US special ops forces & hardware spotted at ISIS positions north of Deir ez-Zor – Russian MoD

Recommended Posts

+Mirumir    5,155

As the end of ISIS in Syria approaches, it becomes obvious who really fights ISIS and who's been pretending to do so for a few years now.

 

Quote

 

US special ops forces & hardware spotted at ISIS positions north of Deir ez-Zor – Russian MoD

 

The Russian Ministry of Defense has released aerial images which they say show US Army special forces equipment north of the town of Deir er-Zor, where ISIS militants are deployed.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Dislike 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+ctebah    2,746

I’m not surprised by these kinds of relevations as the US has a very long history of supporting terrorists.  

 

In this instance they must still be salty that the Russians cams to Syria and ruined their plans of destroying another country.  

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Dislike 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FunkyMike    1,620
8 minutes ago, ctebah said:

I’m not surprised by these kinds of relevations as the US has a very long history of supporting terrorists.  

 

In this instance they must still be salty that the Russians cams to Syria and ruined their plans of destroying another country.  

At this point the Kurds / SDF / US are securing the oil fields before Damascus takes back the entire region.

 

The only one pushing for an offical Kurdistan will be the US, none of the surrounding countries will allow this.

 

Quote

Russia's diplomatic and strategic victory in the Middle East was made clear this week as news broke of "secret" and unprecedented US-Russia face to face talks on Syria. The Russians reportedly issued a stern warning to the US military, saying that it will respond in force should the Syrian Army or Russian assets come under fire by US proxies. 

 

The AP reports that senior military officials from both countries met in an undisclosed location "somewhere in the Middle East" in order to discuss spheres of operation in Syria and how to avoid the potential for a direct clash of forces. Tensions have escalated in the past two weeks as the Syrian Army in tandem with Russian special forces are now set to fully liberate Deir Ezzor city, while at the same time the US-backed SDF (the Arab-Kurdish coalition, "Syrian Democratic Forces") - advised by American special forces - is advancing on the other side of the Euphrates. As we've explained before, the US is not fundamentally motivated in its "race for Deir Ezzor province" by defeat of ISIS terrorism, but in truth by control of the eastern province's oil fields. Whatever oil fields the SDF can gain control of in the wake of Islamic State's retreat will then used as powerful bargaining leverage in negotiating a post-ISIS Syria. The Kurdish and Arab coalition just this week captured Tabiyeh and al-Isba oil and gas fields northeast of Deir Ezzor city.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-09-22/russia-warns-us-unprecedented-face-face-meeting-over-syria-whats-endgame

 

 

 

  • Dislike 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anibal P    2,012

Wow your irrational hatred of the US is really showing here, and one hell of a leap in logic to come to the conclusion that the US is somehow supporting Daesh 

  • Like 5
  • Dislike 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Raze    13,513

The well known trio hard at work with more well sourced information.  Must be very lucrative.   /s

 

And you call others brainwashed.  pot meet kettle      :yes:

  • Like 5
  • Dislike 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xendrome    4,360

I love you guys sources for "news". It's like you scour the internet to find something that suits your anti-US agenda.

Internet-Troll-292x300.jpg

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1
  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+ctebah    2,746

Yes, we are all wrong and the US has never supported terrorists before.... :rolleyes:

  • Like 1
  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Raze    13,513
1 minute ago, ctebah said:

Yes, we are all wrong and the US has never supported terrorists before.... :rolleyes:

 

And no one here said that.   :rolleyes:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM    12,613
7 hours ago, ctebah said:

Yes, we are all wrong and the US has never supported terrorists before.... :rolleyes:

Of course ourse instead of jumping to conclusions there are the facts that 1) special forces equipment may well have been captured on the battlefield and used by IS, and 2)  when Obama abandoned Iraq for electoral reasons much US equipment was left behind in order to meet his harebrained extraction schedule.

 

Neither requires US collusion with ISIS. Short-sighted stupidity in the case of the latter, yes.

  • Like 1
  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SecretAgentMan    147
6 hours ago, DocM said:

2)  when Obama abandoned Iraq for electoral reasons much US equipment was left behind in order to meet his harebrained extraction schedule.

Obama never abandoned Iraq, nice try.  He just followed through on an agreement signed by G. W. Bush in 2008 which planned for all American troops to be out of Iraq by 2011.  Obama was abiding by the will of the Iraqi and American people.

  • Like 3
  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jim K    8,879
7 hours ago, DocM said:

Of course ourse instead of jumping to conclusions there are the facts that 1) special forces equipment may well have been captured on the battlefield and used by IS, and 2)  when Obama abandoned Iraq for electoral reasons much US equipment was left behind in order to meet his harebrained extraction schedule.

 

Neither requires US collusion with ISIS. Short-sighted stupidity in the case of the latter, yes.

Not everything is that black and white. Forget the fact that our agreement with the Iraqi government ended that year, forget the fact that the Iraqi Parliament didn't want us there, forget the fact we should never have been there in the first place (my opinion as an Iraqi war vet) .... etc.  But ok, Obama "abandoned" Iraq for "electoral reasons." :blink:

 

I agree with the rest of your post...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FunkyMike    1,620

Death of Russian general in Syria is result of US hypocrisy – Moscow

 

The death of Russian Lieutenant-General Valery Asapov in Syria is the price Russia was forced to pay for hypocritical US policy, according to Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov.

“The death of the Russian commander is the price paid with blood for the hypocrisy of American policy in Syria," Ryabkov said on Monday.

 

General Asapov was serving as one of Russia’s military advisers in Syria. On Sunday, the Russian Defense Ministry said he was fatally wounded by an exploding shell in a sudden mortar attack by IS terrorists.

 

Moscow is concerned that while Washington claims it is interested in fighting Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS\ISIL) terrorists, it demonstrates quite the opposite, according to the deputy minister.

 

The deputy minister said Moscow wants Washington’s statements on fighting terrorism not to be at odds with its actions on the ground.

Meanwhile, the Russian and US militaries maintain “intensive” contacts at different levels, Ryabkov said.

 

On Sunday, the Russian Ministry of Defense published aerial images which they say show US Army special forces equipment located north of the Syrian town of Deir ez-Zor, where IS militants are deployed.

 

The US troops do not face any “resistance from the ISIS militants,” while their positions have no screening patrol, which could indicate that they “feel absolutely safe” in the area, the ministry said.

However, the US Central Command has denied the accusations in a written statement to RT.

 

“The allegations are false. For operational security, we do not comment on ongoing operations or the current positions of Coalition personnel and our partner forces,” the Combined Joint Task Force-Operation Inherent Resolve said.

 

https://www.rt.com/news/404510-syria-russia-general-usa/

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+ctebah    2,746
7 hours ago, DocM said:

Neither requires US collusion with ISIS. Short-sighted stupidity in the case of the latter, yes.

Are people so quick to forget that the US did nothing about ISIS until the Russians came to Syria?  For a country with a long history of supporting terrorists, it’s much more plausible that there is widespread collusion with ISIS.  

  • Like 1
  • Dislike 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+FloatingFatMan    13,139
3 minutes ago, ctebah said:

Are people so quick to forget that the US did nothing about ISIS until the Russians came to Syria?  For a country with a long history of supporting terrorists, it’s much more plausible that there is widespread collusion with ISIS.  

You didn't claim plausible, you claimed fact.

 

Prove it.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FunkyMike    1,620

Can anyone remind me on which basis the US has people on the ground in Syria and why it is aiding rebranded Al Qaeda factions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Raze    13,513
Just now, FunkyMike said:

Can anyone remind me on which basis the US has people on the ground in Syria and why it is aiding rebranded Al Qaeda factions.

Why don't you use your sources?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FunkyMike    1,620
3 minutes ago, Raze said:

Why don't you use your sources?

In this leftist cluster###### 1+1 always equals 3 doesn't it. Check the western media sources. There is enough info. Check on why the German gov is opening an investigation into illegal weapon smuggling into Syria by the US and falsification of export import documents. 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Raze    13,513
1 minute ago, FunkyMike said:

In this leftist cluster###### 1+1 always equals 3 doesn't it. Check the western media sources. There is enough info. Check on why the German gov is opening an investigation into illegal weapon smuggling into Syria by the US and falsification of export import documents. 

 

 

Whoa, first off I do not support America's involvement in Syria.  I do support US involvement in supporting Iraqi and Kurdish forces attacks on ISIS, but not the so-called rebel forces.  We never should have become involved in their civil war.  So there is no need to be condescending, I'm quite capable and do read multiple news sources, including RT, Al Jazeera and many others.

 

I do not like the role the US has taken in the Middle East.  We have over-extended our reach and caused too much harm and have disrupted the existence of sovereign nations we had no right to or even a justifiable reason.  I would love to see our troops come home and to see the US stop pushing a policy of conflict just because we think we're right and others are wrong.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Mando    3,322
18 hours ago, Anibal P said:

Wow your irrational hatred of the US is really showing here, and one hell of a leap in logic to come to the conclusion that the US is somehow supporting Daesh 

1 word to counter it "Afghanistan" the Soviets are the good guys, we are all wrong...../s

 

people in glass houses and all that ;) 

37 minutes ago, FunkyMike said:

Can anyone remind me on which basis the US has people on the ground in Syria and why it is aiding rebranded Al Qaeda factions.

Oilfields/oil pipeline perhaps? 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+ctebah    2,746
1 hour ago, FloatingFatMan said:

You didn't claim plausible, you claimed fact.

 

Prove it.

 

Read first post in this thread.

  • Dislike 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+FloatingFatMan    13,139
3 minutes ago, ctebah said:

Read first post in this thread.

The article claims to have identified US special forces equipment, from a source I know nothing about. It doesn't claim the US is there, supporting ISIS, as you did.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+DevTech    746

I don't comment on these kinds of discussions very often. There is enough tin foil to deal with in the tech world!

 

But this story is particularly jumbled when it simply does not need to be:

 

1. After being evicted from Mosul by Iraq, Iran, Kurds and the U.S. the ISIS soldiers have retreated to the provincial area and the oil fields of  Deir ez-Zor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_ez-Zor

 

2. This will presumably be the final concentration of ISIS forces as a "semi regular" army

 

3. Iraq, Syria, Russia, Iran and the U.S. all want ISIS eliminated from their final stronghold and forces from all countries are converging on the area in an insanely complex mess of conflicting objectives centered around who gets control of the oil fields and more importantly the pipeline to the sea.

 

4. Just like in Mosul, the U.S. primarily provides air support to 3rd party troops on the ground. As part of that various U.S. "special forces" will be on the ground as advisers and "spotters"

 

5. In the murky ever changing world of Middle Eastern Politics various para-military/rebel organizations that seemed the least likely to cause problems were provided weapons by the U.S. Some of those groups might have switch their allegiance to ISIS, some of them just sold the U.S. weapons for profit etc. While the program was still in operation it was effective in damaging the Syrian Dictator's forces, but of course had the messy side effects I have noted here and was cancelled.

 

6. Without U.S. Air Support, ISIS would not have been eliminated from every stronghold and facing their own "End of Days" in Deir ez-Zor. It is unfortunate for Humanity that Deir ez-Zor is an archaeological rich are and heritage will probably be lost as ISIS loots even more dig sites to finance their evil projects.

 

7. In this complicated scenario all sorts of things will be spotted in the area and simply using Occam's Razor makes theories about the U.S. supporting ISIS intellectually lazy at best and most likely a good working definition of the word "foolish" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+ctebah    2,746
30 minutes ago, DevTech said:

7. In this complicated scenario all sorts of things will be spotted in the area and simply using Occam's Razor makes theories about the U.S. supporting ISIS intellectually lazy at best and most likely a good working definition of the word "foolish" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor

The world is well aware of US long history of supporting terrorists.  Them supporting ISIS is nothing out of the ordinary and nothing new.  Those asking for proof are probably the same that still believe that Iraq had WMDs or that the US was actually attacked during the Gulf of Tonkin incident.  

  • Dislike 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+FloatingFatMan    13,139
3 hours ago, ctebah said:

The world is well aware of US long history of supporting terrorists.  Them supporting ISIS is nothing out of the ordinary and nothing new.  Those asking for proof are probably the same that still believe that Iraq had WMDs or that the US was actually attacked during the Gulf of Tonkin incident.  

Or perhaps you just want to blame the US for everything because, as everyone here full knows, you despise it intensely.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM    12,613
On 9/25/2017 at 9:22 AM, SecretAgentMan said:

Obama never abandoned Iraq, nice try.  He just followed through on an agreement signed by G. W. Bush in 2008 which planned for all American troops to be out of Iraq by 2011.  Obama was abiding by the will of the Iraqi and American people.

The Status of Forces agreement was supposed to be renegotiated, not just allowed to lapse. Obama, because of a promise he made to his base for the 2012 election, just let it

expire. 

 

In hindsight, many foreign policy experts on both sides of the political aisle now call the move short-sighted at best, or when being blunt -  stupid.

 

One is Obama's own Defense Secretary and CIA Director, Leon Panetta,

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/leon-panetta-criticizes-obama-for-iraq-withdrawal/

Quote

 

In a new book, former Defense Secretary and CIA Director Leon Panetta suggests that President Obama failed to heed his advisers who wanted to leave troops in Iraq past December 2011, which may have contributed to the rise of Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

 

"It was clear to me--and many others--that withdrawing all our forces would endanger the fragile stability then barely holding Iraq together," Panetta writes in the book, an excerpt of which was published on Time.com this week.

>

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.