John Chuckman
EXPANSION OF COMMENT POSTED TO AN AP ARTICLE IN CBC NEWS
"Trump decided to withdraw troops from Syria without consulting advisers"
I think at best that is only technically accurate.
Everyone knew Trump's original position on this.
And many reports point to advisors telling him not to go that way. Over and over.
Indeed, I 've seen a piece that says his sudden impulse was in part a reaction to his hearing the same stuff over and again from advisors. There does come a point when there's not much point in asking the same people the same question again.
Perhaps Trump had reached that, although it remains easy to paint him as impulsive and erratic in this decision because he has been impulsive and erratic so very many times. It is part of his basic nature. But you can be impulsive and erratic in executing a sound decision, or you can be erratic and impulsive in even making the decision. Opponents are suggesting the latter.
Well, that all means he knew their positions, and they knew his. So, I view this kind of report as echoing a kind of disinformation from insider opponents.
This would be by far Trump’s worthiest act, keeping his word on a very important matter from two years ago.
There can be no question he has made his Neocon officials angry - folks like Bolton and Pompeo - but who cares? They are some of the most deplorable people in the government. People always ready to see others die in the name of ideology.
I don't like Trump, but I completely support him here. We all should. I only hope he is sincere, but that is not at all certain. Nor is it certain that even if he is sincere, he will not be diverted from his purpose by powerful forces.
Of course, his blubbering about defeating ISIS is just defensive posturing. The best comment I've read on that claim is: "Actually, ISIS Isn’t Beaten Yet Because the US Prevented Syrians From Doing So”
That reflects the truth about most of the American activity in a war that has seen half a million die and millions made refugees. The secret aim of all the effort was to remove a popularly-supported government and weaken a country that Israel does not like having on its border, and the effort has failed. Yes, in the recent past, America did engage in actually bombing ISIS, but that has not been its record for the war.
ISIS has been bombed by Western governments recently because they could no longer resist the public clamor over this horrible gang which went out of its way to terrify opponents with brutal acts. Before that, they were a useful tool. Anyway, they’ve served their purpose and failed. And no one involved in Realpolitik and the war business has sympathy or use for failed hired thugs. You might as well try to earn some public relations credit by killing some of them off.
American bombing of ISIS in places like Raqqa, Syria, has been the most brutal by anyone in the war, killing very large numbers of civilians. It appears the Pentagon put the emphasis on just quickly getting the job done.
Of course, the same pattern has been seen in Afghanistan, a place which endlessly frustrates an American invader whose purpose, beyond vengeance, was never quite clear from the start.
The entire record of American involvement in Syria is shameful, and, of course, all of it is completely illegal since America has no one’s permission even to fly over the country, let alone bomb and build bases and provide weapons to rebellion.
The Syrian army, greatly helped by Russia and Iran, in fact defeated ISIS and some of the other terrorists. Perhaps, soon they can finish the job in the Northeast, and all the refugees can begin going home to rebuild?
But Turkey is promising to do the job for them in its determination to prevent a Kurdish rump state on its border. It is anybody’s guess how that will all sort out, vis-à-vis Syria and Russia.
