Caroline Glick on Trump’s Syria pullout
Pros and cons. There are quite a few of each, so I suggest you read the whole thing.
It ends this way:
Time will tell whether Trump’s decision to remove U.S. forces from Syria was a prelude to disaster for U.S. allies and a boon for America’s enemies, or whether the opposite is the case. But what is clear enough is that move is not entirely negative.
Pretty well balanced article. We have been at war since the Soviet Union collapsed. Somebody, probably Richard Fernandez, the other day. George HW Bush’s vacation from history lasted a year. Bill Clinton ignored the gathering storm until 911 and got out of town just in time. I still recall Madeline Halfbright’s comment, “Of course we take terrorism seriously; we have meetings every week.
”
Meanwhile, the embassies in Africa and the USS Cole blew up.
I am amazed at just how many people have been to a military War College. I never knew.
I don’t have any issue with this pull out but what I do have concerns with are the seeming constant staff turnover and endless drama.
Of course it’s all exacerbated by a dishonest media but a good portion is self inflicted.
Example: the attacks on the Fed chairman. Now the story is Trump ‘has discussed’ (which is weaselly reporting for sure) firing Powell (which would cause a meltdown of epic proportions and perhaps a market drop of extreme amounts) but it doesn’t even matter it just throws more gasoline on the fire in an environment where the market has been in free fall.
The one thing that is weakening my support for Trump is the constant drama and sense of neverending crisis. It’s so damn tiring.
Another resignation — “Brett McGurk, US envoy to anti-ISIS coalition, resigns in wake of Trump decision to pull troops from Syria”
The one thing that is weakening my support for Trump is the constant drama and sense of neverending crisis. It’s so damn tiring.
That’s the idea. Surprised you don’t see it. Read Lewandowski and Bossie’s new book, “Trump’s Enemies.”
The first review is evidence of who they are and what they say.
McGurk is an Obama appointee that was held over for whatever reason. I have less problem with someone leaving like that than with Trump’s own appointees. These should be people more in line with the president’s thinking from the get go and their coming and going reflects poorly on the president and the administration in general.
Mike K,
But Trump can’t make it worse like with the Fed comments he has made. For some things upsetting the apple cart are refreshing but financial markets are not one of those.
And it also tires people out. I guarantee you there will be a set of people that will vote for Beto or whoever just to make all this stop. That won’t be me but that doesn’t mean I don’t understand the thinking.
Glick’s article also appeared in The Jerusalem Post, and the comments there are interesting. I especially like this one:
The most persuasive argument for the withdrawal for me is that it’s a mission creep
protection. So the US currently has 2,000 there now and what happens if an attack happens on them and some of them are killed then the call will be for more and then it will be 10,000 and then 20,000 and so on.
Because no matter what anybody says about there being no calls for troop increase anybody with a brain can easily see a scenario where there would be calls for an increase and then here we go again.
Mark me down as someone who still thinks the Constitution mandates a declaration of war. That’s happened only 5 times in history, all of them at Presidential request, but that request is not itself mandated. Talk is cheap. Make the 525 talkers in Congress stand up and be counted. If war is declared, the US goes in and takes over in full force. If not, the troops come home.
their coming and going reflects poorly on the president and the administration in general.
Do you suppose the fact that an appointee cannot eat in a restaurant in DC might narrow the field of potential appointees ? This is war “by all means necessary,” as the Middle School teacher in Berkeley says.
She is very angry that she was arrested for beating people.
Mike K,
Yeah I get it. But that doesn’t explain Tillerson and others like Zinke who was beyond stupid when you consider the microscope he had to know he would be under. When they are out to get you don’t give them more ammunition.
And I don’t put Mattis in this as he lasted longer as Secretary Of Defense than Obama’s last 3!!! guys in that job did.
A Twitter thread worth reading re McGurk’s resignation by Rukmini Callimachi, the NY Times correspondent covering ISIS:
“While four American soldiers were killed there in the 3+ years since our involvement, officials estimate that the Kurds buried 10,000 of theirs” — and we just walk away.
Ann,
So we stay forever? Because that’s what will be needed. And what if more troops are needed?
That’s the thing about this that get’s me. There is no end in sight to this.
Maybe 17 years will be enough. Of course it’s not for Afghanistan.
Ann
There are two things wrong with your comment. First, DIPLOMATS do NOT lead the fight against anybody, much less ISIS.
Secondly, McGurk’s talk of “coalition partners” implies that they are contributing substantively in the fight against ISIS. Please. Their ‘contribution” consists entirely of facile wording designed to placate. Basically, our coalition partners have agreed not to verbally oppose our military opposition to ISIS.
Griffin,
It’s not our length of involvement which is the problem. It’s a lack of determination to finish the job and an unwillingness to identify Islam itself as the source of the aggression.
At base, our problem is not Islam. The source of our problem is the Marxist/Amerikan Left.
Geoffrey,
Maybe. But that finishing the job is easy to say and extremely difficult and costly to do. How many thousands or millions of American lives are you willing to spend to finish that job? How many places do you want to finish that job? Syria, Iran, Pakistan?
I’ve got to think there was a lot of people the other day that saw on TV or read online that we pulling out of Syria and their first response was
‘Wait a minute, we have troops in Syria?
The number was so small as to not touch as many people as at the peak of Iraq and Afghanistan and the reason for being there has always been murky and hard to simply explain so it just became this thing for military to play with.
I remember in the run up to the Gulf War there was talk about how the US didn’t have a lot of senior generals with leadership experience in real combat situations since we had limited engagements from 75-90 or so and now we have gone the other way with at least 17 straight years of war and now we have military leadership that has known nothing else for a long time. In many ways it’s the only way they know.
I’m looking at this part of Glick’s piece for the long-term strategy, which addresses some of the points raised by comments above, and may explain the reason that Mattis and McGurk decided they just can’t get behind Trump’s policy priorities:
“When Trump came into office, he continued to implement Obama’s policy. He did not ask for an expanded mandate for U.S. forces in Syria. This despite the fact that National Security Advisor John Bolton told Breitbart News in August that the writ of U.S. forces in Syria had been expanded to containing Iran and blocking Iran from seizing control over the Syrian-Iraqi border. The Pentagon, for its part, insisted on maintaining the Obama administration’s pro-Iran policy and rejected attempts to abandon it in favor of an anti-Iran policy in Syria.
The same has held in Lebanon. Despite voluminous evidence that Hezbollah controls both the Lebanese government and the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF), the Pentagon has resisted any attempt to end U.S. support for the LAF and the Lebanese government. And so, for the past two years, the Trump administration has continued to fund and train the LAF and to support the Lebanese government. In a sign of just how intertwined Hezbollah and LAF forces have become, Israel’s Hadashot news channel reported Wednesday that LAF and Hezbollah forces conduct joint patrols along the Lebanese border with Israel.
One of the consequences of the U.S. pullout from Syria is that Trump will finally abandon Obama’s pro-Iranian policy in Syria. True, he isn’t replacing it with an anti-Iranian policy in Syria. But all the same, by abandoning a pro-Iranian policy in Syria,the move will lend some coherence to the U.S.’s overall strategy for countering Iran’s growing power and influence in the region and worldwide.
Israel’s Hadashot news channel reported on Wednesday that along with Trump’s decision to remove U.S. forces from Syria, U.S. officials told Israel that if Hezbollah gains a more powerful position in the next Lebanese government, the U.S. will end its support for the LAF and agree to Israel’s request that it place an economic embargo on the Lebanese government.”
William Barton on December 22, 2018 at 5:14 pm at 5:14 pm said:
Mark me down as someone who still thinks the Constitution mandates a declaration of war. That’s happened only 5 times in history, all of them at Presidential request, but that request is not itself mandated. Talk is cheap. Make the 525 talkers in Congress stand up and be counted. If war is declared, the US goes in and takes over in full force. If not, the troops come home.
* * *
This has been argued on and off since 9/11, and I agree: declare war and beat the bad guys into the ground, or don’t play in the sandbox.
Another piece in The Jerusalem Post on the U.S. withdrawal from Syria shares none of Glick’s optimism, calling it a “nightmare”:
This is a puzzling move by President Trump. The situation in Syria is chaotic. There are many factions and trying to make peace there is a fool’s errand. I understand his desire to disengage.
On the other hand, we have, with the aid of the Kurds, created a bit of stability in the northeastern part. According to General Dunford we are 20% of the way to training a 40,000 man Kurdish militia, which ostensibly could continue to maintain the stability without us there. Here’s a pretty good discussion of the situation with a map.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/dec/19/us-troops-syria-withdrawal-trump
The Middle East is a quagmire. Good hearted people think it can be fixed ala the “Pentagon’s New Map” by Thomas P. M. Barnett. I once thought it might be possible. Iraq and Afghanistan have revealed the truth that fundamentalist Islam is extremely resistant to reform. We need to rethink how we deal with that truth. Pi**ing away blood and treasure in unending skirmishes Isn’t, IMO, going to get the job done. But I have yet to see a new strategy articulated by anyone close to the President or the DOD. I sure don’t have any genius insight to offer.
Let us hope that our interests are not badly harmed by this move.
I am still reading articles in alternating fashion: withdrawal good, withdrawal bad; with an occasional “withdrawal is both good and bad” thrown in (like Glick’s) for good measure.
If all these experts can’t agree, then maybe there really is no right answer.
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/12/the-cost-of-betraying-syrias-kurds.php
Paul: “President Trump says he’s about making America great again. Great nations don’t betray allies who have borne the brunt of a successful war against a mutual enemy. They don’t do the bidding of the likes of Erdogan and they don’t respond to the threats of such men by running away.”
Well, then we aren’t a great nation, because that’s exactly what we did in the Far East, betraying our South Vietnamese allies and others who fought a successful war with our help. Then after Gulf War I, we reneged on promises to help the Iraqi Kurds – it’s amazing that they worked with us again, but you go to war with the allies you have, and all they had was the US.
The obvious analog is that Congress is “the likes of Erdogan”: works for me.
FWIW, I detested those politicized betrayas in the seventies and the nineties, and I don’t like deserting the Kurds now, but they are fighting Turkey as well as ISIS, and we are still stuck with Turkey as a NATO ally; that has to be settled one way or the other, and there are bad conseqences down either road.
I just drove from Tucson to Orange County and the argument about Syria is no clearer. The Kurds should receive arms and air support when needed. They have survived 20 years with modest US help.
What we really need to do is get out of Afghanistan where we have 15,000 troops at risk. They are accomplishing nothing. They will not be easy to get out. Pakistan is no ally; any more than Turkey is.
Both WWI and WWII showed the folly of continuing and reinforcing a rotten situation.
Our ‘CIA army’ in Syria was NEVER going to stop Iran. It was a creature of 0bomba — and he was in lust with Tehran.
For those not following the news… or very slow on the up-take… Iran has been shipping LARGE to Syria all along.
There is no super highway from Mosul to Damascas. A two-lane highway must suffice.
For the weapons at issue, they are air flown, and always will be.
The nation given the biggest headache is not Israel — it’s Jordan. Duh.
Erdogan has got two suitors: Putin and Trump. Trump got rid of the S-400 — and is sure to make Raytheon happy. (Patriot)
Trump also kept NATO in one piece — and in so doing totally frustrated Putin’s highest hope.
I rather suspect that Erdogan will also be obtaining a waiver from Congress — down the road — for F-35 jets.
Ann / The Jerusalem Post:
“For Israel, as well as for the Sunni states in the region, this is a nightmare. The presence of the US troops in Kurdish-controlled areas in eastern Syria kept Iran from being able to complete a Shia arc leading from Iran, through Iraq and Syria and into Lebanon.”
If it is that important, then the people on the front lines there (Israel, SAUDI ARABIA, etc.) should take over and even increase the war against “ISIS”
@CarolineGlick
Mattis:
1. Opposed moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem.
2. Opposed cancelling the Iran nuclear deal.
3. Insisted on arming and training the Hezbollah-controlled Lebanese military.
4. Opposed using US forces in Syria vs. Iran and partners.
5. Said Tel Aviv is Israel’s capital.
If ISIS is to be defeated, it must be by Muslims. A Western force on Arab soil merely feeds recruitment, and it will pop up again.
Extremist Islam kills far more Moslems than Westerners, and most of the local countries knock it on the head, once stable enough to do so.
Continuing wars allow it to flourish.
I think there is more going on than we know about, certainly more than I know about, so I’m going to sit back and await developments.
The latest — “Trump forcing early Mattis departure”:
Well, so much for that “orderly process”, etc.
Chester:
You seem to have a forest and trees problem. How is ISIS to establish it’s caliphate? Hint: it ain’t by nonviolent proselytizing.
It will be by the sword, sort of how Islam routinely has spread it’s political power. So war by ISIS against non-ISIS entities if built into their plan. Who are the first to be exterminated by totalitarian, expansionist ideologies, such as ISIS? Any close at hand that don’t support the ideology. So ISIS kills mostly fellow Moslems to start, non-Moslem victims are just a bonus. The West didn’t create ISIS or Boko Haram but when such groups become a threat to Western interests it ain’t because the West has special forces or comparatively small military forces in Islamic lands. You seem to have forgotten BHO’s policy of pulling out of Iraq in 2011 and the rise of ISIS.
You are repeating OBL’s (he who fed the fishes) talking points that he made prior to 9/11.
Ann,
So naming the second in charge as an acting Secretary isn’t orderly? It was questionable whether a replacement could be confirmed by the end of February anyway so there probably would have been an acting Secretary anyway.
And if Mattis wanted an ‘orderly process’ he shouldn’t have released that letter to the media. When you publicly attack your boss there are consequences and one of them is you may not get to leave on your terms.
Also makes Trump look as if he didn’t fully understand the resignation letter at first, had to get all riled up by what commentators said about it. But, what the heck, he’s embarrassment-proof.
I strongly recommend checking out Rand Paul’s appearance on ‘Face The Nation’ today.
Great job of articulating the case for withdrawal.
VDH gives some nistorical perspective, and he didn’t even have to go to the Greeks and Romans to do it.
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/mattis-and-syria-get-a-grip-on-the-hysteria/
“…the hysteria over the withdrawal of troops and the unfortunate resignation of Mattis as something end-of-the-world devastating and historically unprecedented is as weird as it is incoherent.
First, we should remember that earlier General Mattis did not resign from the Obama administration; he was summarily and without much cause fired — reportedly without a phone call, causing outrage in January 2013 from many who now see his resignation as unprecedented.
Two, defense secretaries, given the nature of the job, have historically sometimes had short tenures. Harry Truman and Barack Obama each had four different secretaries, many of whom were controversial and at odds with their bosses. At some point, policy differences outnumber agreements, and secretaries resign or are forced to resign.
…
Four, earlier this year Trump had promised to put troops into Syria to finish up destroying ISIS for “six months.” So his deadline was not really much of a surprise, although most had thought, given the success of the mission, that a continued presence would be in the country’s and the administration’s interests.
…
So far, we rarely receive any real information on what the actual ends are, and whether the means to obtain them are sufficient or justifiable, at a time of $21 trillion in national debt and a seeming absence of gratitude from those we seek to help.”
So, Trump gave them six months to finish a mission, got the word via Erdogan (not his own advisors, although they validated the Turk) that it was done within tolerance limits, and terminated the engagement as promised.
Sounds sane to me, even if staying might be advisable for other reasons.
I strongly recommend checking out Rand Paul’s appearance on ‘Face The Nation’ today.
Yes, we just listened to Conrad Black’s book on Trump driving from Tucson to LA. Trump’s is like no other president, certainly no modern one. He does what he says and says what he does. The Syria hysteria is just this week’s rant by all his enemies. Rand Paul is sometimes sketchy on foreign policy but he is right on here.
On the gripping hand,
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/1218/thiessen122118.php3
“Trump was right to denounce Obama for declaring victory against the Islamic State and withdrawing U.S. forces. So why is he now doing exactly what he criticized Obama for doing? The president needs to ask himself: Who is celebrating this decision? Answer: Iran, Russia, the Assad regime, Hezbollah, the Islamic State — and, in his prison cell at Guantanamo Bay, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.
When your enemies are cheering, you have made a mistake. It’s not too late to change course.”
Commenter to Thiesen’s post cited above:
“The US has to fly it’s troops past all of Europe to get to Syria. Why is this our problem? We are $21 trillion in debt. If we stay there, how long will it take until we can leave? We have been in Afghanistan for 17 years, and if we left today, tomorrow you would never know we were there. Why do we need “influence in the region?” We are now the largest petoleum producer in the world. Let Assad and ISIS beat each other to a pulp. Even if Iran swallow all of Syria, so what? A slightly bigger $h!thole.”
Some people would know we had been in Afghanistan, but his general point is probably correct.
On the last point about Iran, however, I think Glick and Dyer have a better perspective, but it’s not really clear that 2000 US troops can prevent Iran from taking over, because they really want to and have the capacity to do so.
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/col-david-hunt-trumps-syria-decision-looks-frivolous-in-a-region-where-every-move-is-deadly-serious
“There is a real possibility that ISIS will reconstitute in Syria – and we should not be surprised that malleable groups such as ISIS or Al Qaeda or the Taliban will grow back like the cancers they are. Without U.S. intelligence and Special Forces on the ground, without U.S. bombing in Syria, it is a certainty that ISIS (which was never totally defeated) will get stronger.
What should be done – and should have been done years ago – is to use a small powerful force of between 500 and 1,000 men. These should be Special Operations Forces only. Their one mission should be Counter Terrorism and NOT nation building, which we have failed at for 17 years now in Afghanistan. This force should have drone and fixed wing aircraft support and it should kill terrorists and those that support them.
This option should be used not only in Syria, but in Afghanistan as well.”
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/dan-gainor-trump-attacked-over-wall-syria-and-more-liberal-media-skip-naughty-or-nice-list-this-week
“The Syrian pullout dropped The New York Times officially on both sides of the ongoing debate at the same time. A January editorial criticized Trump’s increase of troops in Syria as “poorly conceived, too dependent on military action and fueled by wishful thinking.” It even warned about whether “the mission won’t creep more.”
Fast forward 11 months and The Times had a different answer — once more anti-Trump. The Times editorial board warned readers this time of Trump’s “abrupt and dangerous troop withdrawal decision.” “
Trump should have declared that he’s removing troops from Syria so as to prepare for an all-out, take-no-prisoners, hit-the-beaches, war-to-end-all-wars war against Global Warming (TM).
Then the MSM would be eating out of his hand:
https://dailycaller.com/2015/05/20/obama-readies-the-troops-for-the-war-on-global-warming/
Um, hold on. Maybe not…
Their one mission should be Counter Terrorism and NOT nation building, which we have failed at for 17 years now in Afghanistan.
We once had such a force. Read “Jawbreaker. It was working,. Then “The Big Army” arrived, told all the SF guys to “shave and get into uniform.”
You might also read Dakota Meyer’s Into the Fire” to learn how dysfunctional that Army is.