President Trump 'to pull thousands of troops' from Afghanistan

Oct 2018
137
China
#1
US 'to pull 7,000 troops' from Afghanistan


The Trump administration is planning to withdraw thousands of troops from Afghanistan, US media say.
Reports, citing unnamed officials, say about 7,000 troops - roughly half the remaining US military presence in the country - could go home within months.
The reports come a day after the president announced the country's military withdrawal from Syria.
Earlier on Thursday, Mr Trump's Defence Secretary Jim Mattis announced his resignation from his post.
Reports about the sharp reduction of forces emerged on Thursday, but have not been confirmed by US defence officials.
Analysts have warned that a withdrawal could have a "devastating" impact and offer Taliban militants a propaganda victory.
A Taliban official told AFP news agency: "Frankly speaking, we weren't expecting that immediate US response... we are more than happy."
 
Oct 2013
13,231
Europix
#4
If Trump made good on his promise to get out of Syria and Afghanistan, it would be one of the bravest things any president has done in decades.
Probably the most important effect will be Kurds: loosers, as they've been for a century.

They were good for getting the hot chestnuts out of the fire. Someone consider the chestnuts are out, no need of Kurds any longer. They can be left to their fortune ... Turkish, Syrian, Iranian fortune .... who cares? Hot hestnuts are out.
 
Likes: Futurist

Rodger

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
5,370
US
#5
I respect the Kurds and admire their bravery and courage. But, being spread among 3 or 4 nations, it seems as if there is no amicable resolution to their situation. Regarding Afghanistan, I personally know 3 individuals who have served there. All came back with some sort of disability, be it physical or emotional. It has been a real war there.
 
Dec 2017
474
Australia
#6
Probably the most important effect will be Kurds: loosers, as they've been for a century.

They were good for getting the hot chestnuts out of the fire. Someone consider the chestnuts are out, no need of Kurds any longer. They can be left to their fortune ... Turkish, Syrian, Iranian fortune .... who cares? Hot hestnuts are out.
Kurds were losers forever. How a group of people with a population of 30mln-45mln living in neighbouring regions of several states were unable to establish their own? Not even autonomies.
 
Likes: Futurist

Rodger

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
5,370
US
#7
Kurds were losers forever. How a group of people with a population of 30mln-45mln living in neighbouring regions of several states were unable to establish their own? Not even autonomies.
Historically, I am sorry to say the British, and to some degree the French, created that situation. Plenty of missteps following WW1 and the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire.
 
Oct 2013
13,231
Europix
#8
But, being spread among 3 or 4 nations, it seems as if there is no amicable resolution to their situation.
How a group of people with a population of 30mln-45mln living in neighbouring regions of several states were unable to establish their own? Not even autonomies.
Well, it's simply because Kurds never counted more than useful tools.

The frontiers in the region were designed after WWI, for a couple of days a state of Kurdistan even existed on a map on the negotiations table. But none of those peoples ment to live inside those designated borders were asked anything, be them Kurds, Arabs, Iranian or whatever.

This time it might have been really the last opportunity Kurds have had to have a state. I suppose most of them were conscious of that and I suppose it's one the motivation at the base of their so strong involvement in the anti-ISIS war and the rest of fightings.
 

sparky

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
3,608
Sydney
#9
Between the Agean sea and the Pacific there is only one formal US Allie , that's Turkey
since they have a massive beef with the Kurds , the US position was always going to be a bust

don't worry too much about the Kurds , they have a great relationship with Russia (there were Russian troops to keep the peace in Afrin between Kurds and Turkmen )
their relationship with the Syrian government is pretty good to , the SAA enclaves were never attacked , and by and large both sides didn't step on each other toes

there is some ongoing negotiation on some form of Kurdish autonomy "within the inviolable and sovereign Syrian borders"
the Kurds like it since the Syrian army would then protect them from the Turks , the point of disagreement are the area extend and the nature of the "autonomy "

The Kurds were used as ground troop by the US in central and southern Dar al Zur province ,
there is nothing Kurdish about the area but it has some oil and the local Arab tribe are useless and unreliable
in exchange the Kurds blackmailed the US in getting some supplies and equipment which drove the Turks mad

the US has been pretending to fight the last pocket of ISIS East of the Euphrates river but their bombing was more like skin scratching than hammer blow
however the "alliance" has been very aggressive to destroy any attempt by the Syrian Army or militia to cross the river

An obvious conclusion was that they were pretty happy to have an ISIS remain to justifies their presence
 

Rodger

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
5,370
US
#10
This time it might have been really the last opportunity Kurds have had to have a state. I suppose most of them were conscious of that and I suppose it's one the motivation at the base of their so strong involvement in the anti-ISIS war and the rest of fightings.
Do you think there is a chance for a Kurd nation?