Quote:General Mazloum Abdi, the pre-eminent military leader of the Syrian Kurds, thanked President Donald Trump on Wednesday for his efforts in stopping a Turkish offensive and negotiating a cease-fire.

General Mazloum, who leads the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), issued his statement shortly after the president announced the U.S. was lifting economic sanctions on Turkey in return for its commitment to a “permanent” cease-fire.

That commitment had been announced the day before, when Russia and Turkey agreed to joint patrols within 10 km of the Syria-Turkey border, and the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) agreed to withdraw 30 km south of the border.

General Mazloum’s statement was announced via Twitter by Mustafa Bali, a spokesperson for the SDF.

President Trump reciprocated soon afterwards:

Trump hailed the new arrangement on Wednesday, declaring that the U.S. was “willing to take blame and we’re also willing to take credit” for the new cease-fire.

“We are achieving a much more peaceful and stable area between turkey and syria, including a 20-mile wide safe zone,” he said.

The president added: “Turkey, Syria, and all forms of the Kurds have been fighting for centuries. we have done them a great service and we have done a great job for all of them. And now we’re getting out. … Let someone else fight over this long blood-stained sand.”

He added that he had spoken with General Mazloum, who thanked him and assured him that members of the so-called Islamic State (ISIS) would remain in prison.

The new arrangement had been accomplished, Trump noted, “without spilling American blood.

“After all of the precious blood and treasure America has poured into the deserts of the Middle East, I am committed to pursuing a different course, one that leads to victory for America,” he said.

Link

Trump makes the Dems look like fools without even trying!

Just exhausting.

I'm guessing the MSM hasn't reported this.

(10-23-2019 04:02 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  Just exhausting.

Smoke (dog) and I are 'huffing' now...

https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/24/10-...rom-syria/
Another take on the Syrian withdrawal.

"...That Trump’s withdrawal showed more strategic clarity than the foreign policy establishment is hardly surprising. He ran against Washington’s post-9/11 foreign policies in the Middle East, in particular novelty items like Bush’s freedom agenda and Obama’s Iran deal.

From Trump’s perspective, those policies defined the divide between the Beltway bubble and the rest of the U.S. public that saw no wisdom in enriching an Iranian regime at war or spending American lives and money to promote democracy in places like Iraq, Lebanon, or the Palestinian territories where elections were certain to empower anti-American forces.

Partnering with a terrorist faction of a sub-state actor at war with a NATO member is in the same category of objectively foolhardy and self-defeating policies. That many Republicans appear to have learned nothing in the last 19 years and chose to join Democrats in protest against the withdrawal shows that the divide is much more profound than even Trump had imagined. It is not only the American public from which the Beltway establishment is separated, but reality."

I have two questions.

One, whom do we want to win in Syria? 1) Daesh/ISIS, 2) Syria/Russia/Iran, or the new guys 3) Turkey? Because those are the choices.

I can't come up with a good reason why we want any of them to win. In fact, I think the best result for us might be for all of them to get bogged down and stay bogged down in an endless conflict with no sign of victory. If they kill each other, then we don't have to. Which leads to my second question.

Two, if we don't want anybody to win, why are we even there?

Never fight a war that you don't intend to win. Vietnam should have taught us that, but apparently it didn't. Never, never, never, never fight a war that you don't anyone to win. Syria is never, never land.

(10-24-2019 09:32 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I have two questions.

One, whom do we want to win in Syria? 1) Daesh/ISIS, 2) Syria/Russia/Iran, or the new guys 3) Turkey? Because those are the choices.

I can't come up with a good reason why we want any of them to win. In fact, I think the best result for us might be for all of them to get bogged down and stay bogged down in an endless conflict with no sign of victory. If they kill each other, then we don't have to. Which leads to my second question.

Two, if we don't want anybody to win, why are we even there?

Never fight a war that you don't intend to win. Vietnam should have taught us that, but apparently it didn't. Never, never, never, never fight a war that you don't anyone to win. Syria is never, never land.

XACLY!

if one can't answer the obvious, then why...

they've become irrelevant....

all I see is funding senseless conflicts while putting American lives in harms way...

that, I cannot support in any capacity...

our country has evolved past the point of giving two shites about their centuries' long religious wars....

either go sand to glass, or fk 'em....