turkey already bombing syria

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

The kurds didn't help in WW 2 or at Normandy..

The stupid sh it never stops
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

well if i’m stupid
and you’re not, tell
me why another nation can’t pony up and put a few dozen troops there. why is it always us, and only us?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

well if i’m stupid
and you’re not, tell
me why another nation can’t pony up and put a few dozen troops there. why is it always us, and only us?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It’s not always us, that is you buying Trump’s lies.

Jim, we have a NATO member violating the charter with Trump’s approval. Who came to our aid after 9/11? It’s insane what is going down.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

It’s not always us, that is you buying Trump’s lies.

Jim, we have a NATO member violating the charter with Trump’s approval. Who came to our aid after 9/11? It’s insane what is going down.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If they're violating the charter, why isn't NATO responding? And what standards are the Kurds violating, if they're in fact supporting terrorism in Turkey, which you made it sound like they were.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

well if i’m stupid
and you’re not, tell
me why another nation can’t pony up and put a few dozen troops there. why is it always us, and only us?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Whos calling you stupid ? That above statment was from Trump

Why us.. isolationism is dangrous .. how about letting China fill our void .. let them take a turn. Or Russia. how many Syrian refugees have NATO countries taken and how many have we ? 50 or 1000 troops seems like a fair compromise
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Whos calling you stupid ? That above statment was from Trump

Why us.. isolationism is dangrous .. how about letting China fill our void .. let them take a turn. Or Russia. how many Syrian refugees have NATO countries taken and how many have we ? 50 or 1000 troops seems like a fair compromise
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

one thing that people on both sides do when they have a weak position and know it, is accuse the other side of extremes.

i’m not an isolationist. i’m suggesting that an argument can be made that if we’re in syria long enough to complete the mission against ISIS ( and i haven’t heard anyone say that isis still has a meaningful presence there), that maybe it’s time for someone else to take a turn.

just because i don’t necessarily want to be there forever, doesn’t make me an isolationist. does it?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

one thing that people on both sides do when they have a weak position and know it, is accuse the other side of extremes.

i’m not an isolationist. i’m suggesting that an argument can be made that if we’re in syria long enough to complete the mission against ISIS ( and i haven’t heard anyone say that isis still has a meaningful presence there), that maybe it’s time for someone else to take a turn.

just because i don’t necessarily want to be there forever, doesn’t make me an isolationist. does it?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

But yet you complain that Obama pulled out of Iraq and caused isis
How long were you willing to stay there hindsight is always 20/20

Yet now as if by magic Isis is defeated .And once again Trumps getting picked on. Talk about a weak position

ISIS IS also an idea the west hasn't killed that and Trukey is relighting that candle.. And Trump has destroyed the idea that the US is a dependable partner .. that decades of treasure and American lives were used to forge such an image. Even some Republican have have spoke out against Turkey.. the country not the T in the oval office
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

one thing that people on both sides do when they have a weak position and know it, is accuse the other side of extremes.

i’m not an isolationist. i’m suggesting that an argument can be made that if we’re in syria long enough to complete the mission against ISIS ( and i haven’t heard anyone say that isis still has a meaningful presence there), that maybe it’s time for someone else to take a turn.

just because i don’t necessarily want to be there forever, doesn’t make me an isolationist. does it?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

America actually is not locked into pointless “endless wars” in the Middle East. We have troops there for the same reason we keep troops in other parts of the world — to preempt threats to our homeland, deter aggression and protect America’s far-flung interests. Their mission is counterterrorism, not war, in support of Afghan and other local forces that are doing most of the fighting on the ground.

It’s been 74 years since Japan surrendered unconditionally on the battleship USS Missouri, but the United States still has 56,000 troops there. About 65,000 active duty U.S. troops are stationed in Europe (including NATO ally Turkey). We have over 25,000 troops in South Korea. And the U.S. Central Command overseas between 60,000 and 70,000 troops in the Middle East, most of whom are not engaged directly in combat.