Top U.S. general cautions against talk of 'winning' against Islamic State

Another expert that's about to get a dose of stupidity from horrible businessperson, Dumpster Fire Donny.

All we need now is for Trump to echo one of his predecessors and state, "Mission Accomplished!"

I'm sorry Gen Thomas, you're just a 35 year career military veteran with direct combat experience, schooled in the art of war, with a lifetime of honesty and integrity....

Our Commander-In-Chief, who cheated his way out of serving his country, who has insulted Gold Star families, and who other honored military Generals have called an "idiot", "moron", "with the understanding of a fifth or sixth grader", is so much more capable than you of assessing the combat capabilities of our enemies...

Trump's ensuring Putin controls Syria. Putin sees Syria as part of his bloc, maybe even of his Eurasian Economic Union.

If Russians in their nationalistic zeal are willing to be sacrificed so that Putin, his oligarchs and fellow .01% can get richer and more powerful, that's of course their choice in their version of democracy.

If Russians are willing to be sacrificed fighting in what appears to be a never ending war against religious extremism, that again is their choice.

General Joseph Votel, who heads U.S. Central Command, this month said Trump did not consult him ahead of the decision to pull U.S. troops from Syria.

It's nice to finally have a President who listens to his generals. Or however the story went.

They must never say they are winning against ISIS... because they want to continue milking the US tax payers!

Man, back during the Iraq war all the comments on here would be liberals/progressives calling this guy a tool of the military-industrial complex's desire for never ending war. Now it's liberals/progressives claiming him as the epitome of honesty and integrity compared to that dastardly Trump.

That "objective is to reduce the threat in that area and to be able to maintain persistent capabilities so that an external threat cannot emanate from that in the future," he added.

What a mealy mouthed bunch of utter nonsense. How can something so unclear and un-objective be claimed to be an objective? Whenever anyone suggests withdrawal, there will always be war hawks saying that the threat still exists. In fact, he's literally saying that the objective is to have a never-ending presence there, i.e. "maintain persistent capabilities". In other words, permanently occupy and subjugate an area of Syria, a country that we never even declared war on!