In testimony to the House Armed Services Committee, Defense Secretary Mark Esper and Gen. Mark Milley predicted that the US will continue to have troops inside Syria for many years, and that it is “hard to foresee anytime soon” when the US might leave.
The two told the committee that this presence continued to be about the ISIS threat, and that it would be a long time before regional forces in Syria could fight on their own. It’s not clear what regional forces are even being referred to, as the US troops are centered in a very small area at this point.
Moreover, the US presence in Syria has not been presented by the administration as being about ISIS for months, with President Trump insisting ISIS was long defeated. Pentagon officials have continued to cite ISIS because the administration’s alternative is a tough pill to swallow.
President Trump now insists that the US war in Syria is exclusively about oil, and the only reason US troops are in Syria is to take Syrian oil with the help of US oil companies to be named later. President Trump has repeatedly reiterated this stance, despite military officials trying to make the war about something else.
As a practical matter, either military goal, or any combination of the two, is going to be similarly an open-ended military adventure, as there is no sign of ISIS being any more defeated, nor of a single drop of oil coming out of US-occupied Syria, any time soon.
Defense Secretary Esper said ideology would make it difficult to defeat ISIS fully. Gen. Milley predicted the reemergence of ISIS if the US left Syria, even though there is no sign the US is doing anything to fight them, or indeed doing anything at all apart from waiting for a hypothetical situation where oil starts being produced.
Pentagon Says Full Syria Withdrawal Many Years OffUS troops can't leave any time soon
In testimony to the House Armed Services Committee, Defense Secretary Mark Esper and Gen. Mark Milley predicted that the US will continue to have troops inside Syria for many years, and that it is “hard to foresee anytime soon” when the US might leave.
73 thoughts on “Pentagon Says Full Syria Withdrawal Many Years Off”
Too bad, the Afghan papers are a golden opportunity to get out, if trump really wants to.
Trump is supposed to be the cammandor of the military . but the last few years Trump looks more like the pentagon is commanding him . I supported Trump because I thought he had a more reasonable agenda on foreign wars . I don’t believe staying to take the oil is at all reasonable or even honest to Syria .
“thought he had a more reasonable agenda”….this is the problem with electing people with no record of responsibility. trump said whatever was necessary to get elected, all sides of every issue. You just heard what you wanted to hear. I heard…carpet bomb ISIS cities, win in Afghanistan, biggest military, torture and worse. Guess one of us heard right. Question is, you gonna believe him in 2020 ?
I might have to support Trump again . Even though his Foreign policy has disappointed me . I would try Yang or Tulsi Gabbard but the democratic party is more interested in fighting global warming
Bernie should team up with Yang and Gabbard. Declare Yang his VP choice and Gabbard his choice for Secretary of State. That would win him the nomination — which he will win in any case — and present a formidable challenge to Trump in the general, barring any smart move by Trump — of which there are numerous possibilities — in the year remaining before the election.
Everyone here knows I’m a Trump supporter, but that support is conditional. So far he’s been quite disappointing on the issue I care about most — terminating the endless wars-for-profit — but I cut him some slack on that because of the unrelenting opposition — a “political war” actually — he’s faced. So he’s got a year before the election to show me something to justify me voting for his reelection.
The other factor in the equation is the Dems. Ever since Pelosi declared in 2006 that “impeachment is off the table” for war criminals Bush & Cheney, I have been committed to voting AGAINST the Dems — to driving a stake through the heart of their corporatist betrayal — without regard to who their GOP opponent might be. So the Dems have to nominate someone who isn’t just another Clintonite corporate stooge — I refuse to go back to the Neoliberal/Neocon status quo ante — or Trump gets my vote by default.
Final decision rests on what happens in the next 11 months.
Happy Friday the 13th, good luck & peace be with you in the coming holiday season.
A few adjustments for Bernie. First, declare being a one term President if victorious. Make Gabbard the VP. I know the VP is meaningless but I think she would have a better chance of winning the Presidential election being the VP more than SOS. Show some bipartisanship by nominating Rand Paul as SOS.
Can you name one candidate that was running against Trump that had a record of responsibility , from either political party , you believe would have gotten us of these wars .
In 2016, I voted for Clinton, after Sanders got screwed. Already know how popular that would make me around here. Yet, Clinton had acknowledged her mistakes, and was a true political hack on the order of Hubert Humphrey. For me, it is party, I have done the research on congressional votes, and with the gop, there is no chance for a sustainable america. The votes prove it. The dems, as horrible as they are, have an actual voting record to not get into wars. Clinton, the hack she is, recognized the militant nature of the US voters, and adjusted her policies accordingly. When I pulled the lever, it was on the hope that being in charge, might liberalize her policies, and, even if it didn’t, the dem party would be there to resist. There is no such resistance in the gop. It is all war, all day. The other difference is experience…the US citizenry is under war weariness, dems and GOP alike. If Clinton recognized this, she would have the experience to make disengagement happen, the opposite of trump “peace train” people.
Considering your question as to who would be a better candidate than trump now ? Anyone at random. You, me, Wars, Jay. Someone who respects the job, and accepts responsibility for it. The drunk, forever at the end of the bar, bloviating that he could run the country better, finally got his chance. Let’s move on.
“from either political party”
The US has dozens of political parties, at least four of which had presidential candidates on the ballot in states representing a majority in the electoral college. Gary Johnson and Jill Stein were both better candidates than anyone the Republicans or Democrats were every likely to cough up.
Understood. If the gop weren’t so universally horrible, I wouldn’t vote dem. I confess to the “lesser of evils”.
People take the Commander-in-Chief role the wrong way since 9/11 and GW Bush dressing up in camo and landing on an aircraft carrier. The POTUS as a civilian outranks generals, etc, and the term ‘CINC’ symbolizes civilian control over the military. However, it does not mean that Trump runs the military. The civilian gov’t sets the policy, and the military executes it. Eisenhower wisely never wore his military uniform as POTUS, but the draft-dodging trust fund kid wore one right as his administration was kicking off a war of choice.
If he was really in charge, he would.
If he is not in charge, he should step off, or never should have run at all. The job is self explanatory.
Yeah but what’s in a name?
While his term has been a disappointment, it does vindicate the public that elected him. Hopefully next time we find a leader with some backbone.
What does it take to get fired in your neighborhood?
An election. If Trump is so damn bad ( and he is ) it shouldn’t be hard to find somebody who can beat him. It seems like the Dems are working hard to find someone who can’t, though.
That’s the real scandal.
This is where the neutering of the president through the “Russia” and “Ukraine” hysteria will pay its dividends for empire. Even if he wanted to, which is always debatable, Trump can’t afford to do anything too controversial … simply not enough institutional support.
Sure, that’s why he vetoed the get out of Yemen bill, not enough support ?
Note that I said “even if he wanted to …”. He may not. But either way, the hysteria will not let him get what he wants done.
On Yemen, he (and Obama before him) have considered supporting the Saudi position the vital issue. On Syria it’s been far more nuanced.
“the hysteria won’t let him”…its his own hysteria then. Clinton continued to govern, and push his policies despite the impeachment. So too with the multiple governors impeached recently. Nothing new here, except the deafening whining coming from an administration, and his supporters, that are in denial that a US executive branch has political opposition. Perhaps the gop might consider a qualified leader next time, their rubber stamp is falling apart.
Trump was the most qualified leader the GOP had . Now Tuli Gabbard is the most Qualified leader the democrats have . I’am only going by what they say that satisfies me
So, how do you buy a car ? Just what the salesman says ?
What ? Trump said we should get out of Syria . Now after the rebels we supported lost the war . Trump now says we are going to stay and take the oil . Doesn’t Trump think maybe Syria could use the oil themselves . Isn’t sending troops to a foreign country to take their oil against international law ? Looks to me to be much the same as armed robbery . I would think Syria might need help rebuilding a lot of stuff in their country that our bombs destroyed . Today the Washington Post came out with documents proving our government has not been telling the American people the truth about our involvement in all these foreign wars from Viet Nam to Syria . It is nice the Washington Post tells us now but If the paper was going to help us they should have told this stuff and told us much earlier when we maybe could have done something about it . Now they tell us just before Trumps second term .We know the post is against Trump . So telling us every administration including Trumps has been lying to us about our foreign policy wars may be to just get rid of Trump . The previous administrations are all already long gone . We can’t possibly punish any of them . I have been a Trump supporter not because of his tax cuts , but more for his anti war agenda . that just has not turned out to be as true as I was hopping for .
“just to get rid of trump”….no, trump has been a friend to US militancy. The problem is the expansion of the security state, everything done overseas is becoming “state secret” and has to be found by a whistleblower, whom will have to pay the price. Sign of the times that good journalism is a crime.
Good journalism is a crime ? Just ask Julian Assange
Eric- US newspapers have been reporting that our government has been misleading us about wars from Vietnam to Syria all along. It’s that these reports aren’t in the interest some of the biggest advertisers (energy, defense) for the networks to be willing to promote them nor do they have the power of the right-wing echo machine to put them front and center in people’s mind.
So says our masters. WTF!?!?!?!?!
Let’s see…Japan & Germany, 75 years; Korea, 70 years; Afghanistan, 18 years; 11 States in the American South, 155 years; so US imperialist invaders & occupiers will be in Syria for the infinite future.
It won’t be a nationalist that removes them.
Our Syrian policy is to perpetually destabilize the country – citizens be damned. Can’t have a stable prosperous Syria in the thrall of Iran and Russia.
Defense Secretary Esper said ideology would make it difficult to defeat ISIS fully
Ha! Spoken like the former (and future) Raytheon lobbyist he is. This statement might be true if he were referring to US ideology.
Our presence in the Middle East insures that there will be a terror threat against the US. Want to end terrorism? Get out. Stop the occupations, stop killing civilians, stop causing chaos. There will be no motivation for revenge.
You sound a lot like Ron Paul . I can’t say you are wrong , when I think your idea is worth a try .
Vote for GOP then, or better yet, just shoot up your neighborhood.
The Afghan papers showed that that the US spend over a trillion and 18 years of warfare without any goal and endgame.
With Syria the US wants to double down on its insane record.
absolutely true might just as well add Libya ,Ukraine , Egypt ,and Iraq too all places a aggressive U.S foreign policy has left a trail of tears for the NWO . You say without any goal . I say it bankrupt us and destroyed them . What fine legacy for a once proud Christian country to leave .
When were we a “proud Christian country”? Was it when we were wiping out the natives? Dropping the big bombs on Japan? Leveling North Korea? Viet Nam? Iraq 1? Afghanistan? Iraq 2? And those are just some of the highlights.
We did not wipe out the natives although we could stand more improvements . Simple fact war is hell .
“We did not wipe out the natives”….who did ?
We damn sure tried, but not the point. When exactly were we a “proud Christian country”?
They ARE achieving their goal. As much of earth’s surface must be in chaos as possible. This will a) prevent their development b) degrade education, science, technology c) over one generation of chaos, and all self governing institutions and traditions would be gone. People without traditions, poor education, limited employment would all contribute to easy colonization, and the excess of poor , angry young males, become very useful in global supply of “rebels”, “terrorists”.
This is a Palestinian model. Keep them poor, under constant threat of violence, with no education, or even permission to go abroad for education — as those are not permitted to come back.
The objective is to stay. Sounds simple.
But here is the problem. It costs money. Money will be created as much as needed, but without a self-sufficient economy, money is needed for our consumption as well. With the loss of industrial base, we lost the edge in science and technology,. Now, it is a race to regain lost ground, as well as maintaining the coverage of territory we keep for down the road colonization.
So, to start with short list of list of needs. In defense, hypersonic missile capability. American territory missile defense, submarine defense, naval assets defense, air capabilities, icebreakers. In science and technology, robotics, AI, new chip technology , 5G and related capability, big data, internet of things, new heat resistant alloys, quantum physics and mechanics, nano technology, catch up with 30 years of lag in civilian nuclear technology. In space — just to put one man into ISS after 9 year hiatus would be a success. Getting our own high powered rocket engine to stop using Russian one to launch heavy Atlas V. And this is just a shallow list, as the underlying science is not there.
In one hand, politicians argue for giving incentives to Chinese and Russian scientists to come, in the other they are suspected of working with scientific circles in their countries, and can in a smallest suspicion land in jail. That is not appealing. Another obstacle is the lack of scientific discipline in many institutions. Non scientific management has tried to shortcut science, blaming them for overthinking, not fast enough to market. This has dogged pharmaceuticals for a long time.
Basically, a lots to do, not enough money and no priorities. We can do it all.
It shows in space plans. By the end of this year, both Space-x and Boeing-ULA were planning liftoffs, astronauts selected. Countdowns started. Both changed plans, flights will be conducted in a pilotless mode. Crewed flights postponed for 2020. It is clear that with such tremendous tradition of space program, US could be doing much better. But the change in NASA. mission and moving satellite launching and lower space exploration to commercial sector, many unintended consequences came about. One, commercial approach introduced shortcuts and tests showed the scientific deficiencies. Russia sounded alarm when Space-X Dragon was readied for its test mission to dock with ISS. There was no backup computer, and no tests performed to insure that the docking would not affect ISS stability. NASA got involved with testing, corrections made, and test was successful. Now, NASA is working with both contenders to insure proper testing. In fact, Space-X is known for making on the fly changes, so NASA forced them to freeze design to perform system wide testing. Modules did not have abort capability or were not tested. This caused delay.
Are these just teething problems? Ir is there a systemic flow at work? For example, Space-X is competing globally for launches of satellites. But to offer low cost and beat competition – it is making up the loss by charging US government launches higher cost.
All these “commercial” ventures are existing exclusively on taxpayers money. They have no customers for their products such as launching astronauts into ISS. But when they do one day, how come THEY will earn profit, when it was TAXPAYERS capital that funded the while venture. Should not taxpayer get at least 90% of profits down the road, until such companies can out THEIR money and claim profits? We have same problem with the entire military industry. Taxpayer capital is literally gifted to corporations to develop products. Then they SELL it to us, as well as globally. President is key salesperson. Yet, we see no profit, no reimbursement for government assets, staff or facilities being used for either development, testing or production. Nor reimbursement for marketing. We are just USED to such abuse of taxpayers capital and assets, that we do not even see it as wrong!
And if we keep up this way, where will the money come for the laundry list of deficiencies?
Not to mention our dogged clinging to our occupied pieces of dirt around the globe. It costs money too. Payable to those same corporations that have NO OTHER customer then US government. We should own them because they live of our money alone. No wonder Congress cannot imagine withdrawing from anywhere. It us somebody’s money that is at stake.
Gotta agree. Sombitches jes launched the hypersonic missile out my front door yesterday. Boy do I feel safer…..
Fully agree. Almost all US infrastructure money is already channeled to the insanity….and the rest will follow, together with more printing and more theft around the World.
US debt will only increase……and will never be repaid.
More wars, more killings, more destruction.
The World will pay for US insanity.
Only one country has the power to stop US insanity and destroy the US military…….thats Russia.
Thats why the Russophobia, demonization and endless sanction.
Next week Congress will vote on a bill, declaring Russia a state sponsor of terror.
US insanity has no limits.
Since neither Congress nor the Syrian govt authorized US personnel to be there in the first place, apparently the only procedural way to get them out would be to defund the military until they are removed. Congress is doing the opposite. Few congressmen would stick their necks out by calling for withdrawal from Syria, more would condemn Trump as pro-Russia if he chose to do so. So Congress is the problem, and more fundamentally campaign finance is the problem.
True, except one small problem…if trump hadn’t put them there, congress would have no one there to fund…..
Actually it was Obama/Clinton.
Candidate Trump said he’d get us out of there and it won him the election.
Unfortunately, he lacked the courage of his convictions.
You’re quite right, JP McEvoy. Yes, it was Obama and Clinton who illegally sent scores of US troops to Syria without even notifying its legitimate President, Bashir Assad (they also funded/armed Al-Qaeda and ISIS). On December 18, 2017, DJT announced the withdrawal of ALL US troops from Syria. However, there was one huge problem .. his 2 advisers – SecState Pompous Pompeo and Nat. Security Adviser Bonkers Bolton would have none of it and sabotaged his agenda. He should’ve fired those 2 on the spot, but he lacked the courage to do so, and the troops are still there.
“However, there was one huge problem. He was blowing smoke up our ass.”
Fixed, no charge.
Blowing smoke, or lame and ineffectual? I suspect Trump is quite a bit of both.
Hiring evil people, but out of his own evil intent or being manipulated? Both, he’s nasty, and he’s manipulated quite a lot.
Sheesh, how many times do I have to post this…..when trump came in there were 350 spec ops in Syria. By summer 2017, trump sent in 3000 marines, and quadrupled air strikes. It is not arithmetics fault that you fell for trumps bs. Let me know when he gets down to 350, then you can start talking about him getting out.
It wasn’t the 350 SFs that Obama put in that were the problem as much as thousands of ISIS that he unleashed that bedevil us today.
I am not defending Trump — but these troops were there ling before as US bet on many horses in Syria. We funded “vetted” militants that promptly joined Al-Qaeda, then tried to arm militants along Turkish border in order ti set them up as patsies for Kurd expansion. We first punished Kurds for being supportive of Damascus by inexplicable ISIS raid on Kobane. Only after Kurds ousted pro-Damascus leadership and YPG (offshoot if Turkish PKK) took the leadership role, US cane to “help” Kurds, and ever since have them used as “fighting” ISIS. And everywhere they went — their militia took control over Arab towns, and allowed Kurds to kick out inhabitants with better housing, and take properties as they pleased.
All of that was happening before Trump took office.
Let me remind you of key events. Mosul fell in October 2016, due to Iraqi army and Shia militia offensive. US contribution, air pummeling of Mosul, only harmed civilians. US did EVERYTHING possible to keep Mosul from falling into Iraqi hands. First, moaning was loud about Shia militia. As if Iraqi population gave a hoot about who is fighting ISIS, for as long as ISIS was defeated.
Then we tried to organize some Paris conference to make Mosul “international” city. All that as a wink-wink to Sunnis. We love you Sunnis (by extension even your ISIS), and will defend you against bad Shia! But Sunnis had it ENOUGH with ISIS, the creature funded and supplied by Saudi Arabia and others. Sunni tribal leaders went to Baghdad instead to support Iraqi government. End of road for American-EU attempt at interfering in Mosul. And then, remember — our media was all excited about corridor being opened for ISIS to pour into Raqqa! Excitement galore.
But after fall of Mosul, and Iraqi forces ousting PKK that America propped up in Sinjar and Kurkuk — it was game over for Saudi project. ISIS project would have worked ONLY if US managed to control Iraqi Army and prevented it from consolidating power over Sunni region. The idea was to consolidate Iraqi and Syrian Sunni lands, and separate Kurdish lands, leaving Iraq with only Shia regions.
It did not work. In Saudi Arabia alarm bells were ringing. The crown prince with all powers, former Interior minister, was US man Mohammed bin Nayef, literally FBI and CIA trained, and pushed into Crown Prince position. He was the man that was key in ISIS strategy. He was already anointed as future King by our media spreading false stories of King being demented. But things went wrong, and US did not keep its end of bargain. When Trump visited Saudi Arabia immediately after becoming president, Crown Prince was on ropes at home. His power was more and more checked by King’s son, MBS then minister of defense. Trump was trying to give him boost, by suggesting Qatar be blamed for sponsoring ISIS, and breaking relations with Qatar. Trump just wanted Qatar punished for being close to Iran and Turkey.
But it was the last drop — Crown Prince was ousted, and MBS became Crown Prince. Saudis knew that US could no longer implement Sunni caliphate with Saudi Wahhabism in charge. It was all over. Turkey, Syria, Iraq snd Iran were winners, as a hostile Sunni caliphate was not going to be a barrier between Levant, Mezoppotamia, Gulf and Iran. With the end of Kurdish separatism, that barrier was gone.
Trump can then easily declare ISIS our enemy, as its remnant in Syria was useless for any strategic purposes.
It was useful inly as a placeholder for Kurds. And with some luck, create Kurdistan along Iraqi and Turkish borders — accomplishing a minor toll both between Turkey and Middle East. Turkey was not buying it. It cut corridor preventing Kurds going West, entered Afrin to end smuggling arms, and leaned on US to vacate border, arranging with Russia and Syria the control of territory. When Raqqa fell nobody cared. Except Trump who promises getting out of Syria.
Even though US controlled are in Syria is minimal— US must stay. Israel supporters cannot imagine both Syria and Iraq having territorial integrity.
Thus , Trump is taking a line he thinks his base will swallow.
But the real reason to stay is to prevent peace in Syria. And to stay around to stir up more chaos. More chaos with Kurds, or Sunnis or Shia, ir in Lebanon or in Turkey.
In fact, Turkey is top priority for destruction. Former EU darling, Davatoglu is forming his party to challenge AKP. You know it will be funded by Soros, NED, and slew if European liberals, Mi5s, etc. Another Gulen.
Trump wanted to get out of a losing position, get out clean and go from there. He cannot. Until there is a change in US armed forces leadership that prioritizes military defense mission over political missions — no chance for change regardless of who us the president.
No, on Syria, when trump entered office, there were 350 spec ops in Syria, directing air strikes against ISIS. In early 2017 trump sent in 3000 marines, support for 2 (16-24) 155mm artillery batteries. Those batteries fired 100ooo laser guided shells into Syria by 2019, rubbling northern Syrian cities, killing civilians, and causing millions of refugees. He also quadrupled airstrikes. Dont even try to say trump does not own this. Meanwhile US troops are crossing the Syrian/Iraq border, back and forth, likely so they don’t count as deployed in either country. Let me know when trump gets down to the original 350, then we can talk about if he is going to “get out”.
They weren’t directing air strikes on ISIS as much as it was being directed against Syrian infrastructure.
It wasn’t until the Russians entered the fray that ISIS got whacked.
Your description of events leading to ISIS omits 2 important points.
1) refugees…predominately Sunni, whom headed North and west from civil strife, and a US anti- Sunni occupation. Millions settled in Syria.
2) Bush’s surge…in an attempt to quell the Iraqi civil war(collaborators vs resistance,
and sunni vs shia) sunni warlords were paid in dollars and weapons to head away from shia areas, and civil war. This they did, to the north, west, and Syria. This is the main reason US forces encountered US weapons within Sunni forces later.
Mosul was “liberated” from sunni control after trump ordered the rubbling of the city in 2017. Mosul was reduced to what the US military calls a “feral city” by US artillery and airstrikes. Raqqa followed in destruction. The “destruction” of the so called “caliphate” was simply the destruction of any infrastructure which would make any social order possible.
Bianca- I appreciate your synopsis (Dave S too). But as far as Trump’s motivation, I don’t think you are looking at it the right way.
We can better understand this administration by viewing it through this prism: what does Trump believe will benefit him the most? I find that once you determine that, all else becomes clearer.
Trump may want to “get out clean” of Syria – Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, etc – because there is a block of voters who will support him if he does (myself included). But we should consider what else Trump wants.
I feel that his business interests in Turkey and Saudi Arabia, plus, perhaps to a lesser degree, consideration of the significant influence over US elections and “narrative” that Israel wields, are the prime factors in his decision making here. Any analysis of the Middle East, or Foreign Policy in general (or anything else), that does not include a “what’s in it for Trump” angle is incomplete at best. Plus be aware that his opinion of “what’s best” can change at any moment.
We should assume that he currently believes destabilizing Syria and “taking the oil” helps him the most.
It may just be that simple.
No Trump is the problem . It looks like he lied just like our past presidents have . Trump foreign policy has not been what he said it would be . It has been much the same as Obama and the Bushes clearly NWO policy
Basically any “anti-terrorism” millitary mission can be purported to not need further authorization unless Congress says so. We can blame the presidents, the “Deep State”, donors, and Congress, but the incovenient truth is Americans keep supporting the status quo. Those of us who object are in the minority, and the minority loses in this form of government. To be frank about it, Americans are not antiwar as a people. We can only hope this changes in the decades to come, if we survive that far.
We knew what the establishment of both political parties wanted . We hopped Trump was different . But Trump has failed to be enough different to stop the wasteful needless war .
antarticus, I agree with your hopes —–but we both know that the only thing that makes people antiwar is getting their teeth kicked in, e.g. Japan after WWII.
On the contrary Richard, History has demonstrated time and time again that those countries “getting their teeth kicked in” usually end up, one way or another returning the favor, often in spades. Naked aggression is almost NEVER the only way.
Japan was literally forced into war against the United States by an illegal, clandestine, but none the less all out war waged by a treasonous FDR. A secret war that he used to trick the American people into war with not just Japan, but Germany as well. In fact, the parallels between the treason of FDR’s “Pearl Harbor” and Bush/Chaney’s 9-11 which resulted in the American people being tricked into wars of conquest for israel should be absolutely terrifying to every Patriotic
Truman, that great Humanitarian (war criminal in the real world) dropped 2 Atomic Bombs targeting INNOCENT CIVILIANS AFTER, the Japanese tried to surrender. The second offer was unconditional. (that bit of history was rewritten almost immediately) Truman rejected both attempts out of hand. The parallels between this action and that of at least 6 other US Presidents and every single Prime Minister of Israel all of whom targeted innocent civilians to “have their teeth kicked in” leaves no doubt that at best, the US/israel are no better than the “bad guys”.
For the record: I volunteered to serve my country as an Infantry soldier many decades ago……
You’re only right about Americans if you assume doing nothing other than following the law and paying your taxes is “supporting the status quo,” ie permanent occupation / war. We’ve seen here that polls of Millennials show most young people would resist being drafted. No one asks voters if they support the wars as if their opinion matters, when polls actually do ask a lot of Americans say they don’t like what’s going on.
“Do you think it is in the national interest of the United States to be involved in the conflict in Syria, or not?” More answered no than yes. Most of the other questions here
had push-poll bias.
What we have is not democracy, and democracy is not the root of the permanent-war problem.
I disagree with your implication that ultimately the American people are at fault it is utter rubbish. We the people haven’t had any say in who gets to run for national office for decades. Which means in practical terms that the outcome is immaterial to deciding who is actually incontrol of the government. The same group of rabid, war mongering israel first zionists remain in charge because they always decide who gets to run on both
tickets. And “our” elected officials, particularly since 9-11 have made it clear by their actions that it israel comes first, last and always and America and Amerians be damned.
Too much oil and land for Israel, Saudi Arabia, and US corporations to steal.
It is the job of the military to avoid creating a crisis in which we get run out.
That is not the same as deciding to stay forever.
When to leave then becomes a political choice. That is how things ought to be done, with civilian command of overall war plans. However, with our specific politicians it is a problem, because they are one and all utterly useless and incompetent, or at best just sold out and unwilling.
They also said Assad would be out in a matter of weeks… They were wrong about that timeline too.
Start warming up the choppers boys.
Esper ain’t too bright, obviously.
I wonder if there is even one country in the world that the USA would not feel obliged to consider invading and occupying if it took the fancy to do so?
Obama got preemptively awarded Nobel “Peace” Prize and was hailed by his supporters as an anti-war President. Similarly, Trump gets preemptively praised by his supporters for pulling troops out of Syria. The brainless sheeple are never bothered by the reality.
Censorship isn’t just ugly and deceitful, it is the antithesis of everything that America stands for. Liars, hypocrites, criminals and terrorists resort to censorship. And when there isn’t even the excuse of shielding readers from profanity, or threats of violence to rationalize such cowardice, often these actions are sedition or treason.
Without mass censorship by our government, media and majority of the political online community, Israel would have ceased to exist long ago…..
Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech.” — Benjamin Franklin
It’s refreshing to see a transparent badly-run government. The rich kid turned reality TV star is bellowing about how we’re going to take all the oil, and the incestuously-amplified military brass is talking about how we have to stay to defeat an enemy which has never attacked the USA and will be nearly impossible to defeat because, ‘ideology.’ Great job, Donnie!
The US is a terrorist pirate. I wonder what the world will do.
We will leave when Israel tells us we can leave….and not sooner. And besides, we haven’t stolen any oil yet.
Mmmmmm I think we could completely out of Syria in less than a week if we really wanted to. There is literally no one stopping us from leaving. Hell, the Syrians would probably help us pack our stuff for free.
Comments are closed.