• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

US is paying the penalty for pulling troops protecting Kurds

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
[cite=[URL="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/military/pentagon-sending-troops-syria-after-clashes-between-u-s-russian-n1240319"]Pentagon sending troops to Syria after clashes between U.S., Russians[/URL]]

Pentagon sending troops to Syria after clashes between U.S., Russian military
The troops are meant to discourage Russians from crossing into the eastern area where U.S., coalition, and Syrian Democratic Forces operate, say officials.

By Courtney Kube


WASHINGTON — The Pentagon is deploying a small number of U.S. troops to Syria after a series of escalating encounters between the U.S. and Russian militaries, according to three U.S. defense officials.

The troops and vehicles will serve as a show of presence to discourage the Russian military from crossing into the eastern security area where U.S., coalition, and Syrian Democratic Forces operate, the officials said.


The additional troops will include six Bradley Fighting Vehicles and fewer than 100 soldiers operating in northeast Syria on a 90-day deployment.

A U.S. official said, "These actions and reinforcements are a clear signal to Russia to adhere to mutual de-confliction processes and for Russia and other parties to avoid unprofessional, unsafe and provocative actions in northeast Syria."

While U.S. military and Russian forces have come in contact at checkpoints and along highway M4 in Syria throughout 2020, on Aug. 17 U.S. and Syrian Democratic Forces came under small arms fire after passing through a checkpoint near Tal al-Zahab, Syria. The U.S. and SDF had permission from the pro-Syrian regime forces manning the checkpoint, but then began to take fire from unidentified forces nearby. The U.S. and SDF returned fire and did not suffer any casualties. U.S. officials said the small arms fire likely came from Syrian and Russian forces.

Related

NEWS
2,000 U.S. troops to leave Iraq as part of long-held Trump pledge
The most serious incident this year occurred several days later, when seven U.S. soldiers were injured when Russia military vehicles sideswiped a U.S. military vehicle in northeast Syria. Three U.S. officials said the Russian vehicles intentionally collided with the Americans and then several Russian helicopters flew low and fast over the scene, which one official said was “extremely provocative.” The Russian vehicles were outside of their agreed-upon operating area without notice, the officials said.

U.S. Central Command spokesperson Capt. Bill Urban characterized their actions as “deliberately provocative and aggressive.”

In an exclusive interview with NBC News, the commander of U.S. Central Command decried the Russian misbehavior and lack of professionalism on the ground, saying it “got us into a dangerous situation where a Russian ground patrol actually came into the eastern Syria security area, an area they were not authorized to be in.”
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
Seems to me every time we(the US) gets involved in someone else's war we make things worse.
Just because we have the military might to push other countries around doesn't mean we should.

I'd rather see these military actions come out of the UN. The US, all countries can support the UN with troops and equipment. Then every country can have a say in what military actions need to be taken. Not just the US.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
Seems to me every time we(the US) gets involved in someone else's war we make things worse.
Just because we have the military might to push other countries around doesn't mean we should.

I'd rather see these military actions come out of the UN. The US, all countries can support the UN with troops and equipment. Then every country can have a say in what military actions need to be taken. Not just the US.

I do not think this addresses the issue in this case. The troops were a peace keeping force and not involved in conflict. The Turks nor the Russians would not attack them, and the Kurds were protected.

Your solution is a bit idealistic and unrealistic. The Russians nor the Turks would approve a UN peace keeping force.
 

IAMinyou

Active Member
[cite=[URL='https://www.nbcnews.com/news/military/pentagon-sending-troops-syria-after-clashes-between-u-s-russian-n1240319']Pentagon sending troops to Syria after clashes between U.S., Russians[/URL]]

Pentagon sending troops to Syria after clashes between U.S., Russian military
The troops are meant to discourage Russians from crossing into the eastern area where U.S., coalition, and Syrian Democratic Forces operate, say officials.

By Courtney Kube


WASHINGTON — The Pentagon is deploying a small number of U.S. troops to Syria after a series of escalating encounters between the U.S. and Russian militaries, according to three U.S. defense officials.

The troops and vehicles will serve as a show of presence to discourage the Russian military from crossing into the eastern security area where U.S., coalition, and Syrian Democratic Forces operate, the officials said.


The additional troops will include six Bradley Fighting Vehicles and fewer than 100 soldiers operating in northeast Syria on a 90-day deployment.

A U.S. official said, "These actions and reinforcements are a clear signal to Russia to adhere to mutual de-confliction processes and for Russia and other parties to avoid unprofessional, unsafe and provocative actions in northeast Syria."

While U.S. military and Russian forces have come in contact at checkpoints and along highway M4 in Syria throughout 2020, on Aug. 17 U.S. and Syrian Democratic Forces came under small arms fire after passing through a checkpoint near Tal al-Zahab, Syria. The U.S. and SDF had permission from the pro-Syrian regime forces manning the checkpoint, but then began to take fire from unidentified forces nearby. The U.S. and SDF returned fire and did not suffer any casualties. U.S. officials said the small arms fire likely came from Syrian and Russian forces.

Related

NEWS
2,000 U.S. troops to leave Iraq as part of long-held Trump pledge
The most serious incident this year occurred several days later, when seven U.S. soldiers were injured when Russia military vehicles sideswiped a U.S. military vehicle in northeast Syria. Three U.S. officials said the Russian vehicles intentionally collided with the Americans and then several Russian helicopters flew low and fast over the scene, which one official said was “extremely provocative.” The Russian vehicles were outside of their agreed-upon operating area without notice, the officials said.

U.S. Central Command spokesperson Capt. Bill Urban characterized their actions as “deliberately provocative and aggressive.”

In an exclusive interview with NBC News, the commander of U.S. Central Command decried the Russian misbehavior and lack of professionalism on the ground, saying it “got us into a dangerous situation where a Russian ground patrol actually came into the eastern Syria security area, an area they were not authorized to be in.”
The war-mongers would love to make war for the rest of their lives and fill their pockets with lots of money from the hard working tax payers whose votes do not count when it comes to their agenda to keep the wars going.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
The war-mongers would love to make war for the rest of their lives and fill their pockets with lots of money from the hard working tax payers whose votes do not count when it comes to their agenda to keep the wars going.

Did not respond to the problem presented in the thread.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
Manufacturing consent.

US soldiers are not "peace keepers". Never have been.

Unreasonable idealism aside. In this case they were effective without firing a shot keeping the Turks and Kurds apart and Russian troops out. This is a fact.
 

averageJOE

zombie
Unreasonable idealism aside. In this case they were effective without firing a shot keeping the Turks and Kurds apart and Russian troops out. This is a fact.
I served 11 years with a combat tour in Iraq. NEVER in my years were we ever trained in "peace keeping". How long did you serve? Soldiers are not "peace keepers", no matter how many times the TV tells you.

This is why I was a strong supporter of Tulsi Gabbard. She made it her career to end the endless wars.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
I served 11 years with a combat tour in Iraq. NEVER in my years were we ever trained in "peace keeping". How long did you serve? Soldiers are not "peace keepers", no matter how many times the TV tells you.

This is why I was a strong supporter of Tulsi Gabbard. She made it her career to end the endless wars.

First, your avoiding the issue of the thread. Second, regardless of your experience people draw different conclusions that have the same experience you had. Third, you your holding an idealistic unrealistic isolationist view of the a very hostile world.

Actually in the long terms as humanity matures I have empathy for your view form the Baha'i perspective.
 

averageJOE

zombie
First, your avoiding the issue of the thread. Second, regardless of your experience people draw different conclusions that have the same experience you had. Third, you your holding an idealistic unrealistic isolationist view of the a very hostile world.

Actually in the long terms as humanity matures I have empathy for your view form the Baha'i perspective.
The "issue" of your thread is you attempting to justify a forever war.

No branch of the military has a "peace keeping" MOS.
 

averageJOE

zombie
No such citation on my part is justified from your assertions.



Yes, they are capable of it. It remains a problem you have failed to address the issue of the thread.
It's obvious that you are unaware of the realities of military culture. Because, yes, you are trying to justify a forever war.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
It's obvious that you are unaware of the realities of military culture. Because, yes, you are trying to justify a forever war.

First, your avoiding the issue of the thread. Second, regardless of your experience people draw different conclusions that have the same experience you had. Third, you your holding an idealistic unrealistic isolationist view of the a very hostile world.

Actually in the long terms as humanity matures I have empathy for your view form the Baha'i perspective.
 
Top