ISIS, Their final stand in Syria begins.

[Value Buy]

CNN is saying ISIS has been reduced to one city in Syria, thus begrudgingly admitting President Trump was correct in his statement about ISIS in Syria.
It does not mean ISIS is dead, but does mean they are finished as a legitimate fighting force in the country.

www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/isis-has-been-reduced-to-15-square-miles-in-syria-this-is-its-final-stand/ar-BBT2ec6?li=BBnb7Kz

Unless posters are going to say CNN is now a fake news site controlled by President Trump, The President was truthful in his statement when he announced pulling troops out of Syria because ISIS was defeated.

[Value Buy]

Feb 1, 2019 7:50:47 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Show us how we keep the Kurds from being slaughtered by the Turks and I am happy to see our troops leave.  I will say though, it is not quite as simple as the territory controlled by ISIS.

- They still have thousands of adherents in the region.  Thousands of armed ISIS fanatics.  They will still fester.  Will they blossom once again?  I don't know.  I would hope they have sullied their reputation among common people as badly as al Qaida in Iraq did before them.  But, I do not know.
- We are de facto ceding influence there to Iran and Russia.  This does not bother me.  But be aware of it.
-Because of the previous point, we are pissing off our Allies here, who do NOT want to see these two powers gain influence there.

Me, I'll be glad to see our troops out of there once we can be sure our Allies are safe from any resultant harm.  These other points are also reasons why those who oppose their departure (including most Senate Republicans) would like them to stay.

The Kurd's situation is a bad situation.
We both know that problem is 75% a Turkish issue where their President wants to kill them. Period.
I do not have that solution.
RemeMber, Turkey is in NATO.
imo, NATO should be handling this, with the US also being a player in the negotiations, but NATO voting and deciding the outcome, and let every NATO country provide troops to die on an equal basis on the ground rather than just Americans.

[Tennesseer]

Feb 1, 2019 7:04:24 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

CNN is saying ISIS has been reduced to one city in Syria, thus begrudgingly admitting President Trump was correct in his statement about ISIS in Syria.
It does not mean ISIS is dead, but does mean they are finished as a legitimate fighting force in the country.

www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/isis-has-been-reduced-to-15-square-miles-in-syria-this-is-its-final-stand/ar-BBT2ec6?li=BBnb7Kz

Unless posters are going to say CNN is now a fake news site controlled by President Trump, The President was truthful in his statement when he announced pulling troops out of Syria because ISIS was defeated.

It only took 19 terrorists originally scattered around the U.S. to bring us 9/11. 2,977 dead, 6,000 injured. Nothing stopping them from committing the same in the future.

[Rukh O'Rorke]

Feb 1, 2019 7:04:24 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

CNN is saying ISIS has been reduced to one city in Syria, thus begrudgingly admitting President Trump was correct in his statement about ISIS in Syria.
It does not mean ISIS is dead, but does mean they are finished as a legitimate fighting force in the country.

www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/isis-has-been-reduced-to-15-square-miles-in-syria-this-is-its-final-stand/ar-BBT2ec6?li=BBnb7Kz

Unless posters are going to say CNN is now a fake news site controlled by President Trump, The President was truthful in his statement when he announced pulling troops out of Syria because ISIS was defeated.

Again - are posting for discussion, or to make baseless accusations about what you think (or want?) other posters to say?

[thyme4change]

I don't listen to Trump anymore. I do, however, listen to his intelligence professionals. I wish he did, too.

[Tennesseer]

Feb 1, 2019 9:22:19 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

I don't listen to Trump anymore. I do, however, listen to his intelligence professionals. I wish he did, too.

If trump isn't getting his intelligence from his own appointed intelligence directors and their agencies, where is he then getting it from and from whom?

[billisonboard]

Feb 1, 2019 9:26:18 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Feb 1, 2019 9:22:19 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

I don't listen to Trump anymore. I do, however, listen to his intelligence professionals. I wish he did, too.

If trump isn't getting his intelligence from his own appointed intelligence directors and their agencies, where is he then getting it from and from whom?

He told us back in March 2016:

Asked on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” who he talks with consistently about foreign policy, Trump responded, “I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things."

"I know what I’m doing and I listen to a lot of people, I talk to a lot of people and at the appropriate time I’ll tell you who the people are," Trump said. “But my primary consultant is myself and I have a good instinct for this stuff."

link

[Tennesseer]

Feb 1, 2019 9:32:43 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Feb 1, 2019 9:26:18 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

If trump isn't getting his intelligence from his own appointed intelligence directors and their agencies, where is he then getting it from and from whom?

He told us back in March 2016:

Asked on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” who he talks with consistently about foreign policy, Trump responded, “I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things."

"I know what I’m doing and I listen to a lot of people, I talk to a lot of people and at the appropriate time I’ll tell you who the people are," Trump said. “But my primary consultant is myself and I have a good instinct for this stuff."

link

So the multiple personalities residing in his head provide him all the intelligence he needs.

[Value Buy]

Feb 1, 2019 9:03:14 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Feb 1, 2019 7:04:24 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

CNN is saying ISIS has been reduced to one city in Syria, thus begrudgingly admitting President Trump was correct in his statement about ISIS in Syria.
It does not mean ISIS is dead, but does mean they are finished as a legitimate fighting force in the country.

www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/isis-has-been-reduced-to-15-square-miles-in-syria-this-is-its-final-stand/ar-BBT2ec6?li=BBnb7Kz

Unless posters are going to say CNN is now a fake news site controlled by President Trump, The President was truthful in his statement when he announced pulling troops out of Syria because ISIS was defeated.

It only took 19 terrorists originally scattered around the U.S. to bring us 9/11. 2,977 dead, 6,000 injured. Nothing stopping them from committing the same in the future.

Notice you do dispute CNN'S announcement ISIS IS/was defeated in Syria

[Value Buy]

Feb 1, 2019 9:14:12 GMT -5 Rukh O'Rorke said:

Feb 1, 2019 7:04:24 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

CNN is saying ISIS has been reduced to one city in Syria, thus begrudgingly admitting President Trump was correct in his statement about ISIS in Syria.
It does not mean ISIS is dead, but does mean they are finished as a legitimate fighting force in the country.

www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/isis-has-been-reduced-to-15-square-miles-in-syria-this-is-its-final-stand/ar-BBT2ec6?li=BBnb7Kz

Unless posters are going to say CNN is now a fake news site controlled by President Trump, The President was truthful in his statement when he announced pulling troops out of Syria because ISIS was defeated.

Again - are posting for discussion, or to make baseless accusations about what you think (or want?) other posters to say?

So, do you agree with CNN admits ISIS is defeated as Trump told the USA?

[Tennesseer]

Feb 1, 2019 9:37:49 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Feb 1, 2019 9:03:14 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

It only took 19 terrorists originally scattered around the U.S. to bring us 9/11. 2,977 dead, 6,000 injured. Nothing stopping them from committing the same in the future.

Notice you do dispute CNN'S announcement ISIS IS/was defeated in Syria

There was no caliphate around on 9/11.

And from your own link:

ISIS may be about to lose its last sliver of territory, but it will not disappear with it. The group has transformed, indeed has returned back to what it was before ISIS leader Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi declared his so-called caliphate: a deadly insurgency in Syria and Iraq.

And in far flung corners of the globe -- Nigeria, Libya, Egypt's Sinai Peninsula, Afghanistan and the Philippines -- ISIS's black banner still flies.

This battle on the banks of the Euphrates is an important one. But the war isn't over.

You posted the link but neglected to mention what I quoted above.

[Cheesy FL-Vol]

I could have sworn I saw a headline this  morning suggesting that ISIS plans to re-surge when US forces move out. The downside to parsing so many news websites, I just can't remember where I saw it.

[billisonboard]

Feb 1, 2019 9:38:48 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

... ISIS is defeated as Trump told the USA?

Feb 1, 2019 7:04:24 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

CNN is saying ISIS has been reduced to one city in Syria, ...

President Trump declared victory and (said he would) pull the "players off the field at the two minute warning".

[Rukh O'Rorke]

Feb 1, 2019 9:38:48 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Feb 1, 2019 9:14:12 GMT -5 Rukh O'Rorke said:

Again - are posting for discussion, or to make baseless accusations about what you think (or want?) other posters to say?

So, do you agree with CNN admits ISIS is defeated as Trump told the USA?

You are still not focused on a discussion here, but I will indulge you a little and try to address your question.

Let me break this down a little.

Do I agree with CNN?

Agreement would imply that I had independent access to information and would be comparing my own information and interpretation of that with CNN. Do I think they are a credible news source? yes, I do. I wouldn't think that any particular news story was an attempt to obfuscate facts. If it is an opinion piece, then it would depend quite a bit more.

This particular article is more of an emotional look at what is happening to people at the edges of this stronghold. A few pieces of information are also included.

CNN admits? 

First of all, what exactly do you mean by "admits"? That is an odd word to describe a news source reporting the news, and it makes answering the question difficult because the implications are that they stated something to the contrary and are correcting themselves, but I don't see that that is the case at all. So - what do you mean by admit here? 


ISIS is defeated?

I do not see that information contained in the article. This is the ending of the article, I see tenn already quoted it.

ISIS may be about to lose its last sliver of territory, but it will not disappear with it. The group has transformed, indeed has returned back to what it was before ISIS leader Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi declared his so-called caliphate: a deadly insurgency in Syria and Iraq.



And in far flung corners of the globe -- Nigeria, Libya, Egypt's Sinai Peninsula, Afghanistan and the Philippines -- ISIS's black banner still flies.



This battle on the banks of the Euphrates is an important one. But the war isn't over.

So - what do I take from the linked article?

Isis is currently contained to a 1.5 square mile area in syria.

Do I believe this?

It seems plausible. I believe it is the most uptodate info available to journalists at the moment. is there information not known? maybe.

Is ISIS defeated?

No - the article clearly states that ISIS is established in many other countries.

Is ISIS defeated in Syria?

Well - not yet, obviously. There is fighting and they have a strong hold - so the defeat seems likely and imminent. But is not yet accomplished, and meanwhile, many are dying at the edges of this conflict.

In answer to your original question:

So, do you agree with CNN admits ISIS is defeated as Trump told the USA?

I don't even know how this question stems from the article in questions - so my direct answer to this particular question is....

Wha.......

[Gardening Grandma]

Feb 1, 2019 9:26:18 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Feb 1, 2019 9:22:19 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

I don't listen to Trump anymore. I do, however, listen to his intelligence professionals. I wish he did, too.

If trump isn't getting his intelligence from his own appointed intelligence directors and their agencies, where is he then getting it from and from whom?

He’s pulling it out of his ass like he does everything else.

[hurley1980]

Did Trump say ISIS has been defeated? I will say he was wrong.

Did Trump say ISIS has been defeated IN SYRIA? I will say he was correct.

[Rukh O'Rorke]

www-m.cnn.com/2019/02/01/politics/pentagon-syria-isis-warning/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F


"(CNN) — The Pentagon believes ISIS could re-emerge and take back territory in Syria within months if the US does not maintain military pressure on the terror group, according to an official familiar with the latest assessment."


So, can we define what is meant by "defeat"?

[Tennesseer]

Feb 3, 2019 12:27:22 GMT -5 Rukh O'Rorke said:

www-m.cnn.com/2019/02/01/politics/pentagon-syria-isis-warning/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F


"(CNN) — The Pentagon believes ISIS could re-emerge and take back territory in Syria within months if the US does not maintain military pressure on the terror group, according to an official familiar with the latest assessment."


So, can we define what is meant by "defeat"?

Apparently the Pentagon department which wrote the report didn't get invited to trump's meeting with his own hand selected Intelligence folks to tell them he is smarter than all the intelligence they gather.

[djAdvocate]

should be easy to beat the JV league.

[Value Buy]

Feb 3, 2019 12:27:22 GMT -5 Rukh O'Rorke said:

www-m.cnn.com/2019/02/01/politics/pentagon-syria-isis-warning/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F


"(CNN) — The Pentagon believes ISIS could re-emerge and take back territory in Syria within months if the US does not maintain military pressure on the terror group, according to an official familiar with the latest assessment."


So, can we define what is meant by "defeat"?

Question for you and other people discussing whether ISIS is beaten in Syria. (This goes for the Taliban and other groups in Afghanistan too)
At what point do we decide they have been weakened enough where we decide we can remove troops from these countries?
Are we going to say, we have to keep armed troops in all these countries for the next 75 years, ala, Germany and South Korea? How long before we decide the time is not yet, or we decide the time is right for removal of our troops? Some posters here claim drone technology is good enough to defend our borders from invasion, along with other technical devises etc. Why does that not work over there? If the drones see the action there, our men and women thousdands of miles away can pull the trigger on the drones, or we bring in bombers from neighboring countries to destroy them.

[billisonboard]

Feb 4, 2019 9:57:24 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Feb 3, 2019 12:27:22 GMT -5 Rukh O'Rorke said:

www-m.cnn.com/2019/02/01/politics/pentagon-syria-isis-warning/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F


"(CNN) — The Pentagon believes ISIS could re-emerge and take back territory in Syria within months if the US does not maintain military pressure on the terror group, according to an official familiar with the latest assessment."


So, can we define what is meant by "defeat"?

Question for you and other people discussing whether ISIS is beaten in Syria. (This goes for the Taliban and other groups in Afghanistan too)
At what point do we decide they have been weakened enough where we decide we can remove troops from these countries?
Are we going to say, we have to keep armed troops in all these countries for the next 75 years, ala, Germany and South Korea? How long before we decide the time is not yet, or we decide the time is right for removal of our troops? Some posters here claim drone technology is good enough to defend our borders from invasion, along with other technical devises etc. Why does that not work over there? If the drones see the action there, our men and women thousdands of miles away can pull the trigger on the drones, or we bring in bombers from neighboring countries to destroy them.

Great questions. I would very much have appreciated President Trump ordering the Pentagon to look into those ways of dealing with a weakened ISIS and the situation in Afghanistan. And not doing it on Twitter.

[thyme4change]

Feb 4, 2019 9:57:24 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Feb 3, 2019 12:27:22 GMT -5 Rukh O'Rorke said:

www-m.cnn.com/2019/02/01/politics/pentagon-syria-isis-warning/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F


"(CNN) — The Pentagon believes ISIS could re-emerge and take back territory in Syria within months if the US does not maintain military pressure on the terror group, according to an official familiar with the latest assessment."


So, can we define what is meant by "defeat"?

Question for you and other people discussing whether ISIS is beaten in Syria. (This goes for the Taliban and other groups in Afghanistan too)
At what point do we decide they have been weakened enough where we decide we can remove troops from these countries?
Are we going to say, we have to keep armed troops in all these countries for the next 75 years, ala, Germany and South Korea? How long before we decide the time is not yet, or we decide the time is right for removal of our troops? Some posters here claim drone technology is good enough to defend our borders from invasion, along with other technical devises etc. Why does that not work over there? If the drones see the action there, our men and women thousdands of miles away can pull the trigger on the drones, or we bring in bombers from neighboring countries to destroy them.

First off - I have no idea.

But, I guess the question I have is what we are doing there now, and what is our role going forward. Years ago, the mission was advertised as "training" and mentoring a new government, including army, police, elections, etc. Is that what we are still supposedly doing?

[Rukh O'Rorke]

Feb 4, 2019 9:57:24 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Feb 3, 2019 12:27:22 GMT -5 Rukh O'Rorke said:

www-m.cnn.com/2019/02/01/politics/pentagon-syria-isis-warning/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F


"(CNN) — The Pentagon believes ISIS could re-emerge and take back territory in Syria within months if the US does not maintain military pressure on the terror group, according to an official familiar with the latest assessment."


So, can we define what is meant by "defeat"?

Question for you and other people discussing whether ISIS is beaten in Syria. (This goes for the Taliban and other groups in Afghanistan too)
At what point do we decide they have been weakened enough where we decide we can remove troops from these countries?
Are we going to say, we have to keep armed troops in all these countries for the next 75 years, ala, Germany and South Korea? How long before we decide the time is not yet, or we decide the time is right for removal of our troops? Some posters here claim drone technology is good enough to defend our borders from invasion, along with other technical devises etc. Why does that not work over there? If the drones see the action there, our men and women thousdands of miles away can pull the trigger on the drones, or we bring in bombers from neighboring countries to destroy them.

That's a good question for some military, intelligence, and political science experts.

But it's pretty dumb to leave with predictions of a resurgence in just a few months and trump talking already talking about sending troops back.