US SHOOTS DOWN SYRIAN AIR FORCE FIGHTER
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The U.S. military on Sunday shot down a Syrian Air Force fighter jet that bombed local forces aligned with the Americans in the fight against Islamic State militants, an action that appeared to mark a new escalation of the conflict. The U.S.-led coalition headquarters in Iraq said in a written statement that a U.S. F-18 Super Hornet shot down a Syrian government SU-22 after it dropped bombs near the U.S. partner forces, known as the Syrian Democratic Forces. The shootdown was near the Syrian town of Tabqa. The U.S. military statement said it acted in "collective self defense" of its partner forces and that the U.S. did not seek a fight with the Syrian government or its Russian supporters. U.S. forces tangled earlier this month with Syria-allied aircraft in the region. On June 8, U.S. officials reported that a drone likely connected to Iranian-supported Hezbollah forces fired on U.S.-backed troops and was shot down by an American fighter jet. The incident took place in southern Syria near a base where the U.S.-led coalition was training Syrian rebels fighting the Islamic State group. An Army spokesman at the Pentagon said at the time that the drone carried more weapons and was considered a direct threat, prompting the shootdown. Just hours earlier, the U.S. bombed Syrian government and allied troops inside a protected zone in that area, and marked a sharp escalation in the skirmishes between the coalition and those pro-Syrian government forces there. © 2017 The Associated Press . All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use . |
With the US backing of the YPG and allies in Syria the confrontations will continue with the forces allied with Syrian government.
Dear Friend Kavika: May G-d help us against our enemies and allies in that war torn former state.
Enoch.
Agreed niijii, we've lost 6 Army Rangers in the past month.
When is enough, enough.
The U.S. military statement said it acted in "collective self defense" of its partner forces and that the U.S. did not seek a fight with the Syrian government or its Russian supporters.
Donald Trump has said that they (the Russians) are there assisting us in our battle against ISIS. Somehow it doesn't seem to be coming out that way? The Kurds, on the other hand, have been the backbone of taking city after city away from the phony Caliphate! Even then though ISIS will just turn into another version of Al Qaeda, with vermin spread around the world instead of in centralized location that can be fought with traditional military means.
The only thing that the Russians are doing in Syria is protecting their own interests, period.
No doubt about it and their number one interest in the area is the continuation of the dictatorship of Basar al-Assad.
''No doubt about it and their number one interest in the area is the continuation of the dictatorship of Basar al-Assad.''
That and a port for their navy at Tartus.
They have a shortage of warm water, year 'round ports and they'll protect them at all costs.
They have a shortage of warm water, year 'round ports and they'll protect them at all costs.
At one point the USSR had a bigger presence in the Meditteranean-- for one thing Egypt was a Soviet "client state". A great place to use to project Soviet power...
But since Egypt is now a "U.S. client state", I believe that Russia doesn't have a single port in the Meditteranean-- so obviously Putin sees a pro-Russian gov't in Syria as being crucial.
The Russians are already embeded in the Syrian port of Tartus.
''No doubt about it and their number one interest in the area is the continuation of the dictatorship of Basar al-Assad.''
That and a port for their navy at Tartus.
Exactly. Assad (the current official Syrian gov't) is friendly to Russia. If the rebels overthrow him, the new gov't would be hostile to Russia-- so Assad and his allies (Iran, Russia, & the Lebanese terror group Hezb' Allah) are doing everything they can to ensure that Assad stays in power.
So are the Americans. Obama didn't take the U.S. there just to be nice.
Aeon, I'm not sure what our interests are there except to try to stop the slaughter and give air cover to the YPG.
Right or wrong it is what it is. With all the competing forces involved in Syria, there is at some time bound to be a clash between them.
In your opinion, why did he take us there?
I do not agree that the US is in Syria for anything even closely resembling altruistic reasons. The amount of innocent Syrian civilians being killed in our bombing and drone raids attests to that.
U.N. says 300 civilians killed in U.S.-led air strikes in Raqqa since March
Agreed, numerous civilians have been killed. But what is you opinion as to why we are there?
Fair question. This may be conjecture but it is logical and very probable. Why has Qatar been in the news recently?
Certainly a possibility, the but recent developments with Qatar, although with Trump now selling billions of dollars worth of arms to Qatar leaves one wondering what the hell is going on there.
Here is the lastest response from the Russians. Yes, things are heating up between the US and Russia.
We have dueling pipeline strategies people are getting killed over. One, no morally better than the other....both driven by GREED.
The pipeline ''war'' will always be about greed Aeon, it is there and it is in the US.
Sadly this will continue to get civilians/miliatry killed.
I'm always reminded of General Smedly Butler, (War is a Racket) comment on his career.
I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902–1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.
I do not agree that the US is in Syria for anything even closely resembling altruistic reasons.
Unlike when other nations go to war-- because other than the evil U.S., all other warring nations do so only for altruistic reasons!
Huh?
I do not agree that the US is in Syria for anything even closely resembling altruistic reasons. The amount of innocent Syrian civilians being killed in our bombing and drone raids attests to that.
U.N. says 300 civilians killed in U.S.-led air strikes in Raqqa since March
So based on your comment, I assume that you would be opposed to Allied actions during WWII?
300 killed?
Well, to cite one example-- Allied action vs the Germans in Dresden:
The bombing of Dresden was a British / American aerial bombing attack on the city of Dresden , the capital of the German state of Saxony , that took place during the Second World War in the European Theatre . In four raids between 13 and 15 February 1945,
722 heavy bombers of the British Royal Air Force (RAF) and 527 of the United States Army Air Forces (USAAF) dropped more than 3,900 tons of high-explosive bombs and incendiary devices on the city. [1] The bombing and the resulting firestorm destroyed over 1,600 acres (6.5 km 2 ) of the city centre.
An estimated 22,700 to 25,000 people were killed, although inflated casualty figures have been claimed over the years. Three more USAAF air raids followed, two occurring on 2 March aimed at the city's railroad marshaling yard and one small raid on 17 April aimed at industrial areas.
300? Nope-- -- we murdered 20,000+ !!!
Altruism?
I don't think so...
The bombing of Dresden was a British / American aerial bombing attack on the city of Dresden
300? Nope-- -- we murdered 20,000+ !!!
Altruism?
I don't think so...
_____________________________
And then there's this:
The bombing and the resulting firestorm destroyed over 1,600 acres (6.5 km 2 ) of the city centre. [2]
City Centre-- get it? This was a Allied attack deliberately aimed at Germans in the "City centre" -- in other words, it was deliberately aimed at civilians , not at German military forces.
So Aeon-- do you think the motive was greed?
That perhaps we were out to "steal the Germans' oil?"
Or that since we deliberately massacred civilians (OMG-- even more than 300! More than 300-- unbelieveable!!!) that we should never have gotten involved in WWII?
(WWII-- "It's all about oil"!)
I'm quite aware of the American atrocities being committed in the middle east. I only posted that example because it's recent. If you want to expand on that, which you are doing, I say Go For It.
Aeon, I'm not sure what our interests are there except to try to stop the slaughter and give air cover to the YPG.
IMO we actually have conflciting interests:
1. To stop the slaughter by the Assad-Iranian-Russian-Hezb'Allah alliance. Which means opposing Assad and supporting the rebels.
2. Opposing ISIS & al Qaeda. But they are also opposing Assad & Iran.
So if Assad & his allies are weakened-- ISIS is strengthened. If Assad & his allies are stronger, then ISIS is weakened.
(Our interests there actually are in weakening or even destroying two opposing sides-- ISIS & Assad).
Bravo to the Air Force-- maybe they will think twice before doing this again!
Sadly Dowser, I don't think that it will. There have been other incidents like this in the past month or so.
It bothers me that Russia can fly over Finland, etc. with impunity... I'm proud of our Air Force and wish to give them all the credit in the world for their achievements-- but I doubt that anyone will learn anything from this... Not our enemies, for sure....
but I doubt that anyone will learn anything from this
Unfortunately that seems to be the case throughout most of world history.
Here's what many fail to realize about Syria (& Afghanistan and...):
quag·mire
an awkward, complex, or hazardous situation.
Awkward? Yup.
Complex? Definitely (although most uninformed people can't resist the urge to try to attempt to make it all about only one thing... which thing they choose depends upon their political agenda)
Hazardous? Well, not as bad as the 300 civilians the U.S. is alleged to have killed ,of course, but still fairly hazardous:
Death Count in Syria: 470,000 - Children: 55,000
Bravo to the Air Force-- maybe they will think twice before doing this again!
From a psychological perspective, Obama & Trump are opposite types. Obama was quite thoughtful before acting--- he tended not to be impulsive. Trump is the opposite-- he acts without thinking.
So unless his advisers (or Congress) start to exert more influence over him, the American involvement there will probably escalate.
From a psychological perspective, Obama & Trump are opposite types. Obama was quite thoughtful before acting--- he tended not to be impulsive. Trump is the opposite-- he acts without thinking.
So unless his advisers (or Congress) start to exert more influence over him, the American involvement there will probably escalate.
IMO the same is true for Afghanistan
There are only so many pressure points that can be pushed without a valve somewhere letting go. This thing will go fubar at some point...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/irans-revolutionary-guard-strikes-syria-for-tehran-attacks/2017/06/18/0c764970-549f-11e7-840b-512026319da7_story.html?utm_term=.f0a49af50c74
I'm sure that it will go FUBAR at some point, Larry.
There are only so many pressure points that can be pushed without a valve somewhere letting go. This thing will go fubar at some point...
Important article-- thanks for the link!
This is one of those complicated foreign situations. We can already see the effects it is having between the US and Russian relations. It's clear to me that this fight isn't so much about Syria any longer but more about Russia's power.
That's seems to me the point of it all Pj.
This is one of those complicated foreign situations. We can already see the effects it is having between the US and Russian relations. It's clear to me that this fight isn't so much about Syria any longer but more about Russia's power.
True.
And its also about the age-old sectarian religious conflict (Sunni vs Shia).
And the age-old Arab vs Persian (Iran) conflict.
And the struggle between Islamic moderates and Islamic extremists.
And the so-called "Arab Spring".
And the aspirations of various politicians world-wide (including the U.S.).
And the defense industry lobbies (U.S. and elsewhere).
And the illegal occupation of Kurdistan.
And...more!
(The KISS technique falls flat on its face if used in an analysis of the Syrian conflict).