Editorial Analysis: Trump′s Approach to syria is no way to run a way

  Edit my editorial analysis essay which is Trump′s Approach to syria is no way to run a way . please, see the pictures it has my instructor′s revision on my draft and try to edit it correctly. However, i uploaded the guideline which is ( editorial_analysis (2).docx). Moreover, whatever you edit on this paper please highlight the changes that you do on the paper. Editorial analysis: Trump’s Approach to Syria is no Way to Run a War” The issue of whether American soldiers fighting in foreign countries in the middle east should come home or not has been a major source of controversy since the Obama administration. Now the issue has come up again in the Trump administration resulting in different opinions in the country. Those against the idea of American troops returning back in the middle of their missions have been arguing that it would lead to resurgent of radical militia groups in the abandoned countries resulting in major security threat to the US. On the other hand those in support of the call to bring home our troops claim that America has already done enough in Syria in addition to citing failure by other countries to support the US in fighting the radicals. This analysis focuses on the editorial article titled "Trump's Approach to Syria Is No Way to Run a War" by Company T on behalf of the New York Times published on the 5th of April 2018. In making his arguments, the author first sites the miscommunication and confusion within the white house by stating that it is on the same day that General Joseph Votel was speaking on behalf of the Pentagon in support of indefinite American military presence in Syria that president Mr. Trump was talking of his plans to get the troops out of Syria as soon possible to the white house press corps (Company). The author's analysis and arguments regarding the issue are based on lack of strategy to take out the troops and as much he is in support of the decision, the author argues that the presidents should not ignore the warnings of American commanders who are against the idea indeed the author does make successful arguments in this case against Trump approach towards the Syrian war as discussed below. The author claims that the president plans to recall the troops are not based on any meaningful strategy at all and the plan is only driven by emotion with little understanding of what is happening on the ground. One of the reasons that the author uses to support his claim of the president not having a good strategy in place is the fact that the call to withdraw the soldiers is already receiving opposition from the America commanders who argue that it will only open an opportunity for ISIS to rebuild and rise again (Company).The commanders are sitting examples of Iraq where militant groups have rebounded after the withdrawal of troops from their by the immediate former president Obama. According to the Author, Mr. Trump is foregoing the hard work of commander in chief while in search of quick political glory hence leaving the generals to make the hard call. President Trump wants to withdraw the US military from Syria due to many reasons. To begin with, Trump has realized that his government has been only the government involved in stabilizing Syria while other Arabian countries and Saudi Arabia have been less concerned. According to the author's arguments, Syria should train the local soldiers who should take over once the stabilizing troops are withdrawn. It is long since US administration has been taking control of the Syrian territory. Since 2000 the US troops have been in Syria to eliminate the terror group, ISIS. This means that US administration is spending a lot of capital to stabilize the Syrian country. From this Trump believes that this capital and resources can be used to build the US and boost its economic strength. Just like the other presidents including Barack Obama, President Trump has started realizing the reason US troops should be withdrawn from the Syrian territory. Many nations have a discrimination habit for Syria because of the high number of criminals and thus if the US should also do so. This will make the Syrian government try to stabilize itself by making arrangements to deploy new troops from their country. Being one of the isolated countries in the Arabian countries, it will be possible for the government to partner with the other countries such Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, and Kuwait to build mutual relationship thus being part of those countries will be a good deal for them to deal with the ISIS (Shepp NP). According to Trumps believe that ISIS will not be able to attack the US again as the troops will move to secure US borders is an assurance that they are no further threats after the withdrawal. Having found the ISIS for almost 20 years means that they have been weakened by the US troops thus they cannot have power in the near future to launch other deadly attacks in the US territories (Company NP). To justify that the author is true in his arguments or claims, we consider the condition of Syria. The country has been in war for many years and the war has never come to an end. US government has spent a lot of money to stabilize the country but these efforts have never been successful. It is true that the US government has started experiencing the burden of the losses they have been undergoing to carry out operations. Additionally, many people are killed including US soldiers during attacks and operations have led to great losses for the US Pavel and Michael NP). Withdrawing the US troops will see another group of soldiers from other nations will enter the country to stabilize it as the countries possess a great threat even to their neighbors. The US will then save the cost of carrying out an ending war and focus on building their country as a big number of presents and top office have shown concerns to withdraw the soldiers from the deadly region. Some people are against Trumps decision to withdraw his support in fighting the ISIS. For instance, the US troops themselves believe that the ISIS will come back into power and thus they will pose threat to them. Mr. Tillerson is also against the move as he believes that Syria has no stable government and troops to suppress the ISIS alone thus the US troops should stay first until the reconstruction goals are achieved (Shepp NP). He believes that Trump should first ensure that he has stabilized the Iran government before pulling his troops away. The author also is against Trump's interest to withdraw the US troops from the Syrian territory as he believes that by withdrawing the troops, he will endanger the lives of the Syrian Kurds who have been the closest partners in suppressing the ISIS and now will be fighting them alone which can be challenging (Company NP). The author believes that the Kurds will also be in danger as Turkey considers them as terrorists and they are likely to attack them. The Former secretary of state Rex Tillerson had earlier in January pointed out that the soldiers were going to continue with their mission In Syria for unforeseeable future and pointed out that the Syrian mission was in fact condition based implying that it had no end date and benchmarks for success (Pavel and Michael NP). the General did recently back up those claims by describing the US mission in the middle east nation as one that is gaining grounds and consolidating support while at the same time working hard to train and equip the local forces so that they can deter ISIS from rising again. The author does indeed provide reliable evidence to back up his claim of being against Trump's plans to withdraw from Syria. First, he does point out the president has in the past seemed to support the idea of staying as illustrated by his decision to send more troops in Afghanistan and Syria and therefore it is quite unreasonable for him to recall the troops now. The only reason the president might have changed his mind is the belief that it will earn him political mileage. As a matter of fact, the president had earlier questioned Mr. Obama's decision to set a timetable for the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan claiming that it gave the Taliban an upper hand in the war (Pavel and Michael NP). In conclusion, the issue of whether American troops fighting abroad should come back home continues to be a divisive one. However, there is no doubt that the manner in which President Trump is approaching the war in Syria is really not the right way. It is quite unrealistic that the president would consider getting out of Syria without considering the trouble that is likely to follow. Works Cited Company, The. "Opinion | Trump’S Approach To Syria Is No Way To Run A War". Nytimes.Com, 2018, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/05/opinion/trump-syria- withdrawal-isis.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fopinion- editorials&action=click&contentCollection=editorials&region=stream&module=stream_ unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=9&pgtype=sectionfront. Accessed 12 Apr 2018. Pavel K Baev, and Michael E. O'Hanlon. "A Modest But Enduring Syria Strategy For President Trump". Brookings, 2018, https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from- chaos/2018/04/11/a-modest-but-enduring-syria-strategy-for-president-trump/. Accessed 12 Apr 2018. Shepp, Jonah. "Why Are U.S. Troops Staying In Syria? The Trump Administration Won’T Say". Daily Intelligencer, 2018, http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/02/why-are-u-s- troops-staying-in-syria-trump-admin-wont-say.html. Accessed 12 Apr 2018.