Is the presidents new Syrian policy misguided, or with good intention? - The Best Online Debate Website | - Debate Anything The Best Online Debate Website |

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The Best Online Debate Website | The only online debate website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the leading online debate website. Debate popular topics, debate news, or debate anything! Debate online for free! DebateIsland is utilizing Artifical Intelligence to transform online debating.

The best online Debate website -! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!

Is the presidents new Syrian policy misguided, or with good intention?
in Politics

By piloteerpiloteer 850 Pts edited October 2019
The presidents new policy in Syria is not out of line with his campaign promise to keep America out of endless wars, and lessen American presence in foreign countries. Will it erase any military gains we've made in the region and only be beneficial to Russia and Iran like Mitch McConnell claims, or is it time for America to disengage from a conflict we shouldn't be involved in? Your thoughts? 

Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted To Win

Details +


  • I disagree with Trump a lot, but I support him fully on this decision. Yes Russia and Iran will benefit from this, but not in some drastic way that will hurt us. Russia literally just gets easier access to ship their oil out of the Mediterranean.

    I am sick of being involved in every military conflict in the middle East. Look at Iraq, is hitting the fan again there. Yes we are screwing the Kurds with this but they aren't exactly vital to anything. 

    I would love to pull out of afghanistan too. We can't fix any of that. Whatever we improve will just go back to . Let's leave
  • At this point, it won't have any affect at all, since all that is happening is that some troops are being moved around inside Syria away from projected Turkish combat operations. Regardless, we're talking about a small number of troops, enough to fit in one or two C-130's or one C-17.  The effectiveness of such a small force is limited; the political value of losing even a single troop is significant, not just for it's propaganda value to the attackers, but also because every single troop represents at least 1% of the troops in country.  Come to think of it, we had more people stationed at the MUNSS I was stationed at just to the north.  That's a very small force.

    A Senior White House official clarified Monday that President Donald Trump was not immediately withdrawing troops from Syria, after Trump’s phone call with the Turkish president.

    “This does not constitute a withdrawal from Syria. We’re talking about a small number of troops that will move to other bases within Syria,” the official noted, citing 50-100 troops in the region.

    The White House arranged for an official to brief reporters in a call after Republicans in the foreign policy establishment universally condemned Trump’s decision, announced on Sunday night and promoted on Twitter on Monday morning.

    “I held off this fight for almost 3 years, but it is time for us to get out of these ridiculous Endless Wars, many of them tribal, and bring our soldiers home,” Trump wrote on Twitter.

    President Donald Trump was informed of the upcoming operation by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan on Sunday night, prompting his announcement that he was moving about 50 American operatives away from the potential conflict zone.

    The official was adamant that Trump’s troop movements were not “green lighting” or endorsing the Turkish military campaign against the Kurdish PKK forces.

    “The President has made it very clear, publicly and privately, that the United States does not endorse or support any Turkish operation in Northern Syria,” he said.

    He criticized a New York Times headline that said that Trump had “endorsed” the operation, noting that it was “irresponsible and doesn’t comport with the reality of the situation.”

    The official said that the president ultimately wanted to move troops out of Syria, but that he was not doing it at the moment.

    “That remains our ultimate goal, is to get American troops from the Middle East and to let the parties in the region determine their own future,” he said. “But this is not the time for any such move right now. We’re moving 50 troops within Syria.”

  • With people like Assad, you cannot do with half-measures. The way I see it, either the US government should fully involve itself in the war and openly target deposition of Assad and democratisation of the system, or it should not bother doing anything in the region. Trying to support some rebels here and there and maintaining some small presence does nothing but waste resources, and also gives Assad the idea that he is not being taken seriously, so he can get away with any human right abuses he desires.

    Falling apart totalitarian states are like burning forest: either you just let it burn to the end on its own, or, if you want to stop the fire, you need to start a full-scale fire-fighting operation. Trying to spill some liquid here and there will accomplish nothing, and doing it inefficiently enough actually may only worsen the fire.

    Trump in particular should be more bold and decisive with his actions. His presidency gives an impression of trying to please everyone and play onto both sides, leading to decisions being flipped every few days. With regards to the Middle East, either he should commit there, or pull out; doing something one day and retreating another is arguably worse than doing nothing at all.
  • TKDBTKDB 615 Pts
    edited October 2019

    Humanity has nuclear weapons, chemical and biological weapons, guns of varied calibers.

    Tanks, attack helicopters, airplanes, RPGs, sonic weapons, that can affect human ears, mines, claymores, napalm, ships, aircraft carriers, and satellites, that can see, for the most part, what other countries are doing, provided that the overhead weather, doesn't obscure the lens on the satellite.

    And humanity, each day, is looking for a way, to outsmart, his adversary whether, the adversary is around the next block from his own home, or in another country a number of hours away via 747 or what have you.

    The below from you, are wishful words, at best:

    "I am sick of being involved in every military conflict in the middle East. Look at Iraq, is hitting the fan again there. Yes we are screwing the Kurds with this but they aren't exactly vital to anything. 

    I would love to pull out of afghanistan too. We can't fix any of that. Whatever we improve will just go back to . Let's leave"

    Some of mans friends, are; Crime, Betrayal, Profit, Weapons development, and War, and Conflict.

    The Middle East isn't going anywhere.

    North Korea, The DMZ, and South Korea, are going anywhere.

    Afghanistan, Russia, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Venezuela, Africa, and the rest of the Troubled countries, are going anywhere.

    Because some of Man, and his apparent desire, to hurt others, for thousands of years now, isn't going away, for many years to come.

    Man hasn't learned to mentally cope, with his destructive, and self destructive sides, just yet. 

    So War, and Conflict, are here to stay, for a long time. 


    "Is the presidents new Syrian policy misguided, or with good intention?"

    Some of Humanity is, and has been, self misquided, for centuries now.

    The current generation of Man seems to be misguided with what a good intention is.

    Your question, is bigger, than who you're framing your question around.

  • @MayCaesar

    Sorry, but your burning forest analogy fizzled out for me. I do find it heartbreaking that the Kurdish fighters will suffer, but as CYDdharta pointed out, it's only 100 troops. The reason we fought with them is because they had a common enemy with Assads forces (ISIS), but they were not aligned with the Assad regime. Now ISIS isn't considered nearly as big as a threat in the region, and I assume there's a lot of extra baggage that comes along with continuing our alliance with the Kurds because it could pit us against Turkish forces, which still is an important American ally.  We would also be fighting against the Assad regime, and I fail to see why that's a war the US needs to be involved in.  
  • @piloteer

    Assad is one of the worst dictators on this planet, responsible for untold levels of human suffering both before and throughout the civil war, and he is also one of the main destabilising factors on the Middle East. If the US want to play a world policeman, then he is one of the first guys it should take care of.

    If, on the other hand, the US only want to do what benefits them, then, indeed, getting involved in a small region on the other half of the planet seems pointless.

    Regardless, my point is, the government must make its decision and then go with it. If it wants to fight Assad, it should do it seriously. And if it does not want to be serious, then it is probably better to not get involved at all, then send out a pitiful force and sell some guns around, hoping that the situation will take care of itself.
  • I feel we cannot make a fair judgement on this issue until we know the full facts/see the big picture behind President Trump's decision. 
  • I think President Trumps decision to pull our troops back was a mistake.  Although we only had a few troops there I don't believe Turkey would have made a move if we still had our troops there.

    I also don't believe Turkey's stated mission, especially after the recent developments of missle fire reaching our pulled back troops.

    Also this has set a bad president for any future allies we may want to precure and I am sure leaves some we have asking themselves if they can really count on us when the going gets tough.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2019, All rights reserved. | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us
Awesome Debates
Terms of Service

Get In Touch