Worrying developments. Throwing new armaments and explosions into a pre-existing warzone is dangerous and will only further destabilise the region. And bearing in mind the Turkish military's reputation in regards to the Kurds. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuşkonar_massacre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mardin_engagement_ceremony_massacre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roboski_airstrike Now my understanding... as it presently stands based on what I've managed to read in my rather busy working life ... [so if people know better please link me to informative content] ... Trump was basically told that Turkey was doing this. Erdogan didn't consult, he just said his country was going to occupy a 10km strip of the whole Syrian border. Trump could have kept US forces in the way of that advance but it would have risked US lives and possibly placed them in a position where they had to engage Turkey militarily in self-defence. As the purpose of those troops being there was completed [the defeat of ISIS], Trump saw it as wise to strategically withdraw. I don't like that this was necessary. I wish there was a way of reining in Erdogan and stopping his silly little foreign adventure. But I don't see how the USA could actually have intervened in a peaceful effective fashion. It's a tough one. I will happily berate Obama/Cameron for failing the people of Libya in 2011 by not staying behind and helping them build an effective, functioning nation. But if the USA remains in Kurdish Syria to help build a safe, effective, functioning region... that'd only place them in opposition to Turkey. It's nearly impossible to see the 'good' outcome.* * ideally the 'good' outcome would involve a time machine and the creation of a Kurdish state out of Iraq, Syria and Turkey back in 1920. But I'm not Doc Brown.