The one certainty is that there is no certainty

With the Deep State found at every turn, it is hard to know where to look for sense on PDT’s pull-out of American forces from Syria. The one person whose views I therefore most wished to hear were those of Caroline Glick at The Jerusalem Post. She has now published this, which the headline writer described as: TRUMP’S DECISION TO PULL FORCES OUT OF SYRIA HAS UPSIDES. In the article itself, she is more positive, with this her conclusion which she links to Nikki Haley’s speech to the UN last week:

By abandoning the anti-Israel fake “peace process” and striking out on a new path based on reality, and by walking away from Obama’s pro-Iran policies in Syria and Lebanon and backing Israel in its efforts to defeat its enemies, the Trump administration is demonstrating what pro-Israel really means. So long as it is true to its word, Israel is safer and stronger for it.

OK. But there are two sides to this as she makes clear.

For the past two years, the Trump administration has continued implementing Obama’s pro-Iran policy in Syria. Efforts to change the US mission have failed, largely due to Pentagon opposition. During his visit to Israel in August, National Security Advisor John Bolton said that the mission of US forces had been expanded to block Iran from asserting control over Syria. But since the administration didn’t request a new mandate from Congress, the mission remained officially what it has been since 2014.

It is true that on the ground, the US forces in Syria do far more than fight ISIS. They block Iran from controlling the Syrian border with Iraq and so prevent Iran from controlling a land route from Tehran to the Mediterranean Sea.

US forces also have blocked Turkey from taking over Syrian Kurdistan and have prevented Turkish President Recep Erdogan from carrying out his pledge to destroy the Kurdish-dominated Syrian Democratic Forces. If the US chooses not to arm and supply the SDF, once the Americans leave, Syria’s Kurds – America’s only loyal allies there – will either have to cut a deal with Russia and Iran or face Turkey alone.

US forces in Syria also block Russia from taking over Syria’s oil fields. On February 7, forty US Special Forces troops blocked hundreds of Russian mercenaries from seizing the Conoco oil field on the eastern side of the Euphrates.

Finally, US forces in Syria act as a deterrent against Russian, Iranian and Hezbollah aggression against Israel. With US forces on the ground, they fear that provoking a war with Israel will be tantamount to going to war against America. With US forces out of Syria, their fear of attacking Israel will diminish.

Nevertheless, she still sees the positives, and it is quite striking that the Israeli reaction generally has been so quiet. It is the same people who oppose a border wall in the US who are also the ones most critical of Trump’s decision. The one certainty is that there is no certainty, no matter what you do.

FURTHER DEVELOPMENTS: There is an apparent assumption that PDT just does what he does with no groundwork and preparation. However, as noted by Baa Humbug in the comments: Saudi Crown Prince MbS Sends Replacement Troops To Defend Kurds in Syria…. There is also this to dwell on if it doesn’t turn your stomach: THE NEW YORK TIMES WAS AGAINST WAR IN SYRIA BEFORE IT WAS FOR IT.

Almost a year ago, on Jan. 19, 2018, that same editorial board raked the president over the coals for even daring to continue America’s policy of military adventurism. The Times expressed concern that more American troops beyond the 2,000 initially deployed could soon be sent overseas in a mission without any clear goals. “Syria is a complex problem. But this plan seems poorly conceived, too dependent on military action and fueled by wishful thinking,” The Times said.

Who would depend on these people to protect our way of life?

This entry was posted in American politics, International. Bookmark the permalink.

81 Responses to The one certainty is that there is no certainty

  1. I hadn’t realised that my earlier statement was on the money:

    Regardless of your position on President Trump’s decision this week to fulfill his oft-stated campaign pledge to get our troops out of Syria, look at our media right now, but most especially the unprincipled Times.

    Less than a year ago, the Times editorial board condemned Trump for breaking his campaign pledge, for throwing 2,000 Americans into an “open-ended conflict” that has no real chance of success, which meant another war of “perpetuity.”

    And now that Trump appears to agree with that assessment, this very same editorial board is siding with John Bolton(!!!) and accusing Trump of being a Russian stooge.

    There is no principle here. No consistency. It is Orwell’s 1984,…

  2. stackja

    Those who oppose DT on all fronts seem to be usual suspects. So what’s new?

  3. md

    Irrespective of the views of the deranged Left and their allies, the ‘chamber of commerce Republicans’ (those who want globalism and mass immigration), a lot of people who voted for Trump wanted to see the US stop wasting trillions of dollars on wars with no end that provide no benefit to the US, other than serving to hone military skills and test new weapons. The US is self-sufficient in fossil fuels and therefore doesn’t need the Middle East. They should walk away and let them work it out themselves.

  4. A lot of people seem to think that if the US isn’t there, that China or Russia will. Let them try and deal with it; Russia didn’t fare that well in Afghanistan, nor has the US. The whole of the Middle East is a cluster and maybe it’s time to leave them to their own devices and see what ensues out of the ashes.

  5. Roger W

    Look in vain for reliable journalism these days.
    The following is a line by line breakdown of the lies the recently exposed Der Speigel journalist and CNN journalist of the year Claas Relotius.

  6. MH;

    The US is self-sufficient in fossil fuels and therefore doesn’t need the Middle East. They should walk away and let them work it out themselves.

    It would be fun watching the French/German forces trying to settle the Arabs down.
    What with the gender fluidity recon patrols, the fighter bombers being navigated by lesbian pilots and the weapons familiarity and experience shown by the German army in Afghanistan, it will be the biggest handover of military equipment since the Dunkirk evacuation.

  7. Roger

    Trump’s decision was rational and prudent. although you won’t hear the rationale explained on our msm.

    Turkey is about to launch an offensive in northern Syria against the militia wing of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, which has been engaged in an insurgency within Turkey since 1984. 200 000 US troops would be in the middle of a war between bad guys & bad guys with a high risk of being inadvertently targeted.

    Trump is not going to risk a war with a NATO ally, however unsavoury they may be, for the sake of a temporary alliance with far left Kurdish revolutionaries whom that ally regards as terrorists now that the common threat of IS has been neutralised.

    The more remarkable thing here is that so many in the media have been critical of Trump and not offered any deep analysis. The Left have become the imperialist war mongers!

  8. New Chum

    check https://www.americanthinker.com/
    President Trump Is Right about Syria
    Mark A. Hewitt
    We’re no longer dealing with Obama’s Middle East.

    Mattis was no good
    December 21, 2018
    The outgoing secretary of defense should not be missed.

  9. classical_hero

    Mattis did his job and now it’s time for someone else to do the job.

  10. Those who’ve followed the protests in Iran will have noted the chants by the crowds of “get out of Syria, look after Iranians first” or words to that effect.
    I disagree with the analysis that Iran will make a push for gains in Syria when the US troops are out.
    They are broke and unlikely to have the money for big military operations in Syria. The Mullahs will worry that an uprising will result.

    Russia has no interest in the oil fields for the oil for itself. Assad needs those fields to generate income and he owes a lot of money to Russia.
    Russia’s only interest in Syria are the warm water deep ports they lease from Syria. These ports are critical to Russia’s security in the event of Turkey blocking access to the Russian fleet in the Black Sea.

    The myriad tribes of the Middle East have been fighting each other since biblical times. The only periods of relative peace have been when strong arm men have taken ruthless control.
    Modern day rules of engagement used by the West is wholly incompatible with the region. With the now much stronger Gulf Cooperation Council, you’re better off getting out and let them handle it with the proviso that nobody touches the only democracy in the region, Israel.

    I believe this is what Trump is striving for. There is now some good signs of improving relations between Israel and the GCC. There may be a good chance of a 4 way power balance between Israel, Arabs, Turks and Iranians in the region if others get out.
    Not hopeful though. As I said, the joints been at war with each other for over 5000 years or more.

  11. md

    Winston Smith
    #2890583, posted on December 22, 2018 at 10:30 am
    It would be fun watching the French/German forces trying to settle the Arabs down.

    I hope Trump realises what a strong hand he has to play. The Europeans are reliant on Russian and Middle Eastern gas and oil. In both cases, the US military threat is all that is keeping a lid on potential trouble.

  12. RobK

    ://thewest.com.au/politics/state-politics/wa-owned-power-provider-synergy-mired-in-costs-crisis-ng-b881057551z

    WA-owned power provider Synergy mired in costs crisis.
    The sharp decline in expected revenue has been caused by plummeting demand for energy from the grid as growing numbers of households in Perth and the South West generate their own power from solar panels.

    There are almost 200,000 households with rooftop solar panels on the south-west grid, which stretches from Kalbarri in the north to Kalgoorlie in the east and Albany in the south.

    Amid forecasts that the uptake of solar photovoltaic cells, or PVs, will continue to gallop along, Treasury said Synergy’s business model of generating electricity from power plants and selling it to customers over the grid was likely to take a battering.

    All RE pushers take note: WA has high amounts of gas generators and reserved gas piped to Perth, still it is not immune from the cancer that is non-dispatchable electricity. Gas is no stand-in to cheap power utopia. RE will not be cheap. PV owners pay along with other consumers in advance for upto 15years of incidental energy when the sun shines, then want the system to supply cheap backup. It won’t work with what we have now. Stop this stupid expensive experiment.

  13. Iampeter

    With the Deep State found at every turn, it is hard to know where to look for sense on PDT’s pull-out of American forces from Syria.

    You mean you’re struggling to find a way to blame yet another blunder from the Trump administration on someone other than Trump? Strange, you’re normally so good at this.
    Keep in mind this comes a few weeks after Trumps tough tweets threatening more and “smarter” missiles into Syria, threatening Russia to shoot them down. Why the sudden 180 degree turn?
    What a steady hand! What a stable genius!

  14. Oh come on

    Well done getting out of Syria. The Assad regime is now strong enough to end the civil war alongside its allies. We are not their allies, and due to the actions of the previous administration, we never will be. Our guys in the civil war, the FSA, was a joke from the start. It’d be better to have Assad in charge than that group of Islamists.

    As for the Kurds – so much caterwauling over the betrayal of the Kurds! Well, Kurds ain’t Kurds. The communist YPG (Kurdish separatists from Turkey) are not our friends. They aren’t our enemies, but they really aren’t our friends. We owe them nothing. The Iraqi Kurds – they are our allies. We owe them, we have let them down in the past, but we have also done the right thing by them. We helped them roll back ISIS in Iraq. We have helped them to establish a powerful defacto state within Iraq. We haven’t abandoned them.

    Our job in Syria is done. We could have played a more constructive role there, but Obama’s wreckless and naive policy of regime change in Syria nixed that. So now it’s time to leave. Good decision, Trump. Mattis is wrong.

  15. Oh come on

    You mean you’re struggling to find a way to blame yet another blunder from the Trump administration on someone other than Trump?

    Arch libertarian iampeter clearly would rather US troops stayed in Syria. Face it, iampeter. You’re no libertarian. You’re just another m0nty. If Trump removes troops from Syria, you complain. If Trump doubles troop numbers in Syria, you complain. If Trump says the status quo in Syria will remain, you complain.

    When Trump does anything, you complain. Stop pretending to have principles.

  16. Iampeter

    Arch libertarian iampeter clearly would rather US troops stayed in Syria. Face it, iampeter. You’re no libertarian. You’re just another m0nty.

    Well yea, I’m obviously not a libertarian and have never claimed to be one. But I’m certainly not another Monty, LOL, that’s what you and most posters here are, but are too clueless to realize.

    You are right though, I wasn’t as clear as I should’ve been in my original post. The “blunder” in question, isn’t necessarily the act of pulling out of Syria, but the way that it’s been done. It demonstrates once again the total disconnect between Trump and the people he is managing. It also sends the usual mixed messages to both friends and enemies abroad. It’s a complete mess.

    Incidentally, I think America should pull out of everywhere since they have no foreign policy and have no business sending men and women to risk their lives in the name of nothing anyone can name.
    But unlike hopeless libertarians, I support total war theory of foreign policy and ensuring the West does whatever it needs to do, in order to secure its interests.

  17. Iampeter

    Oops, I should’ve said “hopeless libertarians AND conservatives” who also have no foreign policy and absolutely no idea how to deal with the world we live in.

  18. max

    You have to hand it to Assad. A modern Machiavell. Virtue signaling ? What’s that ?

  19. And just like that…

    https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/12/21/checkmate-saudi-crown-prince-mbs-sends-replacement-troops-to-defend-kurds-in-syria/#more-158042

    SAUDI ARABIA – Saudi Arabia and the UAE have sent military forces to areas controlled by the Kurdish YPG group in north-east Syria, Turkey’s Yenisafak newspaper reported.

    The paper said the forces will be stationed with US-led coalition troops and will support its tasks with huge military enforcements as well as heavy and light weapons.

    Quoting the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, the newspaper reported that a convoy of troops belonging to an Arab Gulf state recently arrived in the contact area between the Kurdish PKK/YPG and Daesh in the Deir Ez-Zor countryside.

    This comes at a time when Ankara is preparing to launch an expanded military operation with the Free Syrian Army against the Kurdish PKK group in the northeast of Syria. (read more)

    Now let’s consider the brilliance of this move.

    Do read on.

    p.s.

    Oh come on
    #2890681, posted on December 22, 2018 at 12:55 pm

    Spot on mate, spot on. But don’t expect Peter to understand any of it….obtuse as.

  20. P

    And just like that…

    The article by Sundance is inspiring but the article in the Middle East Monitor is dated a month ago.
    November 22, 2018 at 10:48 am | Published in: Asia & Americas, Middle East, News, Saudi Arabia, Syria, UAE, US.

  21. Dr Fred Lenin

    WhatTrump should do now is support assad in tandem with the Russians and restore assad dictstorship in Syria He was not a social globalst so the decromats wanted to destroy him like they did gaddafi and saddam ,and look how well that turned out and how many deaths and refugees the left created in the ME . Like the left those people have no concept of democracy ,again like the left they need a dictator to tell them want to do or there is chaos . As always the solutions to these problems is within those countries not here intervention never works . The much coondemned British Raj kept the lid on India for many years ,as soon as the Raj finished the country dissolved i tovthree parts with masses killed and millions of refugees ,the middle east is no exception to this divisive culture . And to think the EU left wanted aTurkey to be part of Europe these lefties know bugger all about islamofascists inviting millions to invade their vountries bringing their hatreds with them ,destructive left fascists .

  22. OldOzzie

    The so-called ‘adults’ in the Trump administration are surprisingly childish

    Mattis’s petulant resignation fits a pattern

    Roger Kimball

    What Malcolm said of the Thane of Cawdor — ‘nothing in his life/ Became him like the leaving it’ — cannot be said of General James Mattis’s leavetaking his position as Secretary of Defense.

    Let me first say that General Mattis has long served his country with distinction, betraying immense care for the Marines and soldiers under his command as well as condign fierceness towards the enemies of civilization. As Secretary of Defense, he obliterated ISIS as a fighting force and has overseen the beginnings of a critical upgrade of America’s military infrastructure, which had been allowed to atrophy under the lead-from-behind posturing of Barack Obama.

    Like President Trump, I liked the fact that Mattis’s nickname was ‘Mad Dog,’ though I understand he dislikes the soubriquet. After the America-last, apologize-first foreign policy of Obama, it was nice to have a Secretary of Defense with sufficient backbone to compliment the steeliness of a robust Commender-in-Chief such as Donald Trump.

    At the same time, I remember several conservative friends expressing reservations about Mattis when his nomination for the post of SecDef was announced. He was, it was widely rumored, a Hillary supporter and, what’s more, his view of foreign policy was much more in line with the Bush-Obama species of moralism than Trump’s ‘we’ll-do-what’s-in-our-national-interest’ pragmatism.

    So it was hardly surprising that rumors of Mattis’s imminent departure have circulated at least since last summer. As the Trump administration matured and the President’s policy of ‘America First’ (which does not, as POTUS perhaps neglects to point out frequently enough, mean ‘America Alone’) came increasingly on line in his foreign policy, it was inevitable that fissures between Mattis and Trump would open up.

    Predictably, the neo-con fraternity has its collective knickers in a twist over Mattis’s announced departure. Max Boot, who is always good for a laugh these days, epitomized the angst in some recent tweets. ‘Jim Mattis is gone,’ he said in one. ‘God help America. And the world.’ But then it has been obvious for some time that for Max the criterion of a good decision is that it was not taken by Donald Trump.

    For example, when the President announced a couple of days back that he was withdrawing American troops from Syria — thus taking another step towards fulfilling his campaign promise to extricate America from needless foreign entanglements — Max skirled that the decisions was ‘a giant Christmas gift to our enemies.’ But one wag pointed out that it was not so long ago that Max said the opposite, insisting ‘Trump can’t do anything right — we don’t need troops in Syria.’ Okee-doke. I am not sure if that is Walt-Whimanesque logic (‘Do I contradict myself? Very well I contradict myself. I am large. I contain multitudes’) or something out of the more recondite precincts of Hegelian dialectic where, the sage of Berlin told us, ‘X = not-X.’ Whatever the explanation, Max’s pirouettes do put us on notice about what to expect from those NeverTrump quarters.

    It should also be said that that even if the President and his Secretary of Defense were in perfect accord about things, it is hardly surprising that a Secretary of Defense should leave after two years. Indeed, by the time he departs, at the end of February, Jim Mattis will have served longer than the last three Secretaries of Defense: Leon Panetta, Chuck Hagel, and Ash Carter.

    The sad thing about Jim Mattis’s exit is his grandstanding, not to say petulant and immature, mode of departure. The letter announcing his resignation, circulated yesterday, is half bureaucratic boilerplate (‘I have been privileged to serve,’ ‘proud of the progress,’ etc., etc.).

    But those nuggets are set in a jelly of snarky recrimination about how he, Jim Mattis, has always believed that our strength as a nation is ‘inextricably linked’ to our system of ‘alliance and partnerships.’ Further, he says we must treat our allies ‘with respect’ while remaining ‘resolute and unambiguous’ about ‘those countries whose strategic interests are increasingly in tension with ours,’ e.g., Russia and China.

    You do not need an advance degree in hermeneutics to unpack the implications of such statements. ‘I, Jim Mattis, am the adult in the room. I want to foster our partnerships with our allies — unlike some people — and I want to be tough with respect to opponents like Russia and China’ — again, not stated but clearly implied, unlike some.

    The implication is made all-but-explicit in the next paragraph which begins ‘Because you have the right to have a Secretary of Defense whose views are better aligned with yours on these and other subjects…’ Well, because of all this, I quit. In other words, I am the good guy who wants to reward our friends and stand up to our enemies, whereas you, Donald Trump, do not.

    I think there is plenty of room for disagreement and shades of opinion about how the United States ought to conduct its foreign policy. I can understand how Donald Trump’s heterodox behavior and rhetoric raises eyebrows among establishment diplomats. The President speaks a novel language most of us are unused to hearing among politicians. I believe that thus far the he has been admirably resolute in his dealings with Russia and China while at the same time regularly reminding us that ‘it would be a good thing, not a bad thing’ to have good relations with both countries. I think that is true, notwithstanding the thuggishness of Putin and the neo-Maoist ambitions of Xi.

    In any event, the larger point here is that Secretary Mattis’s letter of resignation exhibits a petulance and smallness unbecoming a man of his distinction, accomplishments, and position. I was sorry to see it. Curiously, however, it was of a piece with the behavior of other former high-ranking officials in the Trump administration. The most conspicuous is Rex Tillerson, Trump’s first Secretary of State, whose chief qualification for the job seems to have been that he looked the part. Since being abruptly fired, he has taken to sniping at the President publicly, an unbecoming and counterproductive habit. The takeaway, alas, is that many of the figures who were hailed as the adults in the Trump administration have turned out to be grandstanding partisans. In the aftermath of Mattis’s resignation, the spigots of fake news are gleefully disgorging dire predictions of ‘global chaos’ and ‘international shock waves.’ The whole spectacle is childish and distasteful, and it reminds us that it is not always as easy to tell who are the real adults in the room as we might think.

  23. calli

    Heh. Watching Vincent Price evilling excellently in the Ten Commandments. And his henchman Edward G Robinson smarming in the background.

    They don’t make ‘em like they used to.

  24. calli

    Oops…wrong fred. 😐

    Or perhaps not…Washington shenannigans are plague-worthy.

  25. Bruce

    Has anyone factored in another wild card:

    BOTH the Assad boys and much of their population cleave to the Allawite sect of Islam. This is a pure heresy to Sunni and Shia types, as is the Allawite (relative) tolerance for Jews and Christians.

    BUT, it gets better, a core belief in ths operation is closely related to Iranian Shia islam.

    This little beauty is the belief in “the Twelfth Imam”, who is like an islamo-gothic anti-Santa Claus”. The ultimate abiter of souls, not only will he know who’s been naughty or nice, he will be administering the rewards and punishment.

    The BIG catch is that the trumpets will not blow nor the imam come until the world is in utter chaos.

    So, as in ALL apocalyptic business models, the game is to BRING ON Armageddon to speed up the cosmic livestick sorting.

    If these clowns go for broke, expect the Israelis to kick the Sampson Option into play.

    We may all find ourselves Ön the Beach”.

  26. Iampeter

    The President currently negotiating America’s withdrawal from Afghanistan with the Taliban (read surrender to the Taliban) is a “steely and robust Commander in Chief”?
    The President who has done a world tour, grovelling in front of the worlds worst dictators from NK to Russia, is “America First”?
    This stuff is observably false.

    In fact, apparently this entire episode is courtesy of a Trump phone call with Erdogan, wherein Trump once again sided with the dictator, and agreed to pull America’s troops from Syria.

    Looks like the Kurds will join the long list of American allies who have been betrayed and left to their grisly fate, in the name of range-of-the-moment, political expediency, of horrible, leftist American Presidents.

    This is one of the worst American administrations in history.

  27. Bruce of Newcastle

    I don’t what is required in order to break the alliance terms with Turkey. That almost certainly requires Congress to act, and they haven’t shown any sign of doing so.

    Therefore the alliance with Turkey is legally superior to the informal alliance with the Syrian and Iraqi Kurds. For that to change would require action from Congress.

    It is unfair and immoral to blame Trump for adhering to the law, when the actual culprits are Erdogan and the swampthings of the House and Senate.

  28. braddles

    It is remarkable that just two thousand troops, out of a military of over a million, were supposedly able to keep ISIS at bay and control the big powers in the Middle East. In the past, two thousand would have been considered barely enough to defend themselves, let alone control a country in civil war, but now Trump’s critics say their withdrawal will be a great disaster.

  29. max

    By Eric S. Margolis”

    Trump To End Unconstitutional Syria War
    If Trump wants to make America great, he can start by ending the squalid Syrian misadventure and the butchery in Afghanistan.
    Neocons and the US war party are having apoplexy
    Trump’s abrupt pullout from Syria has shocked and mortified Washington’s war party and neocon fifth column.
    It was amusing to watch the anguish of such noted warlike chickenhawks as Sen. Lindsay Graham and the fanatical national security advisor John Bolton as their hopes for a US war against Syria diminished.
    The venerable imperial general and defense secretary, Jim Mattis, couldn’t take this de-escalation.  He resigned.
    The US has been defeated in Afghanistan, rightly known as the ‘Graveyard of Empires.’   Yet no one in Washington can admit this defeat or order a retreat after wasting 17 years, a trillion dollars and thousands of Americans killed or wounded.

  30. bespoke

    Imp

    What would be reasons for the west to go total war?

  31. bespoke

    And Imp, define total war?

  32. Iampeter

    If Trump wanted to end the war in Syria because it’s unconstitutional then that would be one thing.
    But Trump doesn’t know anything about the constitution and neither do those suddenly concerned with this.
    The whole issue, is that Trump was randomly persuaded to change foreign policy, by a random dictator, in a random phone call. It’s typical randomness from a mismanaged administration.
    The chicken-hawks are awful, but not for any of the reasons given here or in the articles covering this, but the way Trump changed policy on this is ALSO awful.

  33. Iampeter

    Imp
    What would be reasons for the west to go total war?

    Oh, something like 9/11 would qualify as a reason for the west to go total war.

    And Imp, define total war?

    Identify the enemy and proceed to kill them all until they unconditionally surrender or are all dead. Whatever comes first.
    Basically what America did with Japan, the only real and lasting victory in America’s history.

  34. bespoke

    Ok Imp fair enough but total war means disregarding civilian casualties. Are you up for that?

  35. P
    #2890699, posted on December 22, 2018 at 1:36 pm

    And just like that…

    The article by Sundance is inspiring but the article in the Middle East Monitor is dated a month ago.
    November 22, 2018 at 10:48 am | Published in: Asia & Americas, Middle East, News, Saudi Arabia, Syria, UAE, US.

    Yes it is from November, which indicates that Trump didn’t just wake up one morning and decided to take the troops out. This was planned some time ago and a quiet handover is being done. This supports my earlier comment. But look at Peters comment, claiming Trump did a 180Deg turn. Peter maybe getting his news from the fake news media, hence is woefully ill informed.

    Iampeter
    #2890638, posted on December 22, 2018 at 11:43 am

    With the Deep State found at every turn, it is hard to know where to look for sense on PDT’s pull-out of American forces from Syria.

    You mean you’re struggling to find a way to blame yet another blunder from the Trump administration on someone other than Trump? Strange, you’re normally so good at this.
    Keep in mind this comes a few weeks after Trumps tough tweets threatening more and “smarter” missiles into Syria, threatening Russia to shoot them down. Why the sudden 180 degree turn?
    What a steady hand! What a stable genius!

  36. Iampeter
    #2890993, posted on December 23, 2018 at 9:09 am
    The whole issue, is that Trump was randomly persuaded to change foreign policy, by a random dictator, in a random phone call.

    You’re such an obstinate cockhead.
    What Trump is doing has been his policy on the ME for decades. Nothing random about what the man is doing.
    At least take the time to read the links provided and stop making a dick of yourself. You don’t like Trump, we get it. You’re also an ill informed cockhead, we get that too.

  37. candy

    Iampeter
    Trump was the anti war candidate before he was elected. Hillary Clinton was always the warmonger.

    As strange as it seems, the Dems are now the war mongers and run by elites for the wealthiest Americans interested in identity politics and call half the population “deplorables” and prefer the blacks and Latinos to live in poverty.
    The Repugs under Trump are anti war and support the working class and looking after the US and lifting employment for blacks and Latinos.

    It’s hard but you have to accept the Dems and Repugs have swapped places.

  38. bespoke

    The base of the Repugs have candy but not the leaders.

  39. Tel

    Trump very clearly put forward an “America First” strategy, so the withdrawal from Syria fits that strategy perfectly well. There’s no American defensive purpose to maintaining a Kurdish alliance when the Kurds have been disorganized and unreliable, and when it would disrupt NATO by driving Turkey away from the West.

    http://www.voltairenet.org/article191545.html

    We’re getting out of the nation-building business and instead focusing on creating stability in the world. Our moments of greatest strength came when politics ended at the water’s edge. We need a new rational American foreign policy, informed by the best minds and supported by both parties, and it will be by both parties — Democrats, Republicans, independents, everybody, as well as by our close allies.

    This is how we won the Cold War and it’s how we will win our new future struggles, which may be many, which may be complex, but we will win if I become president.

    First, we need a long-term plan to halt the spread and reach of radical Islam. Containing the spread of radical Islam must be a major foreign policy goal of the United States and indeed the world. Events may require the use of military force, but it’s also a philosophical struggle, like our long struggle in the Cold War.

    In this, we’re going to be working very closely with our allies in the Muslim world, all of which are at risk from radical Islamic violence, attacks and everything else. It is a dangerous world, more dangerous now than it has ever been.

  40. mh

    Candy, both Republicans and Democrats were taken over by interests loyal to the globalist elites. The populist movement led by Trump has in part rescued the Republican Party.

    Trump is the number one enemy of those who wish to create a New World Order, a goal openly espoused by President George H. W. Bush over and over again. There is nothing moral about this vision, it’s pure evil and a blueprint for the global enslavement of humanity.

  41. Iampeter

    What Trump is doing has been his policy on the ME for decades. Nothing random about what the man is doing.

    Then why didn’t he pull out a year ago? Why wait till now?
    Why tweet a week ago that he was about to increase incoming missiles?
    Why bomb the country in retaliation for chem attacks when he previously tweeted that he opposed that type of action?
    etc
    He’s been doing 180’s non-stop since taking office. You’ve gotta stop being such mindless drones. There’s no strategy here, no gamesmanship, just random nonsense.

    Ok Imp fair enough but total war means disregarding civilian casualties. Are you up for that?

    Yes. In fact, if a situation presents itself where we can save even one of our soldiers from even getting a scratch but it would require action that would result in enemy civilian casualties, then we should take that action without hesitation.
    The enemies civilian casualties are their responsibility, not ours.
    It’s something they should’ve thought about before flying planes into buildings.

    But, thanks to the treason of the religious conservatives in office at the time, they needn’t have worried.

  42. stackja

    None Dare Call It Treason by John A. Stormer
    INTERNATIONALISM
    Since World War II, propaganda for World Government under the United Nations has been added to textbook agitation for the collectivist society envisioned by Counts and Rugg.
    The drive, spearheaded in America by the National Education Association, is part of a world-wide movement by UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization). It received the official blessing of President Truman’s Commission on Higher Education. The Commission’s report, issued in 1947, had these recommendations:
    The role which education will play officially must be conditioned essentially by policies established in the State Department in this country, and by ministeries of foreign affairs in other countries. Higher education must play a very important part in carrying out in this country the program developed by UNESCO… The United States Office of Education must be prepared to work with the State Department and with UNESCO.41
    What was the UNESCO program which the Presidential Commission recommended that American schools should implement? Embodied in the nine-volume UNESCO study, Towards World Understanding, it is the blueprint for conditioning American children for the day when their first loyalty will be to a socialistic one-world government under the United Nations.
    The work of Counts and Rugg laid the foundation for the first two steps — the destruction of the U. S. Constitution and free economy — so that America could be easily merged into a socialistic world federation. •
    UNESCO’s Director General, under whom the plan was prepared, was Julian Huxley, an atheistic philosopher and member of the Colonial Bureau of the British Fabian Society.
    The goal of UNESCO was stated plainly in the study’s first volume. It recommended that children should be educated in … … those qualities of citizenship which provide the foundation upon which international government must be based if it is to succeed.42

  43. Tel

    Therefore the alliance with Turkey is legally superior to the informal alliance with the Syrian and Iraqi Kurds. For that to change would require action from Congress.

    It is unfair and immoral to blame Trump for adhering to the law, when the actual culprits are Erdogan and the swampthings of the House and Senate.

    As long as the US stayed out of genuine Turkish territory, there wouldn’t be any legal reason why it would violate the treaty building an independent Kurdistan in Northern Syria and Iraq. However, such action would enrage the Turks, and upset Baghdad, and the Russians would have an opportunity to say, “Tsk! Tsk! National sovereignty.”

    When Turkey started rolling their own troops into strategic corners of Syria (really an invasion, since they had no business being there) perhaps 12 months ago, they called it “Operation Olive Branch” which is a kind of funny name when you think about it. The olive branch is a Christian symbol for making peace, which the Turks (none of the Christian) were using as the moniker for their invasion force. The only explanation for that name is that the Turks and Russians had come to an agreement over giving some Kurdish territory over to Turkey, and the olive branch was that Russia would not allow Assad to contend this settlement.

    Putin was remarkably chill allowing the Turks to claim new territory for themselves. Clearly Russia decided that independent Kurdistan didn’t suit them. Trump is a businessman, he sees everything as cost vs benefit so he has assessed the situation and come to the same conclusions. The Kurds are sentimental favourites but unreliable allies, and it’s better to keep onside with the big powers in the region. Oh, and Erdogan has agreed to buy Patriot missiles, if that makes any difference. Erdogan also dangled the prospect of buying S-400 missiles from Russia … so if Tailgunner is right and “game saves lives” then Erdogan must be some kind of superhero by now, because he has been a player every which way. Mind you Turkey does have a very key strategic position … so what else would you expect him to do?

  44. stackja

    Syria, Sykes-Picot legacy.

  45. bespoke

    Ok Imp fair enough but total war means disregarding civilian casualties. Are you up for that?

    ==

    Yes. In fact, if a situation presents itself where we can save even one of our soldiers from even getting a scratch but it would require action that would result in enemy civilian casualties, then we should take that action without hesitation.
    The enemies civilian casualties are their responsibility, not ours.
    It’s something they should’ve thought about before flying planes into buildings.

    But, thanks to the treason of the religious conservatives in office at the time, they needn’t have worried.

    That would be an unpalatable scenario to a vast majority of the Weston population, faith has nothing to do with it. Total war also includes the acceptance of high military casualties so spare me the sentinel rubbish.

    Come up with more then X-Box inspired boilerplate.

  46. BorisG

    I also always read Glick’s articles. But this one was the worst. It suggested that the US troops in Syria were deployed to help Iran, and therefore their departure is a positive step. This is absurd. It is true that both the US and Iran were interested in defeating IS, and may have even cooperated. But The US have enough of its own reasons to fight IS, due to its global terror and public execution of US citizens. And as IS disintegrated, US and Iran became rivals in their competing quests to control the former IS territory. The US troops assured the control of the Kurds over Raqqa and most priced IS territory. More importantly US troops prevented the establishment of land corridor from Iran into Lebanon via Iraq and Syria. No wonder Israeli government is outraged.

    There is also other strange logic in Clicks article. She hails an impeding change in US policy towards Lebanon as good for Israel. OK but how this justifies removing a stabilizing force from Syria? Iran and Russia can’t hide their delight at trump’s decision.

  47. Iampeter

    That would be an unpalatable scenario to a vast majority of the Weston population, faith has nothing to do with it.

    Yes and the reason for this is the immorality of Christian altruism that continues to undermine Western Civilization. We can’t fight our enemies at home or abroad because the culture agrees with them on an ethical level, thanks to Christian teaching.

    Total war also includes the acceptance of high military casualties so spare me the sentinel rubbish.

    Against Russia maybe. Even then, I think they’re capabilities are grossly overstated. But there should no serious casualties against any tin-pot in the Middle East. Not sure where you got sentimentality from my posts. Nor “boilerplate”.

    Actually try and understand what I’m saying, instead of pretending to be debating me or something.

  48. BorisG

    a lot of people who voted for Trump wanted to see the US stop wasting trillions of dollars on wars with no end that provide no benefit to the US, other than serving to hone military skills and test new weapons.

    Well, a 2000 force does not cost billions and was perfectly sustainable in the long term, if it played a stabilizing role. It is true that it’s original mission has been accomplished and Trump is fulfilling its campaign promises but it does look a bit like surrender to the Russians, Iranians and Turks.

    One can only hope that this will lead to increased conflict between Turkish and Iranian Islamists. The danger is that they will find accommodation in their common interest in confronting Israel and Sunni gulf states.

  49. mh

    As strange as it seems, the Dems are now the war mongers and run by elites for the wealthiest Americans interested in identity politics and call half the population “deplorables” and prefer the blacks and Latinos to live in poverty….

    It’s hard but you have to accept the Dems and Repugs have swapped places.

    Have to pick you up on that Candy. The Democratic Party has always been the party of black enslavement. The KKK was the terror wing of the Democratic Party. LBJ said that he would “have those nig*ers voting Democratic for 200 years”.

  50. Boambee John

    mh
    #2891015, posted on December 23, 2018 at 10:18 am
    Candy, both Republicans and Democrats were taken over by interests loyal to the globalist elites.

    Same here with the Lieborals and the Liars.

  51. bespoke

    Yes and the reason for this is the immorality of Christian altruism that continues to undermine Western Civilization. We can’t fight our enemies at home or abroad because the culture agrees with them on an ethical level, thanks to Christian teaching.

    And yet you say the war again Japan was a success (something we both agree on) This was done at a time when the Christian faith was dominant more the now.

    Against Russia maybe. Even then, I think they’re capabilities are grossly overstated. But there should no serious casualties against any tin-pot in the Middle East.

    Really! Russia tried and failed.

    Actually try and understand what I’m saying

    Well I am trying to find out if you have more depth to your thinking.

  52. Iampeter

    Besboke, being an integrated thinker such that you can see the connection between the mystical collectivism of Christianity and the inability of Western Civilization to fight the collectivism of Marxism or Islamism, is as “deep” as thinking gets on these issues. The fact that no one gets it today, is why we have a circus instead of a serious political discourse.
    It’s not depth that you’re looking for, it’s wishing that what I was saying wasn’t true.

  53. bespoke

    Imp, I’m not religious but your proclamations sound like an act faith rather then based in realistic alternatives.

  54. Iampeter

    Religious people don’t practice faith, they practice evasion.
    Lot’s of atheists do it too.
    You’re doing it here, by trying to pretend I’m making random “proclamations” so you don’t have to think about what I’m actually saying, and what that means for the superficial/cargo cultist understanding of our world that you, and many others have.

  55. max

    Ah yes Battle of whose God is right.

    Christian mystical God or Iampeter man made God.

    Which one I am going to believe ?

  56. max

    Imp
    What would be reasons for the west to go total war?

    Oh, something like 9/11 would qualify as a reason for the west to go total war.

    15 of the 19 hijackers were citizens of Saudi Arabia — ready for war Imp.

  57. bespoke

    Iampeter
    Yes and the reason for this is the immorality of Christian altruism that continues to undermine Western Civilization. We can’t fight our enemies at home or abroad because the culture agrees with them on an ethical level, thanks to Christian teaching.

    Explain why western religious leaders one wars in the past that not so religious leaders cant now?

  58. max

    Rand idea of altruism is based on the ethical system of Auguste Comte and the English positivists.

  59. bespoke

    So you don’t have to make assumptions Imp, I’m against war unless its in self defence. Your National interest leaves it open the to invade for profit.

  60. max

    Rand’s egoism is irreconcilable with both Christianity and capitalism. In fact, since the system fails to have any true explanatory value, it’s difficult to find any reason to adopt Objectivism at all.

  61. Iampeter

    Christian mystical God or Iampeter man made God.

    No, I’m saying reason, not God, but that’s incomprehensible to you.
    Meanwhile you’re trying to argue in favor of religion by pretending I’m arguing in favor of religion, which contradicts your own argument, as usual.

    15 of the 19 hijackers were citizens of Saudi Arabia — ready for war Imp.

    Yep. Saudi Arabia should’ve been reduced to glass after 9/11 and we’d have world peace today.
    It was a great opportunity to stamp the classic liberal world order on the world, but it was squandered because the religious conservatives in America are ideological allies of the religious conservatives in the Middle East, responsible for 9/11 and numerous other terrorist attacks against the West.

    Explain why western religious leaders one wars in the past that not so religious leaders cant now?

    What are you trying to ask? Religion has NEVER played the role that it plays in politics today. The contradictory term “religious right” didn’t even exist until the 70’s and didn’t really start taking over politics until the 80’s. Today even democrats don’t want to piss off too many religious voters, which is why even the Obama administration only went after secular dictatorships in the Middle East.

    So you don’t have to make assumptions Imp, I’m against war unless its in self defence. Your National interest leaves it open the to invade for profit.

    I’m also against war unless in self defense, I’m just saying if you’re going to fight a war then go all out.

  62. Iampeter

    Rand’s egoism is irreconcilable with both Christianity and capitalism. In fact, since the system fails to have any true explanatory value, it’s difficult to find any reason to adopt Objectivism at all.

    You have it the exact wrong way around and are oblivious to the glaring contradiction, that I’ve pointed out to you repeatedly, that mystical and altruistic ideologies like Christianity, are obviously not the basis for the rational and egoistic systems like capitalism.

    This is a perfect example of that evasion I was talking about earlier.
    The hopeless wishful thinking that the world was something it obviously isn’t.

  63. mh

    Yep. Saudi Arabia should’ve been reduced to glass after 9/11 and we’d have world peace today.

    Of course we would.

    One moment…..

    😆 😄 😂

  64. bespoke

    No Imp you said “We can’t fight our enemies at home or abroad because the culture agrees with them on an ethical level, thanks to Christian teaching.” I’m saying we did even though owe leader were more religious.

    Your an open boarders guy, how do you fight enemies at home? More loss of privacy?

  65. Iampeter

    No Imp you said “We can’t fight our enemies at home or abroad because the culture agrees with them on an ethical level, thanks to Christian teaching.” I’m saying we did even though owe leader were more religious.

    Well…when?
    This is my point, America only ever won two wars.
    The American Revolutionary War fought by men of the Enlightenment and opposed by the religious conservatives at the time.
    The war against Imperial Japan, fought at a time that Christianity played the lowest part in American politics.
    Not so low that America didn’t end up handing the European continent to the communists, which are the secular, intellectual descendants of Christians. If Japan was also a communist nation I wonder if things wouldn’t have been very different there as well.
    No other wars were won by any country against anti-West enemies. Today we can’t even defeat goat herders.
    We only exist today by the grace the incompetence of the enemies of Western civilization, not because we are capable of competently fighting military conflicts. This is largely a consequence of the massive resurgence of religiosity in our culture. Whether it takes the form of religious conservatives or groups like environmentalists. These are all the same thing in principle.

  66. Kneel

    We can’t fight our enemies at home or abroad because the culture agrees with them on an ethical level, thanks to Christian teaching Political Correctness gone mad.

    FIFY.

  67. Tel

    This is my point, America only ever won two wars.

    Spain still owns … ahhh … how much of the Americas?

  68. max

    you say:
    “No, I’m saying reason, not God, but that’s incomprehensible to you.”
    I replay:

    “Randian belief that every individual is armed with the means of spinning out all truths a priori from his own head
    the idea that each one is able and qualified to spin out an entire philosophy of life and of the world a priori.
    The Rand cult was concerned not with every man’s individuality, but only with Rand’s individuality, not with everyone’s right reason but only with Rand’s reason.”

    you say:
    “Meanwhile you’re trying to argue in favor of religion by pretending I’m arguing in favor of religion,”

    I reply:
    It is never a question of “creed vs. no creed”; it is a question of which creed.
    It is never a question of God vs no God; it is a question of which God.

    “Yep. Saudi Arabia should’ve been reduced to glass after 9/11 and we’d have world peace today.”

    you do not think that this was insider job or Mosad job ?

    you say:
    “What are you trying to ask? Religion has NEVER played the role that it plays in politics today.”

    I reply:
    It started with American revolution, and extended with American constitution.

  69. max

    you say:

    I’ve pointed out to you repeatedly, that mystical and altruistic ideologies like Christianity, are obviously not the basis for the rational and egoistic systems like capitalism.

    Really, why did it develop in christian west ?

  70. max

    You say:

    The American Revolutionary War fought by men of the Enlightenment and opposed by the religious conservatives at the time.


    I reply:
    “The Fourth of July was all about war and secession. It is all about avoiding tyranny at the hands of the British. You know. The way Canada suffered.

    Canada has never had hyperinflation. The United States has: the American Revolution.

    Canada has never had a Civil War.
    Canada is not empire “

  71. Iampeter

    It is never a question of God vs no God; it is a question of which God.

    Which proves my point “no, I’m saying reason, not God, but that’s incomprehensible to you.”

    you do not think that this was insider job or Mosad job ?

    Is that what you think 9/11 was?

    It started with American revolution, and extended with American constitution.

    What did? The worlds first rights protecting republic based on the doctrine of the rights of man, was a secular movement. Obviously. You can’t get the concept of rights from the Bible.

    Really, why did it develop in christian west ?

    There is no such thing as a “christian west”. Christianity is the oldest enemy of the west.

    Canada has never had a Civil War.
    Canada is not empire “

    What even is this? America is not an empire.

    So to sum up your arguments to date, you are a religious, historical, political and economic illiterate. You are completely disintegrated in your thinking and can’t see any of the glaring contradictions in most of your own arguments. You are profoundly anti-west, anti-American, and you think 9/11 was an inside job or mossad.

    Can’t wait to see what you post next…

  72. bespoke

    The American Revolutionary War fought by men of the Enlightenment and opposed by the religious conservatives at the time.

    So the “men of the Enlightenment” weren’t motivated by religious belief even though they attended church regularly and referred to god in there writing. Sure!

    Imp I’m not scholar but both sides sort religious justification and both sides sort to conserve State rights V’s Union.

    Look Imp, recognizing the horrendous acts done in the name religion is one thing that makes Weston society but to dismiss its roll in progress is just stubborn wilful ignorance.

  73. Iampeter

    So the “men of the Enlightenment” weren’t motivated by religious belief even though they attended church regularly and referred to god in there writing. Sure!

    Well, yes. They also didn’t reference god in their writings much at all, often referring to “nature’s god” which is obviously talking about reality constraining any “creator”. Most of them were deists, which was basically atheism before the theory of evolution. The striking thing about that time period was just how low church attendance was and also how incredibly secular the writings of the founders and their contemporaries were. I was actually surprised, expecting far more religiosity than there actually is.
    They were fundamentally men of reason not faith, as easily can be seen by just reading them.
    Also like I said, the religious conservatives at the time totally opposed them and the American Revolution.

    Look Imp, recognizing the horrendous acts done in the name religion is one thing that makes Weston society but to dismiss its roll in progress is just stubborn wilful ignorance.

    But religion has no roll in the progress of Western civilization. The only willful ignorance here is continuing to insist that it did, even as you acknowledge its “horrendous acts,” which should trigger alarm bells in your own head as to the validity of what you’re suggesting.
    If you think religion contributed to our progress, as opposed to hindering it every step of the way, then you need to think again.

  74. max

    you say:
    “No, I’m saying reason, not God, but that’s incomprehensible to you.”
    I replay:

    “Randian belief that every individual is armed with the means of spinning out all truths a priori from his own head
    the idea that each one is able and qualified to spin out an entire philosophy of life and of the world a priori.

    yes your good is reason, human reason — man made religion —
    question is which human?
    which human going to teach us that reason?
    which human is going to be God to teach us that reason

    which human reason, we are not all born with same abilities to reason.

    “It started with American revolution, and extended with American constitution.

    What did? ”

    all problems that America have today started with American revolution, and extended with American constitution.
    fiat money,central banking, slavery, civil war

    “There is no such thing as a “christian west”.” —-Go to any cemetery and you can see statement of your truth.

    “If you think religion contributed to our progress, as opposed to hindering it every step of the way, then you need to think again.”

    western civilization will not exist with out Christianity, and one of the reason that western nations falling apart today are because they abandoned teaching of Jesus and teach humanism, and your reasoning sound same to me.

  75. max

    Iampeter –your reason at work:

    Aristotle is accepted as one of the founders of modern Western thought with his antecedents Socrates and Plato.

    Natural slavery was Aristotle’s belief, found in the Politics, that some people are slaves by nature, while others were slaves solely by law or convention.

    He stated that slavery is natural and beneficial to both the masters as well as the slaves. He was of the belief that the slaves have no reasoning power despite the ability to understand and follow their intellect. Therefore, according to Aristotle, natural slaves are those who understand reason but possess no reasoning ability.

  76. max

    Aristotle:

    “from the hour of their birth, some are marked out for subjection, others for rule.”

    sound to me that Aristotle was father of scientific racism.

  77. bespoke

    If you think religion contributed to our progress, as opposed to hindering it every step of the way, then you need to think again.

    I think it reasonable to argue that its been more of a hindrance but to claim it hasn’t contributed to our progress in any way is just blind BS. Evan the most harshest scholar’s on the topic acknowledge some positive.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.