Slaughtering our Kurdish allies

[seer]

Just wonderful...

TURKEY BOMBS US SPECIAL FORCES IN SYRIA ATTACK, APPARENTLY BY MISTAKE

A contingent of U.S. Special Forces has been caught up in Turkish shelling against U.S.-backed Kurdish positions in northern Syria, days after President Donald Trump told his Turkish counterpart he would withdraw U.S. troops from certain positions in the area.

Newsweek has learned through both an Iraqi Kurdish intelligence official and senior Pentagon official that Special Forces operating on Mashtenour hill in the majority-Kurdish city of Kobani fell under artillery fire from Turkish forces conducting their so-called "Operation Peace Spring" against Kurdish fighters backed by the U.S. but considered terrorist organizations by Turkey.

The senior Pentagon official said that Turkish forces should be aware of U.S. positions "down to the grid." The official could not specify the exact number of personnel present, but indicated they were "small numbers below company level," so somewhere between 15 and 100 troops.

https://www.newsweek.com/us-troops-syria-turkey-1464727

[seer]

You mean like Ginsburg? https://www.politico.com/story/2015/...ol-sotu-115172

[Juvenal]

By Chris Dixon and
Colby Itkowitz
Oct. 10, 2019 at 10:49 p.m. EDT

The damage is already done, but to answer any lingering doubts about how poorly this decision has been received:

[Juvenal]

You don't think he's relevant in the context of gauging how evangelicals writ large view Trump.

I don't think he should be.

And, yeah, I know what you're doing with this post. But he's actually personally connected with the president, unlike Robertson.

Is that supposed to be a defense of Robertson, or an impeachment of Franklin?

[Juvenal]

Gorsuch was an incredible pick for a Supreme Court justice. Kavanaugh was okay. Beyond that, there's not that much I have to praise Trump for. So a few really good decisions, but a lot of really dumb ones.

It's sort of telling that the best decisions he's made (judicial appointments) are ones where the choices were narrowed down by people beforehand who actually knew what they were doing. Anyone can make a smart decision if the only options given to them are smart ones. I suppose there's intelligence in listening to people who know what they're doing in this regard, but Trump seems incapable of doing that in any other issue.

I'm highly antagonistic to politicization of the judiciary. There is no bar to a non-partisan, merits-based appointments process, as was once the standard, at least for the lesser federal courts. Anything less runs the risk of watering down professionalism and creating disrespect for the courts. In both the Bush W. and Trump administrations, these political filters have led to nominations and appointments of unqualified candidates. In Trump's case, at least, the nominations came from experienced professionals, so they were of arguably higher quality than those from Dubya's still-wet-diploma YEC-Liberty U. grads.

I don't really post that much in regards to Trump because I've just grown apathetic about him--I don't even have a real opinion on the whole Ukraine mess. I already know I'm not voting for him or whoever the Democrats nominate (my choice will almost certainly be Brian Carroll of the American Solidarity Party--as a write-in, if he doesn't end up on my state's ballot), there's no Senator election in my state in 2020, and my district is so liberal that the Republicans didn't even bother running anyone in 2018. So why does it matter to me what he did in the Ukraine? It won't affect who I vote for in any way, or much of anything in my actual life. Beyond that, I'm just tired of it all, tired of stupid attacks on Trump and tired of Trump doing stupid things.

I pretty much tune out attacks on Trump from the , but the heaviest attacks have consistently come from the right, and they're impossible to ignore. The National Review ran an entire issue against him. The never-Trumpers. Mueller, Comey, G. Conway III, Bharara, George Will, et al., all with "unimpeachable" conservative credentials. And then the anonymous op-ed guy/gal, "We're not doing that" Kelly, and "I'll resign before I do that" Mattis.

The guardrails are gone.

Trump's only meaningful defender on Ukraine is "It's not illegal if I've got texts from State" Giuliani, whose investigative companions have just been arrested on suspicion of the exact crime they were trying to pin on Biden: foreign support in an American election in favor of yeah-sure-that's-just-a-coincidence Biden-accuser, since-removed Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX).

You can't make this stuff up.

Ukraine matters to me because we can't let Trump leave the presidency with a precedent for soliciting support for an election by withholding military support against Russia's invasion of a foreign country.

[KingsGambit]

I don't really post that much in regards to Trump because I've just grown apathetic about him--I don't even have a real opinion on the whole Ukraine mess. I already know I'm not voting for him or whoever the Democrats nominate (my choice will almost certainly be Brian Carroll of the American Solidarity Party--as a write-in, if he doesn't end up on my state's ballot), there's no Senator election in my state in 2020, and my district is so liberal that the Republicans didn't even bother running anyone in 2018. So why does it matter to me what he did in the Ukraine? It won't affect who I vote for in any way, or much of anything in my actual life. Beyond that, I'm just tired of it all, tired of stupid attacks on Trump and tired of Trump doing stupid things.

I'd like to do that theoretically, but I feel my case is different because it is plausible that the election will come down to my state. This particular action makes a vote against Trump much easier for me to justify on a pure pro-life calculus. (I wouldn't vote for him regardless of circumstance, it just comes down to what I do end up doing with my vote.)

[Terraceth]

I would point out that there are two posters in this thread, NorrinRadd and seer, whom I have seen posting consistently in support of Trump, who nonetheless do not agree with this development. I would add Terraceth due to his "amen" on the former, but this is only a suggestion, and I do not know his posting history of support or opposition to Trump's actions in general.

Gorsuch was an incredible pick for a Supreme Court justice. Kavanaugh was okay. Beyond that, there's not that much I have to praise Trump for. So a few really good decisions, but a lot of really dumb ones.

It's sort of telling that the best decisions he's made (judicial appointments) are ones where the choices were narrowed down by people beforehand who actually knew what they were doing. Anyone can make a smart decision if the only options given to them are smart ones. I suppose there's intelligence in listening to people who know what they're doing in this regard, but Trump seems incapable of doing that in any other issue.

I don't really post that much in regards to Trump because I've just grown apathetic about him--I don't even have a real opinion on the whole Ukraine mess. I already know I'm not voting for him or whoever the Democrats nominate (my choice will almost certainly be Brian Carroll of the American Solidarity Party--as a write-in, if he doesn't end up on my state's ballot), there's no Senator election in my state in 2020, and my district is so liberal that the Republicans didn't even bother running anyone in 2018. So why does it matter to me what he did in the Ukraine? It won't affect who I vote for in any way, or much of anything in my actual life. Beyond that, I'm just tired of it all, tired of stupid attacks on Trump and tired of Trump doing stupid things.

[KingsGambit]

Why is anything Franklin Graham says slightly relevant? He's been making a mockery of his last name for at least 15 years.

You don't think he's relevant in the context of gauging how evangelicals writ large view Trump?

And, yeah, I know what you're doing with this post. But he's actually personally connected with the president, unlike Robertson.

[Juvenal]

Franklin Graham, of all people, has pushed back against Trump on this. I think we finally have an answer to the question as to whether there is any line that would cost Trump evangelical support short of full support for Roe v Wade or nuking Israel. Indeed, there is.

Why is anything Franklin Graham says slightly relevant? He's been making a mockery of his last name for at least 15 years.

[KingsGambit]

Franklin Graham, of all people, has pushed back against Trump on this. I think we finally have an answer to the question as to whether there is any line that would cost Trump evangelical support short of full support for Roe v Wade or nuking Israel. Indeed, there is.

[oxmixmudd]

'But but but there is bipartisan support for this group infamous for terrorism, kidnapping, assassinations, targeting civilians, forcibly recruiting child soldiers, drug trafficking, suicide bombing, and human trafficking. '

And where has Trump indicated this is the reason for his action? And when has he tried to make a case in Congress or the Senate that our support of them is misguided for these reasons? Where has he first put pressure on the Kurds to change their ways or face consequences? They are our allies, and we are abandoning our commitment to them without trying to work with them to change these elements if they in fact are real. They have lost over 10,000 to fighting on our behalf. And these 'reason' are being offered as excuses after the fact.



Jim

[oxmixmudd]

Russia working with Turkey to carve out bits of Syria. Putin says thanks Yanks (suckers).

Pretty much.

Hard to know why Trump is so willing to play into what Putin wants (divisions with NATO etc). But there is no scenario where Trump takes this specific action for the overall benefit of the USA.


Jim

[oxmixmudd]

I would point out that there are two posters in this thread, NorrinRadd and seer, whom I have seen posting consistently in support of Trump, who nonetheless do not agree with this development. I would add Terraceth due to his "amen" on the former, but this is only a suggestion, and I do not know his posting history of support or opposition to Trump's actions in general.

More substantively, the same should be acknowledged for Lindsey Graham.

But more directly, it is not reasonable in my view to continue to defend an initial judgment at odds with Rogue's direct denial of support in this instance. The proper course, in my view, is to gracefully admit to being wrong, learn from the experience, and move on.

I agree with you.

My reply had nothing to do with saying I think rogue supports this action. I thought I had already acknowledged that. I already recognize many in this thread have said they do not support this action. If anyone thinks otherwise, I'll be clear here. I accept rogues declaration he is against it.

The post you replied to was a response to being ragged on for assuming rogue's initial post supported this action before he made clear his position.

[firstfloor]

Russia working with Turkey to carve out bits of Syria. Putin says thanks Yanks (suckers).

[rogue06]

What? Wait, you were actually serious?

GIF Point & Laff.gif GIF point & laugh.gif