President @RT_Erdogan of Turkey has very strongly informed me that he will eradicate whatever is left of ISIS in Syria....and he is a man who can do it plus, Turkey is right “next door.” Our troops are coming home!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 24, 2018
The Hill: Trump: Turkey’s Erdoğan vowed to ‘eradicate’ whatever is left of ISIS in Syria
President Trump said early Monday that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan "has very strongly informed" him that Turkey will "eradicate whatever is left of ISIS in Syria" after the U.S. withdraws its troops from the country.
"President @RT_Erdogan of Turkey has very strongly informed me that he will eradicate whatever is left of ISIS in Syria....and he is a man who can do it plus, Turkey is right 'next door.' Our troops are coming home!" Trump wrote on Twitter.
Read more ....
WNU Editor: No one has any reason to trust Turkish President Erdogan. And as for eliminating what is left of ISIS, Turkey had ample opportunities in the past to do so, but they did not. Why should they do it now?
More News On President Trump Saying That Turkey Will Eliminate Whatever Is Left Of ISIS
Trump complains that presidential harassment has been with him ‘from the beginning’ as he doubles down on his belief that Turkey will complete the mission to destroy ISIS -- Daily Mail
Trump on Syria Pullout: Erdogan Assured Me He'd 'Eradicate Whatever's Left of ISIS' -- Haaretz/Reuters
Trump says Erdogan will 'eradicate' Isil in Syria and praises the Turkish leader as 'a man who can do it' -- The Telegraph
Turkey will 'eradicate ISIS' in Syria after US troops withdraw, says Trump -- SKY News
Erdogan Pledged to Eradicate 'Whatever Left' of Daesh in Syria, Trump Says -- Sputnik
24 comments:
Now Trump is digging himself a whole.
It was shown during the Battle of Kobane that Turkey aided ISIS.
As such Erdogan could and should be charged with war crimes.
Being concerned about the wisdom of any deal with Turkey is not unfounded. I definitely am empathetic to it and I share it. However I think this situation is different from past situations and should go forward for the following reasons.
1.)The measure of the man, specifically president Trump: during his business career he has had numerous siccesdful negotiations with difficult even unsavory characters. Many of his critics consider this a flaw. I do not, for better or worse if America is to prosper such dealings have to take place. From the start, I considered this a great asset. Nothing against GW Bush or Obama but I just don't think they had the wherewithal to deal with the likes of Erdogan. Trump has successfully dealt with this type before. Maybe he can't this time but I think the odds are reasonable especially when looking at the alternative.
2.) ISIS is but a shell of what it once was. It's lost pretty much all state support it once had. Essentially when it was going strong capturing and holding territory as efficiently as any fighting force ever has the tendency is "make nice," "back the strong horse," and other such thinking in order to advance one's intersts. Now I'm not seeing any profit in backing it along with plenty of downside risks on supporting it. As such, I think Turkey's calculus will be different now with regards to ISIS. Essentially going after ISIS is in their intersts.
3.)Planning for the American redeployment has been in place for months and involves a multitude of countries whose intersts are opposed to those of ISIS are involved. To support ISIS at this point would likely mean the end of the Turkish government and possibly the end of the life of Erdogan himself. I don't think that was a pleasant conversation for Erdogan that he had with Trump. Essentially I think he was told by Trump what he was going to do and he has/had no choice but to comply.
Without having access to inside information in real time we can't "know" for certain what is happening. We must make our best judgments based upon limited information. As such, this is my "take,"
Based upon the outlines of the redeployment plan I've seen I estimate an 80-85% chance of success. Maybe I'm being overly optimstic. With that said the current course if having our forces remain ib perpetuity further depleting our strength has a zero percent chance of success. As such, respectfully I'll go with the Trump plan.
As the redeployment is going to be "slow and coordinated" we should be able to make adjustments to the plan as needed. For example we should be able to gage the actiibs of the Turks and others at every step and adjust accordingly.
I apologize for the numerous misspellings.
You could abjectly apologize for being an effussive Russian shill.
If by ISIS you mean Kurds, then Erdogun’s your guy.
Poster is moronic shill Russian troll factory simpleton and always comments pro Russian nonsense
Find any comment that is not pro Putin!
Anon (7:02AM),
I'm not Russian nor do I shill for Russia. You owe me an apology for this slander. I find when people don't have a case to make or the case is weak they often resort to such slander.
I'm pretty sure you already know I'm not Russian. I've provided ample information on my identity and how anyone wishing to do so can contact me many, many times. Yet you persisted in such slander.
As for the "shill" accusation, if you read my posts in their entirety you would know this to be inaccuate. As I've said before, Russia is a very powerful country. There may be times and places where we will need to confront them. It will be helpful to have cooridal working relations with them in a number of areas. If the leadership, is going to engage in activities that exacerbate the conflict, many of us would appreciate better explanations than we've been provided.
Anon (7:48AM),
Perhaps not having a valid point to make you were trying to be cute. With that said ISIS and the Kurds are distinct and separate. The Kurds are an ally that I care deeply about. ISIS is an enemy. ISIS is nearly defeated. The Kurds are in great shape especially now that they should be having the UAE and Saudi Arabia backing them. Additionally as part of the redeployment the US has not ruled out air strikes. As such, as needed the US will be bringing in air strikes to back up the Kurds.
ISIS is in terrible shape. They are a shell of what they were and are surrounded by enemies on all sides. There's no upside to support for them coupled with much downside risk. Add to this the traditional Turkish goal of annihilating the Kurds is now going to be much more difficult than it was.
Turkey will be taking steps to finish off ISIS, if for no other reason than they want to stay relevant. I don't see that they have a choice. Even if they don't follow through, the redeployment will be "slow and coordinated." As such, we will be able to make course adjustments as needed.
Vanil,
I did not write that stuff at 7:02.
But it is true.
When Lori Gatuso says that Russian planes are neat. She has a leg to stand on. She discussed something specific (for one strakes). As far as I can tell it is a difference in design objectives. It is not like Ivan can go anywhere say Libya. Too far, a short jump. So why would Russians design the jets the same way?
Obama should never have gone into Libya. His 1st instinct was to not go. Then neocon Hillary and others talked or shamed into it. It was a mistake. Mistake or not Obama took out a Russian client state and Poot Poot sat on his hands.
Put Put also sat on his hand in Syria for the 1st 3 years until he saw what a putz Obama was. He saw Obama would do nothing, so he moved in.
If you are going to troll at least make it realistic. Say China is the strongest nation instead of Russia and say it with your usually ebullience.
Join a military booster club. Maybe you will have some military experience then, because you do not have any that I can tell now.
Anon (10:50AM),
I have provided what I believe to be an extremely thorough analysis of this based upon reading an analyzing multiple sources. You must insult because you have nothing of value to contribute and/or you hold a position that is based entirely on ideology and not suoported by facts. Therefore you need to shout down the other side with baseless insults.
"Find any comment that is not pro-Putin!" The comments on this thread are not pro-Putin. As we will need to work with Putin in a number of areas and we will need to confront him in a number of areas, it will help to be circumspect in our dealings with him. If we work with Russia where we can and find compromises where we can, this will help to diffuse tensions in areas of conflict. Such approaches are not being pro-Putin. I call it statesmanship and representing the American people.
While wild and reckless accusations against Russia may make someone feel good, they run counterproductive to our interests.
The purpose of this was to answer the question "why should they now?" I believe I've answered this. Admittedly point 1 is subjective but from examining Trump's record, it is my considered opinion he is going to be in a better position than either of our two previous presidents to elicit the cooperation of Turkey. Point 3 will depend upon the abikty of the parties to work together. Given the stakes, I think it a strong possibility that they can and will. I believe this represents a better option than the staus quo which I don't think is sustainable for us. As for point 2, we can stop right there. I don't think anyone would suggest ISIS is anywhere near what it was or that it has any state support left. As such, Turkey is going to assist in finishing off ISIS, to much downside risks in not doing so.
If you have anything constructive to add in the way of frank dialogue, please do so. I'm all eyes. With Christmas and family my time is limited.
Time permitting I'm going to do an analysis on the battle of Kobane. While my knowledge isn't complete right now, this occurred in 2014 as I understand it. At this time, ISIS was at or near its height and they had common adversaries with the Turks. As such, Erdogan may have thought it made sense to work with them. One analysis called ISIS's defeat here the beginning of the demise of ISIS. Today ISIS is weaker and the Kurds are in a better positiion. As such, being the survivor Erdogan is I would expect his analysis to be different now.
Anon (12:58),
You have just taken the slander of anon 7:02 and repeated it. I am neither "Russian" nor am I a "shill" for Russia. While it is hard to know who an anonymous poster is, I think I recognize the style. If it is who I think it is, this person knows better or should know better.
Perhaps you're new. If interested, I can help you find my identity. Posting that over and over again becomes tiresome. If my posts are read in context, it should be obvious that I place American interests first and foremost.
Now with that said once you get past the slander you get into constructive dialogue. I appreciate that.:-) Thank you!!:-) Based upon what you typed I think there's quite a bit we'd probably agree on.
I seem to have missed the particular post of Ms. Gattuso that you're referring to. For what it's worth I rather enjoy her posts and find them informative. If jets are to be utilized for a certain purpose it makes sense to design them accordingly.
I fully agree with you on Libya. Maybe we took out a Russian client state. At what cost? 1.)Libya had agreed to give up its WMD in the wake of the Iraq war. 2.)Libya had agreed not to support Islamic terrorism. As at least one analysis put it, the Libyan leader had become "content to soil his own nest" as I recall and had essentially ceased to be a threat to us. We could have stopped right there. The invasion wasn't justified. Obama's initial instincts were spot on. Very respectfully "neo-con" is kind of a nebulous term. With that said people whose only "tool" to solve conflict is war are a problem.
Now moving on, 3.)enmity with Russia was,needlessly inflamed. 4.) Putin "sat on his hands " When your adversary is injuring himself, it doesn't make much sense to interfere. At least that's my take. 4.)This action destabilized an entire country creating a massive refugee crisis, made the lives of Libyabs a living hell, created a fertile ground for Islamic terrorists to flourish, and swamped our Italian ally with much of these refugees.
I'd say the costs outweigh any benefits here. Taking out a Russian client state even if a justifiable action which in the context of broader US interests seems questionable at best very respectfully appears to be fishing for a way to justify the unjustifiable.
My "take" on why Putin "sat on his hands" in Syria is because he didn't really want to wade into that mess. Nevertheless Russia has what it deems core interests to protect. Our efforts had made a God awful mess of things making a bad situation many times worse than it was. Frankly some of our "allies" in the Syrian Civil War were questionable at best bearing little difference than Al Qaeda and ISIS in terms of philosophy. Sometimes I don't even think we knew who we were supporting!! Essentially Russia had to intervene to establish some sort of order and to preserve what it deemed core interests. Once the focus switched to fighting ISIS as the main mission, progress began to be seen. I suspect the US and Russia worked together on this.
"If you are going to troll..." back to the insults. On this site at least, weak argument=insults come out. With that said I've enjoyed reading your analysis. I hope we can do it again.
As we read and study, we learn. We must always be willing to challenge preconceived notions. The point I've made of late is Russia is ARGUABLY the world's most powerful country. It might be the US. I'd put them ahead of China because of the nuclear arsenal. The only way to "know" is actual military conflict.
"Time permitting I'm going to do an analysis on the battle of Kobane"
Translation?
Tax season just started, but I am going to troll.
Anon (12:38PM),
Due to family needs there was not sufficient time to address your last paragraph. "Join a military booster club." I'm an associate member of the Marine Corps League and I do work for the American Legion. I'm going yo be expanding my activities in these areas and others related yo assisting veterans in the coming year. Additionally I have numerous friends and family members who have served in the military and who had multiple tours of duty in combat.
When you've lost loved ones and had loved ones who have been maimed for life in war, you won't look at it the same way. This is not a game whereby our young men and wonen should be used as pawns on someone's chessboard.
I'm an associate member of the Marine Corps League and when I get together for a dinner with the Marines I regal them with how superior Russian military is to the US military and of how Putin is play 5 D chess. Yeah riiiiiiiiiight!
What are you smoking. I want some of that.
Anon (4:12PM),
The troll slur comes out again. At least you're finally admitting that I am being truthful about my identity. I want to be as polite as possible. We're moving in the right firection.:-)
Do you know what an Internet troll is? Wikipedia has quite a bit to say about the topic. Essentially to summarize an internet troll is someone who posts inflammatory and off-topic content. I'm very polite here and I stay on topic. In contrast, accusations of troll almost seemed designed to distract ftom the topic at hane. Maybe you need an echo chamber, a safe space pethaps where you can go and not have your assumptions challenged.
I would suggest always challenging your assumptions. I've had to change my opinions based upon information gleaned from this website and the comment threads a multitude of times.
Unfortunately there really isn't time to expound on the Battle of Kobane right now beyond what I've already said. Research is ongoing. Perhaps there will be an opportunity on another thread to expound upon this. Essentially, geo-political realiyies are different now than in 2014 and Erdogan is a ruthless man who pursues his perceived interests at any and all costs, he wishes to remain in power, and he wishes to stay alive. IMHO this is, in a nutshell, the answer to "why should they now?" as the editor asks. The remainder of my analysis can be found above.
Anon (7:08),
Actually I don't really discuss such things with them. I don't recall saying Putin is a 5 D chess player. Maybe I did somewhere. As we study we learn. I have said Russia and/or China are ARGUABLY the world's top military powers. Maybe it's the United States. The only way to "know" is an actual military conflict.
Actually I think it's the media who seems enamored with Putin. They think he has Trump's number.
The last sentence is interesting. The argument is weak. Accuse me of lying.
" I have said Russia and/or China are ARGUABLY the world's top military powers. "
Umm no. Several people know you are all Putin all the time.
"Umm no. Several people know you are all Putin all the time.
Very respectfully they're not reading carefully enough. I will frankly admit that as I have read this blog, the links provided by the editor, the editor comments, the posts in the threads, commented on the posts, and had dialogue on them as a result I have altered views on a number of areas including views on Russia, China, and a number of other areas. Constructive dialogue is helpful.
Very DISrespectfully they're reading just fine.
Obviously they aren't reading propetly. Now, as for you, you can either read my posts in their entirety and find out the truth for yourself which will verify that they are not reading properly or you can take what they say without questioning perhaps because it fits your preconceived narrative. Your choice.
A-- Poster
I have had card carrying communists in my family. I do not have preconceived ideas. You are on the otherhand I suspect are paid to troll.
What you suspect about me is completely in error. Of course you'd know this if you took the time to read what I've posted here.
I'm not sure how the fact that you have had "card carrying communists" in your family is relevant to the discussion. If you're accusing me of being communist, this is further confirmation that you haven't taken the time to read my posts here. If you had, you'd know I'm nowhere close to being a communist or to supporting it.
The troll slur comes out again. Maybe some people need safe spaces and/or schi chambers where their ideologies aren't challenged.
For a moment here I had actually forgotten what the original topic of the editor's post was!! I scrolled back to the top to find out.
Trump says Turkey will eliminate what is left of ISIS. The editor rightly points out they had opportunities in the past to fight ISIS and didn't. He asks "why should they do it now?"
His question is a good one. I gave it considerable thought and have continued to give it considerable thought. I then provided an analysis formulated in large part based upon links provided by the editor elsewhere that spells out why I believe the situation on the ground has changed and Turkey will now fight ISIS.
I believe the analysis to be sound and stand by it. Time will tell if I'm right.
Somewhere along the way I allowed you to get me off topic. This is part of the classic definition of an internet troll. They seek to distract. Perhaps I have "fed the troll." Maybe I shouldn't do that.
"schi" should have read as "echo."
I am sure the Feds have the bogey in tow.
Good luck
Post a Comment