So we (the US) have how many troops in Syria? 2,000 roughly, with only 50 to 100 having been in the area being invaded?
Can we trust Turkey's leader, Erdogan when he said Turkey's aim is to combat Kurdish fighters in the border area and to set up a "safe zone" for Syrian refugees currently living in Turkey? Is that it... really? If it's not, we only have economic sanctions as an option. Would we do that to a NATO ally? The military option is not acceptable (yes, just imo.)
There are over 3.6 million Syrian refugees in Turkey, who (understandably) want them out of their country. About two million would go into this safe zone. Otherwise, Turkey has threatened to send them to Europe. What would our European allies do about that? I'm sure the progressives in this country would take a million or so... why not???
The Kurds have been getting screwed for hundreds of years, and there doesn't seem to be any letting up in the foreseeable future. It's wrong, and something should be done about it. But what?
The US has only so much influence in the region, even with our NATO ally Turkey. Unless of course, all you progressives out there want to get into a shooting war with Turkey??? That would have been a possibility if we hadn't removed our troops. Or hadn't any of your considered that?
Even if Turkey was very concerned about US troops' safety, they would still be in harms way, considering how large this military operation is. (sorry, I can't seem to find the number of troops Turkey is using for the invasion, but given the size of their military, I would have to believe it's considerable... enough to get the job done.)
This is a very complex situation, and I certainly don't fully understand it. But this knee-jerk reaction to what Trump did is typical, even if some republicans are joining in with the dems this time.
Here's a link to a BBC article that has a lot of info about this messed up situation, and of course there's plenty to learn on the interweb: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-49960973