CNN: Four ways to think about Trump's Syria decision vs Fox News: Turkey and the Kurds: It's more complicated than you think
Democracy is not only about voting. Democracy is about making an informed decision. We expect our media to help voters make these informed decisions. Unfortunately, that is not the case very often. The media also have their own agenda, and their own politicians who they support. That is why they often resort to media manipulation, withholding certain information, feeding us false information, or looking at the problem from one angle only.
Being an independent, I have always been interested only in truth. That is why I always compare different sources in order to find the middle ground and the grain of truth.
Trump has been both criticized and defended for his decision to withdraw from Syria and abandon the Kurds. CNN article criticizes Trump’s decision on four grounds: 1) morality 2) leadership 3) strategy and 4) politics. According to CNN, Kurdish allies helped America in fighting ISIS, so leaving them at the mercy of Turkish forces is morally wrong. Trump showed his lack of leadership by yielding to Erdogan. He was also strategically wrong by ceding leverage in the Middle East. While he kept his promise to defeat ISIS and send troops home, that decision is not making the world a safer place.
According to Fox News article, Trump was acting consistently with his promise that he would withdraw from the Middle East. The fact that his decision came only after a phone call with Erdogan was just an unfortunate timing. On top of that, Congress has never approved a decision to intervene in Syria.
Looking at this independently, America, as a superpower, has often been forced to make morally wrong decisions. Syria is not an exception. A clear connection cannot be established between Erdogan phone call and Trump’s decision. Trump started withdrawing from Syria already last year and this is just the continuation of that process. However, while it is true that Congress never approved the use of military force in Syria, that would not be the first time the president was acting without approval. On top of that, it would have sufficed to just keep the troops in Syria, because that would have deterred Erdogan from attacking. Staying in Syria would have had strategic value- by relying on our own ally there, the Kurds, and using them to neutralize Russian influence there. however, CNN seems to suggest that the US should still act as a world policeman, regardless of whether it suits us or not.