Trump wants to pull troops from Syria 'as quickly as possible,' but it won't be very quick

US President Donald Trump wants to bring troops back from Syria as soon as possible, the White House said, but not before their goals are fulfilled. Earlier, the French president said he had convinced Trump the troops had to stay.
"The US mission has not changed – the president has been clear that he wants US forces to come home as quickly as possible," White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders said in a statement cited by Reuters. The US has some 2,000 troops and a number of military contractors acting in Syria. Before they go home, though, their mission has to be fulfilled.

"We are determined to completely crush ISIS and create the conditions that will prevent its return. In addition, we expect our regional allies and partners to take greater responsibility both militarily and financially for securing the region," Sanders said.

The goals outlined by Sanders were earlier mentioned by the US envoy to the UN, Nikki Haley, in a Fox News interview. Haley's list was somewhat broader, though, adding monitoring Iran's activity and ensuring American interests are safe from Syrian President Bashar Assad's purported chemical weapons. The somewhat vague objectives, combined with Washington's refusal to hold any direct talks with Damascus and numerous demands for Assad to step down or be toppled, could effectively extend "as quickly as possible" to a nearly indefinite stretch.

Indeed, French President Emmanuel Macron, one of Trump's allies in the recent joint strikes on Syria, said he had convinced Trump to keep the troops in place for the unspecific "long term."

"Ten days ago, President Trump was saying 'the United States should withdraw from Syria'. We convinced him it was necessary to stay," Macron said.

In late March, Trump said the US would be "coming out of Syria very soon" and letting "other people take care of it now," which went against previously-outlined plans by the Pentagon and the State Department to keep troops in Syria to "support our partners," "prevent the return of terrorist groups" and transition to a "post-Assad leadership."

Soon after that, Syrian anti-government activists, including the White Helmets, claimed Assad launched a chemical attack that killed and injured dozens of civilians in Douma, a suburb of Damascus that he was close to decisively re-taking from militants. Russian forces, who are on the ground to assist Damascus in fighting terrorists and de-escalating the conflict, said they had not found any evidence or victims of the alleged attack, and accused the White Helmets of faking it. Presently, Trump boasted that "nice and 'smart'" American missiles would soon fly to Syria.

After a week of UN Security Council meetings and failed resolutions, and before a fact-finding mission by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) could arrive at the site of the alleged attack, Trump, together with Macron and UK Prime Minister Theresa May, launched about a hundred missiles into Syria. Their stated goal was to cripple Assad's purported chemical weapons facilities and stockpiles, but one of the targets they hit was reportedly a civilian facility that specialized in medicine.

Now, Haley says at the UN Security Council that America remains "locked and loaded" for more strikes should new "chemical attacks" come, and uses an if-clause when talking to Fox about the prospects of withdrawal from Syria. And while Trump's people say he wants a withdrawal "as quickly as possible," it's highly likely that it will not be very quick at all.

https://www.rt.com/usa/424227-trump-withdraw-syria-quick/
 

meesterperfect

Hiliary 2020
If The Syrians have been fighting "our" enemy for years now then why isn't the US helping them instead of fighting them and threatening to kill their President?

The answer to that question is the answer to pretty much everything that has happened since Sept 11 2001.

Our so called enemy is and has been working with us. A boogeyman created and funded by the very people who claim they are our enemy and must be stopped at ALL COSTS . Trillions and Trillions of dollars later and no end in sight until somebody blasts us off the map.
Just like a drug addict who came into some money, gonna go binge drugging until theyre dead.
They just can't get enough.
They just can't get enough.

 
Maybe in 15 years
If the US then have another country to attack so that the Military-Industrial Complex can make a fortune in tax-payers money selling arms to the Pentagon
 
ISIS is decimated all but some random pockets. Maybe instead of France making requests maybe they should offer to help? France could commit 1000 troops so we can bring 1000 US war dogs home? I know, I know, seems far fetched since France has never committed to anything.
 
ISIS is decimated all but some random pockets. Maybe instead of France making requests maybe they should offer to help? France could commit 1000 troops so we can bring 1000 US war dogs home? I know, I know, seems far fetched since France has never committed to anything.

France is one of the main contributors to the military action of the international coalition against Daesh. France has been carrying out Operation Chammal within the framework of the coalition in Iraq since September 2014 and in Syria since 8 September 2015.

It carries out air operations, and provides advice and training to Iraqi and particularly Kurdish security forces. France is also providing support to the moderate opposition fighting against Daesh in Syria.

Following the attacks in Paris and Saint-Denis on 13 November 2015, France has intensified air operations over Syrian territory. To this end, it has deployed six Rafales and an Atlantique-2 maritime patrol aircraft operating from the United Arab Emirates, and eight Mirage 2000 aircraft stationed in Jordan. These resources are strengthened from time to time by the carrier battle group built around the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier (18 Super Etendard, 8 Rafale marine, 3,500 French troops, from November 2015 to February 2016).
Our increased military efforts and those of our partners will only have full effect if sustainable political solutions are found for the crises in Syria and Iraq.
https://au.ambafrance.org/What-is-France-doing-to-counter-Daesh


But, yeah, we're not stupid enough to have boots on the ground. We let that to Americans, they are used to send their boys abroad only to see them coming back in coffins.
 
:1orglaugh
 

Mali is simple. There's a elected government and there's jihadi terrorists. It's easy to know who are the "good guys" and who are the "bad guys".


Syria is much more complicated :
There's Assad who's the country leader but who's a cruel dictator.
There's jihadis.
There's rebels, some are pushing for democracy, some are jihadi sympathisers.
There's kurds who are ennemies of the jihadis but are considered as (non-islamic) terrorists by Turkey
There's Russia who's on the side of Assad 'cause they try to gain influence in the region and challenge the american leadership on global Diplomacy.
There's Iran who's on the side of Assad 'cause the Jihadis are from a different strain of islma than them.
There's Saudi Arabia who's on the side of Assad but in some kind of cold war with Iran and is known for playing on both side in the war against islamic-terrorism

It's a mess, it's a war that can't be won.
Get out of this, let them kill each other and pray Daesh won't come on top at the end, that's the best you can do
 
Mali is simple. There's a elected government and there's jihadi terrorists. It's easy to know who are the "good guys" and who are the "bad guys".


Syria is much more complicated :
There's Assad who's the country leader but who's a cruel dictator.
There's jihadis.
There's rebels, some are pushing for democracy, some are jihadi sympathisers.
There's kurds who are ennemies of the jihadis but are considered as (non-islamic) terrorists by Turkey
There's Russia who's on the side of Assad 'cause they try to gain influence in the region and challenge the american leadership on global Diplomacy.
There's Iran who's on the side of Assad 'cause the Jihadis are from a different strain of islma than them.
There's Saudi Arabia who's on the side of Assad but in some kind of cold war with Iran and is known for playing on both side in the war against islamic-terrorism

It's a mess, it's a war that can't be won.
Get out of this, let them kill each other and pray Daesh won't come on top at the end, that's the best you can do


got it, France is not stupid enough to have boots on the ground.
 

meesterperfect

Hiliary 2020
Mali is simple. There's a elected government and there's jihadi terrorists. It's easy to know who are the "good guys" and who are the "bad guys".


Syria is much more complicated :
There's Assad who's the country leader but who's a cruel dictator.
There's jihadis.
There's rebels, some are pushing for democracy, some are jihadi sympathisers.
There's kurds who are ennemies of the jihadis but are considered as (non-islamic) terrorists by Turkey
There's Russia who's on the side of Assad 'cause they try to gain influence in the region and challenge the american leadership on global Diplomacy.
There's Iran who's on the side of Assad 'cause the Jihadis are from a different strain of islma than them.
There's Saudi Arabia who's on the side of Assad but in some kind of cold war with Iran and is known for playing on both side in the war against islamic-terrorism

It's a mess, it's a war that can't be won.
Get out of this, let them kill each other and pray Daesh won't come on top at the end, that's the best you can do

100% false.
 
Top