Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Trump uses murderous Turkey to force Kurds to negotiate.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by ljadw View Post

    Trump wanted to leave already 9 months ago, but the Pentagon wanted to remain and sabotaged Trump's policy .
    The US military withdrawed in a few hours, thus evacuation plans were not needed .
    If the US military had left BEFORE the invasion, there would be no problem .
    What he wanted and what he did to prepare the military are two different things
    Trump wants one thing one day and the next day he wants another thing. We know from Mattis resignation that there was some type of debate within the Trump administration about the proper course in Syria. We also know that even in situations where there is some contingency plan, big organizations still need sufficient warning time to initiate a plan. The fact that the US was bombing its own HQ is one piece of evidence that this was a hasty withdrawal. The failure to coordinate with the Kurds for the proper garrison (or evacuation) of ISIS prisoners is also another clear example.
    My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by pamak View Post

      Trump had zero reason to withdraw immediately after the phone call and without even warning the Kurds to at least evacuate the civilians or take measures to secure the evacuation of ISIS prisoners. There were even reports of US airplanes bombarding facilities like

      https://www.wsj.com/articles/turkey-...=hp_lista_pos1

      The US military destroyed its own anti-ISIS headquarters in Syria, The Wall Street Journalreported Wednesday, to prevent them from falling into the hands of fighters backed by Turkey.


      None of the above are indications of a controlled withdrawal.

      So no matter what Trump announced, it is obvious that he did not prepare the military and his allies to execute any such withdrawal. As usual, what Trump says in public is at odds with what Trump really does! What happened is that Mattis and the other DOD advisers convinced him to backtrack from his original statements and that staying on course was the best decision for the US.
      It is NOT the mission of the potus to prepare a military withdrawl . It is the mission of the Pentagon to make plans for all eventualities .
      Not for the first time the Pentagon failed in his duties .

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by ljadw View Post

        It is NOT the mission of the potus to prepare a military withdrawl . It is the mission of the Pentagon to make plans for all eventualities .
        Not for the first time the Pentagon failed in his duties .
        The POTUS is also the CIC.

        End of story!
        My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by pamak View Post

          The POTUS is also the CIC.

          End of story!
          The potus does not prepare military plans .

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by ljadw View Post

            The potus does not prepare military plans .
            He is still responsible to have the military ready for action.
            My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by pamak View Post

              What he wanted and what he did to prepare the military are two different things
              Trump wants one thing one day and the next day he wants another thing. We know from Mattis resignation that there was some type of debate within the Trump administration about the proper course in Syria. We also know that even in situations where there is some contingency plan, big organizations still need sufficient warning time to initiate a plan. The fact that the US was bombing its own HQ is one piece of evidence that this was a hasty withdrawal. The failure to coordinate with the Kurds for the proper garrison (or evacuation) of ISIS prisoners is also another clear example.
              The hasty withdrawal was caused by the fact that Pentagon had not made plans for a withdrawal .
              Coordination with the Kurds about the fate of ISIS prisonners was also the duty of the Pentagon .
              It was not the duty of Trump .
              The Pentagon knew that Trump wanted to leave . It was the duty of the Pentagon that there was a plan to leave .
              The Pentagon had no plan,although this was an easy job, this proves that the Pentagon was sabotaging the orders of the president .

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by ljadw View Post

                The hasty withdrawal was caused by the fact that Pentagon had not made plans for a withdrawal .
                Coordination with the Kurds about the fate of ISIS prisonners was also the duty of the Pentagon .
                It was not the duty of Trump .
                The Pentagon knew that Trump wanted to leave . It was the duty of the Pentagon that there was a plan to leave .
                The Pentagon had no plan,although this was an easy job, this proves that the Pentagon was sabotaging the orders of the president .
                Sorry but the CIC is choosing the Pentagon leaders and has the responsibility for whatever the Pentagon does!
                End of story!

                p.s. Pentagon was sabotaging the orders of the president? You have no evidence for that! You just make up again conspiracy theories out of thin air.
                My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by ljadw View Post

                  It is NOT the mission of the potus to prepare a military withdrawl . It is the mission of the Pentagon to make plans for all eventualities .
                  Not for the first time the Pentagon failed in his duties .
                  All planning is subject to the constraint of what can be accomplished with the forces at hand. You don't plan for the implementation of things that are impossible to do with the assets at hand, no point. You can request more assets to deal with scenarios. But whether the armed forces gets them – that is subject to a political decision – so it still goes back to the potus.

                  The anger in the US armed forces is over being given a job, and an envelope of assets tailored to it (reasonably) – by the political leadership – and then have the rug pulled out from under them like this with no advance warning – by the potus.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by pamak View Post

                    Sorry but the CIC is choosing the Pentagon leaders and has the responsibility for whatever the Pentagon does!
                    End of story!

                    p.s. Pentagon was sabotaging the orders of the president? You have no evidence for that! You just make up again conspiracy theories out of thin air.
                    1 You don't know much about the Pentagon jungle
                    2 The Pentagon knew that sooner or later ( better : at the first occasion ) Trump would give the order to withdraw . It was their duty to be ready if they received the order . They were not,which means that they were incapable or that they sabotaged the order .
                    If tomorrow Trump would give the order to leave immediately Afghanistan, the Pentagon should be ready to execute the order .
                    3 The potus is responsible if the Pentagon follows his orders, he is not responsible for whatever the Pentagon is doing .
                    4 There are people EVERYWHERE in the administration( not only in the DOJ) who sabotage the orders of Trump .

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Johan Banér View Post
                      All planning is subject to the constraint of what can be accomplished with the forces at hand. You don't plan for the implementation of things that are impossible to do with the assets at hand, no point. You can request more assets to deal with scenarios. But whether the armed forces gets them – that is subject to a political decision – so it still goes back to the potus.

                      The anger in the US armed forces is over being given a job, and an envelope of assets tailored to it (reasonably) – by the political leadership – and then have the rug pulled out from under them like this with no advance warning – by the potus.
                      The retreat was possible : it was done . Thus ...
                      What anger in the US forces ? Did anyone resign ?
                      If you dislike certain orders, don't go to the armed forces .Everyday soldiers receive orders they dislike .

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by ljadw View Post

                        The potus does
                        Code:
                         not prepare
                        military
                        plans .
                        You are - half correct

                        The trout who swims against the current gets the most oxygen..

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          The Pentagon knew that the potus wanted to withdraw US military from Syria and that he would give the order to do it at the first favorable opportunity . Thus the Pentagon had to be ready to execute such an order .
                          Making the execution possible (= planning it ) was the business of the Pentagon, not of the potus .JFK was not planning the invasion of Cuba in 1962 ;that was the job of the Pentagon .

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            The Turkish news channel A Haber ( pro Erdogan ) is saying that Deep Pentagon was trying to sabotage the withdrawal from Syria .
                            Conspiracy claim ?

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by ljadw View Post
                              The Turkish news channel A Haber ( pro Erdogan ) is saying that Deep Pentagon was trying to sabotage the withdrawal from Syria .
                              Conspiracy claim ?
                              Military people are not very imaginative, they tend to go for battleships not aircraft carriers.

                              As I stated earlier battlefield generals are often not strategic. Once the U.S. pulled back in Syria the combatants no longer knew what they were fighting for. The U.S. as a buffer against annihilation has created an environment in which the battle not the war became the focus. The Pentagon and intelligence community have repeatedly shown they are also incapable of seeing the war for the battles. The Middle East like Vietnam was shaping up to be a war in which the U.S. won every battle but to little long term gain.

                              As to conspiracy it is the nature of the human ape. Whenever three people interact a coalition of two against one will form. If the third party is authoritative then the nature of the coalition will be conspiratorial.
                              We hunt the hunters

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post

                                Military people are not very imaginative, they tend to go for battleships not aircraft carriers.

                                As I stated earlier battlefield generals are often not strategic. Once the U.S. pulled back in Syria the combatants no longer knew what they were fighting for. The U.S. as a buffer against annihilation has created an environment in which the battle not the war became the focus. The Pentagon and intelligence community have repeatedly shown they are also incapable of seeing the war for the battles. The Middle East like Vietnam was shaping up to be a war in which the U.S. won every battle but to little long term gain.

                                As to conspiracy it is the nature of the human ape. Whenever three people interact a coalition of two against one will form. If the third party is authoritative then the nature of the coalition will be conspiratorial.
                                In fact, America has lost every war since WWII.
                                Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X