- The American Conservative - https://www.theamericanconservative.com -

Trump’s ‘Eyeball-to-Eyeball’ Orders to the Generals on Syria

Few other foreign policy decisions of this administration have sparked more criticism than Donald Trump’s announcement that he will remove U.S. troops from Syria. Even as he declared last night during his State of the Union address that “as a candidate for president, I loudly pledged a new approach…. Great nations do not fight endless wars,” he drew a tepid response from Congress. The planned applause line fell discernibly flat.

Perhaps that’s not a surprise, given that the withdrawal has been condemned by leaders [1] from across the political spectrum—including from Trump’s own party. South Carolina’s Lindsey Graham called keeping troops in Syria “vital to our national security interests.” Senator Marco Rubio described the decision as “a major blunder.” Nebraskan Ben Sasse said that Iran, ISIS, and Hezbollah were “high-fiving” the move. Finally, last Thursday, Republican leader Mitch McConnell orchestrated a resolution condemning the withdrawal—which passed the Senate in a lopsided vote.

Graham, Rubio, Sasse, and McConnell have been joined in their condemnation by a host of establishment heavyweights. Richard Haass, the president of the Council on Foreign Relations, called the withdrawal “a bad idea” that constituted a “strategic defeat” for the U.S. Neocon penitent and Washington Post columnist Max Boot said the decision [2] was a betrayal of America’s Kurdish allies—comparing it to America’s serial betrayals of “the South Vietnamese in the 1970s, the Afghans in the 1990s, and the Iraqis after 2011.” A bevy of retired military types joined the chorus, including MSNBC regular General Barry McCaffrey and former Army vice chief of staff Jack Keane, not to mention former Marine General James Mattis, who announced his resignation as secretary of defense following the announcement.

Indeed, the reaction to Trump’s decision was so overwhelmingly negative that Washington pundits speculated that it was only a matter of time before Trump “walked back” the decision by slowing the withdrawal—a deferential nod, it was said, to wiser and more seasoned foreign policy veterans. In fact, that not only hasn’t happened, the president has dug in his heels, issuing eyeball-to-eyeball orders to military commanders that are anything but ambiguous.

Advertisement

The first such order, according to a senior officer of the U.S. Central Command, which oversees American military operations in the Middle East, came during Trump’s surprise Christmas visit to the al-Asad Airbase in Iraq. There the president (and First Lady Melania Trump) not only joined U.S. soldiers in a high-profile meet-and-greet, but, along with national security adviser John Bolton, huddled with the U.S. high command in a tent set aside for the meeting. Among the team that met with Trump was U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Douglas Silliman and Lieutenant General Paul LaCamera. Of the two, LaCamera was the more important [3], as he is the commander of the Combined Joint Task Force-Operation Inherent Resolve (CJTF-OIR), the military organization established in October 2014 to “degrade and defeat” ISIS.

After an extended question and answer session [4] with the press on December 26, Trump was privately briefed on the anti-ISIS effort by LaCamera, who told the president that only a few pockets of ISIS militants remained in Syria’s Euphrates Valley. Trump praised the effort, I was told, but then issued his order. “I want us out of Syria,” the Centcom officer with whom I spoke quoted Trump as saying. “There wasn’t anything ambiguous about it,” the Centcom senior officer added. “There were no qualifiers, no conditionals, and so far as I know, nothing about that conversation has changed.” Put another way, while any number of civilian Pentagon officials speculate that the military has been given leeway in implementing the president’s directive, that is not the understanding among senior Centcom officers. “Nothing has changed since that meeting,” I was told. “We’re out.”

Trump’s decision provides a window into what actually constitutes a direct order from a president and how it is implemented—while also separating fact from noise. On December 30, four days after his visit to Iraq, Senator Lindsay Graham told reporters that he would try to persuade Trump to rethink his decision, to “sit down with his generals and reconsider how to do this.” His goal, Graham said, was to “slow this down. Make sure we get it right.” Graham’s effort came the next day, during a lunch meeting with Trump and General Joseph Dunford, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, at the White House. Graham emerged from the meeting [5] reassured, hinting that his efforts had been successful. “After discussions with the president and Dunford, I never felt better about where we are headed,” he said triumphantly. “I think we’re slowing things down in a smart way.”

Triumphant or not, Graham had not, in fact, persuaded Trump of anything, outside of an agreement that the Syria withdrawal would not be immediate but could take at least 90 days to implement. But that was already in the cards—as it takes at least 90 days to withdraw 2,200 troops from anywhere. “You don’t just back up a truck and throw in some boxes,” retired Colonel Kevin Benson says. “It’s a huge job.”

change_me

Benson would know. A West Point graduate and former director of the Army’s School of Advanced Military Studies, Benson developed the plan for the ground invasion of Iraq in 2003, before eyeballing the final U.S. troop withdrawal in 2011. That pullout, which involved extracting the final 50,000 U.S. troops from Iraq, took one year to carry out. Benson adds that it will not only take 90 days to withdraw from Syria, it is likely the withdrawal will include a temporary increase in the number of troops deployed in the country. “You actually have to add to subtract,” a civilian Pentagon official told me, “which means deploying logistics personnel onsite to implement, catalogue, and coordinate the withdrawal. We’re at 2,200 right now, but as the withdrawal accelerates, we’ll be adding people. It’s the nature of the beast.”  

Which is only to say that, while Trump’s Syria withdrawal decision has been derided by a cross-section of the foreign policy establishment, the announcement was greeted with a collective shrug by most senior military officers. A planner at Centcom headquarters in Tampa was puzzled by the controversy over the Trump announcement, saying that the only response he received was from officers “whose immediate reaction was not whether this was a good or bad decision” but how quickly and effectively it could be implemented. “It was more like, ‘fine, but you know, how many trucks is it going to take? What do we need to do? When do we start? What do we need to move?'”

While military officers are loathe to express an opinion on any president’s decision, Trump’s plan tends to break down along traditional (and predictable) service lines, with the deepest disagreements between senior Army officers and their Air Force counterparts. “Getting out is not a good option,” a recently retired Army officer who advises his former service (and reflects their views) told me. “The calculus on this is pretty straightforward, and I would argue that you actually gain more by staying in than by getting out. Staying in yields better outcomes. People say that we should get out because we’re not winning. But not winning is not losing: losing is losing.” What the U.S. should want, this officer says, is “to keep the worst that could have from actually happening. And when you pull out like this, you increase the chances of that.”  

Retired Air Force Lieutenant General Dave Deptula, an outspoken and influential voice on the use of airpower (and the head of the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies), disagrees. Deptula argues that the reason it took four years to degrade and defeat ISIS is that the Pentagon “adopted a ground-centric strategy that took four years to implement. It was based on assisting the Iraqis to build up their ground forces first instead of destroying ISIS in Syria first.” Deptula continued: “In fact, there was actually very little thought given to another option—which would have been to use our real strength, which is airpower. We did that in Iraq in Operation Desert Storm, we did that in Afghanistan after 9/11. And it worked.”

More simply, as Deptula wrote in an influential assessment of Trump’s decision in the pages of Forbes, the Pentagon’s judgment that degrading and defeating ISIS would take time became a self-fulfilling prophecy. “Military leadership with a genuine joint-force perspective and a clear-headed appreciation of the problem at hand,” Deptula wrote, “would have recognized that a focused, intense air campaign against the Islamic State, with all its immediately targetable vulnerabilities, could have far more rapidly decomposed its ability to function.”

Which is simply to note that the continuing cross-partisan condemnation of Trump’s Syria decision (that it’s a kind of “Exhibit A” of his constant bungling) is hardly unanimous. It certainly isn’t in the military, despite the protests of the celebrated General Barry McCaffrey (we must remain in Syria, he argues, “to consolidate our gains”) or the resignation of uber-soldier James Mattis. Indeed, for perhaps the first time in his presidency, Trump has succeeded not only in confusing his critics but (perhaps inadvertently) flushing them out.

In truth, it’s nearly impossible to ignore the obvious: that those who whinge on about Trump “turning Syria over to Iran” or “betraying the Kurds” are the same people who got us into this mess in the first place.

Mark Perry is a contributing editor at The American Conservative and the author of  The Pentagon’s Wars. [6] He tweets @markperrydc [7].

35 Comments (Open | Close)

35 Comments To "Trump’s ‘Eyeball-to-Eyeball’ Orders to the Generals on Syria"

#1 Comment By 11bravo On February 6, 2019 @ 9:33 pm

Once you decimate Isis why stay? I could never figure that out. Are we going to beat Russia, Assad, or go to war with the Iranians.
Obama lost Syria long ago, it makes no sense to stay. The one general is right. We have satellites, drones, and air power. If trouble crops up we go in and take care of it through the air.

#2 Comment By polistra On February 7, 2019 @ 2:49 am

The reason we weren’t degrading ISIS is simple. ISIS is a branch of the US military. We aren’t going to defeat our own forces.

ISIS is not a branch of the Russian military, so Russia was able to defeat ISIS.

#3 Comment By Now Afghanistan On February 7, 2019 @ 4:39 am

Great article. It’s dispicable that this isn’t getting backing from most Democrats. I detest Trump, but a pullout from Syria is a very good decision, The Russians, Iranians, Hezbollah , and the Syrian military did the vast majority of the work in Syria anyway. It’s unfortunate American soldiers were recently killed by an IED in Syria.

#4 Comment By Michael Kenny On February 7, 2019 @ 5:56 am

Trump is caught in the contradictions of his own rhetoric.”Great” countries do not get bogged down in unwinnable wars but equally, great countries do not run for home with their tail between their legs. Trump has to choose between those two options,both of which indicate that the US is no longer a “great” country and, try as he might, Trump will not be able to make it grate “again”.

#5 Comment By cka2nd On February 7, 2019 @ 7:14 am

We’ll see. I trust the statements of anonymous military officers not at all, so we’ll see whether the US is really going to be “out.”

#6 Comment By Diego Garcia ’90 On February 7, 2019 @ 8:00 am

We’ve been repeatedly reassured that Trump is finally getting us out of Syria, and we’ve been repeatedly disappointed, as Trump’s people keep editing, qualifying, and outright overruling what he said.

So I’ll believe it when I see it. Where I come from, “out of Syria” means “out of Syria”. Right now we’re still there.

#7 Comment By SteveM On February 7, 2019 @ 9:06 am

Re: polistra

The reason we weren’t degrading ISIS is simple. ISIS is a branch of the US military. We aren’t going to defeat our own forces.

ISIS is not a branch of the Russian military, so Russia was able to defeat ISIS.

Right. E.g., it was Russia that documented and destroyed the massive ISIS oil tanker caravans from Syria into Turkey to fund their operations:

[8]

If Russia knew, the U.S. knew, and let it happen. Connect the dots…

And the “moderate” jihadist lunatics in Syria who were explicitly funded by the CIA and U.S. “allies” funneled weapons to ISIS because they were simpatico.

P.S. Not reporting critical factual information is another flavor of the MSM “Fake News” paradigm.

#8 Comment By StephenJ. On February 7, 2019 @ 9:40 am

Top Secret.
———

“Memo to the Commander in Chief: For your eyes only.(satire)”

You now have help in the White House. The Military Industrial Complex (MIC) has kindly supplied a seasoned ex general to assist with communications. You, yourself have appointed him and others of great military talent. The MIC got a bit worried when you said “NATO was obsolete,” and “rattling allies” is not good for the war business. Still, now that you are supporting the Afghanistan War, there is some relief in the ranks of the MIC. Big money, corporate profits and jobs are at stake, if there is PEACE in the world. Wall Street nearly collapsed with worry and the stock market shares of the war industry depend on more war. (Please no more peace scares.) Peace would be a disaster, and people might like it. Therefore, we must keep bombing, blitzing, destroying, killing, murdering and supporting both sides in some of the conflicts. That is the reality of what is happening today. Anyway we are glad you are hopefully getting with the program. Keep on tweeting and doing what you are doing best. Leave the Big Stuff to the MIC, consider us your obedient helpers and may God Bless America as we make it great again.

Note: This memo could be construed as Satire.
[more info at link below]
[9]

#9 Comment By Fred Bowman On February 7, 2019 @ 9:56 am

I don’t care at all for Trump, but his decision to bring the troops home from Syria is a good one, although one has to wonder if these troops are going to re-deployed to Iraq or some other “cat litter box” in the Middle East. As for the Congressional “naysayers” such as Lindsey Graham, where the Hell was the authorization for the troops to be there in the first place? Wasn’t it Congress job to make sure such authorization was put in place before sending troops into these troubled area

#10 Comment By Habarigani On February 7, 2019 @ 10:59 am

“Great” Countries abide by the rule of law and do not invade other countries illegally. They cannot carve out an exception for themselves. If they invade illegally, it is a war crime. They must be invited in by legal Government or authorized by UN. We (US,UK,France,..) are in Syria illegally. We need to leave. It is the honorable thing to do. It is not leaving with “tail between legs”.

#11 Comment By Sid Finster On February 7, 2019 @ 11:30 am

So far, not one American soldier has left Syria. In fact, the Pentagon is expanding its unauthorized presence in that country.

So let’s see whether anything positive actually happens before we take a victory lap, what say?

#12 Comment By EdK. On February 7, 2019 @ 11:42 am

The congress didn’t authorize sending troops to Syria, Obama did it behind their back and they did nothing to block him. Trump wants to bring them back and the Democrats are working against him to do that. Syria does not needs us to defeat ISIS, they already doing it with the help of the Russian who they invited to help them. We were never invited, thus we are illegally in Syria.

#13 Comment By Rossbach On February 7, 2019 @ 12:02 pm

I wonder if he has checked with Ivanka and Jared. When he has their OK, I will believe that we’re getting out.

#14 Comment By Kent On February 7, 2019 @ 1:44 pm

The military should have zero say of when and where they’re ordered in or out. There roll is to fight wars, not determine which wars to fight.

#15 Comment By One Guy On February 7, 2019 @ 2:18 pm

Diego Garcia ’90 is correct. Maybe some general took a paper off Trump’s desk when he wasn’t looking, and now he doesn’t know what to do.

#16 Comment By George Hoffman On February 7, 2019 @ 2:35 pm

Whatever one may think about Donald Trump as commander-in-chief, he gives the marching orders to the brass which is enshrined in our Constitution. I’m a Vietnam veteran, and I was overjoyed when he gave this order (even though I like to refer to him sarcastically as President Bone Spurs). He just sometimes in his erratic and mucurial style stumbles upon the truth. And anyone who can throw these war hawks inside the beltway bubble surrounding Washington D.C. must be doing something right. To these war hawks, war has become good business and a throughly corrupt way of life. He scares the sh*t out of them. War has become the raison d’être of their existence, status, the basis for their careers. President Harry Truman was also attacked in a similar manner by the establishment when he fired General Douglas McArthur during the Korean War. And history has vindicated his decision.

#17 Comment By Minnesota Mary On February 7, 2019 @ 2:41 pm

It was the Russians that routed ISIS is Syria. Anyone watching the progress of the Syrian war from its beginning knows that.

#18 Comment By Kurt Gayle On February 7, 2019 @ 3:18 pm

“Now Afghanistan” says (Feb 7, 4:39 am): “Great article. It’s despicable that this isn’t getting backing from most Democrats.”

On the other hand, 22 Democrats were among the 26 Senators who on February 4th voted “Nay” to the Republican “endless war” amendment “to express the sense of the Senate that the United States faces continuing threats from terrorist groups operating in Syria and Afghanistan and that the precipitous withdrawal of United States forces from either country could put at risk hard-won gains and United States national security.”

Baldwin (D-WI)
Booker (D-NJ)
Brown (D-OH)
Cardin (D-MD)
Durbin (D-IL)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Harris (D-CA)
Heinrich (D-NM)
Hirono (D-HI)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Leahy (D-VT)
Markey (D-MA)
Merkley (D-OR)
Murphy (D-CT)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schatz (D-HI)
Schumer (D-NY)
Smith (D-MN)
Udall (D-NM)
Van Hollen (D-MD)
Warren (D-MA)
Wyden (D-OR)

Only four Republican Senators voted against the amendment:

Cruz (R-TX)
Kennedy (R-LA)
Lee (R-UT)
Paul (R-KY)

#19 Comment By Patrick Rodgers On February 7, 2019 @ 4:02 pm

If the George Soros controlled Council on Foreign Relations opposes the withdrawal, you know the President is on the right track. Also opposed, are members of Congress on the payroll of the Military-Industrial Complex, who never met a war they didn’t love and profit from. The President is right on in his determination to get us out of being “Policeman to the World.” Bring those military people home and use money being spent on Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan to help homeless Veterans in the United States.

#20 Comment By Cratylus On February 7, 2019 @ 5:48 pm

Kurt Gayle above writes:
“On the other hand, 22 Democrats were among the 26 Senators who on February 4th voted “Nay” to the Republican “endless war” amendment “to express the sense of the Senate that the United States faces continuing threats from terrorist groups operating in Syria and Afghanistan and that the precipitous withdrawal of United States forces from either country could put at risk hard-won gains and United States national security.””
BUT withdrawal from Syria is Trump’s idea and so these Dems are on the side of Trump! And since Trump is a dupe of Putin who elected him, as many (all?) of these Dems have claimed, then these Dems are also dupes of Putin.
In fact the claim has been made that Putin elected Trump to carry out missions just such as this one, withdrawal from Syria!
But it is worse, Putin publicly stated that “Donald is right” to withdraw from Syria. So these Dems are siding with Putin quite publicly. Puppets of Putin, quite obviously.
We need a Special Counsel at once to look into their contacts with Russia and Ukraine and their finances and the finances of their relatives. The hour is late patriots!
We might also have special hearings carried out by the House to look into the doings of these Putin Puppets. Minority leader McCarthy might lead them and since the precipitating cause of the hearings is the departure of the US Army from Syria, we might call them the Army-McCarthy hearings. It is time to root out these vermin who have proven by their vote that they are traitors working for Putin just as they have claimed Trump is. That cover will no longer work! Lock ‘em up!
In fact it is wo

#21 Comment By Myron Hudson On February 7, 2019 @ 6:32 pm

I’m no Trump fan built as I told my wife: even a stopped clock is right twice a day. We had and have no business there, unless you count attempted regime change, in which case; we had and have no business there.

It irks me to no end that so many Dems and progressives oppose this: after years of bemoaning Obama derangement syndrome, they’re exhibiting Trump derangement syndrome.

#22 Comment By WorkingClass On February 7, 2019 @ 6:38 pm

Trump wants out of Syria. Bibi doesn’t want Trump out of Syria. The MIC doesn’t want Trump out. The congress doesn’t want Trump out.

After two years Trump is still in Syria. I don’t think he is in charge.

#23 Comment By bgone On February 7, 2019 @ 6:42 pm

“Trump is playing one-dimensional chess!”

Fool, born.

Why are so many people hell-bent on celebrity politickery? It’s liars and cretins all the way down.

#24 Comment By Whine Merchant On February 7, 2019 @ 7:35 pm

People who see this a a ‘Left vs Right’ or ‘Democrat vs GOP’ issue are falling for the distraction.

This is a Populist vs Establishment struggle, and guess who has the experience and nouse to prevail. […and I believe the myth of a Deep State is no more than a tabloid conspiracy].

Patience to wait until the next election cycle, that’s all it takes…

#25 Comment By SteveK9 On February 7, 2019 @ 7:43 pm

“Military leadership with a genuine joint-force perspective and a clear-headed appreciation of the problem at hand,” Deptula wrote, “would have recognized that a focused, intense air campaign against the Islamic State, with all its immediately targetable vulnerabilities, could have far more rapidly decomposed its ability to function.”

Which is exactly what the country that actually destroyed ISIS, Russia, did. Nothing was happening to degrade ISIS until Russia stepped in. They used relentless airpower to destroy oil convoys, arms depots, command centers, … everything Deptula wanted.

#26 Comment By EliteCommInc. On February 7, 2019 @ 9:01 pm

I’ll believe it when I see it.

#27 Comment By TS On February 8, 2019 @ 1:51 am

“It takes a minimum of 90 days to withdraw from a conflict.” That is curious, since it took the U.S. only 26 days to go from peacetime, to a full-out attack on Afghanistan, after 9/11. We were bombing by Oct. 7. Perhaps we should compare the will with which we entered into that war, and the will to withdraw now.

#28 Comment By Brad Smith On February 8, 2019 @ 4:18 am

I watched a video of a reporter in Syria yesterday. He was filming the last pocket of ISIS in the area. The Special Forces guys all over with artillery I’m assuming and they were handling the refugees/captives and trying to figure out who was ISIS and who wasn’t. There are a few thousand fighters left, some want to die with their families I guess and are holding out. But it’s pretty much just mop up time now.

And they won’t give them much more time either, everyone there just wants to get it over with. It sounded like everyone who wanted to surrender had been given a chance. So it will probably be any day now and the last town actually held by ISIS will be gone. Of course there will still be some fighters here and there but this is the last of the actual territory they held in this part of Syria. The end of their Caliphate,

I can only imagine how many of them, who escaped, hate our guts and would do anything to kill an American. If you don’t feel all that safe, maybe you can thank the people who thought regime change schemes were a good idea. This is all a direct result that carries over from trying to get rid of Saddam, Qaddafi and finally Assad. Add in Afghanistan and Chechnya, Yugoslavia, etc. etc.

How many times are we going to arm these guys before we figure out it’s not a good idea?

It will be a long time before our country is back to anything resembling normal. Ending the ground wars is the first step and an absolutely necessary step. If we want to see our defense budget go down, so we don’t bankrupt ourselves and without being less safe, we have to end the ground wars. They hate us because we are over there killing them, not because they don’t like Hollywood or because we are free. Do we want to demand less spying on everyone? End the ground wars and then you can do that too or at least we could get there eventually. Keep the ground wars going and we will be like this forever, stuck in 1984 (the novel, not the year of bad music and good horror movies)

#29 Comment By Carroll Price On February 8, 2019 @ 9:02 am

As all informed person are well aware, US forces played a very minor role in defeating ISIS, with their defeat due almost entirely to Russian air power.

#30 Comment By makes_sense On February 8, 2019 @ 11:58 am

I agree with Trump. Go Pres! 20 years in Afghanistan. That’s crazy. Time to get out after negotiations. The US created the Taliban and Al Qaeda to defeat the Russians, then they turned on the US afterwards. Bad Intel. Bad management. ISIS is defeated in Syria. Another stupid story about US involvement with Iraq, another self-created mess about mismanagement that created ISIS. Sadam was a US friend. Who do you think provided him all of his war toys to attack Iran after the Carter hostage crisis? Provide the Kurd’s with enough gifts to support themselves. Can’t stay forever. But war is a business for some including US generals, and business is good in the ME. The other reason to not stay in Syria is WWIII, a perfect storm could brew there given the players invovled. If necessary the US can always re-engage, it’s just an aircraft carrier group away. Nobody really seems to care that these engagements cost US taxpayers 100’s of billions of dollars, and US life and limb.

#31 Comment By Burn Bag On February 8, 2019 @ 2:08 pm

The military apparently needs to be reminded that its job is to zip it and obey lawful orders of the civilian leadership.

We’re not a Communist or Nazi country. Generals don’t run things here. If there’s some general who doesn’t understand that, someone who thinks serving the American people is beneath him, then kick him out on his ass.

#32 Comment By Eileen Kuch On February 8, 2019 @ 10:15 pm

Who’s the decision maker when it comes to pulling out all US troops from Syria? The Commander-In-Chief of the Armed Forces (Donald Trump), or the Pentagon Brass? According to the US Constitution, the Commander-In-Chief’s the decision maker and not the Pentagon Brass.
Trump has just issued orders to start withdrawing all US troops and equipment from Syria next month and be completely out by the end of April. He has the authority to fire any general officer who refuses to obey these orders. The late POTUS Harry Truman fired General Douglas MacArthur for insubordination during the Korean War, and MacArthur was the hero of the war against Japan in WWII. Therefore, Trump has the authority to fire any Pentagon Brass for insubordination if he refuses to obey orders.

#33 Comment By Russell Patton Davis On February 9, 2019 @ 6:12 pm

Trump maybe either right or wrong in beginning to end perpetual war in this way. Either way I love Trump for his courage. Seems Trump is a faulted man after God’s own heart whether in peace or in war.
God will preserve such men as best as men may be preserved. Who could reasonably ask for more?

#34 Comment By william chandler On February 10, 2019 @ 8:53 am

It is a War Crime for us to have ONE soldier inside, or plane flying over Syria.
. The TRAITORS in the Pentagon had spent 24 months at $10MILLION a DAY bombing sand. ISIS continued to hold miles long parades of OUR equipment complete with flags on clear, dry, sunny days, and the TRAITORS in the Pentagon “could not seem to HIT them with any of those thousands of bombs”. ..
Then the Russians came in and blew the ISIS asses off. Did you notice the parades ENDED.
ISIS has ZERO antiaircraft abilities. the TRAITORS in the Pentagon could have dropped bombs from HOT AIR BALLOONS or BIPLANES ……. We KNOW who the Pentagon is working for and it is NOT America.
That would be a “tragedy” for Turkey and Israel who are BOTH genocidally flooding White, CHRISTIAN Europe with muslum invaders …………. that war had to get going again …..

#35 Comment By Ambrose Bierce On February 10, 2019 @ 12:18 pm

Same old magic show, troops leave, CIA ops and mercenaries, and surrogates, fill the void. The MSM gave Trump what he wanted, a story on the defeat of ISIS. CIC always gets what they want, more false flags than flags in front of the UN building in NY. Trump wants to look like he is doing something, and some people want to help him.