This has been one of the best and most informative threads I have ever read on this site. I appreciate everyone's insight (@txradioguy and others) and took lots of notes and did lots of research.
But truthfully...as much as I read the harder it gets to make a decision on right or wrong. I don't think the people in the ME think like us. That will never change.
Well, as I see it, without making moral judgements of either group we have treaty obligations (NATO) with the Turks.
We have shed blood alongside the Kurds, fighting ISIS. They have been a major factor in the defeat and capture of most of ISIS.
Some 10K ISIS prisoners are in custody, in prison, in Syria.
The Turks and Kurds have been in conflict since the partition of the region post WWI, when the Kurds were left without their own country when the lines were drawn.
The Turks want a "buffer zone" some 35 miles into Syria, but that same zone includes the prison the ISIS captives are in, and most of the Kurd area in Northern Syria.
If the Turks invade, there will be a fight between them and the Kurds, who will defend any land they see as theirs.
During that fight, there is a good chance that the ISIS fighters in custody will be released or escape.
There is always to likelihood of civilian casualties in the Kurdish areas.
Removing the Special Forces Troops from the area may keep us from being in direct conflict with Turkish forces, with whom we have a treaty (NATO Obligations), but it abandons the guys we've fought alongside to beat back ISIS.
There is no good answer which allows us to both maintain our obligation to the people we have shed blood with and keep us out of conflict with an ally we have treaty obligations with.
The only solution which would do both is to convince the Turks to back off and not invade and kill the Kurds (and risk releasing the ISIS prisoners).
In the midst of a no-win situation, as policy goes, Trump has chosen to pull our people out of the combat zone.
Some folks here are good with that, some don't like it, but frankly, I don't see what alternative he has.
He is painted into a corner on this, by treaty obligations, and by unwritten obligations to comrades in arms, with no good alternative.
YMMV. Soldiers follow orders, whether those orders are considered "good" or not, with few exceptions.
While there are few good guys in the Middle East, the Kurds got the shaft during the post Ottoman partition of the region, and have been handed the sh*tty end of the stick since, with great regularity. I sympathize with their desire for a homeland, and they are religiously diverse as a people, despite being majority Muslim, and tolerant of the other religions among them.
It was the actions of the Turkish Brigade in Korea which bailed out my Dad's unit under an ongoing wave attack by Chinese troops, a situation the US Army had apparently written off. I wouldn't be here if not for that relief action. Still, I recognize that Turkey has a record of genocidal actions, including that taken against the Armenians, and that they are Muslim.