Rep. Paul Gosar: Trump was right to withdraw troops from Syria – We should protect US borders instead By Paul Gosar | Fox News I was one of 60 members of the House of Representatives to vote against the resolution condemning President Trump’s removal of American troops from the Syrian conflict zone. I did this because America simply has no business protecting the Turkish or Syrian borders – instead, we should refocus our efforts and energy to protect our own weak borders. Our Founding Fathers envisioned a nation that limited the power of government, empowered the individual, and could stand the test of time. The Constitution’s brilliance is often found in its simplicity. Enshrined in this simple, yet powerful document is one of the most consequential powers: to authorize the use of military force. This power belongs to Congress, and to Congress alone. The Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) has been passed by Congress several times. In September 2001 Congress authorized President Bush to use military force to combat Al Qaeda terrorists and the Taliban regime in Afghanistan following the attacks of 9/11. Then in October 2002, Congress passed a second AUMF authorizing military action in Iraq following reports that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. If a president is going to send American troops into combat, he should have the moral courage to honor the Constitution, allow Congress to declare war, and then fight to win. While there was no AUMF passed to authorize military action in Syria, it is exactly where we have found ourselves since President Barack Obama’s decision to strike in 2013. My position remains the same today as it did when I spoke on the House floor in 2013: Without congressional approval, we have no business in Syria. Congress never voted to send troops to Syria, but found the courage to pass a resolution condemning President Trump’s removal of troops from Syria. That is the simplest reason for why I voted against it. Beyond the clear constitutional parameters that enable a president and Congress to authorize military action, the Syrian conflict stuck American troops in a messy proxy war against Russia, aligned with less than ideal strategic partners. The Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) is a militant group, designated by the United States and the European Union as a terrorist organization. The PKK is a coalition of Maoists, Marxist-Leninists and other Communists. While America shares a common enemy with the PKK – the Islamic State (ISIS) – the PKK doesn’t share American ideals or have anything else in common with Western values. As a member of NATO, the United States is a treaty-bound ally of Turkey. While Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan may not be the ideal ally, we are legally obligated to defend Turkey. I’ve had enough of our good men and women getting killed and wounded in battles that have no valid U.S. interests at stake. During World War II, the United States and the Soviet Union also shared a common enemy: Nazi Germany. Working together, the Allies defeated the Axis forces and the world was saved from evil. Immediately following our victory over the Axis powers, the Soviet Union and the United States entered the Cold War. In the same fashion, the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS was formed in 2014 and has been remarkably successful in part because of American leadership, and with the help of Kurdish forces. Now that the ISIS caliphate has been defeated, there is simply no reason for American troops to remain fighting an endless and unauthorized war. President Trump promised he would bring our troops home, stop endless wars, and defeat ISIS. That is exactly what his decision will do. Instead of fighting wars for other countries and involving ourselves in proxy wars in the Middle East, we are putting America first. The power to authorize military force belongs to Congress, and to Congress alone. If our great republic is to stand the test of time, we must honor our constitutional obligations and duties. I say to those politicians who want more war: bring it to the floor of Congress, make your case and let us vote. Put your position firmly in the record. As for me, I’ve had enough of our good men and women getting killed and wounded in battles that have no valid U.S. interests at stake. I will vote against more wars with no plan for victory and an open checkbook of taxpayer costs. Finally, it’s ironic that so many Democrats and soft Republicans are clamoring to protect Syrian borders with our troops and money – but claim our own border should be open.
Syria cease-fire follows completely appropriate actions by Trump – Avoids needless bloodshed By James Jay Carafano | Fox News Vice President Mike Pence, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien showed they know how to talk Turkey when they announced Thursday that they’ve negotiated a five-day delay in the Turkish military’s advance into Kurdish-held territory in Syria along Turkey’s border. The U.S. officials met for nearly five hours with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Ankara to reach the agreement. President Trump praised the deal, tweeting that “This is a great day for civilization,” after Pence announced the agreement. The ceasefire is meant to give Kurdish forces time to make a peaceful, orderly withdrawal from the area, thereby establishing a buffer zone between them and the Turks. Will it work? We’ll see. The worst-case scenario is that it doesn’t take. The best case is the deal leads to a long term arrangement that avoids needless bloodshed and brings more stability to a part of the world that desperately needs to be more stable. This does not appear to be a case of Washington trying to put a Band-Aid on a self-inflicted wound. Early reports to the contrary, Trump did not OK the widely condemned Turkish incursion. Indeed, the administration spent months looking for ways to forestall it. Trump’s actions, however, were completely appropriate. He was right to put the safety of U.S. troops first. It would have made no sense to keep America’s small military contingent caught in a crossfire between the Turks and Kurds. And he was right to try to mitigate the mess precipitated by Erdogan. The cease-fire, if fire actually ceases, is far from a perfect solution. Even if Turkey manages to peacefully set up a buffer zone and move some refugees back to their homeland, this won’t come close to ending the Syrian civil war, nor will it secure the future of the Kurds in Syria. But the U.S. has used its limited influence and capabilities – judiciously and appropriately – to try to achieve something constructive. The handwringing over the Turkish incursion has been understandable. It has displaced many civilians, caused needless suffering and precipitated unwarranted acts of violence. And none of that will change the status quo in Syria’s Civil War – a conflagration that has visited suffering and violence on that country’s people for more than eight years. The Kurds may withdraw, but they will remain a force to be reckoned with. Syrian strongman Bashar Assad will not regain control of all of the country anytime soon. And, crazy predictions to the contrary, Russia will not gain a new launchpad into the Middle East. The Syrian regime has always been in Russia’s orbit. Moscow can’t really use its position there to expand its influence, nor is it likely willing to spend much more blood and treasure to win back more territory for Assad. Russian President Vladimir Putin, in fact, seems content to fight to the last Syrian or Iranian, but not to put one more Russian on the front lines. Iran, for its part, already has its hands full with a proxy war in Yemen and rising dissension at home. Much has been made about a potential resurgence of ISIS’s so-called caliphate. Yet none of the parties to the conflict seem keen to see the terrorist state make a comeback. The U.S. drawdown in Syria led some to assume it was the end of American influence – and the U.S. counterterrorism mission – there. But as we learn more about the Trump administration’s game plan, that assumption seems less and less valid. The U.S. has every intention of continuing to work with our partners to keep ISIS from making a comeback. The U.S. isn’t leaving the Middle East anytime soon. Peace and stability in the region is still very important to America. The chief threat to stability remains Iran. Only America can lead the effort to tame the regime, and it can’t do that by remote control from afar. It is true that Trump doesn’t want to carry the load alone. He wants others to step up and take more responsibility. He wants more collective security and less American babysitting. And Trump absolutely rejects the idea that America can or should be the arbitrator and solver of every problem, everywhere. In the end, the president wants a more restrained and sustainable presence. That’s a far cry from the America disengaging or becoming isolationist If Trump wanted to walk away from the region he wouldn’t have bothered to send his A-Team to Turkey. He did so because he knows the U.S. can’t lead by not being there. The cease-fire may not solve much but it demonstrates that America isn’t planning to walk away from its friend or its responsibilities. James Jay Carafano is vice president of foreign and defense policy studies The Heritage Foundation. Follow him on Twitter @JJCarafano.
I suppose it's to hell with our allies, the Kurds, especially since their bloodshed already won us our temporary victory.
they tried, never realy held out a great deal of hope but i am still saddened. https://thehill.com/policy/defense/...partial-truce-days-after-signing-deal-with-us
Plenty of profit for the companies that sold the equipment and provided infrastructure. Probably companies run by Trump's buddies. You scratch their backs and they'll scratch yours.
US-Taliban Inks Deal Afghanistan Bolts Over Prisoners Release Taliban Attacks Resume US conduct airstrike on Taliban 72 Hours
