JUST the Stolen Documents/Mar-A-Lago/"Judge" Cannon Trial

[foreverlax]

Guess it's time we get over Trump losing Syria to Russia.

Lost Syria ? When did the US ever have any control or influence over Syria ? Never said we did, but in the words of the great George Costanza, we lost any hand we had.

They were a Soviet ally before they were a Russian ally.
The last time that point was made, you said it was a stupid observation.

What is "winning" in Syria ?
No clue...what is winning in any of our other military adventure? Seems the DoD never gets that part right.

Responsibility for stopping a civil war, peacekeeping, reconstruction, resettlement of millions of refugees ?
That used to be our role

That's the prize which comes with "winning" Syria.
Doesn't matter since we left that table when we walked away from the Kurds.

The best we can hope for is to help protect the Kurds (if they'll cease their terrorist activities against Turkey), give them some leverage for autonomy, keep them as an ally & base to hold down ISIS, & not prolong an intractable civil war.

...and not "lose" Turkey (completely) in the process.

Turkey remains a geo-strategically critical NATO ally.

It was a stupid observation then (when inserted in the context of the discussion afan & I were having), Fine. Delivery matters.

just like "losing Syria" is a stupid observation now. Disagree....there can be no moaning when Syria, somehow, gets worse, since Vlad has the strings and the Kurds don't trust us. Iran is another example of What the heck is the plan? Can you tell me the situation hasn't deteriorated since he walked from the deal? Things have gotten worse for Iran, They're running out of money to fund their proxies throughout the region. Massive anti-Iran protests in Iraq. Oil is still flowing out of the Gulf. Other Navies have joined us in keeping the sea lanes open & participating in the largest minesweeping exercise ever conducted.

We were never in it, to "win" it. Disagree - as the world's cop, we are always in it. You don't want that job, set aside, give it to China and the yuan. We're still there to step on IS, keep the sea lanes open, keep the oil flowing & we're still protecting the Kurds. We're just not signing up for an open ended peacekeeping & reconstruction mission in Syria, although we will join NATO & GCC allies if they want to participate.

You can't lose what you never had. Bet there are some easy examples of that...like the death of an unborn child. Syria was a miscarriage before we got involved.

We never had a seat at the table (although Flynn was working to get one for us). Horse Hockey. Trump met with Little Kim...we can be where we want to be. During the transition, Flynn was negotiating with Kislyak for a seat at the Astana conf, set to take place in early 2017.

Holding the oil fields & their territory outside the Turkish incursion zone still gives the Kurds leverage, So again it's selective what falls under AUMF. We don't need their fossil fuels. What is the actual plan here? Denying the oil fields to IS falls within the existing AUMF. Read the NPR explainer I linked earlier about the strategic significance of the oil fields. We won't use or profit from the oil, the Kurds will. Those bases are perfectly located as staging points for raiding IS remnants in the lower Euphrates valley.

which they are playing expertly. The Kurds get it, if you don't. They're hanging with us. Oh, I see what's happening and globally it's stunning to watch and completely inexplicable, as hard as you try. Watch the news on DW & BBC. They get it.

You didn't answer the questions asked -

Iran - What is the plan? Have they moved further down the road to enrich uranium?
Maintain the sanctions. Force Iran back to the table. Structure our defensive forces in the region to deter & counter Iran's military retaliations. Quietly encourage our Brit, French, German allies to restrain Iran's breakout & attract them back to the table.

Syrian Oil - What is the plan?
https://www.npr.org/2019/10/31/77514285 ... it-matters
It's obvious. Read the NPR explainer
The SDF can use the same sales, micro-refining & (smuggling) distribution as ISIL did, with US tech assist & protection.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_produ ... ng_in_ISIL

Regarding IRan - how long or is it open ended?

Syria - you linked an opinion piece. What is Trump's plan?

An opinion piece full of information laying out 3 reasons why Syrian oil is worth protecting for the Kurds.
Trump's plan is what we are in the process of doing. Watch the news.
Review my previous posts & stop pestering me to repeat what I've already posted.
Both are open ended.

I don't care about someone's opinion, I want to know the actual plan.

Both are open ended, and yet in this same thread, you say Trump left the Kurds because he doesn't want it to be "open ended".

Got it...watch TV. Clearly there is nothing concrete you can add to this conversation.

Yes. I fail to live up to your example of bringing substance to this topic.

This is your wheelhouse, not mine. You constantly make statements as facts, supported by opinions of others.

You asked me the same type of questions ...I admit to not having answer. When you are asked the same questions, you tell us to stop bothering you and to use google. That has no value.

[Typical Lax Dad]

The king of masquerading opinions as facts. It was my first observation.

[old salt]

Guess it's time we get over Trump losing Syria to Russia.

Lost Syria ? When did the US ever have any control or influence over Syria ? Never said we did, but in the words of the great George Costanza, we lost any hand we had.

They were a Soviet ally before they were a Russian ally.
The last time that point was made, you said it was a stupid observation.

What is "winning" in Syria ?
No clue...what is winning in any of our other military adventure? Seems the DoD never gets that part right.

Responsibility for stopping a civil war, peacekeeping, reconstruction, resettlement of millions of refugees ?
That used to be our role

That's the prize which comes with "winning" Syria.
Doesn't matter since we left that table when we walked away from the Kurds.

The best we can hope for is to help protect the Kurds (if they'll cease their terrorist activities against Turkey), give them some leverage for autonomy, keep them as an ally & base to hold down ISIS, & not prolong an intractable civil war.

...and not "lose" Turkey (completely) in the process.

Turkey remains a geo-strategically critical NATO ally.

It was a stupid observation then (when inserted in the context of the discussion afan & I were having), Fine. Delivery matters.

just like "losing Syria" is a stupid observation now. Disagree....there can be no moaning when Syria, somehow, gets worse, since Vlad has the strings and the Kurds don't trust us. Iran is another example of What the heck is the plan? Can you tell me the situation hasn't deteriorated since he walked from the deal? Things have gotten worse for Iran, They're running out of money to fund their proxies throughout the region. Massive anti-Iran protests in Iraq. Oil is still flowing out of the Gulf. Other Navies have joined us in keeping the sea lanes open & participating in the largest minesweeping exercise ever conducted.

We were never in it, to "win" it. Disagree - as the world's cop, we are always in it. You don't want that job, set aside, give it to China and the yuan. We're still there to step on IS, keep the sea lanes open, keep the oil flowing & we're still protecting the Kurds. We're just not signing up for an open ended peacekeeping & reconstruction mission in Syria, although we will join NATO & GCC allies if they want to participate.

You can't lose what you never had. Bet there are some easy examples of that...like the death of an unborn child. Syria was a miscarriage before we got involved.

We never had a seat at the table (although Flynn was working to get one for us). Horse Hockey. Trump met with Little Kim...we can be where we want to be. During the transition, Flynn was negotiating with Kislyak for a seat at the Astana conf, set to take place in early 2017.

Holding the oil fields & their territory outside the Turkish incursion zone still gives the Kurds leverage, So again it's selective what falls under AUMF. We don't need their fossil fuels. What is the actual plan here? Denying the oil fields to IS falls within the existing AUMF. Read the NPR explainer I linked earlier about the strategic significance of the oil fields. We won't use or profit from the oil, the Kurds will. Those bases are perfectly located as staging points for raiding IS remnants in the lower Euphrates valley.

which they are playing expertly. The Kurds get it, if you don't. They're hanging with us. Oh, I see what's happening and globally it's stunning to watch and completely inexplicable, as hard as you try. Watch the news on DW & BBC. They get it.

You didn't answer the questions asked -

Iran - What is the plan? Have they moved further down the road to enrich uranium?
Maintain the sanctions. Force Iran back to the table. Structure our defensive forces in the region to deter & counter Iran's military retaliations. Quietly encourage our Brit, French, German allies to restrain Iran's breakout & attract them back to the table.

Syrian Oil - What is the plan?
https://www.npr.org/2019/10/31/77514285 ... it-matters
It's obvious. Read the NPR explainer
The SDF can use the same sales, micro-refining & (smuggling) distribution as ISIL did, with US tech assist & protection.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_produ ... ng_in_ISIL

Regarding IRan - how long or is it open ended?

Syria - you linked an opinion piece. What is Trump's plan?

An opinion piece full of information laying out 3 reasons why Syrian oil is worth protecting for the Kurds.
Trump's plan is what we are in the process of doing. Watch the news.
Review my previous posts & stop pestering me to repeat what I've already posted.
Both are open ended.

I don't care about someone's opinion, I want to know the actual plan.

Both are open ended, and yet in this same thread, you say Trump left the Kurds because he doesn't want it to be "open ended".

Got it...watch TV. Clearly there is nothing concrete you can add to this conversation.

Yes. I fail to live up to your example of bringing substance to this topic.

This is your wheelhouse, not mine. You constantly make statements as facts, supported by opinions of others.

You asked me the same type of questions ...I admit to not having answer. When you are asked the same questions, you tell us to stop bothering you and to use google. That has no value.

IMHO -- our plan for Syria remains the same. Adapt to changing circumstances. Erdogan upended the table when he insisted on moving into Syria & establishing a safe zone. We are adapting (as we have throughout our time in Syria). Finding a way to maintain a minimal presence in Syria, sufficient to protect the Kurds, provide a base for attacking IS flare ups, retaining the SDF as intel sources, fighters & prison guards. Securing the oil fields provides a base for all that & retains some leverage in determining the final outcome, which could take several years to stabilize.

That is my opinion of what I think our plan is. Based on facts I've cited, just like the opinion pieces I've linked.
This is not anything which I have not stated in previous posts.

obtw -- the Infantry & Armor troops brought in to hold the oil fields aren't new to the theatre. They've been deployed to Kuwait for just such a contingency. Any Special Operators withdrawn from Syria will continue their anti-IS ops, staged from our base at Al-Asad in Anbar, W Iraq.
Air support remains & is enhanced with recent deployments of F-15's & B-1's to Saudi bases (to deter Iran).

[foreverlax]

Guess it's time we get over Trump losing Syria to Russia.

Lost Syria ? When did the US ever have any control or influence over Syria ? Never said we did, but in the words of the great George Costanza, we lost any hand we had.

They were a Soviet ally before they were a Russian ally.
The last time that point was made, you said it was a stupid observation.

What is "winning" in Syria ?
No clue...what is winning in any of our other military adventure? Seems the DoD never gets that part right.

Responsibility for stopping a civil war, peacekeeping, reconstruction, resettlement of millions of refugees ?
That used to be our role

That's the prize which comes with "winning" Syria.
Doesn't matter since we left that table when we walked away from the Kurds.

The best we can hope for is to help protect the Kurds (if they'll cease their terrorist activities against Turkey), give them some leverage for autonomy, keep them as an ally & base to hold down ISIS, & not prolong an intractable civil war.

...and not "lose" Turkey (completely) in the process.

Turkey remains a geo-strategically critical NATO ally.

It was a stupid observation then (when inserted in the context of the discussion afan & I were having), Fine. Delivery matters.

just like "losing Syria" is a stupid observation now. Disagree....there can be no moaning when Syria, somehow, gets worse, since Vlad has the strings and the Kurds don't trust us. Iran is another example of What the heck is the plan? Can you tell me the situation hasn't deteriorated since he walked from the deal? Things have gotten worse for Iran, They're running out of money to fund their proxies throughout the region. Massive anti-Iran protests in Iraq. Oil is still flowing out of the Gulf. Other Navies have joined us in keeping the sea lanes open & participating in the largest minesweeping exercise ever conducted.

We were never in it, to "win" it. Disagree - as the world's cop, we are always in it. You don't want that job, set aside, give it to China and the yuan. We're still there to step on IS, keep the sea lanes open, keep the oil flowing & we're still protecting the Kurds. We're just not signing up for an open ended peacekeeping & reconstruction mission in Syria, although we will join NATO & GCC allies if they want to participate.

You can't lose what you never had. Bet there are some easy examples of that...like the death of an unborn child. Syria was a miscarriage before we got involved.

We never had a seat at the table (although Flynn was working to get one for us). Horse Hockey. Trump met with Little Kim...we can be where we want to be. During the transition, Flynn was negotiating with Kislyak for a seat at the Astana conf, set to take place in early 2017.

Holding the oil fields & their territory outside the Turkish incursion zone still gives the Kurds leverage, So again it's selective what falls under AUMF. We don't need their fossil fuels. What is the actual plan here? Denying the oil fields to IS falls within the existing AUMF. Read the NPR explainer I linked earlier about the strategic significance of the oil fields. We won't use or profit from the oil, the Kurds will. Those bases are perfectly located as staging points for raiding IS remnants in the lower Euphrates valley.

which they are playing expertly. The Kurds get it, if you don't. They're hanging with us. Oh, I see what's happening and globally it's stunning to watch and completely inexplicable, as hard as you try. Watch the news on DW & BBC. They get it.

You didn't answer the questions asked -

Iran - What is the plan? Have they moved further down the road to enrich uranium?
Maintain the sanctions. Force Iran back to the table. Structure our defensive forces in the region to deter & counter Iran's military retaliations. Quietly encourage our Brit, French, German allies to restrain Iran's breakout & attract them back to the table.

Syrian Oil - What is the plan?
https://www.npr.org/2019/10/31/77514285 ... it-matters
It's obvious. Read the NPR explainer
The SDF can use the same sales, micro-refining & (smuggling) distribution as ISIL did, with US tech assist & protection.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_produ ... ng_in_ISIL

Regarding IRan - how long or is it open ended?

Syria - you linked an opinion piece. What is Trump's plan?

An opinion piece full of information laying out 3 reasons why Syrian oil is worth protecting for the Kurds.
Trump's plan is what we are in the process of doing. Watch the news.
Review my previous posts & stop pestering me to repeat what I've already posted.
Both are open ended.

I don't care about someone's opinion, I want to know the actual plan.

Both are open ended, and yet in this same thread, you say Trump left the Kurds because he doesn't want it to be "open ended".

Got it...watch TV. Clearly there is nothing concrete you can add to this conversation.

Yes. I fail to live up to your example of bringing substance to this topic.

This is your wheelhouse, not mine. You constantly make statements as facts, supported by opinions of others.

You asked me the same type of questions ...I admit to not having answer. When you are asked the same questions, you tell us to stop bothering you and to use google. That has no value.

IMHO -- our plan for Syria remains the same. Adapt to changing circumstances. Erdogan upended the table when he insisted on moving into Syria & establishing a safe zone. We are adapting (as we have throughout our time in Syria). Finding a way to maintain a minimal presence in Syria, sufficient to protect the Kurds, provide a base for attacking IS flare ups, retaining the SDF as intel sources, fighters & prison guards. Securing the oil fields provides a base for all that & retains some leverage in determining the final outcome, which could take several years to stabilize.

That is my opinion of what I think our plan is. Based on facts I've cited, just like the opinion pieces I've linked.
This is not anything which I have not stated in previous posts.

obtw -- the Infantry & Armor troops brought in to hold the oil fields aren't new to the theatre. They've been deployed to Kuwait for just such a contingency. Any Special Operators withdrawn from Syria will continue their anti-IS ops, staged from our base at Al-Asad in Anbar, W Iraq.
Air support remains & is enhanced with recent deployments of F-15's & B-1's to Saudi bases (to deter Iran).

Gottcha...thanks for playing.

[MDlaxfan76]

Guess it's time we get over Trump losing Syria to Russia.

Lost Syria ? When did the US ever have any control or influence over Syria ? Never said we did, but in the words of the great George Costanza, we lost any hand we had.

They were a Soviet ally before they were a Russian ally.
The last time that point was made, you said it was a stupid observation.

What is "winning" in Syria ?
No clue...what is winning in any of our other military adventure? Seems the DoD never gets that part right.

Responsibility for stopping a civil war, peacekeeping, reconstruction, resettlement of millions of refugees ?
That used to be our role

That's the prize which comes with "winning" Syria.
Doesn't matter since we left that table when we walked away from the Kurds.

The best we can hope for is to help protect the Kurds (if they'll cease their terrorist activities against Turkey), give them some leverage for autonomy, keep them as an ally & base to hold down ISIS, & not prolong an intractable civil war.

...and not "lose" Turkey (completely) in the process.

Turkey remains a geo-strategically critical NATO ally.

It was a stupid observation then (when inserted in the context of the discussion afan & I were having), Fine. Delivery matters.

just like "losing Syria" is a stupid observation now. Disagree....there can be no moaning when Syria, somehow, gets worse, since Vlad has the strings and the Kurds don't trust us. Iran is another example of What the heck is the plan? Can you tell me the situation hasn't deteriorated since he walked from the deal? Things have gotten worse for Iran, They're running out of money to fund their proxies throughout the region. Massive anti-Iran protests in Iraq. Oil is still flowing out of the Gulf. Other Navies have joined us in keeping the sea lanes open & participating in the largest minesweeping exercise ever conducted.

We were never in it, to "win" it. Disagree - as the world's cop, we are always in it. You don't want that job, set aside, give it to China and the yuan. We're still there to step on IS, keep the sea lanes open, keep the oil flowing & we're still protecting the Kurds. We're just not signing up for an open ended peacekeeping & reconstruction mission in Syria, although we will join NATO & GCC allies if they want to participate.

You can't lose what you never had. Bet there are some easy examples of that...like the death of an unborn child. Syria was a miscarriage before we got involved.

We never had a seat at the table (although Flynn was working to get one for us). Horse Hockey. Trump met with Little Kim...we can be where we want to be. During the transition, Flynn was negotiating with Kislyak for a seat at the Astana conf, set to take place in early 2017.

Holding the oil fields & their territory outside the Turkish incursion zone still gives the Kurds leverage, So again it's selective what falls under AUMF. We don't need their fossil fuels. What is the actual plan here? Denying the oil fields to IS falls within the existing AUMF. Read the NPR explainer I linked earlier about the strategic significance of the oil fields. We won't use or profit from the oil, the Kurds will. Those bases are perfectly located as staging points for raiding IS remnants in the lower Euphrates valley.

which they are playing expertly. The Kurds get it, if you don't. They're hanging with us. Oh, I see what's happening and globally it's stunning to watch and completely inexplicable, as hard as you try. Watch the news on DW & BBC. They get it.

You didn't answer the questions asked -

Iran - What is the plan? Have they moved further down the road to enrich uranium?
Maintain the sanctions. Force Iran back to the table. Structure our defensive forces in the region to deter & counter Iran's military retaliations. Quietly encourage our Brit, French, German allies to restrain Iran's breakout & attract them back to the table.

Syrian Oil - What is the plan?
https://www.npr.org/2019/10/31/77514285 ... it-matters
It's obvious. Read the NPR explainer
The SDF can use the same sales, micro-refining & (smuggling) distribution as ISIL did, with US tech assist & protection.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_produ ... ng_in_ISIL

Regarding IRan - how long or is it open ended?

Syria - you linked an opinion piece. What is Trump's plan?

An opinion piece full of information laying out 3 reasons why Syrian oil is worth protecting for the Kurds.
Trump's plan is what we are in the process of doing. Watch the news.
Review my previous posts & stop pestering me to repeat what I've already posted.
Both are open ended.

I don't care about someone's opinion, I want to know the actual plan.

Both are open ended, and yet in this same thread, you say Trump left the Kurds because he doesn't want it to be "open ended".

Got it...watch TV. Clearly there is nothing concrete you can add to this conversation.

Yes. I fail to live up to your example of bringing substance to this topic.

This is your wheelhouse, not mine. You constantly make statements as facts, supported by opinions of others.

You asked me the same type of questions ...I admit to not having answer. When you are asked the same questions, you tell us to stop bothering you and to use google. That has no value.

IMHO -- our plan for Syria remains the same. Adapt to changing circumstances. Erdogan upended the table when he insisted on moving into Syria & establishing a safe zone. We are adapting (as we have throughout our time in Syria). Finding a way to maintain a minimal presence in Syria, sufficient to protect the Kurds, provide a base for attacking IS flare ups, retaining the SDF as intel sources, fighters & prison guards. Securing the oil fields provides a base for all that & retains some leverage in determining the final outcome, which could take several years to stabilize.

That is my opinion of what I think our plan is. Based on facts I've cited, just like the opinion pieces I've linked.
This is not anything which I have not stated in previous posts.

obtw -- the Infantry & Armor troops brought in to hold the oil fields aren't new to the theatre. They've been deployed to Kuwait for just such a contingency. Any Special Operators withdrawn from Syria will continue their anti-IS ops, staged from our base at Al-Asad in Anbar, W Iraq.
Air support remains & is enhanced with recent deployments of F-15's & B-1's to Saudi bases (to deter Iran).

Gottcha...thanks for playing.

A question, though, arises from Lindsey Graham's recent comments about our 'incoherent' policy in Ukraine.

Is what is described (which sounds rational and pragmatic...ie "best we can do, given bad circumstances") our official POTUS-approved "plan", or just what folks are actually doing when Trump isn't looking, tweeting, speaking?

[old salt]

^^^ in this case (imho) it's what the chain of command could pull together in the wake of Eridogan's treacherous surprise action & Trump's hasty statements.

I've said before -- I agreed with pulling back our exposed troops from the observation posts, but not withdrawing all our forces from the N border area, unless that was the recommendation of the military chain of command, based on the uncertainty of deconflicting our troops (holed up in their N bases) from incoming Turkish backed Syrian militias (including extremists). I hope they were consulted before Trump announced a complete pull out.

Based on news reports, I think that Lindsey Graham & Gen Keane might have sold a continued military presence based on the oil fields, satisfying Trump in the interim, allowing him to save face by calling his walkback a "revision" to his pullout plan, while placating his base by boasting of an oil grab.

I think all parties knew that Trump is anxious to pull us out of Syria. Erdogan seized on that to upset the apple cart before the Joint Security Mechanism became so successful that he couldn't stage his incursion to establish his safe zone & force resettlement of refugees back into Syria.

The YPG/SDF initial armed resistance to the incursion verifies that they would not have welcomed Syrian Arab refugees back into the territory they controlled without a fight. It remains to be seen if & how much ethnic cleansing will take place if/when the safe zone is repopulated with Syrian refugees. The US & our NATO allies retain some leverage over Erdogan in that regard.

[MDlaxfan76]

I'll buy that this was the 'best we could do' notion.

Given Trump as POTUS.

But I don't buy that this was actually the best we could have done.

[Trinity]

Trump’s having Erdogan visit DC anyway. Why not add Putin for a threesome.

[old salt]

I'll buy that this was the 'best we could do' notion.

Given Trump as POTUS.

But I don't buy that this was actually the best we could have done.

That depends on how far you're willing to turn back the clock, how many US forces you were willing to send in & put at risk, & how much of the resettlement & reconstruction of Syria you were willing to sign up for.

Erdogan precipitated this change.

[MDlaxfan76]

I'll buy that this was the 'best we could do' notion.

Given Trump as POTUS.

But I don't buy that this was actually the best we could have done.

That depends on how far you're willing to turn back the clock, how many US forces you were willing to send in & put at risk, & how much of the resettlement & reconstruction of Syria you were willing to sign up for.

Erdogan precipitated this change.

I think your earlier point, right above, was that Erdogan took advantage of Trump's eagerness to leave Syria.
I'd call that feckless eagerness, at best.

But as you know, I think it all leads back to 'what does Vlad want'.
Damn the consequences.

[old salt]

I'll buy that this was the 'best we could do' notion.

Given Trump as POTUS.

But I don't buy that this was actually the best we could have done.

That depends on how far you're willing to turn back the clock, how many US forces you were willing to send in & put at risk, & how much of the resettlement & reconstruction of Syria you were willing to sign up for.

Erdogan precipitated this change.

I think your earlier point, right above, was that Erdogan took advantage of Trump's eagerness to leave Syria.
I'd call that feckless eagerness, at best.

But as you know, I think it all leads back to 'what does Vlad want'.
Damn the consequences.

Your Russophobia blinds you to reality.
What politician is still willing to defend our protracted wars & nation building in Iraq & Afghanistan ?
That's what you're asking Trump to sign up for in Syria.
This forces Turkey, the Euros & Arabs to share the burden.

[foreverlax]

All of that is fine....except this move killed a bunch of our allies, set loose the IS fighters our allies were fighting under a stale AUMF, all while displacing 10s of thousands of those same allies.

And C&S is worried about IS coming in from the southern border to set California on fire.

[a fan]

What politician is still willing to defend our protracted wars & nation building in Iraq & Afghanistan ?.

Nikky Haley.

[MDlaxfan76]

I'll buy that this was the 'best we could do' notion.

Given Trump as POTUS.

But I don't buy that this was actually the best we could have done.

That depends on how far you're willing to turn back the clock, how many US forces you were willing to send in & put at risk, & how much of the resettlement & reconstruction of Syria you were willing to sign up for.

Erdogan precipitated this change.

I think your earlier point, right above, was that Erdogan took advantage of Trump's eagerness to leave Syria.
I'd call that feckless eagerness, at best.

But as you know, I think it all leads back to 'what does Vlad want'.
Damn the consequences.

Your Russophobia blinds you to reality.
What politician is still willing to defend our protracted wars & nation building in Iraq & Afghanistan ?
That's what you're asking Trump to sign up for in Syria.
This forces Turkey, the Euros & Arabs to share the burden.

Ohhh, that's why I flagged "as you know, I think it all leads back to what does Vlad want?"
It should come as no surprise to anyone on here that I'd look at what Vlad wants and do what I could to prevent exactly that, whereas you'd repeat his propaganda. I assume with all good intent, just a dramatically different worldview.

This did not have to be precipitous, it didn't need to abandon our allies to ethnic cleansing, it didn't need to provide a pathway for Iran to threaten Israel.

It could have been handled far better...leadership matters. Alliances matter. Backbone matters.
Pretty sure Mattis, McMaster, Bill Cohen, our soldiers in the field, and whole lot of Senators would still agree.

That is, unless it does all lead back to what does Vlad want.

The other explanation is that Trump is a spineless numbskull, just a 'useful idiot' from the Russian perspective.
I think with Trump (not you) it's more nefarious than that, you don't.

Thank goodness we live in America and we can agree to disagree.
For now.

[old salt]

MDLF76 -- were you this much of a Russia hawk before Trump ?
(1) Were you at all uneasy about the future when the USSR flew apart into a gaggle of new ersatz nations, with no history of independent governance & no democratic tradition or institutions ?
(2) Were you in favor NATO expansion to the borders of Russia ?
(3) Do you support NATO membership for Ukraine & Georgia ?
(4) Did you support Obama's attempts at reset with Russia ?

The Kurds are not our only allies with a stake in Syria.
The Turks have legit issues with the Kurds.
The Kurds are equally responsible for the armed impasse with Turkey.
The Kurds had ample opportunity to reach an accommodation with Turkey,
We did our best to facilitate that accommodation. Some issues are irreconcilable.
The best we can do is try to prevent genocide & restrain ethnic cleansing.
Don't make the perfect the enemy of making the best of a bad situation.

[DocBarrister]

MDLF76 -- were you this much of a Russia hawk before Trump ?
(1) Were you at all uneasy about the future when the USSR flew apart into a gaggle of new ersatz nations, with no history of independent governance & no democratic tradition or institutions ?
(2) Were you in favor NATO expansion to the borders of Russia ?
(3) Do you support NATO membership for Ukraine & Georgia ?
(4) Did you support Obama's attempts at reset with Russia ?

The Kurds are not our only allies with a stake in Syria.
The Turks have legit issues with the Kurds.
The Kurds are equally responsible for the armed impasse with Turkey.
The Kurds had ample opportunity to reach an accommodation with Turkey,
We did our best to facilitate that accommodation. Some issues are irreconcilable.
The best we can do is try to prevent genocide & restrain ethnic cleansing.
Don't make the perfect the enemy of making the best of a bad situation.

Why are you always supporting Russia?

It’s really odd and repugnant.

DocBarrister

[Typical Lax Dad]

MDLF76 -- were you this much of a Russia hawk before Trump ?
(1) Were you at all uneasy about the future when the USSR flew apart into a gaggle of new ersatz nations, with no history of independent governance & no democratic tradition or institutions ?
(2) Were you in favor NATO expansion to the borders of Russia ?
(3) Do you support NATO membership for Ukraine & Georgia ?
(4) Did you support Obama's attempts at reset with Russia ?

The Kurds are not our only allies with a stake in Syria.
The Turks have legit issues with the Kurds.
The Kurds are equally responsible for the armed impasse with Turkey.
The Kurds had ample opportunity to reach an accommodation with Turkey,
We did our best to facilitate that accommodation. Some issues are irreconcilable.
The best we can do is try to prevent genocide & restrain ethnic cleansing.
Don't make the perfect the enemy of making the best of a bad situation.

Why are you always supporting Russia?

It’s really odd and repugnant.

DocBarrister

Stockholm Syndrome from all that time at sea during the Cold War....or too many viewings of Hunt For Red October.

[old salt]

MDLF76 -- were you this much of a Russia hawk before Trump ?
(1) Were you at all uneasy about the future when the USSR flew apart into a gaggle of new ersatz nations, with no history of independent governance & no democratic tradition or institutions ?
(2) Were you in favor NATO expansion to the borders of Russia ?
(3) Do you support NATO membership for Ukraine & Georgia ?
(4) Did you support Obama's attempts at reset with Russia ?

The Kurds are not our only allies with a stake in Syria.
The Turks have legit issues with the Kurds.
The Kurds are equally responsible for the armed impasse with Turkey.
The Kurds had ample opportunity to reach an accommodation with Turkey,
We did our best to facilitate that accommodation. Some issues are irreconcilable.
The best we can do is try to prevent genocide & restrain ethnic cleansing.
Don't make the perfect the enemy of making the best of a bad situation.

Why are you always supporting Russia?

It’s really odd and repugnant.

DocBarrister

Stockholm Syndrome from all that time at sea during the Cold War....or too many viewings of Hunt For Red October.

How'd you guys feel about the reset button ?

[Typical Lax Dad]

MDLF76 -- were you this much of a Russia hawk before Trump ?
(1) Were you at all uneasy about the future when the USSR flew apart into a gaggle of new ersatz nations, with no history of independent governance & no democratic tradition or institutions ?
(2) Were you in favor NATO expansion to the borders of Russia ?
(3) Do you support NATO membership for Ukraine & Georgia ?
(4) Did you support Obama's attempts at reset with Russia ?

The Kurds are not our only allies with a stake in Syria.
The Turks have legit issues with the Kurds.
The Kurds are equally responsible for the armed impasse with Turkey.
The Kurds had ample opportunity to reach an accommodation with Turkey,
We did our best to facilitate that accommodation. Some issues are irreconcilable.
The best we can do is try to prevent genocide & restrain ethnic cleansing.
Don't make the perfect the enemy of making the best of a bad situation.

Why are you always supporting Russia?

It’s really odd and repugnant.

DocBarrister

Stockholm Syndrome from all that time at sea during the Cold War....or too many viewings of Hunt For Red October.

How'd you guys feel about the reset button ?

Was Rudy Giuliani running point with Lev and his boys on that?

[old salt]

MDLF76 -- were you this much of a Russia hawk before Trump ?
(1) Were you at all uneasy about the future when the USSR flew apart into a gaggle of new ersatz nations, with no history of independent governance & no democratic tradition or institutions ?
(2) Were you in favor NATO expansion to the borders of Russia ?
(3) Do you support NATO membership for Ukraine & Georgia ?
(4) Did you support Obama's attempts at reset with Russia ?

The Kurds are not our only allies with a stake in Syria.
The Turks have legit issues with the Kurds.
The Kurds are equally responsible for the armed impasse with Turkey.
The Kurds had ample opportunity to reach an accommodation with Turkey,
We did our best to facilitate that accommodation. Some issues are irreconcilable.
The best we can do is try to prevent genocide & restrain ethnic cleansing.
Don't make the perfect the enemy of making the best of a bad situation.

Why are you always supporting Russia?

It’s really odd and repugnant.

DocBarrister

Stockholm Syndrome from all that time at sea during the Cold War....or too many viewings of Hunt For Red October.

How'd you guys feel about the reset button ?

Was Rudy Giuliani running point with Lev and his boys on that?

Do you guys think NATO membership should be extended to Ukraine, if they clean up their corruption ?