Do you support Trump's ending of airstrikes against ISIS forces?

[Desperado]

We owe Syria nothing , No our circus, not our monkey

Were not doing it for SYRIA, were doing it for our national security interest!

Bullshit, We are not doing it for ourselves.

Sorry, but the operation in Syria is not a charity operation.

You are rehashing the same old excuse used in Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Syria, you need to get some new material if you want to sound believable

 

[Rambunctious]

It seems Mattis agrees with the OP.

A lot of people do.....

 

[U2Edge]

As a percentage of GDP, the United States is in total is spending less on defense than it did during the peacetime of the 1980s. The military is seriously underfunded and has been through out U.S. history with the exception of World War II

You just contradicted yourself in one post.....the military is underfunded because they are maxed out.....come on....18 years of war.....the Obama sequester....bring them home and begin to remove them from Europe and Japan and Korea and the military will be better off and fully funded.....

It does not cost any less to base U.S. troops in the United States than it does to base them in Poland or Estonia. To the degree that there is strain on the military, it is because it is NOT LARGE ENOUGH. The number of U.S. combat Brigades should be doubled. That takes more money for equipment, training and recruiting. Expand the size of the force, and you reduce the burden on the individual soldier. But that takes a lot more money than is being spent right now!

 

[McRocket]

BTW, here is TYT, a VERY progressive YouTube channel (who HATE Trump and LOVE Bernie Sanders)...supporting Trump pulling troops out of Syria.

 

[Rambunctious]

It does not cost any less to base U.S. troops in the United States than it does to base them in Poland or Estonia. To the degree that there is strain on the military, it is because it is NOT LARGE ENOUGH. The number of U.S. combat Brigades should be doubled. That takes more money for equipment, training and recruiting. Expand the size of the force, and you reduce the burden on the individual soldier. But that takes a lot more money than is being spent right now!

Foreign deployment is costly....and should only be done when absolutely necessary...I fail to see the need to keep 2000 men and women on a base in Syria.....and if you ask me....Poland and Estonia too...

 

[U2Edge]

We owe Syria nothing , No our circus, not our monkey

Were not doing it for SYRIA, were doing it for our national security interest!

Bullshit, We are not doing it for ourselves.

Sorry, but the operation in Syria is not a charity operation.

You are rehashing the same old excuse used in Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Syria, you need to get some new material if you want to sound believable

Its not an excuse, its geopolitical reality. You can't allow terrorist to have haven to operate from with impunity like Afghanistan was before 2001. Same with Syria. Iraq is more important than both because of its prior ability to threaten Kuwait and northern Saudi Arabia where much of the planets oil reserves are located. Because of that you want a relatively friendly stable government in Baghdad, and you don't want it being overthrown by the likes of ISIS.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

It does not cost any less to base U.S. troops in the United States than it does to base them in Poland or Estonia.

Yes it does. Troops stationed in those places are getting extra pay in the form of COLA, family separation, and many more things. You talk a lot, but have not clue what you are talking about.

To the degree that there is strain on the military, it is because it is NOT LARGE ENOUGH. The number of U.S. combat Brigades should be doubled. That takes more money for equipment, training and recruiting. Expand the size of the force, and you reduce the burden on the individual soldier. But that takes a lot more money than is being spent right now!

once again, are you willing to join up and put your ass behind your words?

 

[U2Edge]

It does not cost any less to base U.S. troops in the United States than it does to base them in Poland or Estonia. To the degree that there is strain on the military, it is because it is NOT LARGE ENOUGH. The number of U.S. combat Brigades should be doubled. That takes more money for equipment, training and recruiting. Expand the size of the force, and you reduce the burden on the individual soldier. But that takes a lot more money than is being spent right now!

Foreign deployment is costly....and should only be done when absolutely necessary...I fail to see the need to keep 2000 men and women on a base in Syria.....and if you ask me....Poland and Estonia too...

There are many war scenarios that cost far more than basing troops. Proper troop deployment in the right areas deters aggression and prevents war. We don't want to go back to Isolationist America because that resulted in World War I and World War II. The cost of those two wars was far too much. That's why the United States has maintained a forward presence throughout the world since 1945. Peacetime defense spending, deployments, and regional wars are costly, but they are not nearly as costly as World War, resource depletion, or global economic depression due to conflict.

 

[U2Edge]

BTW, here is TYT, a VERY progressive YouTube channel (who HATE Trump and LOVE Bernie Sanders)...supporting Trump pulling troops out of Syria.

Terrible policy as well. One reason I NEVER supported Trump was because he actually had too much in common with the FAR LEFT on foreign policy and defense policy! Or, old school Isolationist Republicans from the 1920s, much like todays Paul family.

 

[Desperado]

We owe Syria nothing , No our circus, not our monkey

Were not doing it for SYRIA, were doing it for our national security interest!

Bullshit, We are not doing it for ourselves.

Sorry, but the operation in Syria is not a charity operation.

You are rehashing the same old excuse used in Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Syria, you need to get some new material if you want to sound believable

Its not an excuse, its geopolitical reality. You can't allow terrorist to have haven to operate from with impunity like Afghanistan was before 2001. Same with Syria. Iraq is more important than both because of its prior ability to threaten Kuwait and northern Saudi Arabia where much of the planets oil reserves are located. Because of that you want a relatively friendly stable government in Baghdad, and you don't want it being overthrown by the likes of ISIS.

Than explain what you have been doing for the last 18 years?
You mean the mighty US military with all its shock and awe could not rid the world of those pesky rebels in all that time. You are raising ISIS to the level of the Viet Cong

 

[Rambunctious]

It does not cost any less to base U.S. troops in the United States than it does to base them in Poland or Estonia. To the degree that there is strain on the military, it is because it is NOT LARGE ENOUGH. The number of U.S. combat Brigades should be doubled. That takes more money for equipment, training and recruiting. Expand the size of the force, and you reduce the burden on the individual soldier. But that takes a lot more money than is being spent right now!

Foreign deployment is costly....and should only be done when absolutely necessary...I fail to see the need to keep 2000 men and women on a base in Syria.....and if you ask me....Poland and Estonia too...

There are many war scenarios that cost far more than basing troops. Proper troop deployment in the right areas deters aggression and prevents war. We don't want to go back to Isolationist America because that resulted in World War I and World War II. The cost of those two wars was far too much. That's why the United States has maintained a forward presence throughout the world since 1945. Peacetime defense spending, deployments, and regional wars are costly, but they are not nearly as costly as World War, resource depletion, or global economic depression due to conflict.

I used to sound just like you...but 18 years U2Edge...18 years...after that long it becomes obvious that we are there for reasons beyond winning....and men and women are at risk...its war....

 

[U2Edge]

Trump will eventually be in jail! The only question is how much more damage to the United States will he do before he gets there.

If he stops sacrificing the lives of our service members in the middle east so that chicken hawks like you can get a woody I will help pay his defense.

You don't know me or understand anything about basic national security, based on your comments.

People like you make me want to puke

Yet, your a Trump supporter. Amazing you would vote for a man like Trump if you are really a veteran of any kind at all.

Fuck you are stupid. I am not a Trump supporter, ask any of the real Trump supporter about me, they all say I am a die hard liberal.

I did not vote for Trump nor Hillary

I support Trump when he does the right thing, I am against him when he does not.

Anyone who did not vote for Hillary voted for Trump essentially. Voting for an unwinnable third party candidate or writing in someone's name not running, is essentially forfeiting your vote. Your essentially supporting the outcome which in this case was a Trump Presidency. I would think you would have learned that by now, but I guess not.

 

[U2Edge]

It does not cost any less to base U.S. troops in the United States than it does to base them in Poland or Estonia. To the degree that there is strain on the military, it is because it is NOT LARGE ENOUGH. The number of U.S. combat Brigades should be doubled. That takes more money for equipment, training and recruiting. Expand the size of the force, and you reduce the burden on the individual soldier. But that takes a lot more money than is being spent right now!

Foreign deployment is costly....and should only be done when absolutely necessary...I fail to see the need to keep 2000 men and women on a base in Syria.....and if you ask me....Poland and Estonia too...

There are many war scenarios that cost far more than basing troops. Proper troop deployment in the right areas deters aggression and prevents war. We don't want to go back to Isolationist America because that resulted in World War I and World War II. The cost of those two wars was far too much. That's why the United States has maintained a forward presence throughout the world since 1945. Peacetime defense spending, deployments, and regional wars are costly, but they are not nearly as costly as World War, resource depletion, or global economic depression due to conflict.

I used to sound just like you...but 18 years U2Edge...18 years...after that long it becomes obvious that we are there for reasons beyond winning....and men and women are at risk...its war....

You put every U.S. citizen at greater risk by not keeping NATO forces in Afghanistan. There is no time limit on protecting the United States and the people that live there.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

We owe Syria nothing , No our circus, not our monkey

Were not doing it for SYRIA, were doing it for our national security interest!

Bullshit, We are not doing it for ourselves.

Sorry, but the operation in Syria is not a charity operation.

You are rehashing the same old excuse used in Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Syria, you need to get some new material if you want to sound believable

Its not an excuse, its geopolitical reality. You can't allow terrorist to have haven to operate from with impunity like Afghanistan was before 2001. Same with Syria. Iraq is more important than both because of its prior ability to threaten Kuwait and northern Saudi Arabia where much of the planets oil reserves are located. Because of that you want a relatively friendly stable government in Baghdad, and you don't want it being overthrown by the likes of ISIS.

What is the end game in Syria? How long do you want us to keep violating a sovereign nation that has not invited us into the nation?

When will we know that ISIS is really dead and not just morphed into a new group like it did when it became ISIS (since ISIS was AQ before being ISIS)?

 

[Rambunctious]

You put every U.S. citizen at greater risk by not keeping NATO forces in Afghanistan. There is no time limit on protecting the United States and the people that live there.

How?....

 

[Harpy Eagle]

If he stops sacrificing the lives of our service members in the middle east so that chicken hawks like you can get a woody I will help pay his defense.

You don't know me or understand anything about basic national security, based on your comments.

People like you make me want to puke

Yet, your a Trump supporter. Amazing you would vote for a man like Trump if you are really a veteran of any kind at all.

Fuck you are stupid. I am not a Trump supporter, ask any of the real Trump supporter about me, they all say I am a die hard liberal.

I did not vote for Trump nor Hillary

I support Trump when he does the right thing, I am against him when he does not.

Anyone who did not vote for Hillary voted for Trump essentially. Voting for an unwinnable third party candidate or writing in someone's name not running, is essentially forfeiting your vote. Your essentially supporting the outcome which in this case was a Trump Presidency. I would think you would have learned that by now, but I guess not.

That is not the way our system works. Sorry you do not understand how our voting system works. Try taking a high school civic class

 

[gipper]

BTW, here is TYT, a VERY progressive YouTube channel (who HATE Trump and LOVE Bernie Sanders)...supporting Trump pulling troops out of Syria.

I long for the days when the left was adamantly anti-war.

When did they become so damn bloodthirsty?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

It does not cost any less to base U.S. troops in the United States than it does to base them in Poland or Estonia. To the degree that there is strain on the military, it is because it is NOT LARGE ENOUGH. The number of U.S. combat Brigades should be doubled. That takes more money for equipment, training and recruiting. Expand the size of the force, and you reduce the burden on the individual soldier. But that takes a lot more money than is being spent right now!

Foreign deployment is costly....and should only be done when absolutely necessary...I fail to see the need to keep 2000 men and women on a base in Syria.....and if you ask me....Poland and Estonia too...

There are many war scenarios that cost far more than basing troops. Proper troop deployment in the right areas deters aggression and prevents war. We don't want to go back to Isolationist America because that resulted in World War I and World War II. The cost of those two wars was far too much. That's why the United States has maintained a forward presence throughout the world since 1945. Peacetime defense spending, deployments, and regional wars are costly, but they are not nearly as costly as World War, resource depletion, or global economic depression due to conflict.

I used to sound just like you...but 18 years U2Edge...18 years...after that long it becomes obvious that we are there for reasons beyond winning....and men and women are at risk...its war....

You put every U.S. citizen at greater risk by not keeping NATO forces in Afghanistan. There is no time limit on protecting the United States and the people that live there.

Oh fucking bullshit.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

BTW, here is TYT, a VERY progressive YouTube channel (who HATE Trump and LOVE Bernie Sanders)...supporting Trump pulling troops out of Syria.

I long for the days when the left was adamantly anti-war.

When did they become so damn bloodthirsty?

One thing that has not changed, the bloodthirsty, war mongers are still the cowards that will not put on the uniform themselves.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Drawdown in Afghanistan announced.