Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Senate will vote tomorrow (January 31) on an amendment attaching conditions to any withdrawal from Syria. It criticizes Trump's decision to pull out of Syria against the advice of his military and national security advisers. "Asked why Republicans couldn't persuade Trump in private to reverse his decision instead of turning to a public rebuke via a major vote in the Senate. [Sen. John] Thune said, 'I think they tried.' "
A number of Democrats are expected to vote for the amendment even though they support removing troops from Syria and Afghanistan. The recognition that these movements need first be planned and not impulsive appears to be bi-partisan.
It's not been a good week for Trump on the national security front. On Tuesday, the Director of National Intelligence and other intelligence officials also appeared before the Senate Intelligence Committee and contradicted Trump on a range of issues - including North Korea, Iran and ISIS. McConnell scheduled tomorrow's vote after the testimony. Trump's response to the testimony was to tweet today that the intelligence community was "extremely passive and naive" about Iran.
This is a bit of separation to test the waters by the GOP on tossing Trump. If this goes over OK with the base they will view it as a go ahead for future departures.
Who in congress was considering or planning to get out of Syria at any time in the future before Trump announced it ? No one. Yet now they want to dictate how it should be done. If we waited for them to make a plan and carry it out it would be just like Afghanistan and we would be there in 20 years too.
As the article mentions its the MO of democrats to oppose Trump no matter what he does or doesn't do. So what they do as to the amendment is meaningless.
We all know the politicians don't make decisions until the donors do. Then the politicians will act after its decided what they should do. Who is making money as long as the war continues and who is getting their future election campaign funds from them ? Trump doesn't need their money and he don't think like that. He wants the troops out. They want to delay until Trump goes away. Then they will have more reason why the war can't end or troops can't come home. We know how and why the meat grinder never ends.
IMO, we need a foreign intervention policy that is more like whack-mole and gorilla tactics. ISIS starts forming and causing a problem in an area we go in and smash them with max. force and get out. Rinse and repeat. Enough of going in and staying or nation building. Enough of taking casualties year after year by having weapons turned on the trainers, constant roadside bombs, and snipers.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,400,252 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by phma
Who in congress was considering or planning to get out of Syria at any time in the future before Trump announced it ? No one. Yet now they want to dictate how it should be done. If we waited for them to make a plan and carry it out it would be just like Afghanistan and we would be there in 20 years too.
As the article mentions its the MO of democrats to oppose Trump no matter what he does or doesn't do. So what they do as to the amendment is meaningless.
We all know the politicians don't make decisions until the donors do. Then the politicians will act after its decided what they should do. Who is making money as long as the war continues and who is getting their future election campaign funds from them ? Trump doesn't need their money and he don't think like that. He wants the troops out. They want to delay until Trump goes away. Then they will have more reason why the war can't end or troops can't come home. We know how and why the meat grinder never ends.
IMO, we need a foreign intervention policy that is more like whack-mole and gorilla tactics. ISIS starts forming and causing a problem in an area we go in and smash them with max. force and get out. Rinse and repeat. Enough of going in and staying or nation building.
Oh look, in the vein of Trump, a statement put forth as fact unsupported by anything factual.
This is a bit of separation to test the waters by the GOP on tossing Trump. If this goes over OK with the base they will view it as a go ahead for future departures.
I hope they finally find their backbone and do the right thing.
This is a bit of separation to test the waters by the GOP on tossing Trump. If this goes over OK with the base they will view it as a go ahead for future departures.
I think you're right, my bet that's exactly what this is.
Republicans putting a tickler out there and doing a "soft separation" from Trump on a major issue to gauge the reaction of his base. Possibly preparing for a nightmare scenario for the GOP in which they'd have to override or maybe even impeach him.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
