NYT bends the knee on Trump’s ISIS victory

D

Darth Omar

Russian asset
I mean the war against the Islamic State, whose expansion was the defining foreign policy calamity of Barack Obama’s second term, whose executions of Americans made the U.S.A. look impotent and whose utopian experiment drew volunteers drunk on world-historical ambitions and metaphysical dreams. Its defeat was begun under Obama, and the hardest fighting has been done by Iraqis — but this was an American war too, and we succeeded without massive infusions of ground troops, without accidentally getting into a war with Russia, and without inspiring a huge wave of terrorism in the West.

Why haven’t we noticed this success? One reason is the nature of our victory: As Max Abrahms and John Glaser wrote recently in the Los Angeles Times, the defeat of the Islamic State didn’t happen the way many foreign policy hawks envisioned, because it didn’t require also going to war with Bashar al-Assad or creating a new Syrian opposition army. At the same time, it happened more easily than intervention skeptics feared — so there isn’t a pundit chorus, right or left, ready to claim vindication in the victory.

But this is also a press failure, a case where the media is not adequately reporting an important success because it does not fit into the narrative of Trumpian disaster in which our journalistic entities are all invested.

I include myself in this indictment. Foreign policy is the place where the risks of electing Trump seemed to me particularly unacceptable, and I’ve tended to focus on narratives that fit that fear, from the risk of regional war in Middle East to the perils in our North Korean brinksmanship.

Those fears are still reasonable. But all punditry is provisional, and for now, the Trump administration’s approach to the Middle East has been moderately successful, and indeed close to what I would have hoped for from a normal Republican president following a realist-internationalist course.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/12/16/opinion/sunday/war-trump-islamic-state.html?_r=0&referer=
___________________

This piece is interesting because it shows a Never Trumper [NYT’s Ross Douthat] trying reconcile the foreign policy facts with the anti-Trump narrative.

And he gets points for intellectual honesty for scrapping the narrative, all be it grudgingly and provisionally lol.

When you factor in the economy with foreign policy, Trump is having 2/3’s of a successful presidency.

Not a bad first year, Mr. President.
 
^ wow . amazing

As Max Abrahms and John Glaser wrote recently in the Los Angeles Times, the defeat of the Islamic State didn’t happen the way many foreign policy hawks envisioned, because it didn’t require also going to war with Bashar al-Assad or creating a new Syrian opposition army
Click to expand...
not that Obama didn't try to..
as well as Hillary undermining Assad.

the Trump administration’s approach to the Middle East has been moderately successful, and indeed close to what I would have hoped for from a normal Republican president following a realist-internationalist course.
Click to expand...
it cannot be over-stated just how badly Obama played the middle east.
Egypt and Libya are obvious, but meddling in Syria almost cost us Syria becoming another terrorist state like Libya.

I wish Trump would engage in Libya -Putin is, but as long as he doesn't cause more terrorist states,I'm fine wiht that.
Partnering with Putin for a stable Syria ( which is going to be the historical Russian client state)
is the best move available
 
noise said:
^ wow . amazing

not that Obama didn't try to..
as well as Hillary undermining Assad.

it cannot be over-stated just how badly Obama played the middle east.
Egypt and Libya are obvious, but meddling in Syria almost cost us Syria becoming another terrorist state like Libya.

I wish Trump would engage in Libya -Putin is, but as long as he doesn't cause more terrorist states,I'm fine wiht that.
Partnering with Putin for a stable Syria ( which is going to be the historical Russian client state)
is the best move available
Click to expand...

Regime change in Syria has disaster written all over it. It’s amazing anyone would even think about it, but it’s where we were headed under Obama and where we would be headed under Madame Hillary.

But Trump has kept us out of it. Trump’s ‘secret plan’ for ISIS was a success and it cost little in the way of US blood or treasure. In fact, the Iraqis, the Syrian army and Russians did most of the heavy lifting. Trump’s combination of getting out of the way in Syria and freeing up US field commanders to make decisions free of political interference from the White House worked, masterfully.

ISIS was eradicated. It has no physical presence though there are still adherents scattered here and there.

Since the media won’t/can’t say it, I will: Trump presided over our first real victory in the region since Desert Storm. And this one is much better because it cost us so little and it was over radical Islam and not a secular despot.

This is what winning looks like.
 
Darth Omar said:
Regime change in Syria has disaster written all over it. It’s amazing anyone would even think about it, but it’s where we were headed under Obama and where we would be headed under Madame Hillary.

But Trump has kept us out of it. Trump’s ‘secret plan’ for ISIS was a success and it cost little in the way of US blood or treasure. In fact, the Iraqis, the Syrian army and Russians did most of the heavy lifting. Trump’s combination of getting out of the way in Syria and freeing up US field commanders to make decisions free of political interference from the White House worked, masterfully.

ISIS was eradicated. It has no physical presence though there are still adherents scattered here and there.

Since the media won’t/can’t say it, I will: Trump presided over our first real victory in the region since Desert Storm. And this one is much better because it cost us so little and it was over radical Islam and not a secular despot.

This is what winning looks like.
Click to expand...
I'm not going to overplay it - the strategy was there
( because it was forced on us) and we played 2nd fiddle to Iran and Shi'a Brigades, as well as Iraq on the ground.

But battlefield autonomy is YUGE.It's a tactic that was very important in the cities of Mosul and Raqqa
 
Darth Omar said:
I mean the war against the Islamic State, whose expansion was the defining foreign policy calamity of Barack Obama’s second term, whose executions of Americans made the U.S.A. look impotent and whose utopian experiment drew volunteers drunk on world-historical ambitions and metaphysical dreams. Its defeat was begun under Obama, and the hardest fighting has been done by Iraqis — but this was an American war too, and we succeeded without massive infusions of ground troops, without accidentally getting into a war with Russia, and without inspiring a huge wave of terrorism in the West.

Why haven’t we noticed this success? One reason is the nature of our victory: As Max Abrahms and John Glaser wrote recently in the Los Angeles Times, the defeat of the Islamic State didn’t happen the way many foreign policy hawks envisioned, because it didn’t require also going to war with Bashar al-Assad or creating a new Syrian opposition army. At the same time, it happened more easily than intervention skeptics feared — so there isn’t a pundit chorus, right or left, ready to claim vindication in the victory.

But this is also a press failure, a case where the media is not adequately reporting an important success because it does not fit into the narrative of Trumpian disaster in which our journalistic entities are all invested.

I include myself in this indictment. Foreign policy is the place where the risks of electing Trump seemed to me particularly unacceptable, and I’ve tended to focus on narratives that fit that fear, from the risk of regional war in Middle East to the perils in our North Korean brinksmanship.

Those fears are still reasonable. But all punditry is provisional, and for now, the Trump administration’s approach to the Middle East has been moderately successful, and indeed close to what I would have hoped for from a normal Republican president following a realist-internationalist course.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/12/16/opinion/sunday/war-trump-islamic-state.html?_r=0&referer=
___________________

This piece is interesting because it shows a Never Trumper [NYT’s Ross Douthat] trying reconcile the foreign policy facts with the anti-Trump narrative.

And he gets points for intellectual honesty for scrapping the narrative, all be it grudgingly and provisionally lol.

When you factor in the economy with foreign policy, Trump is having 2/3’s of a successful presidency.

Not a bad first year, Mr. President.
Click to expand...

Must be why his approval numbers are at record lows and most likely will continue to decline once the new tax bill is signed into law.
 
ive been told that recognizing jerusalem will reinvigorate ISIS and blow up the region.

Wierd. News wouldnt lie would they?
 
tsuke said:
ive been told that recognizing jerusalem will reinvigorate ISIS and blow up the region.

Wierd. News wouldnt lie would they?
Click to expand...

Good point, comrade.

That missed prediction is instructive: so many of the prevailing assumptions are just flat out wrong.
 
floriduhfan said:
Its the poll numbers that get a candidate re elected, honey pot, and you aint going anywhere at 30%
Click to expand...

How'd your poll numbers work for you last November, cum gargler?

Poll shows Clinton over Trump by double-digits

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/23/politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-presidential-polls/index.html

Hillary Clinton Is Beating Donald Trump By 15 Percent: Poll

http://time.com/4439918/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-marist-poll/

One last look at the polls: Hillary Clinton's lead is holding steady

http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-election-day-2016-a-last-look-at-the-polls-clinton-lead-1478618744-htmlstory.html


:rofl2:
 
How did Trump achieve victory? By tweeting that Mosul was a disaster when soldiers were in harm's way, and when Mosul was actually going extremely well?
 
Let's remember who on this forum hounded us, begged us, and demanded that we invade Iraq, ultimately destabilizing the country along with much of the middle east:

Conservatives.

ISIS was on the run, and in collapse throughout Obama's last year or 18 months in office. Trump kept the Obama strategy with a few tactical changes. Trump is the second string field goal kicker who kicked a field goal in the last seconds of a game that was already decided.
 
Cypress said:
Let's remember who on this forum hounded us, begged us, and demanded that we invade Iraq, ultimately destabilizing the country along with much of the middle east:

Conservatives.

ISIS was on the run, and in collapse throughout Obama's last year or 18 months in office. Trump kept the Obama strategy with a few tactical changes. Trump is the second string field goal kicker who kicked a field goal in the last seconds of a game that was already decided.
Click to expand...

The bolded has been countered by Trump's "alternative facts."

Same w/ the economy. The market tripled under Obama & we were almost back to full employment when he left office. But for both ISIS and the economy, Trump told his minions that Obama was a "disaster" and we were "losing," so of course he miraculously turned both around in less than a year.
 
Thing1 said:
How did Trump achieve victory? By tweeting that Mosul was a disaster when soldiers were in harm's way, and when Mosul was actually going extremely well?
Click to expand...
street by street fighting requires instantaneous decision making - loosening up ROE improves that ability.

now before you REACT..recall I wrote Trump was following Obama's over all strategy ( but not tactics)
 
Thing1 said:
The bolded has been countered by Trump's "alternative facts."

Same w/ the economy. The market tripled under Obama & we were almost back to full employment when he left office. But for both ISIS and the economy, Trump told his minions that Obama was a "disaster" and we were "losing," so of course he miraculously turned both around in less than a year.
Click to expand...

Also worth remembering:
The Obama strategy (training, support, airstrikes) - which ultimately worked - was dismissed, degraded, and mocked by a lot of conservatives....many of whom were implying or suggesting that Obama needed to put more "boots on the ground".

In other words, conservatives wanted to get us into another ground war in Iraq.
 
Thing1 said:
The bolded has been countered by Trump's "alternative facts."

Same w/ the economy. The market tripled under Obama & we were almost back to full employment when he left office. But for both ISIS and the economy, Trump told his minions that Obama was a "disaster" and we were "losing," so of course he miraculously turned both around in less than a year.
Click to expand...

Trump aside it was one of the weakest recoveries on record and with the gov't easy money policies flooding the market the Dow rose as it did. That's why there was still such anxiety across the country about the economy even with the low unemployment numbers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top