This is John Batstra, conversation with my good colleague Bill Rajoy of the Foundation for

the Defense of Democracy.

He keeps the Long World Journal about the report that the U.S. is looking at withdrawing

all forces from Iraq within the next two years, year, months.

In any event, what does this mean for watching ISIS, watching the Khatyba Hezbollah, the bad actors of Iraq, working for Iran.

What does it mean for al-Qaeda, for example, in the Syrian Idlib province?

Bill answers, and then I I ask what about keeping them in Kurdistan?

And here's Bill's a very careful answer.

Kurdistan favorable to the United States, but more of this later tonight.

Staying in Kurdistan would certainly be better than a full withdrawal.

We would be able to work more closely with Kurdish allies as well as have the ability to project strikes.

But the problem that I think we have is I still think we would lose a presence in Syria because as

General Karela had stated the head of the US Central Command

recently once you drop below a certain level of troops in Iraq right now there's 2,500

troops in various bases several bases across Iraq once you get below a

certain level you're not going to be able to support this basis in Syria and

that's probably where the US is more needed

to keep eyes on the terrorist activities and to be able to strike at them.

So without that presence in Syria,

sure, having US troops based in Kurdistan in Northern Iraq

will be better than nothing, but our presence on our ability to

see and surveil our enemy and strike back will be severely degraded regardless.

...