war and imperialist interventions are NOT THE LEFT. Real leftists - socialists and left progressives - oppose war and US imperialism. Stop pretending we don't exist! We are anti-capitalism and anti-imperialism, which globally is deployed to uphold US capitalist and strategic military interest. It is not the Left that is behind such immoral policies. The Democratic party is not the left: it is a bourgeois centrist party - the establishment being slightly center right and overlapping with the Republicans on defense, foreign policy, trade, and immigration - with a small progressive fringe that lacks power.
I don't care what Trump's reasons are for withdrawing troops, the effects will be good. It will mean less violence in the middle east with the US out of the equation, and less blood on our hands. The US has been using ISIS as an excuse for its presence there for too long and it's nonsense. The real objective has been domination of the region - its resources, oil, mineral wealth in Afghanistan , regime change in Syria- to prevent a realignment of regional power, and to maintain Israel and the Saudi government. Enough of that already.
Turkey, Russia, and the Syrian government in Syria will take care of ISIS. In Afghanistan and Iraq, the US has already lost, and at an enormous expense of human life and treasure. Remember when liberals were antiwar? This is a disgrace.
14
Speaking as a real leftist, myself, I can’t help wondering why any type of leftist at all would find putin’s capitalism and colonialism just ginger-peachey.
1
@Robert you are making this about Putin when it's not. We are not living in Russia, he is not our president. We are responsible for US policy, not Russia's. If we lived there, then it would be on us to oppose his imperialist and military interventions, or encourage his abstentions and withdrawals. Let's face it, there are plenty of brutal leaders in various countries on this earth, far more brutal than Putin and with poorer populations and more suffering. If you believe that it is the responsibility of the US to intervene militarily or control the fates of small nations to keep other power rivals from dominating them, then you are not a leftist but an imperialist. Sorry.
I Would love to see the New York Times and other news organizations deliver the facts and just the facts, not their opinions about the news. Who really knows what to believe when reporters now use the news as an opportunity to spread their opinion about the news? This is not right whether it is a view you do or do not support, it should be up to the public to form their own opinion, not have the media shove theirs down your throat. I'm totally embarrassed and ashamed for what the NYT and many, many other news outlets have become. If we look at history, we see many times when the media has been used as a propaganda machine, there seems to be a very blurred line between truth and opinion these days and what happens when no one knows the difference? How do we know we aren't all being brainwashed every time we read the news?
14
At the upper left hand corner, it clearly says "News Analysis". If you didn't want News Analysis...then move to the front page news. No one is "shoving down your throat" anything...you chose to read it. Calm down and move on!
2
If you don’t like what you are reading, cancel your subscription. There is no point in getting angry reading someone else’s differing viewpoint.
1
@Robyn
Oh, we know Robyn. And we are not fooled. As the credibility of the MSM asymptotically approaches zero, everyone has noticed, left, right, and center. What is surprising, though, is that the self-delusion, self-regard, self-congratulations, and self-righteousness never abate, much less self-correct.
1
"unite the left and right against a plan to extract the United States from two long, costly and increasingly futile conflicts."
You're assuming facts not in evidence - he HAS no plan. That's the problem.
Most, at least I presume most, want out, but only a fool would think that saying that makes it so. Which explains why trump said it, I guess.
1
Trump has the foreign policy "thought" process of an 11 year old. First exhibited with his comment: "If we have nukes why can't we use them?"
4
Oh please. The right and the left united against Trump? So what? Who's going to stop him? Congress? We might as well not have one. What a joke. Trump just does whatever he wants, and nobody stops him. He is taking over every aspect of government. Based on nothing but whims and the demands of the base. Thirty-five percent of voters control the other sixty-five percent and everyone seems to be just fine with that.
7
I recently returned from my home town of Bury Lancashire in England. I visited with my cousin who's father was in the Army, the Lancashire Fusiliers headquarters in this Lancashire town. There are memorials to the men who died in Afghanistan and Iraq, part of the forces coalition who died for their countries and beliefs in the politics of the day. You may not agree with the politics of the day but you may not call those who died at their post "suckers" and if you do you should be shot!
5
hold onto your hats, because I am coming to the defense of President Trump. from the article and from the quote, it's pretty clear that he did not mean individuals in our military are suckers; he was reiterating his crowd-pleaser about NATO and our other allies, that they have been playing the USA for suckers by using us as Hessians and by not ponying up their "fair share" of money in our mutual defense pacts. the way he means it, it's about money because that's how he sees the world. so, ok, it's a half-hearted defense of Trump but still more than he deserves.
@ABC
baffling to see how one can be so trigger happy! shot for what?
moreover Our US troops are all volunteers, and I suspect the British are too. they enlisted and were shot in an unjust and illegal war that left the ME in shambles, our treasury bankrupt, and the Arms makers and dealers rich!!
Yes, “ …the proper limits of America’s role as a global guarantor of security.”
The US has added some six trillion to the debt with its military adventures since 2001 and wrecked whole countries, created more terrorists, been responsible for the deaths of thousands, and for millions of refugees destabilizing Europe, and making the US less safe and the world less stable.
The US worship of military adventures is insane.
President Carter’s national security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski joked on PBS Charlie Rose that he enticed the Soviets into Afghanistan to give them their Vietnam. Ha! The US funded and armed bin Laden and it went downhill from there… or into the pockets of the military industrial complex.
Yes, get all the troops out of Syria and Afghanistan.
70,000 US citizens were killed on 2017 from opioids, not terrorists.
5
The Middle East a quagmire for the US, but to present the withdrawal as a way to not be a "sucker" anymore misses a key point: The US is vullnerable precisely because of who she is. Getting out of Syria without a plan will not make Americans safer or less of a target. Withdraw? Probably. But with a plan and with logic. Rather than some thought bubble to deflect attention.
4
Pulling out of Syria and Afganistan is distracting me from the Mueller investigation.
6
If you like it or not America has a leading role on this planet the question is how not if you address this role.
3
What were we in Syria for in the first place. If it was to topple Assad then it is a failure. If it was to defeat a radical Islamic State then it is a success. If it was to eliminate terrorism it was mission impossible.
Trump pulling out is the right decision. The way he did it was foolish and disruptive.
4
The lesson of the war in Vietnam was that the best decision the US ever made there — despite dire predictions if it did so— was to just holster its military industrial messiah complex and go home.
The lesson of The War About Nothing in Iraq is that the military industrial messiah complex is hallucinatory and can’t be trusted.
It’s time to permanently holster America’s military industrial messiah complex before it does any more damage.
10
I wonder if Trump took out his Magic-8-Ball in order to show the troops how he makes the foreign policy decisions that will affect whether or not they live or die? Now that would be something!
1
Trump’s smile looks exactly like The Grinch. So creepy. How can our poor troops be comforted by such a man?
1
Trump makes a decision not after careful thought and discussion with the people he needs to make it happen but upon impulse. Then there is a big brouhaha. No surprise. Either he’s playing the clown to distract the news from all the serious things that scare him or he’s just being a clown for real. It does not matter. His behavior is confusing and incoherent which makes all the people working for him or under his authority look like keystone cops from the silent era comedies, and none of them see the necessity for it. He’s clever enough to keep himself from any consequences that he wants to avoid but he clearly cares not about how his behavior affects those for who he is responsible.
Even a broken clock is on time twice a day. Such is the nature of Trump in these matters. Long ago, in a galaxy far far away Obama “pledged” to end the occupation of Afghanistan. Someone talked him out of it! Obama promised to close Gitmo. No go. JFK refused air cover for invading Cuba. It cost him. Nixon ended the Vietnam war “with dignity” (sort of), and the dominoes didn’t start falling! Just because war mongers say you can’t doesn’t matter you should. Unless there will be wholesale mutiny (expect “impeachment sabre rattling to ramp up), the families of soldiers who weren’t asked to make the ultimate sacrifice will be pleased and relieved. As far as Raytheon et. al. is concerned; not so much!
4
Endless deployments of the Israeli Foreign Legion in the Middle East are only destabilizing the region, creating more enemies and bankrupting the country.
5
Trump is itching for a war with China.
Why are we continuously electing Presidents who send troops all over the planet in the name of
‘American Interests’?
Time to come clean and explain exactly what US interests are in every single country on the planet as a service for newly eligible voters and the generations above and below them. They’re still
chewing on American Mythology
and the primary and secondary versions of American History they were taught in school, while trying to square it with the boots on the ground they’ve seen on their screens.
Start close to home with Central and South America...end with Africa. So much money is poured into the Middle East for weapons,
and so little ends up building an Economy in Africa. The US has long abdicated that role, and now China is filling that need from Africa to South America.
Is that what makes the US grumpy? Always talking up development and democracy while China races around with the development part.
Somewhere in the mix, explain the over large role of the US Military- Industrial Complex in the US economy.
How else to explain where the bread and butter, I mean, weapons sales revenue, will come from if he pulls out of the Middle East?
The Lyin’ GOP can’t govern and the Dems tell half truths, so be worried.
Elect a US government that will bring education,
transportation, and health care up to First World Standards, and find another way to earn a living. We can not wait for China to bail us out on those 3 fronts.
1
@BBB USA has no interests in every single country in the world other than to make money there, and the quickest way to do that is through the Military/Industrial Complex. You’re dreaming if you think education, transportation, and most of all healthcare will ever replace that under TPubs/Trumpkins. But under Bernie & Co....
If, after 15 and 17 years of having your military occupy a country, you still have to make "surprise visits", you have already lost and you just don't know it yet.
We have no business being in Syria, Afghanistan or Iraq. Our military interventions have only made matters worse. There was no ISIS until we invaded.
This arrogant, delusional concept that we, the US, can always fix a country if we bomb it enough is pure American-can-do attitude run amok.
When we bomb these countries we inevitably kill innocent civilians and create more terrorists than we kill. To just keep killing Muslims and hoping things will work out is not a strategy, it's a dangerous fantasy.
We should get out of all these countries and their respective civil wars. The fact that we have been there for so long with no progress should be a lesson to us.
For the record, I have traveled to Iraq (during Saddam), Afghanistan, Iran, Lebanon and several other Muslim countries.
I have seen for myself how the military and our government always have these wildly optimistic and totally unrealistic assessments of what hey have accomplished and how close we are to "winning".
It's all nonsense. For example, when I went to Afghanistan in the Fall of 2009 the media, government and military all said great progress was being made and that there were some Taliban strongholds in the southern part of the country but the north was generally secured.
I narrowly missed three separate car bombs in the north while there.
203
@Barry Misenheimer Agree with you. I just rewatched Brad Pitt's War Machine. It's practically a documentary.
10
@Barry Misenheimer "If, after 15 and 17 years of having your military occupy a country, you still have to make "surprise visits", you have already lost and you just don't know it yet."
The Guardian reported today that this is indeed the case. Trump managed not only to unite the right and left in the US, but also in Iraq where they just voted that the US president's surprise visit is a violation of their sovereignty and will now demand that US troops leave Iraq. It's kind of about time.
I fear the world is becoming a very dangerous place and these moves may be setting us up for WWIII.
But, on the other hand, maybe it is setting us up for a post-US interference world, and a chance for the Middle East to fix itself after too many years of US meddling. Why should we suppose the US is capable of bringing stability to a region when - after 17 years - they seem to have only brought chaos.
18
@Barry Misenheimer The U.S. is a military industrial complex. It’s all about the money. President Eisenhower warned the nation way back in the 50’s that the country needed to beware of our country turning into a war machine. We sell arms to other countries. U.S. corporations are making a killing off of selling arms to other countries. The lower economic classes of the U.S. have their sons and daughters trained to use armaments, then get shipped overseas to use those armaments to kill sons and daughters of other nations. The corporations through Citizens United and PACs then make massive “donations” to our Congressmen and women to keep wars going around the world so that the military industrial complex billionnaires can keep their money machine churning. Money. It’s all about the money.
17
Were the troops ordered to attend this, or were there really 47 soldiers in the American Armed Forces who wanted to hear this man speak?
I can just hear Trump now. Telling story about scoring hot models on some yacht. The same story he told the Boy Scouts of America last year.
Or maybe he was talking about his bone spurs? And how because his father was rich, he's never had to do the kinds of things these soldiers are having to do. Like serving their country. Or making sacrifices. Or caring about one another. Or having emotional and intellectual discipline.
Perhaps a short lecture on how wonderful it's been to never have any responsibility to anyone, or anything.
Or maybe, just maybe, he's telling them all about how he, singularly, knows more about the military than anyone, because he spent a year at an academy for spoiled, petulant, self-absorbed brats 60 years ago...
The possibilities are almost endless. The only possibility that isn't possible, is that he's actually doing some good there. Or that he gives two cents for these people or what they're actually doing.
4
It may have united the left and the right against it but unfortunately not much is made of the countries that are happy about it, all of which the grifter in chief has ties to.
That Russia and Turkey, who can now go after the Kurds with immunity, are happy is well known.
But this is also a boon for Saudi Arabia now that Turkey seems to be stalling on the investigation of Khasoggi murder after the phone call.
It seems US Interests are of little concern to this President and if they are of a concern to the Vichy GOP, who are propping up this charade even though they all know he is unfit, they don't seem to show it.
2
No surprise that they unite; so are they most of the time despite their constant bickering which half of the times is just for show.
Essentially, in this country, the "left" and "right" that we have; Democrats and Republicans, are identical in almost everything that matters: They are both very for unrestricted Capitalism, pro rich, pro military expansion and over-reaching, and share the same concepts of foreign policy, including the preferred bogeymen:"Round up the usual suspects".
They only differ in fringe issues like birth control, gay rights, etc.
Trump is right in Syria. It a shame that the Kurds are abandoned but actually the best solution for the Kurds is to work out a quasi federal status in Syria - with Assad or his successor. This break may help them out of the blind alley they are.
Only a strong Syria can protect the Kurds in Syria.
1
Since when is ending wars a bad thing? 18 years in Afghanistan is to much.
6
This article could not be more off base. Thank you President Trump for beginning to remove the US from poisonous foreign adventures that are much better handled by countries in the region. The Times could not be more wrong - really, do we need to be reminded of Viet Nam, Iraq, Libya and Syria? The Times needs to wake up to the propaganda that it promotes and that blinds it to the horrific role the US has played with foreign misadventures like Syria and Afghanistan. Whatever you think of Trump, his willingness to buck the deep state and the mainstream media is blessing.
12
Remember when wars all about killing the enemy until they surrendered? Neither do I. I read about them, though. It seemed to be more effective...
It's not the what, it's the how. A thoughtful discussion that covered national interests and the interests of our allies is what we needed, not another proclamation by Trump's Twitter account (can no one rig up a dummy account for him so his tweets just disappear into the ether?). Perhaps now is a good time to withdraw, but how it's done should be made with rational insight.
I have a son in the military, and I am beyond concerned about what will happen with the lunatic sitting in the White House. I shudder at watching Trump treat the military as a political prop, and have no doubt he'd throw his own kids into the fray to save his own skin. Knowing he's unwilling and unable to seek counsel before making these large policy decisions is terrifying. I don't want anyone's son or daughter, husband or wife, put into harm's way needlessly, but I don't have the confidence in Trump to provide any measure of safety or sanity for our military or the country. Strike that -- the world.
3
Left and right are uniting against Trump because he's revealed himself to be an agent of Russia.
Wasn't this the guy who, during the campaign, said he didn't like tipping his hand about what he would do militarily? POTUS: consider it tipped.
The NYT says the left and right are united against the withdrawal and then proceeds to quote a lot of politicians and military who say that withdrawal is the best option. Very confusing. Most commenters also feel withdrawal is the best option.
Open-ended policing of the world is extremely costly and benefits only the military-industrial complex, the neo-cons and the neo-liberals who run the Democrat and Republican parties. Wake up, people. Stop supporting these parties who are draining your pockets to benefit the elites and the military.
4
What do Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria have in common? Civil wars and broken societies. What else? Foreign military interventions. Draw your own conclusions.
3
Trump lied about the troops’ salary in such a way that he wasn’t even close to reality.
1
"President Trump managed to do something remarkable with his abrupt order last week to withdraw all American troops from Syria and half from Afghanistan: unite the left and right against a plan to extract the United States from two long, costly and increasingly futile conflicts."
No, actually real liberals think removing US troops from Syria (there completely illegally) think the removal a good idea.
No real liberal ever supported that illegal war, or the illegal ( still) war from which that occupation of north east Syria sprang, the Iraq invasion of 2003.
And no, liberals never backed a 17 year long occupation of Iraq. Even if one accepts the official Sept 2001 story, there is no reason for the US to be there 17+ years later. (Oh, and Afghanistan was at peace by the summer of 2002. The US occupiers chose to go hunting the Taliban.)
Mattis, of Fallujah infamy? Why would someone trust him?
1
"President Trump managed to do something remarkable ... unite the left and right against a plan ..."
With Syria, Trump managed to find the worst of all possible solutions: a feckless, chaotic, hasty, rabidly partisan withdrawal that greatly empowers our adversaries Russia, Iran and ISIS. Moreover he is taking the nation back to the isolationism that brought us WWII.
This is typical Trump. His "better and cheaper health care for everybody" means $500 higher health insurance premiums. His "tax cut" didn't cut taxes for middle and working class Americans at all. His trade and tariff chaos is singlehandedly decimating President Obama's economy.
1
An idiotic move. Trump is dangerous; but never more so than when he is doing anything which involves foreign affairs; especially our military deployment (or not). Millions of Syrians are roaming Europe,; trying to find a home. The lucky ones make it to an internment camp which gives them the basics: food, clothing & shelter. If they are extremely fortunate, they have access to medical treatment by people and organizations like Doctors Beyond Borders, The Red Cross, The United Way, etc. Hundreds of thousands (more likely millions) of civilians, including women & children, have already been killed by collateral damage or worse, on purpose. What has been done to Syria is horrific. Most of the country is a wasteland.
3
How young!...and their expressions?..........their hopes?!
The Donny wearing ANY form of active military attire / uniform is an UTTER DISGRACE, his multiple-time draft dodging as a pure coward is very well documented ....as an honorable United States Air Force veteran myself, he should not be allowed on any US military base, installation or site !!!
We have no legitimate business being in Syria, Iraq, or Afghanistan, and the only beneficiaries are the military contractors, weapons suppliers, Israel and Saudi Arabia-----no legitimate US national security interests have been served by our continuing presence in these countries.. Sometimes this ignorant village clown does the right thing for all the wrong reasons and in the most clumsy way possible.
3
I'm not sure why any reputable newspaper is giving white space to Steve Bannon. However, his defense sounds remarkably like Obama's international policy. End wars in the Middle East. Pivot to China. Doesn't this sound familiar? Bannon is totally stealing lines from the Obama playbook to run cover for Trump's complete international disaster.
By the way, Obama never could end the wars without jeopardizing geopolitical stability, sacrificing allies, and ultimately endangering the American public. Hence, the wars never ended. That's not really a neoconservative argument. That's a sober recognition of fact. However, given the facts, Obama was still able to organize the TPP which would have constrained China without sacrificing US interests in the Middle East. What happened to that pivot Bannon?
Again, the news media shouldn't even give the man space to breath. He belongs on Pluto without a spacesuit.
1
Fake news! We all support getting out of Syria and Afghanistan. Trump 2020.
This piece is war propaganda. Many on the left and right support the end of these wars
6
Those, like the NYTimes, who want to stay in Syria and Afghanistan have fallen prey to the illogic of the "sunk cost fallacy."
3
Amazing, the serial draft-dodging cowardly Orangatan had the cheek to appear before real soldiers near a war zone. I note that there was a wall protecting the lizard in chief from the troops.
Thanks to all the suckers protecting freedom.
Just how long have we been suckers?
War Against Terror? began 2001, 12th September, ongoing
Afghanistan War (Part of the War Against Terror)? 2001, 7th October to 2015, 13th March.
Iraq War? 2003, 20th March to 2011, 11th December.
The war against ISIS?
The war in northwest Pakistan?
The war in Libya?
The war in Nigeria?
The war in Yemen (as weapons supplier).
WAIT! HOLD THE PRESSES!!! I KNOW!! It just occurred to me.
We have been suckers since:
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2016 through today.
Impeach, convict, toss. Then, indict, try, convict and punish.
Trump is an evil man with Putin as his ally. He means to destroy the American army—the world’s best. A devil incarnate who despises American democracy.
1
After L.E:
What can be done when Donny just won't read
Either briefing report, fortune cookie or screed?
The world is his oytstah
So we have no other choicetah:
But hide in the closet and weep 'til we bleed
2
What's annoying about the NYT and the corporate media in general is their continual misuse of the term "the left". It's clear from their reporting that the lamestream media wouldn't recognize "the left" if it kicked them in the caboose.
Instead, they've adopted the FAUX News channel's standard that the Democratic Party - or anyone more liberal than Genghis Khan - represents "the left". What bunk.
For decades the Democratic Party has been run by people - the Clintons, etc - infected with the same warmongering interventionist impulse that plagues the neocons, and they share the responsibility for the lives lost and the treasure wasted in our various MidEast boondoggles. But they ain't "the left".
3
Quit trying to ex post facto justify the knee jerk actions of a middle school dropout that is illiterate. We are now quite alone in the world, thanks to Trump - and our word is rubbish.
Why oh why are we hearing from Steve Bannon again? His form of intellectualized double talk has been found out already.
1
"It's the pivot away from the humanitarian expeditionary mentality of the internationalists." Whatever that means, the NYT is quoting Steve Bannon! Why? Or may it's a conundrum of obfuscation with the scintilla of potentiality to constitutionalize irascibility.
Sad, so say to think those eager faces in uniform have such a fool as commander in chief.
2
Putin’s puppet “President,” Donald Trump, has made “suckers” of all Americans. And keeping this Russian mole in office makes us abettors of treason as well.
Erdogan in Turkey agrees to tone down and then tune out his previously ceaseless condemnation of the Saudis for their embassy murder of the American national WaPo columnist. (Chalk one for the Saudis.) In exchange, Trump withdraws U.S. forces from Syria, winking to Erdogan that Turkey is now free to raise its hell-game in Syria. (Chalk one for the Turks.) Simultaneously, Trump hits the trifecta,ceding what's left to cede in Syria, to the Russians. (Chalk one for Putin.)
Let me get this straight, liberals have become Neo-Cons. The NYTimes will soon be publishing an op-ed by Dick Cheney, titled "Why We Should Fight Wars in the Middle East." Oh the irony.
1
Good. Now that all that cash money will be freed up maybe we can afford Medicare for all and free public college tuition to all who meet the requirements.
1
It has never really made sense to associate Trump fans with the "left" or the "right". If Trump woke up one morning and decided to nationalize all businesses, ban all religion and redistribute all of America's wealth equally, Trump fans would cheer him on. If he decided to abolish the Republic, crown himself as a monarch and declare the Old Testament to be our new Constitution, his fans would just keep on worshiping him. Whatever Trump's gut says on any particular day, that's where Trump fans sit on the political spectrum. Every single one of them demanded war against North Korea until the day Trump decided to be friends with Kim. Now they all suddenly think they're John Lennon, singing songs of peace with flowers in their hair. Do Trump fans want war with Iran? Ask on a Tuesday and the answer is a resounding yes, ask on a Wednesday and they demand complete American military withdrawal from all foreign countries. And despite Trump's repeated, urgent insistence that his "wall" needs to be a thirty-foot-high mass of solid concrete, if he decides on any given day that it should be a knee-high white picket fence then that's somehow what his fans have been demanding all along. That's what you get when you embrace a philosophy that has no values, no principles and no ideals. There is no objective other than "winning". And as long as you can move the goalposts whenever and wherever you like, you can always "win". Even when you lose.
9
All Mr. Trump need do is have his family podiatrist certify everyone as having heel spurs just like his father did for him. If it was the right thing for him it's the right thing for us too.
Or, is Mr. Trump just deserting those who fought with us to stop terrorism? My guess is that Mr. Trump is betraying them just as he betrayed America in 1968. I'm as anti-war and as anyone can be, but I am also anti-traitor and Mr. Trump's unilateral decision to abandon people who the country made a commitment to and it is morally wrong to betray those who have been sacrificing their lives simply because they believed America was good to its word. Countries may make excuses for their bad decisions, but there is no excuse for breaking a promise other than defeat.
3
@Max & Max
Couldn't the families of all the people in the service get their podiatrists to Tweet the Pentagon and bring everybody home in time for prime time impeachment? Gosh, if I were Putin I'd have been on that since yesterday. How do we know for sure Trump's Tweets aren't really the enemy's disinformation attacks? Who can't totally believe those Tweets are either fake or by a fake? Faking heel spurs? Betraying our commitments? No, it can't be true in America, can it, Mr. Putin?
I have been a registered Democrat, Republican and Independent. When Trump goes overseas and uses the military as a stage for a political rally, he is abusing his office and neglecting his duty. He represents every American and should act like it. Instead he gets on his podium and rails against the Democrats as if they are an enemy of America. And he doesn't even give a thought that maybe, just maybe, some of the military persons in the audience are registered to a party besides Republicans. The point is, at every opportunity, Trump purposely divides this great nation of ours. It is disgraceful.
471
@Dan
Even worse if some of the military personnel are Republicans (as many are) and they are encouraged by Trump to think they should have a political role (other than voting).
9
@Dan So when Obama did it everything was fine??? You hate the president, that is the bottom line.
@vulcanalex
And, of course, you loved Obama...right?
2
The Afghan and Syrian situations remind me of the early days of Vietnam: we need to be there to fight the powers behind the armies on the ground; if we don’t win there, our enemies will see us as weak and take over other countries (domino effect); then comes the inevitable logic - we need to have enough forces in play there to assure that either we win or our opponents don’t win - leading to escalation beyond anything we can call back until too many body bags come home and domestics politics becomes untenable. Btw, if the Kurds are such important allies, then let’s find a way (“Wilson’s War” kind of way), to keep them well supplied. If the generals couldn’t go along and support the President, then they deserve having the final decision just handed to them to carry out.
1
@Michael Lindsay
Wilson's war led to 9/11, derailing democracy in Pakistan and perpetual instability in Afghanistan. Let us not inflict such wrongful means on destinies of other people.
The rhetorical questions are: 1) if he campaigned on a pullout all along, why did he got advisors who felt the opposite? 2) if he felt this way all along why he couldn’t find the words to explain it ? 3) if he is such a deal maker why he couldn’t make a deal on the way out. 4) why he couldn’t present this with Pompeo, Bolton, and a few senators? Does everyone else really want to stay longer in the Middle East? And on and on. The general direction may be right (I’m not sure) but everything around it is poorly thought out and poorly laid out as well. Yet, better less war than more war.
1
A remarkable about face for many of the same voices on the left and right who just prior to Trump announcing the abrupt Syrian and Afghan pullouts, were demanding the Senate act to force Trump to pull the troops out of Syria and Afghanistan. It supports Trump's refrain that if he wants it, the Democrats, and mainline Republicans, don't, whether it's The Wall or a troop pullout. Politics has become a middle school feud.
1
He probably withdrew for all the wrong reasons such as catering to Endogen or Putin or both, but anything the US withdraws from a foreign country it is good. No matter if it is Republican or Democratic president with the most experienced of advisors and the most extensive planning death and mayhem follow US invasions. From Afghanistan to Yemen hundreds of thousands have died directly or indirectly US military. In the case of Yemen more may have died indirectly due to the breakdown of the economy and infrastructure.
4
The establishment groupthink is that endless wars in places like Afghanistan somehow promote national security. The opposite has to be true. The oversize influence of the military industrial complex is at work here. There is too much to gain from these endless conflicts for that very powerful special interest. Ike warned us about this in his farewell address. Trump is right and courageous to withdraw.
5
Curious about the 10% raise that Trump promised the troops - will he be held accountable to that? Can they demand 10% now?
1
@Stefan
This guy collects Pinocchios like clothes dryers collect lint. Trump lied (no surprise there) to the troops about the 10%. The military have been getting incremental pay raises for the last decade, even during the Recession:
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-lies-military-pay-raise-iraq_us_5c2441a0e4b0407e907fbc2b
1
If we are worried about the Kurds, give them the means to defend themselves - anti-aircraft and anti-tank weapons. If that happens, it would be a man to man fight for the Turks, Russians, and Assad against the Kurds. The Kurds would win that war.
3
As mentioned in your article, President Obama has the same reservations about both conflicts; however he was excoriated about "telegraphing" his plan to withdraw - especially by John McCain. As Obama tried convey, unsuccessfully, both conflicts are tribal in nature. We cannot win...
4
I am firmly in the left. The one policy of Trump’s of which I approve, and as does most of the serious left, is the ending of the postwar consensus, however awkwardly and poorly executed. With a lot of emphasis on the awkward and poorly executed.
We're been in this "war" for so long, a father and a son (or daughter) could have both fought in the same conflict.
..but why let that stop us?!
Let's go for the Holy Trinity and see if we can get our grandkids to fight in Afghanistan too! Great, character building, totally worth the billions we spend! They'll love it.
1
Bringing back troops from a war that has long lost its purpose is a good move by the US, the superpower that actually loves being the ‘world’s policeman’.
Let not this superpower delude itself that it goes to/invests/sends troops/gives economic aid to other countries out of some altruistic sense of ‘humanitarian expeditionary internationalism’. It does so only to sustain its economic and geo-political interests as the only superpower left (for now) on the planet.
So the real question is: Why does President Trump want to withdraw from Syria and Afghanistan at this point in time?
To cede the playground to Russia?
It’s not the withdrawal that is in question, but the motive.
1
The knowing critical and astute faces of the troops (held behind a concrete barrier) gives me faith in the US military.
Trump is not their Commander in Chief.
1
Keeping our soldiers out of harms way is a sound idea when there is no real threat to lives of our citizens, or our way of life in a democracy.
When it comes to protecting economic and geopolitical interests, diplomacy and terms of trade are the only right means available.
1
There are a lot of people who think that if one avoids troublesome people one will never be troubled by them. Therefore if the U.S. would leave all others alone, they will leave the U.S. alone. Then they explain foreign affairs as simply trying to promote capitalism in the service of big corporations or as the work of fanatics trying to create one world government in the service of some half baked ideology. Anything to delegitimize foreign relations.
It’s just the result of misunderstanding how international relations have worked going back all the way in written history. There are no forces at work except those that human social behavior produces, nothing to prevent people from cooperating to accomplish things nor to kill one another to acquire what they covet. We must confront disorder which leads to war and acts of terrorism because of the effects, not because we are projecting power to force people to submit to our will.
1
Trump makes these decisions if he has a clear mandate, which he does not. By not winning the popular vote and Russian interference being involved to allow him to "thread the needle" to win the electoral college, I sure don't think any of these long-term, consequential decisions (such as the Supreme Court) should be occurring at all until we know definitely if Trump and his family is beholden to Russia and is operating as agent of Putin's geopolitical agenda.
2
I am in the uneasy position of agreeing with Trump about something for the first time. I, too, want these undeclared, open-ended, unwinnable involvements in the civil wars of other countries to end. The fact that no one on the left is joining this effort to end our participation in wars that have no clear objective other than providing a profit center for the military industrial complex just reminds me why I have such a hard time voting for Democrats. Not even Bernie was anti-war for goodness sakes. I will continue to vote against Trump, because everything else he does is borderline evil, but I don't get why the left isn't strongly anti-war.
1
There needs to be ongoing concerted debate and thoughtful consideration of our military and foreign policy objectives in the Middle East, and Trump's greatest mistake in how he is dealing with our military disengagement is not so much what he is doing but how he is going about it. If there is one thing we should have learned from the Russians it would have been any type of military victory there was impossible and for reasons to numerous to recount, we should have been out of there yesterday. Syria is perhaps less complicated because we have zero possibility of realizing any substantivemilitary or political gain there but it does seem morally and ethically reprehensible to turn out backs on the Kurds, trusted allies who have stood by us while other Middle Eastern countries turned and ran. At the very least Trump might use some type of leverage with his good friend Erdogan to leave the Kurds alone as they pose little threat to the Turks. So, overall it is Trump's failing here that he does what he does without listening to sage advisors who have forgotten more in the last five minutes than he ever knew in his lifetime, and in this regard it is yet one more time that his reckless, unilateral decisions designed to placate a mindless base place people's lives here and abroad in jeopardy.
3
We excel at the blame game in America. We have worked hard at blaming past Presidents for our involvement in these wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as for our challenges with Iran. We blame Bush and to some degree Obama for the rise of ISIS. But the overwhelming sentiment from both sides has been our inability in this part of the world to succeed in nation building. Or the correctness of trying to export democracy and build stability there. I find a lot not to like about Trump. But have a national debate about what we should do? We can't agree on whether the sun is shining in Washington. Consult our allies? To what end? We owed them notice of our decision before making it public. If we didn't that was wrong.
1
I think Trump, in his thoroughly moribund and pickled way of thinking, actually meant to pull all of the troops out of Afghanistan and said Syria instead. Same same. I doubt he could point to both countries on a map, let alone come up with a coherent or meaningful strategy for exit.
On this one, Trump is correct. For far too long we’ve wasted young blood and Trillions of money chasing the illusion that we could make a lasting difference in both Afghanistan and Syria. Congress has ignored its responsibility for oversight, because we have a strictly volunteer military made up of only 1 percent of the population.
5
If the President really wanted to unite the country, and make a huge statement, plus take all of our minds off border walls and government shut downs, he might as well double down and announce Iraq troop withdrawls.
Oh, wait a minute. Iraqi MPs are already discussing removal of US forces in their country due to his surprise visit. Apparently, our government doesn't quite understand diplomatic protocols, so we now have Iraqis upset with us also.
1
The expert know-better class continues to over-estimate their ability to predict and control events, to treat their lessors as if they have no agency and can be managed, and to keep doing what hasn’t worked for us for decades. “Left” or “right”, it is the same expert class, the same hubris, the same elites who have forgotten who owns America and what it exist for.
No nation building. No “stabilization”, at least not in the Middle East. No more ever again. In that region, the enemy of my enemy is not my friend, but just another enemy waiting for a better day to put the knife in.
Just kill our enemies, break their stuff, and then leave. That is all the people supported in attacking ISIS.
The headline I prefer would declare “Trump Unites the Left and Right in Effort to Secure His Ouster.” DThe subject of the article—members of Congress and Senate working in a bipartisan way to relieve the country of the most destabilizing president in our history.
While I believe there are valid reasons to wind down our involvement, particularly in Afganistan, I worry about the safety of our military when the CIC lacks any understanding of how to proceed and sees no need for guidance from experts with experience in warfare. Everything he touches seems to end up damaged.
1
Let's get out of Japan. South Korea. The Philippines.
Let's not support Taiwan. Let's quite the UN. Let's get out of NATO. Let's abandon free trade. Leadership has led to global prosperity including our own. Troops staying in Afghanistan prevent the Taliban from harboring enemies bent on destroying the West. Staying in Syria keeps Iran and Russia at bay. Thwarts enemies who want to destroy our democratic elections and destroy Israel. Freedom and prosperity require troops on the ground. Grow up and get used to it. Far cheaper in the long run.
2
Headline is not correct. Trump unites the right and Liberals. The true Left has had enough of endless war and the cost of lives and treasure that only serves the elite.
1
People keep talking about U.S. interests. I suppose they are talking about oil and pipelines and such. With the coming transition to renewable energy, and the onslaught of global warming, there is even less reason to have interest in the middle east and Afghanistan. The only interest is for the pockets of the oil barons. Enough already. The problem with Trump is that he has no idea what he is doing. In this case, maybe it's a good thing. I only feel sorry for the Kurds and the women and school children of Afghanistan, but that's not why we went over there. The reason was for vengeance, to kill Osama bin Laden, who we once supported and is now dead.
I can't stand Trump, but he is right about withdrawing US troops from foreign lands.
4
Liberal interventionists from the centrist Obama administration are not "The Left." Nor are the current Democrats who will swing behind anything they see as damaging Trump, despite it's rightness for peace. The left around the world is applauding the removal of the US from the region, as it, as much as anyone is responsible for the catastrophes there, and has remained a pointless burr under the saddle. The point of this article is somewhere between specious and "huh?".
5
Hmm, but he also unites some of them.
He mentioned the US not being recognized enough about its activities in Syria as one reason for his decision. I thought it then, I still think he meant himself. Presidential decisions regarding the military and international relationships being prompted by his big ego does not bode well for anyone.
I'm sure he's heard of NK's Kim Jong-Un's private 'pleasure squad.' He must have been looking forward to it, and if he had been an iron-fisted dictator of some third-world country, he would be swimming in the pleasure. Too bad he's President of the US. And he knows it, too.
As a person of liberal persuasion I find the clatter against Trump here dubious. Flawed as his process is I cannot think prolonged deployment in these theatres has much hope of “success”. The unintended consequences of either staying or withdrawing are both equally unknowable, we make no friends killing people there and our adversaries know they can wait us out however long we might be there. Shades of Vietnam.
3
It now appears that the Iraqi parliament will convene a special session to demand the withdrawal of American troops.
If so, what should Trump do?
Pull them, or keep them there against the wishes of the democratically-elected leaders of Iraq.
I know the neocon answer. I’m afraid to know the liberal interventionists’ answer.
1
Some chutzpah may be needed to take on the military industrial complex. Does it REALLY matter who gets this monumental job accomplished? Even 9/11 was not a threat to our security as a nation. We are the solitary superpower with a budget that exceeds that of the next 15 biggest militaries, at about 600 billion (not including military entitlements). Life expectancy is declining for much of the country. The military is the most viable career pathway for much of the country. Military veterans who had enlisted (as opposed to being drafted) tend to be very conservative, e.g. strong NRA supporters. IMO, we need a much smaller and redefined military that includes two year, mandatory conscription (male and female) that offers national and social service options, like National Guard, AmeriCorps, and care for the elderly. Savings from a smaller military budget should go into trade/professional school education and apprenticeship programs.
172
@carl bumba
With the exception of Bernie Sanders, no candidate mentioned much about Campaign Finance Reform.
And it is lost on the Stupid American Voters who worry about all manner of other things, like who can use which bathrooms. The Congress is bought by special interests and the American voters have not noticed, or do not care, or do not have the intellectual capacity to FOLLOW THE MONEY, stupid. We will have to fight the special interests with a million person march in WashingtonDC with one focus, to get congress back.
20
@carl bumba No conscription. No way. That is antithetical to the concept of personal freedom.
3
Hear, hear. Although (having served as Army Nurse), I think that military service is different than other types of service mentioned. I think there should be mandatory two years of military service specifically.
7
Trump’s realpolitik is brutal. The American campaigns in Syria, Iraq` and Afghanistan to either Americanize or pacify each country have eluded success for more than 17 years. Enough already. As in Viet Nam, the U.S. refused to withdraw because no member of the governmental apparatus, civilian or military, wanted the embarrassment for having a military loss on their record during their period of service.
In this case, like Alexander, Trump did not unravel the Gordian knot. Each severed it with a sword. The Military and the foreign policy agencies forcefully resisted Trump’s efforts to plan an orderly withdrawal. Trump took the only option he had. Obama tried to do it the right way in consultation with others and failed. Trump just did it.`
Let me be very clear about this. The people who live in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan have lived in accordance with their own rules for killing one another for centuries if not millennia. We cannot change that. If they cannot achieve unity in diversity among and between the inhabitants, America cannot change that for them. They have an equal right to choose their destiny and live with its consequences just as we have. They deserve each other.
85
@Richard F. Kessler You are an Isolationist and Nationalist. Like it or not; America is part of the World. I hate war and would love to see peace on Earth. Withdrawing into a safe shell; all alone ; is not the answer. This unilateral withdrawal will cause many more deaths in the long run. History will not be kind to Trump and his enablers. Ray Sipe
7
@Richard F. Kessler wait, he’s only talking, he hasn’t pulled out yet.
1
@Ray Sipe
You are being ridiculous. Such black or white thinking! Unless we stay and fight someone else's war forever - we are isolationist! Strangely, our allies never consider it so essential to put their full resources into these wars. How many hundreds of thousands of Canadians, Mexicans, British, or Germans are fighting in these places? Their military presence - when it exists in these places - is a comparative joke. Yet no one calls Mexico, Canada, the UK, or Germany "isolationist." 17 years in Afghanistan is more than enough. Time for them to fight their own battles on their own.
8
I’m surprised that the maximum leader didn’t appear in combat fatigues, replete with a .45 strapped to his hip. He is a “wannabee “, a “poser”. In his few lucid moments, I suspect that his whole draft exemption charade must really eat at him.
He knows, no matter what, he’ll never be a combat veteran...he knows, he’ll always be a draft dodging coward. Our leader is the worst of the worst.
10
@Patrick alexander Lindsey Graham already did that.
@Patrick alexander Well he did wear that huge jacket that had some kind of insignia on it.
@Patrick alexander
That's democracy.
If neither the left nor the right thinks we should leave, how do we get out?
I abhor Trump on many levels, but the Middle East is becoming another Vietnam in terms of an endless war fighting for people who hate us.
58
@Talbot
Who represents "the left" in this analysis? -- Apparently, Nancy Pelosi. The real anti-imperialist left in this country will have no objection to the Trump retreat, whatever his motives.
@Talbot No one is "hating" you for being Americans, but for invading/destabilizing their countries
1
@Talbot Many of us want out of military conflicts abroad, but we'd prefer that the command to withdraw be done judiciously and with some regard for timetables and respect for those we are leaving and those who've fought with us. I, for one, definitely would like to see a draw down of conflicts. But Trump's approach - command by tweet - is disgusting.
1
AMERICANS ARE NOT WANTED IN THE MIDEAST
Today :
"Politicians from both blocs of Iraq’s divided parliament called for a vote to expel US troops and promised to schedule an extraordinary session to debate the matter.
“Parliament must clearly and urgently express its view about the ongoing American violations of Iraqi sovereignty,” said Salam al-Shimiri, a lawmaker loyal to the populist cleric Moqtada al-Sadr."
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/27/iraq-trump-visit-us-troops-lawmakers-demand-leave
11
There’s one Middle East country where we are welcome. The only democracy in the region.
2
@Steve Cohen
"There’s one Middle East country where we are welcome. The only democracy in the region. "
Are you saying we should invade and take over? Why not? We can't do any worse than them.
True so it might be a good idea to direct the money towards democrats in the region but autocrats Love to buy weapons and bombs from the US.
The US will eventually have to pull out troops from Muslim countries, how to do that should be the result of careful planning to minimize chaos and damage to US interests. The more serious problem in Syria is not Assad or the Russians but Hezbollah. If not kept in check a future bloody conflict with Israel is almost certain.
Another problem is abandoning the Kurds who have been the most reliable US allies in the fight against ISIS. If Erdogan follows through on his promises to send his army against the Syrian Kurds the war instead of winding down will intensify. The Kurds may not have equivalent firepower but they have proven to be fierce warriors.
Removing US troops from Afghanistan probably ensures the Taliban will take over. This will be a calamity for Afghanistan but not necessarily for the US if the Taliban has learned the lesson that fostering terrorists training camps will force the US to invade again.
7
@serban:
Under what legal authority is the US in Syria? None.
The same can be said of Afghanistan, since Al Qaeda has been gone from there for 15 years.
@serban
Do not know about Syria, but in Afghanistan the real issue is not Taliban, but "strategic depth policy" of the security establishment of Pakistan which created and backs Taliban. There is scope for persuading Pakistan to review the efficacy of this policy by diplomatic means in concert with India and EU nations.
@serban
Do not know about Syria, but in Afghanistan the real issue is not Taliban, but "strategic depth policy" of the security establishment of Pakistan which created and backs Taliban.
There is scope for persuading Pakistan to this policy via diplomacy.
When IS a good time to admit defeat or perpetual stalemate?
Never.
That is why the generals’ strategy for the past 15 years has been simply: We need more time. We need more soldiers.
And that would be the same strategy for the next 15 years.
Since there is never a good time to admit defeat, now is as good, or bad, a time as any.
Let's bring them home.
58
The US clearly had a great victory over ISIS. And the taliban were defeated long ago. They’re now just a big drug enterprise. Your rhetoric is paper thin. We couldn’t turn them into civilized areas, but at least we tried.
Just as there is more than one way to skin a cat, there is more than one way to withdraw from a war zone. In this instance it is not so much the idea of withdrawing from Syria as it is the manner in which it is being proposed. Proposed is too strong a word. This is just another instance of Mr. Trump upending the checkerboard when he's unhappy with how the game is going.
34
Message to American allies; "you can not trust us"; message to American foes "do whatever you want; we will do nothing". Dems must take control of America to save Democracy. Ray Sipe
73
@Ray Sipe
Afghanistan and Syria are not allies. Trump has taken a hard line with foes like Assad -- unlike his predecessor. The generals are unable to admit current tactics are failing. The public has no appetite for total war in the Middle East, which is what it would take to crush Iran, Assad etc. Nor does the public have any appetite for nation building after such an undertaking. We need to be all in or all out. I vote all out. The middle ground is a meat grinder for our kids and a drain on the military. Good move Mr. President.
3
@Ray Sipe Where are American people here? Just continue wars to satisfy others: Kurds, allies, military industrial complex, to confront Trump, etc.
1
“Analysts say, analysts say...”
More like, propaganda says.
This is journalism at its worst. Shame on you, NYTimes.
Americans want their tax dollars to fund universal healthcare and education, not endless bombings and murder of civilians.
51
Agree when does America stop the war in Yemen or is it a great deal to sell the bombs to others and stay on the sidelines?
4
Looking at that main photo, I'm wondering why, in the supposedly secure zone of a U.S. air base, are there heavy concrete barriers between the "commander-in-chief" and his troops? But then, given that Cap'n Bone Spurs had just referred to our troops as "suckers," perhaps its best that he keep his distance.
25
Why is Bannon being quoted in this article — in any article, for that matter? What’s in his training, expertise, and education that makes his voice relevant enough to include — and over others who are actually qualified?
A mistake. A real mistake.
266
His opinion matters because for better or worse (worse in my opinion) people listen to him. Better to hear from him in a fact-checked general publication like this where everyone can see as opposed to letting him be invisibly subversive in the echo chamber that is social media and search engines.
4
@CTReader Agree 100%!! I also do not understand why the Times quotes Bannon--a representative of the extreme far right (along the lines of Stephen Miller, possibly even worse) who was thankfully pushed out of his job at the White House long ago. Why is he -- who in the meantime has been travelling the world trying to spread his nationalistic ideology -- somehow an expert on this or any other topic?
11
Agree don‘t quote the wrong and irrelevant people.
8
If President Obama brought 2,000 troops home from Syria the left would have given him his second fake Nobel Peace Prize. Let's face it, we were never going to topple Assad. You have Russia there, Loyal Syrian troops, Iran, The Kurds, Syrian rebels. Syria is Vietnam x 10. The left just hates anything that Trump does. So sad.
25
@P McGrath. Not of when he did so our allies said they were taken by complete surprise, the Presidents leading staff member had to resign in protest and it was clear that no care or thought had been given to the decision. Right and left are allied that we need a thoughtful president who will make decisions based on analysis of key information. The end decision may be different for left and right but for those united on this issue on left and right the most important thing is that such care is being given. The
President has failed to meet this low bar.
20
@P McGrath...yes, you are. Sad, that is.
@AJ
So, it's a matter of HOW he did it? Sometimes, the best way to pull off a bandage is by ripping.
4
Trump doesn’t unite, he divides—ironic considering we used to be called: “The United States.” Not anymore, thanks to Trump we are just like everyone else—worse even. Thanks for the tetanus rust-belt racists.
20
It didn't begin with Trump. It began with Newt Gingrich. Republican values are DEAD, dead, dead. RIP.
There are many things about the Trump administration that are sad, but this abdication in the Middle East and South Asia is one of the most sad. And tragic. And lame. And weak.
It's also a sad commentary on the ineffectiveness of our main political parties when they are so unproductive as not to rise any cream to the top.
America, with its crass blundering about the world the last 70 years, and its crass mercenary ways at home, deserves Trump, but the rest of the world doesn't.
18
Why are there never any consequences for this man’s belligerence? Why are there always people to make excuses for him and clean up his messes? Even this article seeks to paint his recklessness in a positive light. I find it bewildering how he lives in a world where everyone but him suffers the consequences of his thoughtless decisions.
44
Trump's diabolical plan to leave these wars is going to be a disaster.
Iran shall win in Syria. The Iranians are laughing at Trump.
And in Afghanistan, the Taliban are laughing at Trump.
Trump has become a laughing stock.
7
@Alan
Thought he already was. Sad.
@Alan
Iran won the crescent in 2011. Done. Over. Whistling Dixie.
Speaking in such a manner, referring to America's military as having been taken for suckers, is by extension also insulting the sacrifice of so many Canadian as well as British, Australian, French, Norwegian etc etc soldiers who died serving in the Afghan alliance. This reader hopes parents who lost a child in support of America's effort to create civil order out of chaos in Afghanistan, Syria, or elsewhere pay this cartoonish buffoon no never mind. He's not the true president of anything, not even his own foul mouth.
131
I am so glad the Left and Right wings of America’s Imperialist Parties finally agree on maintaining the so-called “War on Terror”
8
@Jean-Paul MaratExcept what the NYT calls left can not really be considered left but is more likely the liberal corporatist DNC folks, which of cours are in for that military industrial lobbying money.
9
I’m sorry is there a movement on the Left to keep troops in Afghanistan? If so I must have missed it.
78
@EdTHE It seems that the NYT does not know left from right.
12
@Ed There is a movement not to make decisions in a haste via phone calls from Turkey and disseminate them via Twitter with no further consultation of our own military and allies. What about that do you not get?
5
@Ed: You also missed the point of the article which did not contest the decision to withdraw as much as it did the manner in which it was made and announced.
1
I get this feeling that the left leaning readers of NYtimes actually do support pulling troops out of Syria and Afghanistan, except they mostly don't because its initiated by Trump.
23
Afghanistan perhaps, Syria no, for obvious reasons. For one, we dragged allies into Syria. For another, the Kurds supported our fight against ISIS in both Syria and Iraq. This is a reprehensible betrayal. Finally, why are we ceding Syria to Iran and Russia? What’s the reasoning behind that?
1
@John, ISIS is a disease similar to cancer. If just a little bit of the cancer is left behind, you can imagine what happens next. And so this monstrosity of a president and cancer surgeon will leave just a little bit of a cancer called ISIS behind. At some future date more of our young men and women will die because of trump’s stupid, yes stupid decisions.
“I’m better than all the generals.” “I’m the best best president this country ever had, except for maybe Lincoln.”
2
@David J, explain how we would ever know if all the cancer is gone? It's impossible to shoot an ideology into oblivion.
The war mongering left and the war mongering right unite against trying to end their endless wars. Who profits from wars? Not the taxpayers, but rather the super rich who own the military industrial complex and the entire MSM, including the NYT. In my almost 70 years of life America has had perpetual wars for the profit of the rich. Today and yesterday 100% of the voting class supports perpetual war. I realized that many years ago and stopped voting. Unfortunately, one cannot reason with the voting class, who all vote for their rulers and for evil. The left wants a Mommy State with massive social services and the right wants a Daddy State with giant police forces and armies. Neither can act as adults.
13
So if the U.S. would just stay home and tend to it’s own business, there would be no need for international relations.
This paper totally ignores the real progressive left, which has been largely in favour of Trump’s move and has condemned the mainstream media coverage of Trump’s decision.
Readers: have you EVER seen the New York Times argue against war? Ever?
36
@KW
Good post K. Happy New Year.
5
@KWNevermind, it it‘s just part of their Orwellian use of the word left..
4
I’m progressive and I’m not in favor of betraying the Kurds or handing Syria to Russia.
5
Trump thinks he is a king and republicans allow it, encourage it and profit by it. That is just criminal. What are they hiding?
Godspeed Mr Mueller- Godspeed
13
Who's the idiot that told him the troops hadn't had a pay raise in ten years? I'm sure Trump will correct that and apologize. Meanwhile FOX viewers believe the lie? This is too weird.
9
@Bob Woolcock. Fox viewers ALWAYS believe the lie. Only the lie changes. Amazingly whomever programs Fox has defacto control of the Presidency along with Saudi money and Russian kompromat
No - we had an oily treaty to defend Kuwait.
W went back to prove his daddy could have made Iraq a full American colony.
Instead, he destroyed that country.
5
@Eatoin Shrdlu
And left what was left of it in the hands of the vile Iranians.
How much longer must the rational majority of Americans, both inside and out of government, put up with this 45th president? Hugely consequential decisions are being made by a very dangerous person while the institutions of government try to wall off his madness.
10
This headline is poor—misleading with quick read. Makes it sounds like the man actually has positive power to unite us. Please tighten it up, editors.
8
The depth that the military-industrial complex owns both sides of the aisle have been laid bare.I am happy for all those soldiers who would have died or been maimed in these useless wars.Every journey has a first step maybe this the beginning of the
American people taking their government back. .Wouldn't it be great if it provided health care,day care, free education a fair judicial system.I'm sorry I got a little carried away.
18
@robert congerIt Here it becomes obvious again that the DNC Dems are just Republican–lights.
1
Trump makes his first visit to American troops overseas -- to Iraq. The elected politicians in the country's federal parliament -- deeply divided on most issues -- are provoked by his arrogance and demand, in unison, that US forces leave.
Trump never tires of insisting that he is acting in defense of US "national sovereignty". In in his speech at the UN, he said that the leaders of other countries should do the same. So the question is begged: will he respect the national sovereignty of Iraq and withdraw US forces from another country in the Middle East?
1
@Wally
Iraq has national sovereignity?
This is an uneven and confusing piece. But I agree with Ambassadors Ford and Valeck along with Obama DNSA Rhodes.
This is the first time I've ever agreed with Rhodes. They all support President Trumps withdrawals from Syria and Afganistan.
They just don't like the way he's doing it. Fair enough, but Donald wasn't elected for his diplomatic skills. He's for ending all the unnecessary wars. So am I.
I believe 17 years is long enough in Afganistan just like the Soviets. Their parliament just asked us to leave. If not wanted, not supported at home and most probably losing are all legitimate reasons for leaving. We have trained them, explained why they should fight and provided arms for that fight. It's time for those who want a different country to fight for it.
In Syria I have already explained that Trump secured from Erdogon a commitment to, along with SDF, to finish the job with ISIS. It's the SDF country and they must fight for their freedom. We owe the Kurds a debt of gratitude and protection. Trump promised both while in Iraq. And if there is a problem we'll be not far away in Iraq, just in case.
So I say Mr. President, "job well done."
8
While one can argue over whether U.S. troops are still needed to defeat ISIS which is the reason Trump gave for withdrawing our troops from Syria, there are many other reasons, as Defense Sec. Mattis outlined in his resignation letter for staying. Perhaps the most important one is that you do not ever leave your allies, in this case the Kurds, in danger. And, that's what Trump has just done when he was clearly informed by Turkish President Erdogan of his intention to invade and annihilate the Kurds. This is beyond disgraceful and unconscionable which is why Mattis resigned. To blithely hand over those "boots on the ground" who were essential in the fight against ISIS is, to be blunt, criminal. The Kurds have earned our support and protection. In fact, as the largest minority in Syria, we should support them establishing a Kurdish Republic there that could be the homeland for Kurds in Turkey, Iran and Iraq. A Kurdish Republic, like Israel, could be a buffer against and between Syrian tyrant Bashar al-Assadf and his Russian backers, and Iran and its Hezbollah terrorists. With absolutely no vision of peace for the region, the U.S. may now find itself drawn into an even larger quagmire as the reckless and ruthless Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman, whom Trump as fully embraced, draws us into a major war with Iran.
6
@Paul Wortman
The Kurds didn’t get into the fight to befriend us. It was their fight in their back yard to start with. It isn’t the same thing as an ally in the fight voluntarily. Because we shared a mutual interest does not bond us to forever surrender our feeedom of action.
Nearly everyone on every side is being duped into political gamesmanship on a horrific scale:
Trump - Actually wants out but also a timely distraction from Russia and his many other pending litigation.
Dems - Want out, but see this as one more way to sew discord and distrust of Trump, plus don't want to give Trump this much power.
Repubs - Object to Trumps unilateral decision without consulting and involving Congress.
1
... if the Taliban returned, it would haunt the Americans “that they were defeated by a ragtag force after 17 years of fighting them.”
Not to say what life will be like for those we've abandoned so precipitously. I don't believe that any of us would like to live under the Taliban, let alone ISIS. What happens now to the Kurds? What happens to all those in both Afghanistan and Syria who've worked with and for the US?
I've just finished reading The Sympathizer by Viet Thanh Nguyen, which among other things reminds us of what our continuous military involvements in other countries does to the people of those countries. We go in knowing little, and we seem to leave without having learned much. We are humiliated by "ragtag forces" that we never seem to learn anything about--assuming among other things, that we are fundamentally superior to them and that they all wish that they could be like us.
Trump describes us as "suckers", quite a thing to say in front of troops who've been in the midst of the violence: but I doubt that he has any clear idea of who he thinks has conned us. My own feeling is that we've once again exported our talents and resources for violence and mayhem to faraway parts of the world, without a clear idea of what would constitute success. Yes, we need to leave. But we also need to recognize the responsibility we have to those whose lives we've profoundly affected, while at the same time our own lives have for the most part been hardly affected at all.
10
For once I agree with Trump. I'm not sure why we still have troops in Afghanistan after 18 years. I'm not sure why we have troops in Syria at all.
116
@Terremotito That is not the point. The point is America made a committement; Trump just broke America's word; why would anyone in the World trust America again? Ray Sipe
37
@Terremotito
Thank you T, I agree with you. Russia is in Syria, loyal Syrian army, The Kurds, Iran, Syrian Rebels. It's Vietnam x 10! Pull them out.
6
@Terremotito
Because John McCain pushed it. Just like Charlie Wilson in Afghanistan arming the Taliban to fight the Russians. Frankly I'd rather spend the money helping refugees and let the people in these countries fight their own battles. The US fought its own (yes, with some French help) against the British and many other countries fought against colonists to throw off the yoke. If the locals don't care enough to fight for their own welfare, why are we in charge? We have people in this country, especially children, that need too be fought for. And all that weapon money could be spent to help the countries in South and Central America so educate, build infrastructure and develop industry so that there wouldn't be so many refugees from there.
5
They idea that a President of the US would refer to servicmen and servicewomen as "suckers", should be enough for every American to denouce the current office holder as a disgrace and not worthy of the title, which most like has been gotten by deceit and collusion. A dispicable remark by a man whose cowardice throughout his life should disqualify him from even being permitted on a military base.
136
@sunrise
But they are suckers. Around age 18 every person takes and IQ test - do I join the military or not?
The US military-industrial complex is truly number one at brainwashing the troops - and the civilian population - to spend hundreds of billions each year to kill people all over the globe - for no reason at all!
Give these suckers a gun, tell them Uncle Sam says it's okay to kill people thousands miles away, and they do it! They willingly participate in crimes against humanity.
"The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him." - Nuremberg Principle IV
6
@Fourteen some join out of patriotism, some need a job, others view it as a means to a college education. Most likely find killing abhorrent. What you're really identifying are the right wing hero wannabes that join fake militias, burn books, desicrate religious institutions and bellyache about foreigners taking their jobs and destroying their way of life.
6
Republicans; take heart. Yesterday the president said we would have a "strong pullout."
Republicans; If you could explain to the rest of us what a "strong pullout" is, that would be great.
Thanks!
28
@Tom Q If only Trump's father had made a strong pullout at a crucial time...
2
I seriously question the description of the Taliban as a "ragtag force" in an article that is supposed to be a serious discussion of Afghan policy. The quote just shows all the dumb-chuck arrogance and ignorance of so much of the foreign policy commentariat.
Afghan and Syrian failures show an institutional failure of thought in Washington DC over a long period of time.
4
Trump has no decency. The way he carries on with things is always thoughtless and crude. It's all political for him. One would like to think that his last tweet on Syria and so on was done with a motivation of goodness...but no, it seems from our point of view that his own motivation is to do any thing that can take him out of his personal mess and to please his followers to keep their votes. This is a dangerous man who certainly reflects the vacuity of 39% of navel gazing Americans.
10
Donald Trump is terrifying in his recklessness, like a toddler playing with a loaded gun.
On the other hand, Trump should be viewed as a very, very strong message to our leaders that America is sick of non-responsive leadership and problems that are never addressed. We are sick and disgusted to be fighting endless wars for what often looks simply like quests for riches and power for the plutocrats and the military industrial complex. We object to unlimited immigration. We are outraged at how many Americans have been economically forgotten and left behind.
So, instead of continuing to hope in vain for rational, sensible leaders who will actually address our many urgent problems, America let a bull into the china shop. He's here to tear things up, and that's what he's doing.
3
This analysis really spins hard to paint withdrawals nicely. Open-ended commitments can work, if they find an equilibrium. Look at the Korean border. The Syrian deployment was insufficient, and arguing against preserving Syria's oil field region for the Syrian opposition is absurd. How does the author know Assad's thought process? Maybe a more careful interview with Ambassador Ford would help. Ford wants a strategy, not a withdrawal. Sometimes the Times tries to mop up the mess. Please don't, it's embarrassing.
2
The headline is misleading. I didn’t see any evidence of people from the left being interviewed. I saw some centrist corporate Democrats from the Obama era, but that’s not left. Trump of course is terrible when he does anything. Little thought involved. But the leftover Obama foreign policy is at least as bad, probably worse. Trump might get us out, which is kind of funny. When will the NYT start viewing US imperialism as a bad thing?
12
@John Krumm Amen. When Rockefeller Republicans in drag like the Clintons and Obama and their misbegotten ilk are termed "the left," Reagan's artful tugging of the perceived center of the American political spectrum rightward has reached its zenith. The "suckers" overall are the American electorate.
2
17 years among the middle-age creatures in Afghanistan (sorry for this, but it does feel and look like it) is more than enough. You certainly do not expect the army to say that they had enough, they never will. The mondialistic NYT and its high-educated readership are always ready to militarily intervene wherever in the world and for whatever reason, as far as they are not personally involved (like Vietnam).
Syria is a different ballgame. Who knows what's happening there? Who is waging war against whom? What is the US exactly supposed to do? Just do not mention establishing democracy and such ...
6
If you look at the hero pic by Al Drago, you'll see Trump even needs a wall to address the troops.
4
Very spooky to find myself in Trump's camp on one issue, but these "engagements" (read "quagmires") did in fact call for a dose of disruption. Among all the actors in our military, State Department, Congress, and our allies, I have heard no description of a "good" way to disengage from these costly commitments of highly debatable value.
I abhor the way the Taliban treats women, but is the answer to that problem keeping troops there indefinitely and pumping money year after year into a corrupt regime?
Kurds have been valuable supporters of our efforts; I hope we find ways to support them in return. Yes, more consideration should have been given to preparing them for this move. But they can hardly be surprised at the decision.
There are no clear "solutions" that our military can effect in Syria and Afghanistan that are worth the cost. There is no winning. It'll be ugly pulling out, but it's also ugly as it is.
What we have is paralysis by analysis and endless disagreement. Too bad Trump can't lead a serious discussion among concerned parties and reach consensus on what to do, but that was never going to happen. Absent agreement, yes: start pulling the troops out. Stop debating and get it done.
It is terrible think of all the military folks (and others) who have died or been profoundly hurt in these campaigns - for what? But given that there is no hope of honoring these people with anything like a victory, the only answer is to stop putting our people in harm's way.
9
@John Q Public
Is it time to carve out a New Kurdistan from the Kurd-dominated parts of Iraq-Iran-Syria and Turkey?.....the reverse of how it was "disappeared" after WWI?..or at least have that discussion among the affected parties?....or re-draw the relationship among those parties, as the US did in Iraq...a Kurdish 'Federation'?
Who wrote the headline ("Trump unites left and right..." to this piece? It does not match the article, which provides a litany of quotes supportive of the withdrawal from Afghanistan and Syria.
3
Why do we want to stay in Syria?
3
@NYC Dwelle
Geopolitical influence in the region as a hedge against Russian gas pipeline interests in Europe.
The most pathetic fact is he does this out of no ideology or belief system. He simply does it because he is an insecure con man way out of his League who needs to appease his own tiny base and Fox News for the sake of his ego. Nice job, Trump Country
9
Putin and Trump sure fooled Israel, didn't they? Israel thought Trump was their hand-puppet, just because right-wing Jewish donors paid for so much of his campaign. Too bad Putin was just getting the Jews to pay the bills, while he was the real puppeteer controlling Trump every step of the way--right down to handing Syria over to Russia and Iran. Israel and the foolish right-wing Jews behind Trump, here and in Israel, just got totally snookered. They no doubt had the fantasy that Trump would launch a regime change war against Iran for them, too. Fat chance! If Trump's base is delighted he's pulling out of Syria and slashing our troops in Afghanistan, does anyone actually think they would support a new neocon proxy war for Israel in Iran, a war bound to cost us much more in blood, treasure, and PTSD than Iraq and Afghanistan combined? Dream on, Bibi and Shel.
3
"Trump short-circuited a needed national debate...."
That was Trump's campaign. He never debated anything, never presented coherent policies, never explained what he wanted to do except isolate us. Trump's entire campaign was a fraudulent, obnoxious string of slogans, threats & childish insults directed against his opponents, every single one of whom was more thoughtful & intelligent than him. He just shouted & drowned them out. Or in Hillary's case, smeared her, threatened her & stalked her.
We're momentarily stuck with Trump but his White House is mired in his obeisance to his base & his championing bigoted stupid ideas that even some of his cabinet can't stomach.
The next president will need to take office with an explanation about foreign policy & national security objectives and how they plan to solidify our alliances, conduct our wars & keep us safe. That's been missing since Trump ran & it's going to be an enormous job to rebuild what Trump has smashed like a toddler knocking over his blocks.
At least we all know what we're up against.
I don't like Pence. But people who don't want Trump removed because they're more afraid of Pence are wrong.
Trump's ignorant & a slave to his unfocused rage. He's dangerous. Pence may be a religious nut but I don't think Pence would threaten Kim Jong Un with nuclear annihilation trash talk or lick Putin's boots. For that reason, I hope Trump is kicked out of office as soon as possible. We can't afford 2 more years of this.
4
I'm really not sure he is trying to do. it is like UK policy 40 years ago. Appease and forget the massacres. We all went to war in Afghanistan/ Iraq and Syria - you don't just walk away - they are real people - civilains out there that put their trust in the west and now getting it shoved back in their faces and the grave they dug themselves
Disgraceful
I guess the UK and France are going to have to sort out the mess yet again and theUSA becomes a Disney alternative with more fire power than the rest of the world - killing each other
heyho
3
Not surprising the president referred to the military as suckers. After all, this is the man who called his adoring base poorly educated.
6
Trump didn’t unite anybody. The mainstream left Is the right in this country of perpetual wars. The problems an idiot like trump brings are small potatoes compared to this long-standing consensus.
6
From what I've heard, the Commander in Chief addressed our troops with outright LIES. There is something morally wrong about that. They did NOT get a10% raise, like trump claimed, and this is not their first raise in 10 years, like trump claimed. The troops have had a raise every single year for decades. How can you trust your own Commander in Chief when he blatantly lies to your face??? Talk about unfit!
33
Deeply disturbing to see something titled "news analysis" as the first article on the NYT website.
3
What we have here, is a MORON, parading around masquerading as a President who has absolutely no idea as to what he is talking about, and can't speak in public without lying almost on everything he says or is completely inappropriate in the other things he says; when Trump speaks and it's broadcasts on the news or live events he basically embarrasses the United States.
18
@Chico
Moron yes, but also a empty vessel for suspect political interests.
The perfect Russian 'Useful Idiot'.
6
The president is a narcissistic moron. His decision making process, if you can called it that, is totally irresponsible and dangerous, but even a broken clock is right twice a day. Our goals for Syria are unrealistic. We cannot control events on the ground in places like Iraq and Syria. As the article implies, we have to be realistic about what we can achieve. An American military force cannot solve social, economic, and political problems in that region.
2
WIT WO
What If This Was Obama?
4
@Mixiplix
They would have awarded him another fake Nobel Peace Prize.
The only sucker in all of this is you, Donald. Vladimir Putin has been playing you like a deck of cards.
You're selling out the country. What a sad, pathetic man you are.
9
Not the right.
Just the warmongering neocon Bushies. Now known as NeverTrumpers.
5
Th underlying reality of the Middle east is that the vast majority of Arabs are Sunni and they do not accept for a minute that they can be ruled by what they see as Shia heretics just because the French and the English drew some lines in the desert in 1918. Those lines, created a Shia majority in "...Iraq...". Taken together with the Persian/Iranian Shia, as Shia concentrations elsewhere, Iran is trying to build a Shia controlled land bridge to the Mediterranean via Damascus, ruled by the Alawite Assads, another minority sect within Islam, again regarded as heretics by the vast majority of Sunnis.
The main thing about the Kurds is that ALL the Arabs and the Iranians too and the Turks too are united in their view that the Kurds will never have a united country. Or any country of their own.
They are tough fighters and it is obviously a disgrace to abandon them, but using them to drive ISIS out of Sunni majority towns under American airpower, while likely the only way to win those fights, was not likely to create a politically sustainable situation.
Having said all that, ISIS will re-emerge as a force as we withdraw-0 and THAT will be 100% on Trump.
1
@Lefthalfbach, got any idea where they drew the lines or whether they knew there would be a Shi'ite regional power when they drew them?
I love it when explanations of ISIS start with Sykes and Picot. They're almost certain to be wrong.
@ondelette Of course I know where they drew the lines. The lines are still on the map. They are the same borders today as they were in 1919, Israel aside. Iraq is and was three former, mutually antagonistic provinces of the Ottoman Empire, cobbled together to form a territory from which the British could extract oil. It isn't all that complicated.
By the way, the Brits loved colonial holding with three antagaonistic componenets. That way, if one group revolted the other two could be relied upon to put them down. They actually crewed ships the same way- Hindus in the engine room. Moslems in the deck crew and Catholics from portugese Goa as the stewards.
And did I say that Sykes-Picot caused ISIS? No, I did not.
I support almost zero this president does or says. This is the almost I agree with. 17 years ..Trillions of Dollars, and no change. In private Business this would have been stopped after a couple years. Bring home the troops and The Money !!
4
"United States is ... ceding a strategically vital country to Iran and Russia." Perhaps you mean "withdrawing as an invading force from a sovereign country and leaving it with its allies who are welcome there."
4
None of the problems in the Middle East is the creation of Trump. He sent the army to destroy ISIS and the army crushed them. Trump doesn't want to get involved in every tribal wars in the Middle East or anywhere else costing American blood and treasure. This is what he promised American people. His actions and instincts are better than even Mattis. He doesn't believe in endless bureaucratic discussion and process. He had enough consultations and discussions to make an informed decision. His decision to withdraw American Army from Syria and cut its size in half in Afghanistan is one of the best of Trump presidency. It is great for America. Others have to learn to solve their problems themselves. We do not have to take their monkeys on our shoulders. Too bad if the experts in the Right or the Left do not understand this common sense concept.
7
@Alex E What's this common sense comment doing in this place?
1
Nothing inspires our soldiers and the coalition fighters doing most of the dying like having the President inform them that they had been played for suckers. Trust in any future attempts to put coalitions together to confront common enemies will be compromised by the instantaneous abandonment without forewarning or consultation as the President proposes.
"Here, we contributed greatly to the making of this mess. It's your problem, bye." are the comforting words of the President. Still, leaving a combat zone would be an order a grunt might respond to with, "When's the next transport out of here? Which embassy will the helipad be on?"
3
The only uniting of left and right that I want to see is on the subject of impeachment.
6
CORRECTION: Trump Unites Neoliberal Center and Neoconservative Right Eith Syria Withdrawal.
The far-right Trump “base” and much of (but not all of) the socialist left see nothing wrong with his move
3
@Alina Starkov, a funny thing about conflict, it begins with dehumanizing the enemy by giving them epithets. Neo- seems to do the trick these days.
I am disappointed in this article and also with the NYT in general because of its silence with the larger picture!
What is the larger picture?
Out of the worlds 195 countries, our country has troops deployed in 150 of them. In fact, our troops have been fighting Global Terror in 39% (76) countries out of the 195 countries in our world. At times, our country has been involved in covert military action with over 100 of the worlds 195 countries. Heck, our forces even transported supplies to Afghanistan through Russia.
Our country has spent over 5.6 Trillion on this Global War. So the question people should be asking is: "After 17 plus years of continuous fighting, what do we have to show for it?"
Answer: NOTHING BUT COFFINS AND DEBT!
Our military can't win wars and hasn't for decades!
We can't even complete the do nothing F-35 Flying Coffin program. We can't seem to complete the sitting target called the Ford Super Carrier program that a cheap missile or torpedo can sink. We can't even build a decent/reliable Littoral Combat Ship. We can't build or maintain roads, bridges or even basic infrastructure - our electrical grid is a joke. Heck even our Government funded agency called NASA can't seem to design and build a new rocket - much less have a program that captures the publics attention...
But is any of this in the news?
No it is not... and the reason why is because the news media fails to look at the big picture - which is why I am so disappointed!
5
Trump thinks that our military presence should be paid for, like US forces are mercenaries, guns for hire. He thinks we are suckers if we don't get paid. For a businessman he is remarkably uninformed in that our investment in the defense of sympathetic allies is more than just for their protection. Our presence is a reminder to the region that we are committed to their defense, which in the long run is peace and stability for us well. This policy has paid for itself over and over again. In fact it lead to the fall of the Soviet Union.
3
Donald Trump's life experience is running a small mom and pop company for which the lifeblood is cash flow. He approaches all of his foreign policy decisions based on cash flow. He is also a very mean person who believes for him to win the other person must lose, and hopefully be humiliated. He cannot relate to the concept of win-win which the foreign policy with our allies is based on. Just another result of his being unfit for office.
4
The US, with 800 bases in 80 countries, just had to have these 2000 troops back, leaving your allies, the Kurds, to face an onslaught from the Turks.
1
I was struck by the faces of the military audience (in the photo where The President gives a talk in his silver jacket.) One woman taking a picture is smiling, a few look rather grim, and the rest are more or less expressionless.
4
I am disappointed in this article and also with the NYT in general because of its silence with the larger picture!
What is the larger picture?
Out of the worlds 195 countries, our country has troops deployed in 150 of them. In fact, our troops have been fighting Global Terror in 39% (76) countries out of the 195 countries in our world. At times, our country has been involved in covert military action with over 100 of the worlds 195 countries. Heck, our forces even transported supplies to Afghanistan through Russia.
So the question people should be asking is: "After 17 plus years of continuous fighting, what do we have to show for it?"
Answer: NOTHING BUT COFFINS AND DEBT!
During this time, our country hasn't been able to win a war. We can't even complete the do nothing F-35 Flying Coffin program. We can't seem to complete the sitting target called the Ford Super Carrier program that a cheap missile or torpedo can sink. We can't even build a decent/reliable Littoral Combat Ship. We can't build or maintain roads, bridges or even basic infrastructure - our electrical grid is a joke. Heck even our Government funded agency called NASA can't seem to design and build a new rocket - much less have a program that captures the publics attention...
But is any of this in the news?
No it is not... and the reason why is because the news media fails to look at the big picture - which is why I am so disappointed!
Our military can't win wars and hasn't for decades!
1
Too bad Trump can't unite the left and right into removing him from office. Now that would be a great headline.
3
I dislike Trump a lot and voted for HRC in the last go-'round of what passes for "democracy" here. I 100% support Trump in the Syria pullout and if he does the same in Afghanistan and resists the urge to start a new war somewhere, I will vote for him in '20 and ring doorbells for him. I will even wear one of those goofy red MAGA hats. I am so DONE with our fraudulent imperial wars.
I reread this post before "sending", at least ten times, because I can't believe I actually typed these words.
5
@Economy Biscuits
Bolton and others in and around this administration have been pushing for war with Iran. Maybe you're going to have to consider that one. Trump will wage a war, stupid or not, if he thinks he will get something out of it.
1
What seems to be missing from all the discussion is how successful our mission in Syria has been. It's a MODEL of how we should support local allies, build their abilities and hope to leave them to create a good, long-term solution. All while working to balance regional tensions and thwart our nemesis, oligarchic Russia.
The only thing that would have made it better would have been cooperating more with Iran in fighting ISIS.
1
Like most things that Trump may do. Even if he does the right thing, he will not do it in the adroit manner. The truth is that there is no workable strategy in either countries. Let the other regional players - China, India, Pakistan, Russia and Iran fight it out for Afghanistan. A radicalised regime in Afghanistan will pose a far greater threat to China, Russia and India than the USA.
1
I wouldn’t throw Trump a boat anchor if he was drowning, but he’s right on bringing all the troops home.
The generals are happy to wage undeclared war for ever and ever
Bring them all home Donald. At least do one thing right
7
@FormerNCResident, that's the spirit! And if after Turkey destroys the Kurds, ISIS steps up to build Trump Tower Raqqa, even better!
1
If we had stayed in the nuclear deal with Iran, would that not have been a wedge we could have used to further "un-chill" our relations with that country and try to get them to reduce and ultimately end their sponsorship of terrorism and replace it with diplomacy? Simply dis-engaging from the world, as Trump seems to be doing, makes us more vulnerable to terrorism, not less. Staying engaged permits us to exert pressure.
3
For 17 years we walked this road. Let's try a different one.
I can't not say enough about American Voters' wisdom.
President Obama was criticized from the right and the left for reducing troops in the middle east. His intent was to reduce American Adventurism in the middle east while donning a dismissing smirk against the U.S. Military.
President Trump is reducing American Adventurism in the middle "to extract the United States from two long, costly and increasingly futile conflicts."
At this point in time, there is no defined American interest in the region anymore, other than the humanitarian aspect.
It is hard to see how this actions will negatively affect President's Trump next presidential campaign.
5
It seems as though Trump gave the generals time to weaken and deal a fatal blow to ISIS in Syria back in March. They have since been resisting him in leaving and want more time.
Trump is the President. The generals may give advice, but not determine policy. Trump's abrupt decision was apparently based on the generals not following the President's wishes, but their own.
1
The key element is land. Are we fighting for ancestral, material rich, religious, strategic, buffer, or simply foreign land we don't want our adversaries to have? trump has lately given up so many deals to other nations with nothing expected in return. So is trump "smart?"
1
Look at the expressions on the soldiers in the audience listening to Trump in Iraq - in the photo with this article. Their expressions are worth thousands of words.
They are watching someone who hasn't a clue about how to engage his audience of actively serving troops. Spectical is too mild. Disgusted but polite is more accurate.
Only one woman is smiling - she's on the front row, holding her cell phone up, perhaps to take a picture to send home?
2
Trump has no military knowledge and shouldn't be thinking that he knows more then his generals.
That type of thinking is how wars start, by people that can't see the forest through the trees.
1
@BTO
Now wait a second. You seem to believe that Trump is starting a war, rather than ending one.
We all know that to communicate effectively, it's not just what you say, but how you say it. Context, tone, facial expression, etc. - these are all as much a part of conversation as the content of what's said.
Likewise, we all know that our electronic communications are poor conveyors of context and subtlety. Dark motives are read into content when none were meant. How many of us have encountered problems with friends and family because of misinterpreted electronic communications? Nothing substitutes for face-to-face contact to communicate context, or barring that, phone or Skype.
President Trump dictates policy by Twitter, and lets his subordinates deal with difficult conversations when necessary. Most of us agree that our country should not engage in prolonged military intervention overseas with no end in sight. We can disagree about the goals, but how they are achieved isn't just a matter of policy. It's also about context, and the manner in which they are achieved. Timing, talking to members of both parties, talking to our allies in advance - these things are critical.
Some people like President Trump because he's a blunt "tell it like it is" kind of person. Well, as the saying goes, if all you have is a hammer, all your problems look like nails.
1
This article alludes to something that should alarm Americans on both the right and the left. Military generals are ignoring or - in Bannon's words - "slow-rolling" the elected President of this country. Once the military generals stop listening to the President and begin to do what THEY want to do instead, we have entered a very dangerous world with grave implications for the future of this republic.
8
This proves what I have always said, Democrats are just as much warhawks and war profiteers as Republicans. Most of the people championing our staying have never been there and their kids will never be over there fighting.
So Trump wanting to bring our troops home, spend the money on infrastructure, smart defense of our country , securing our borders and putting Americans to work are now bad things to Democrats?
Democrats didn't do as well as they imagined during the midterms and are well on the way to losses in 2020 if they keep going down this road. I know this former Democrat won't return to the party.
4
@Hellen, yup! And Ron Paul made the John Birch Society respectable again. Too much intertubes will warp your vision.
I'm trying to figure out the authors perspective on this one. The headline and first paragraph are written to make you think that both the right and left are united against the decision to pull out of what the author calls "costly" and "increasingly futile conflicts". Then, the author presents case after case against staying in these wars. Seems that we're not united against troop withdrawal, are we?
The last public opinion poll on Syria, this past July, had 70% of Republicans, 54% of Democrats and 51% of independents supporting our efforts there. And a spring poll showed that 20% of Republicans supported a withdrawal. How exactly is this placating his base? Its not.
He is actually trying to make a difference and end these wars, though I've come to question is motive on everything. His method is horrible and destabilizing, but the idea to end this insanity is not.
I'm pleased that the author included witnesses as to the futility of these wars in his article. Its rare to see any support for withdrawal of any type in the mainstream media. But it does seem to contradict the premise of the opening paragraph and headline.
6
Credit Trump for making the right decision. But since it renders all the work and blood lost by the military as valueless since it is not at all connected to a plan, it is a woefully inadequate step. No one including Trump knows how to convert the decision into an item of near term or long term value. It is almost as if we never went there in the first place.
"...ceding a strategically vital country to Iran and Russia"
Didn't know we owned Syria so we could give it away. Are there others? Rather than just give them away, shouldn't we see what we can get for them?
"With the exception of a few vocal isolationists..."
Are we now isolated after pulling 2,000 troops out of Syria?
The above examples of non-thinking lead to quagmire-style non-strategies of so-called professional Generals (Mattis) and National Security Advisors (Rice) and Politicians, who live in the neoliberal/neocon echo chamber funded by the Defense budget.
At least Trump is thinking different.
"We're losing" is a reasonable statement of fact that punches a hole through the standard issue military alt-reality.
4
It's actually only the centrists who want war. The Left and Right (Rand Paul's Right) do not want more war.
5
Endless war. America’s treasures used to defend or promote principles ill-defined. Religious hatred fomented not merely by zealots but also by business interests in the countries and regions where US troops are sent. President Trump is right. We should leave Syria and Afghanistan as soon as possible. Add Iraq, too.
7
Mr. Trump's pandering to his "base" is alienating the majority of Americans who oppose his policies. If he continues with this self-destructive action, he will not win re-election in 2020.
". . .(some believe) Mr. Trump’s orders would not even be carried out — at least not on the 30-day timetable he imposed for Syria. The Pentagon has slow-walked his orders before. . "
Putting our troops and their commanders in a position to deliberately disobey orders from the CIC is no way to run a military. Insubordination is a serious offense in the military - some say the most serious offense. Trump salts every earth and poisons every well. Our national security is at stake here, folks.
2
Was this decision by the President an abrupt and chaotic order, or a fulfillment of a campaign promise that had been resisted by military and civilian advisers until Trump pressed his authority?
I would wager on Column B.
3
Two years into Trump’s presidency. Here he is, doing almost exactly what he said he would do.
Think about that.
4
It is interesting that the fact that BOTH Obama and Trump were suspicious of involvement in Syria is not noticed until late in the article.
1
There is absolutely nothing stopping the Germans, Italians, and the UK from replacing US troops in Syria and Afghanistan and for the French to increase their presence in Syria.
If Syrian presence were truly important, then these countries would introduce troops there.
Clearly, they don't feel it is important since none of these countries have announced replacing US troops.
Instead, they expect the US to sacrifice more American lives and spend more American money.
I believe that Europe needs to do more of the military support in their own back yard of the Middle East and that the US needs to dedicate our military towards China.
Germany only spends 1.2% of GDP on defense, Italy 1.5%, Britain 1.8% and France 2.3% while we spend 3.5%.
Japan spends 0.9%.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS
Let Europe increase their spending and increase their military presence in the Middle East and let our troops come home or focus on China.
4
@David MD
You make a very good point. If what we're doing around the world is so important, why is everyone else not rushing in to replace us?
1
@David MD, hoo boy! The French on the ground in Syria, and building war machines in Germany and Japan! What could possibly go wrong?
Hmmm, war or no war? I pick no war. Many people are on the wrong side of history here, all just to spite Trump. We live in amazing times.
4
I NEVER thought that I would be saying this, but I agree with D. Trump. There is no way to quit a war that has lasted 17 years
(Afghanistan) except to get out. I wish he would bring ALL our troops home. But until war is obsolete (and we're getting there), we will continue the exercise of hatred that has created millions of refugees and destroyed whole countries and cultures. Maybe someday...
6
This article shows a bias. I'll take just two examples.
The article says "how Mr. Trump made the decision, without consulting allies " Highly misleading if not false. Trump consulted Turkey, a NATO ally and the ally who cares the most about Syria.
"Even the president’s supporters did not defend him." False. Just for example, Senator Mike Lee said he ""couldn’t agree more with the president's decision."
I for one applaud the President's decision. Even his manner of announcing it may have been politically necessary, to present opponents with a fait acompli.
4
Why does he need a concrete barrier between him and the troops. What’s he afraid of this time?
"Decision" implies that a process of considering several options took place. That doesn't appear to be the case here. Rather than make a decision, Trump appears to have made a declaration. All associated agencies are forced to act on it without the accompanying cost-benefit analysis of a decision. Today's immediate gratification will be paid for by tomorrow's blood and treasure, as yet uncalculated and unimagined.
2
It is obvious that the chaotic and precipitous way the president chose to pull out of Syria and do the drawing down of troops in Afghanistan has meant resignations by General Mattis and McGurk, lacked an effective and convincing need for such an immediate 30 day action, and without consulting allies, Congress, or even letting the generals know is undermining to them all, and not allowing them the time and opportunity to truly participate in the decisions and the right way to implement both decisions.
3
@Sally In his mind he let the important people know. Those in Russia and Turkey, maybe in "Saudia A" as he refers to it. He will get some personal return for his actions.
2
While Trump's abrupt plan to withdraw troops was not carefully planned or timed and disregarded the harm that will befall the Kurds, the decision was at least one that will withdraw American troops from a place where they have no legitimate right to be. If ISIS isn't fully crushed by other forces, then it may be a mistake which can be corrected. However, the continued presence of US troops in numerous countries around the world and the repeated interventions by the US in the affairs of other nations has been a disaster for the US and the rest of the world. I don't support Trump on any matter. However, his hasty decision to withdraw troops from Syria can be justified in many respects. Trump's claim that the generals kept asking him to send more troops brings to mind similar repeated requests by American officers to send more troops to Viet Nam. Unless the security of the US is actually at risk, there should be no more American interventions.
27
@peter s, given your approbation of U.S. policies since the 1950s. I'm sure you are among those who detest the term, "collateral damage."
So tell me, may we assign the collateral damage of the policy of, "If ISIS isn't fully crushed by other forces, then it may be a mistake which can be corrected," to you? ISIS did a pretty brutal job on some subpopulations last time, I will remind you.
Personally, I'm not sure what is to be done, but if I were the decision maker, and that would be either the President or the Congress or both, I would want to listen to, read, and consult the best set of facts and advice I could, and probably come up with a solution that didn't read like the answer on a true-false computer generated exam.
"Should I stay or should I go?" is a pop song, not a foreign policy.
1
If aliens invaded Earth but limited themselves to Africa, Europe and Asia, Trump would probably say "We are not sending troops to fight the aliens. We will build a beautiful dome over America."
5
@Brad I'm not a Trump supporter, didn't vote for him, and generally feel he's diminished us as a country. However, being disingenuous about this situation in the middle east isn't helping anyone. There are real, valid reasons for withdrawing from fights we can't win that have questionable value when it comes to our national and security interests. Was his decision rash, unplanned, naive and likely damaging? Yes. Does that mean we shouldn't entertain the idea of a any withdrawal? Absolutely not. The intent is spot on, the execution, as with most things Trump, is chaotic and likely damaging.
3
@Brad
So what's wrong with that ?
Despite what people think, the Syrian Kurds are not our allies. They are separatists and we shouldn't support them.
6
The Kurds have deserved a homeland for a long time - Ottomans and Arabs have committed crimes against them, crimes against humanity.
Why should they not have control of their historic land.
They have been thankful for NATO aid, which Trump has been cutting back in the name of genocide Bashir al-Assad, who has received his support from Russia.
If Russia gains a client Arab state, I would have them do it with grateful Kurds in way.
53
@Robert James
Well, they are not trying to separate from the USA so really what is your problem. They have been fighting ISIS and want to have land so that they won't be slaughtered by the Turks.
9
@Robert James Some Syrian Kurds might also just be children, or human beings trying to get by with endless war because of natural resources that they will never benefiit from. Some of them are just like me, and your neighbors, and not political at all.
8
Trump being Trump: Chaotic and willfully unilateral. Largely the right action done in absolutely disastrous fashion.
Nothing harder for America than ending its military endeavors however ill advised and foolish in the first place.
The president’s frustrations and related precipitous actions may have been the only way to do what has clearly needed to be done in both Syria and Afghanistan. Hopefully sensible moderation will prevail but not derail the withdrawals.
6
Why? Afghanistan is a country we destroyed by setting Taliban against USSR client state, we arranged 24-nation coalition against al-Assad and ISIL, supporting Kurds and anti-Assad rebels. W. destroyed Iraq with national support to prove his now dead daddy was a wimp and we could take out Saddam Hussein’s micro forces any day.
We trashed those nations and owe the civilian population big time.
1
According to Newsweek and reported in The Guardian, the ‘Commander in Chief’ subsequently proceeded to put his foot in it, as he invariably does, by tweeting a picture of himself with Navy Seals whose deployment is typically classified information - nor were their faces blurred as they usually are to protect their identities. President Blundering Blunderbuss scores again!
182
Incompetence is the essential ingredient of Donald, no matter the endeavor. Just look no further than the shuttered casinos, the airline, the Plaza Hotel, or the properties that never quite came to fruition. He was never successful. His “starring” turn in the Apprentice was all scripted; it was only a semi reality show.
I think his fundamental incompetence is now evident to all who observe his tenure in the Oval Office, whether they are viewing him from the left or the right. When you marry that to his corruption, it is quite an alarming reality. A person with no grasp of the role, geopolitical realities, procedures, no willingness to learn or accept input.
It’s going to be a fascinating study in betrayal if the GOP decides at some point Donald has to go. There will be years of tape with them all defending Donald that they’ll have to somehow explain. And he’ll likely not go quietly or quickly.
52
"Mr. Trump issued the order to withdraw over the objections of military and civilian leaders ..." But, Mr. Trump is the both the top civilian and military leader, so these other "leaders" are just advisers. There is only one leader.
14
@Robert James Yes, that is true; he is the commander in chief. It is nevertheless noteworthy and relevant when a leader disregards the advice and counsel of those whom he appointed to provide such advice -- particularly when the military and civilian leaders mentioned have significantly more experience in these matters. That's not to say that the commander in chief doesn't have the right to overrule them -- only that it's highly significant when their advice is either not sought or heard but dismissed.
5
Please read the U S Constitution: the US has a President to do as ordered by Congress, which he can limit via veto, and the courts.
He acts also as decorative Head of State, like Queen Elizabeth II of the UK.
He is Commander in Chief of the entire executive branch, but only Congress can declare war.
We have no “Chief” we have no head of government, but a mostly- functional slow-moving (except in severe emergency ala Pearl Harbor.
It has worked EXCEPT when someone - Joe McCarthy in Congress, Richard Nixon and, worse, Donald Trump play as Chief and ignorant Americans buy it.
Wadya mean, make America Great - Again? We haven’t failed for 99% of about 250 years (depends on whether you date things with the signing of the Declaration of Independence, or The Jefferson-Amended Constitution.
4
@Robert James fyi he is not a king
3
I do not like President Trump, but if he pulls us completely out of Afghanistan and Iraq I give him a "well done".
47
I would agree with you as long as it’s based on a well thought out strategy that fully considers the impacts, both positive and negative.
5
@Maxman You have that slightly wrong. It is not a "well done" for Trump, but for our adversaries. They know it, but unfortunately you don't.
8
Sorry but the headline “Trump Unites the Left and Right, Against His Plans in Syria and Afghanistan” is grossly misleading and contradicted by the body of the article. The article correctly points out there are many across the political spectrum who *support* the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan and Syria. The article cites ambassadors Ford and Valasek, Rand Paul, and Obama’s former adviser Ben Rhodes in that regard.
To be sure the manner in which the withdrawal was announced and carried through by Trump was thoughtless and crude, consistent with Trump’s own character and style. Pretty much everyone thinks so.
But try not to confuse the means with the end.
78
@FB
An Trump's means to an end is making decision that look good/sound great when campaigning. Sorry if that sounds as cynical as my intent.
@FB, you do know that "the end justifies the means" is known as the Root of Fascism?
@FB—I came away with a very similar impression after reading the piece.
The author “So chaotic was Mr. Trump’s decision-making process; so transparent his appeal to his political base; and so lacking in a cogent explanation to allies or the public that the president’s move short-circuited a much-needed national debate about the future of America’s wars.”
Trump’s style IS “chaotic” but it’s NOT a “decision-making process.” It’s an autocrats plan designed to create the chaos needed in order to take more and more power over time. trump’s campaign inspired hatred and pitted family members & friends against each other and vilified minorities.
Look at the current state he's created. He’s:
• created hatred & suspicion towards our media & electoral systems;
• awarded business with unnecessary tax cuts & rolled back regulations solely for political support;
• put markets in turmoil with trade tariffs, losing jobs in the US;
• hired, fired or driven-out top military & key federal employees’ leaders whose ranks are sworn to follow the president;
• established an unconfirmed acting sycophant cabinet unfettered by the Senate;
• roiled relationships with allies & befriended dictators, refusing to impose sanctions on Russia and her oligarchs;
• undermined years of treaties, global military partnerships & relinquished support of the Middle East; and
• efficiently synchronized national chaos leading to our systems' collapse.
The perfect environment for him to refuse the outcome of the 2020 election supported by 50% of the nation.
A dictator is born.
75
In his chaotic ways, Mr Trump, addresses a problem that previous Presidents avoided.
Trillions were spent foolishly . This debate overdue
25
@talesofgenji I wonder how much it would have cost for another world war?
1
When you think about it...what moral authority does the US have to be present in so many sovereign nations all over the world?
This may be the one thing that the current POTUS is doing that corrects mistakes and misadventures by the US. Do we really want to be the world’s police?
21
@CC That question is a good one to ask and worthy of debate by our country and government. And the article does point out: "Announcing troop withdrawals will force the United States to rethink long-term military commitments that have little public support and are no longer effective." But the question will be whether this action (sudden withdrawal) triggers the requisite debate that we as a nation should be having. Quoting the article again: "But the president’s crude defense of the decision ... seemed unlikely to provoke a serious debate over difficult questions like how best to combat terrorist threats in distant lands or the proper limits of America’s role as a global guarantor of security."
1
Sometimes Trump is right . Getting out of the horrendous mess we created in Syria and Afghanistan is the right choice . Now let’s get out of Iraq .
Neither Democrat nor Republican be
For Big money affects the way they see;
Sticking with Trump only makes things worse
Stand with Larry Eisenberg (RIP) to avoid the curse
12
@Dr Wu Mr. Eisenberg the limerick maker dead. So sorry to hear. Thank you for the homage. Please continue!
@Dr Wu Do you just walk away from your mistakes? Friends and family must love that.
1
The US made the mess in 2 of 3 cases. In the third, Basher al-Assad is a genocide who 24 nations are united in attempting to remove.
1
This article is mis-headlined. It should read: Trump unites the left and right *of the establishment*. The left that I know of -- the left that does not appear on the liberal pages of the New York Times but in alternative media like Counterpunch, Truthout, Truthdig -- has been consistent in its demand for U.S. withdrawal from Syria and Afghanistan.
21
I am Vietnam Vet. 58000 Americans died because the Generals, many in their comfy office in the Pentagon, wanted to keep the war going forever. Thst's what they do. Make War. The longer the better. Trump is right on this one.
41
@Irate citizen
I must be the last person to agree with this idiot on anything, except this time. Imagine if Trump was in the White House when Nixon was around. Tens of thousands of American soldiers should have gone home and reunited with their families. The American government has no money for universal health for its people but can build roads and bridges for far away lands which have absolutely nothing to do with the U.S interest. I say get out of there before the sun goes down.
6
Iraq needs a shielded Peace Corps as do the Kurds.
We could end most of Syria’s suffering with one small drone bomb directed against al-Assad.
We destroyed Afghanistan-read your history. And Learn from It.
@Eatoin mShrdlu
So, you are saying killing Qadaffi is the reason that Lybia is a prosperous, peacefull, democratic nation today?
5
Underlying thought process:
“Hmm, we could discuss this withdrawal with affected allies, or instead, I DECIDE!!!...Do MY generals have ideas worth hearing, or do I listen to ME! ME! ME!...Do we leave in an orderly process to conserve any gains and optimize opportunities for positive outcomes for us and allies in the future, or LEAVE WITH CHAOS!!! I could praise families who have lost loved ones and those who have been maimed in these battles, or infer THEY WERE SUCKERS!!!...Now, what else can I DECIDE!!!”
10
The "RIGHT" and the "LEFT" united in support for endless Middle East Wars? Nonsense! Half the country voted for Trump because he had promised to end these "stupid " wars . Now he is keeping his word. Thank you Mr President. "Support Our Troops" , get them the heck out of the Middle East!
15
Half the country did not vote for Trump- he lost the general election, results manipulated by friend Vladimir Putin.
1
As wrong and corrupt as Trump is on domestic issues, he correctly defies the "conventional wisdom" of our failed and costly attempts at securing empire in the middle east. Let other countries waste their blood and treasure where they are not wanted.
The whole idea that we need to transfer trillions of public dollars to private contractors has in fact made the US taxpayer the suckers for decades.
Regarding the pro-war "liberals", they should reassess their opposition to Trump on this issue and realize that even a broken clock is correct twice a day.
15
@Qui Tam. So true in your last sentence. I have to admit I am on the one hand find this man disgusting on just about every issue but I must say I am on his side on this one.
3
We are back to the balance held in Iraq by Saadam Hussein,
whom Bush Sr. invented, installed, and refused to challenge
once Saadam was out of Kuwait during Desert Storm. We
stay in Iraq to keep Iran at bay, as Bush Sr. knew to do, and
his son wrecked. The American airfield North of Baghdad is larger than O'Hare, our largest. Go figure.
Now Trump says we can manage ISIS in Syria from Iraq.
What? How is that a change?
3