What's the consensus here about Trump pulling out of Syria? I'm giving the orange man a thumbs up on this one. Oh you cry, it has responsibilities now it's intervened in the first place, and it's only doing it because Turkey and Russia blah blah blah. I'm adopting a simpler position and maintain the less involvement America has with anything outside America the better. I've seen Apocalypse Now and approve of this withdrawal business.

Honestly I cant remember a more tragic state of affairs in my lifetime than Syria.

Yossarian wrote:

Fucking over your allies is never a good thing.

Well that's clearly wrong, especially if you're a baddie. 

Anyway, I would vote for Trump until the end of time if he pulled all troops out of anywhere that wasn't North America. That could be his legacy - and it could be worse.

SpaceGazelle wrote:

Yossarian wrote:

Fucking over your allies is never a good thing.

Well that's clearly wrong, especially if you're a baddie. 

Anyway, I would vote for Trump until the end of time if he pulled all troops out of anywhere that wasn't North America. That could be his legacy - and it could be worse.

I disagree with this.
If America or anyone else enters/invades another country they have an obligation to see it through and deliver a stable and safe environment for the population of that country.

If they should have been there in the first place is up for debate and varies on the situation, once they are in they are in.

In regards to Syria it was at the most stable place it had been in nearly a decade until Trump pulled out.

LivDiv wrote:

SpaceGazelle wrote:

Yossarian wrote:

Fucking over your allies is never a good thing.

Well that's clearly wrong, especially if you're a baddie.  Anyway, I would vote for Trump until the end of time if he pulled all troops out of anywhere that wasn't North America. That could be his legacy - and it could be worse.

I disagree with this. If America or anyone else enters/invades another country they have an obligation to see it through and deliver a stable and safe environment for the population of that country. If they should have been there in the first place is up for debate and varies on the situation, once they are in they are in. In regards to Syria it was at the most stable place it had been in nearly a decade until Trump pulled out.

There's no obligation to see it through, mainly because it's badly thought out non-policy in the first place. I'm genuinely finding it difficult to support American intervention in anything and I'm surprised anyone else is too.

Yossarian wrote:

If he keeps on blocking action on climate change, then pulling troops out of anywhere is irrelevant.

Arguably, being isolationist is greenist foreign policy since Wilson.

SpaceGazelle wrote:

Yossarian wrote:

If he keeps on blocking action on climate change, then pulling troops out of anywhere is irrelevant.

Arguably, being isolationist is greenist foreign policy since Wilson.

You’ll have to expand on that argument because I don’t see it.

Yossarian wrote:

I’m genuinely a bit torn over US intervention in Syria. Instinctively, I am against it, and in 99% of cases, that holds true. However, Isis were genuine, complete and irredeemable cunts. And frankly, if we are looking at US intervention historically, should they have not intervened in WW2? Would the world be a better place if they hadn’t?

I can't quite believe you're using the McCarthy argument of WW2 as a justification for intervention but here we are, 70 years later. Wow.

Not really, I dont think U.S attempted to occupy Syria anyway, stir up Russia maybe but I never saw it as a controlling effort.
They had pulled back their forces there fairly heavily leaving only a small force to aid the Kurds.

Trump pulled that force out and now Turkey have genuinely moved to take land and occupy a strip of northern Syria while a bunch of ISIS PoWs have escaped.

I'm not a fan of Western and particularly U.S intervention in the middle east but I dont see Syria in the same way I see Iraq or Afghanistan because they are different scenarios.

Isis are the result of US interventions. US interventions usually turn out well, right? I mean iraq, Iran,  Afghanistan, Vietnam, Guatemala etc. They are the good guys after all. And now Trump is in charge, so what could possibly go wrong? Clusterfuck. Talking about rules or right or wrong or up or down is waste of time.

The Kurds did the majority of the ground fighting against ISIS. They sacrificed their lives to expell ISIS from those northern areas of Syria, on the understanding that the US would help them and have their back.

Regardless of whether the US should have been their in the first place, they were there, and they made a commitment to the Kurds. By abandoning them and allowing Turkey to come in and massacre them, while also reinvigorating ISIS, is just a disgusting betrayal.

Also, none of the troops have gone home. They've just been redeployed in the region. Additionally, the decision was taken so suddenly that the troops didn't even know where they were supposed to be going when they left their bases. Some tried to enter Iraq but were refused entry because they weren't authorised.

SpaceGazelle wrote:

Does Corbyn not support the withdrawal of troops from Syria? I genuinely have no idea what is considered left/right wing anymore.

You can be sure that Trump isn't left-wing. Like, 100%.

I'm sure a Left leader would want troops out of Syria, but not in a way that's done to appease Turkey (a right-wing dictator) in their war against the Kurds. Trump's move was spontaneous dick-headery - like he actually knows what he's doing or gives a fuck.

You're right that military isolationism from the US would be better for the world and the environment to boot, but that's not what's happening here. Trump has talked isolationism, but he's no less involved in the region overall than previous presidents.

Yossarian wrote:

I’m genuinely a bit torn over US intervention in Syria. Instinctively, I am against it, and in 99% of cases, that holds true. However, Isis were genuine, complete and irredeemable cunts.

And frankly, if we are looking at US intervention historically, should they have not intervened in WW2? Would the world be a better place if they hadn’t?

Oh lol

Beto O'Rourke has finally dropped out.

Just need more of the no hopers to catch up with reality.

You can't trust US intelligence because they're controlled by leftist bureaucrats.
UK's intelligence on the other hand can be controlled by Quid Pro Quo.
It's the beauty of the art of the deal.