Wednesday, October 23, 2019

Nobody wins in a domestic argument

"President Donald J. Trump is going to abandon our friends and leave them to be killed in the streets by a vastly superior force."

Translation: President Donald J. Trump is withdrawing US troops from Syria, where we have been providing military support to only one side in a domestic dispute that has been going on for centuries.  This makes him "Orange Man Bad".

OTOH, we are bound by NATO treaty - a treaty approved by the Senate and signed into law - to support the other side in that same domestic dispute.  Turkey became a NATO member in 1952, long before its most recent fall (dive?) into Islamic authoritarianism.  But we are sworn by treaty to defend it - not attack it.

So, according to the Democrats and the MSM, we're abandoning our friends, the Kurds - with whom we have no written agreement - to support a "frenemy" named Turkey - with whom we have a senate-ratified treaty.

If we want to discuss Orange Man Bad's actions toward (against?) the Kurds, let's step back a bit and see what happened in the recent past in Bashar Assad's Syria.  Let's remember that Assad dropped poison gas on his own population while President Obama was in office.  President Obama publicly announced that the use of chemical weapons was a "red line" and that using those weapons would result in some kind of punishment.  But, to appease Russia and thus work toward the JCPOA (aka the Iranian "deal"), President Obama took no action against Syria.  He also took no action to help the Kurds.

To break an untenable and quickly failing stalemate, President Trump sent American troops into Syria to go after ISIS strongholds.  After destroying those strongholds and taking thousands of prisoners, he announced that the US would be withdrawing troops from Syria and that the Kurds - some of whom had fought alongside American troops - would be taking charge of the prisoners (some of whom were also Kurds).  We would leave some military advisers in place, but would withdraw most American troops from the area.

Now, the same politicians who demanded that we not get involved in Syria, but supported the "boots on the ground" to attack ISIS, are demanding that we stay involved in Syria.  Their excuse?  "We are abandoning our friends."

Um, no.  We aren't "abandoning friends" - we are leaving a perpetual war zone.

President Trump asked, rhetorically, whether we should be involved in a perpetual war "until the end of time".  He was completely correct to ask that question.  The Middle East was rife with internecine battles for centuries, long before Israel was created, and it will continue to be a war zone as long as Sunni and Shiite Muslims are at each other's throats (as they have been for centuries).  The presence of US troops won't stop this: in fact, US troops have become targets and have been killed all over the Middle East because they seen as interventionists and not peacemakers.

We - the United States - may be the most powerful free nation in history, but we - the United States - cannot be the world's policeman.  In truth, that's the job of the United Nations, which does have an armed force (the "white helmets" and "blue helmets").  If the general consensus of the United Nations is that these wars should end, then the United Nations should be the organization to enforce the peace.

But it is time for the United States to withdraw from active-fire zones where centuries-old hatred still results in firefights - sometimes between different members of the same family.

Withdraw from Syria first.

Then withdraw from Afghanistan.

Then withdraw from other Middle Eastern countries where Americans are seen as viable targets.

We should maintain a presence there in case American forces are needed, but it should be in non-combat operations in a frenemy country, such as Kuwait.

But until it is abundantly clear that we have an overriding national interest in being the world's policeman, and until the expenses of those operations are defrayed by the rest of the world, it makes sense for the US to reevaluate whether it makes sense to spend American money - and spill American blood - in an area of the world where "perpetual wars" are the way of life.