Take our user survey and make your voice heard.
world

Trump OKs wider Syria oil mission, raising legal questions

14 Comments
By LOLITA C. BALDOR

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2019 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.


14 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

How will Trumpophiles try to spin this as Donny keeping his promise to get us out of endless wars in the ME?

It takes a lot of intellectual dishonesty so continue to claim Donny is getting us out of the ME.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

President Donald Trump has approved an expanded military mission

Is this another flip-flop for Trump, or is it a cave to appease the defense and oil industries who continue to see increased profits from his reign. Or was/is he just lying once again.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Trump has said multiple times that the U.S. is "keeping the oil."

Esper said Friday he "interprets" Trump's remarks to mean the military should deny IS access to the oil fields.

As President Merkin Muffley once said, "There's nothing to figure out, General Turgidson. This man is obviously a psychotic."

3 ( +3 / -0 )

The decision, coming after a meeting Friday between Trump and his defense leaders, locks hundreds of U.S. troops into a more complicated presence in Syria, despite the president's vow to get America out of the war.

Bring those troops home! Get out of the Middle East! We aren't the world's policeman! Right Trumpers?

How does it feel getting played and scammed? I guess the same as getting a Trump U diploma?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Amazing how the anti-Trumpers were screaming when he pulled U.S. troops out of harm's way of the Turkish attack on the Kurds, and are now screaming at this. Oh, the irony.

On one hand, the Iranians need to be kept from getting their hands on this oil. On the other hand I want to see others do this. I don't agree with Trump's decision here.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

@serranoOn one hand, the Iranians need to be kept from getting their hands on this oil

Iran/Russia same-same. Not surprising global far rightists can't say anything negative about the Russian Federation and its Eurasian Economic Union. Mighty big global reach extending from Moscow.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

By deciding to pull out of Syria and abandon the Kurdish fighters who have been a strategic partners, Trump pleased Putin. Less than four weeks later, by approving an expanded US military mission across eastern Syria, Trump pleased the Republican senators who will likely keep him in office. Trump is a national security risk and cannot be trusted.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Trump's such a bonehead. He should've begged Gen. Mattis to stay and manage this mess. This is 100% Trump's fault.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Trump is a national security risk and cannot be trusted.

Trump's not the one who was sending emails with classified info on an unencrypted private server.

Trump's such a bonehead. He should've begged Gen. Mattis to stay and manage this mess. This is 100% Trump's fault.

Oh, so all the interference in Syria by Obama-Biden-Clinton allowing the rise of ISIS there is totally forgiven, and this is all Trump's fault. I see. Makes sense - in anti-Trump land.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Oh, so all the interference in Syria by Obama-Biden-Clinton allowing the rise of ISIS there is totally forgiven, and this is all Trump's fault. I see.

The likes of ISIS arose from the illegal invasion of Iraq, carried out by another President ill-equipped to comprehend the intricacies of the Middle East. They filled a vacuum created by the downfall of the Ba'athist regime. A regime originally supported by the CIA.

Makes sense - in anti-Trump land.

You mean the rest of the world, natch.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Hmm. Someone is seriously trying to deflect from the oil grab at the heart of this story.

Troops to aid the Kurdish allies - no way, we're bringing the boys and girls home. Someone else can get involved.

What's that? There's oil involved? Why didn't you say so?

PROTECT THE PRECIOUS OIL, I MEAN, KURDS

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Troops to aid the Kurdish allies - no way, we're bringing the boys and girls home. Someone else can get involved.

What's that? There's oil involved? Why didn't you say so?

PROTECT THE PRECIOUS OIL, I MEAN, KURDS

I've already said this -

On one hand, the Iranians need to be kept from getting their hands on this oil. On the other hand I want to see others do this. I don't agree with Trump's decision here.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Gosh, I wonder how many thumbs down I'd get if I said I do agree with Trump's decision to deploy troops in Syria to protect those oil installations and the Kurds. Jeez...

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites