U.S. Strikes Killed Scores of Russia Fighters in Syria, Sources Say

U.S. forces killed scores of Russian mercenaries in Syria last week in what may be the deadliest clash between citizens of the former foes since the Cold War, according to one U.S. official and three Russians familiar with the matter.

More than 200 contract soldiers, mostly Russians fighting on behalf of Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad, died in a failed attack on a base held by U.S. and mainly Kurdish forces in the oil-rich Deir Ezzor region, two of the Russians said. The U.S. official put the death toll at about 100, with 200 to 300 injured.

Before anyone begins the WWIII talk though, this happened last week and is somehow resolved for lack of a better word.

The Russian assault may have been a rogue operation, underscoring the complexity of a conflict that started as a domestic crackdown only to morph into a proxy war involving Islamic extremists, stateless Kurds and regional powers Iran, Turkey and now Israel. Russia’s military said it had nothing to do with the attack and the U.S. accepted the claim. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis called the whole thing “perplexing,” but provided no further details.

“This is a big scandal and a reason for an acute international crisis,” said Vladimir Frolov, a former Russian diplomat and lawmaker who’s now an independent political analyst. “But Russia will pretend nothing happened.”

“No one wants to start a world war over a volunteer or a mercenary who wasn’t sent by the state and was hit by Americans,” Vitaly Naumkin, a senior adviser to Russia’s government on Syria, said in an interview.

Bloomberg

Although I think it's odd that Russia takes the biggest hit since their entrance into the war (though these were contractors), and no one really comments on it.

I wonder if we're not getting the full story.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

So Trump is bombing Russian citizens in Syria?

Almost like Trump isn't really Putin's best buddy, eh?

U.S. Strikes Killed Scores of Russia Fighters in Syria, Sources Say

Well that's an odd thing to do considering our president is a Putin stooge.

a reply to: butcherguy

While I see what you're saying... Let's not forget the military is a bit more autonomous now.

He gave the power to strike without having to get presidential approval to commanders.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: butcherguy

While I see what you're saying... Let's not forget the military is a bit more autonomous now.

He gave the power to strike without having to get presidential approval to commanders.

So if Trump is bestest buddy pals with Putin, he couldn't stop our military from bombing Russians?

That is sure to piss Vlad off just a bit.

Soldiers got killed in a war zone?
Shocking...

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: butcherguy

While I see what you're saying... Let's not forget the military is a bit more autonomous now.

He gave the power to strike without having to get presidential approval to commanders.

So if Trump is bestest buddy pals with Putin, he couldn't stop our military from bombing Russians?

That is sure to piss Vlad off just a bit.

Sure, Trump could change the rules back to presidential approval on strikes.

But the article didn't say if Trump had knowledge of the strike prior to, or if any of the forces were aware these were Russians.

With all do respect, I think you're trying to politicize this story without anything to back up your claims with.

The U.S and Russia have no business being there in the first place. That's a regional conflict that should be dealt with by countries in the region. The Arabs have been fighting for over a thousand years and protecting the flow of oil to the west has always been the main reason America intervened in the Middle East powder keg in the first place. Our intervention has only created more enemies and terrorism for the United States. They have a twisted and strict ideological enslaved culture that many Christians and other western countries can't relate to. So let the people and countries in the region take the responsibility and settle their differences. We should stop sacrificing our military young men and women's lives overseas for regional interests and control.

We have Americans going to join ISIS. Some American Finns went back to Finland to help them break away from Russia and claim independence from all other countries. Americans moved to fight with the other side in the Revolutionary war. This activity is actually common in our world. The Russians who went there were probably once in the Russian Millitary and I supposed they did want to get paid for the risk. Some mercenaries are just pathological killers, others are people who actually believe in the cause but still do want to get paid for their work.

Wagner mercs.

Plenty of them died in Syria and Ukraine. So no big deal.

From what I've read their casualty rate is pretty high. But apparently the pay is good enough to offset that.

They are convenient for Putin to use is he can deny any affiliation.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Of course we aren't getting the full story.

We are getting a piece of narrative.

originally posted by: moebius
Wagner mercs.

Plenty of them died in Syria and Ukraine. So no big deal.

From what I've read their casualty rate is pretty high. But apparently the pay is good enough to offset that.

They are convenient for Putin to use is he can deny any affiliation.

Just a bunch of dead mercenaries/green men being killed. no big whoop.

Don't get overjoyed ...

The possibility that the stories are true ... very little. That some Russian "mercenaries" died, probably ... that it's "Ukraine" some, bla bla ... maybe. But are people really siding with Ukraine nazis? Just to point this out, Ukraine is not "enemy of my enemy is my pal" ... you don't make Nazis your pals.

Shame on you.

On Russia in Syria ... they are being "very" careful. If I were Russia, I wouldn't be ... but they are playing to "keeps", and that is more than likely the wrong "long term" stragedy. Question we always ask "are they prepared for the worst". Putin "claims" he is, but acts as he isn't.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

"More than 200 contract soldiers, mostly Russians fighting on behalf of Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad, died in a failed attack on a base held by U.S. and mainly Kurdish forces in the oil-rich Deir Ezzor region, two of the Russians said. The U.S. official put the death toll at about 100, with 200 to 300 injured."

So 200 soldiers attacked a base held by the US...this title is misleading making it sound like the US preemptively struck the Russians who appear to be either contractors or mercenary groups...but again very misleading

originally posted by: chrismarco
a reply to: CriticalStinker

"More than 200 contract soldiers, mostly Russians fighting on behalf of Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad, died in a failed attack on a base held by U.S. and mainly Kurdish forces in the oil-rich Deir Ezzor region, two of the Russians said. The U.S. official put the death toll at about 100, with 200 to 300 injured."

So 200 soldiers attacked a base held by the US...this title is misleading making it sound like the US preemptively struck the Russians who appear to be either contractors or mercenary groups...but again very misleading

Agreed. The attack was from the Russian Mercs against a base held by the US.

Change the title.

What were they thinking?!

Crazy mercs.

That was a pretty good smackdown tho.

Imagine if the attack was successful.

100 cruise missiles this time?

a reply to: wdkirk

It's literally the title of the article, and they were Russian.

I didn't put it in WWIII, but it's not insignificant.

If Russia killed 100-300 American contractors it would still be a relevant talking point the same as this.

www.nytimes.com...

So the NYT take on the incident. (Link above) is different from BBC (link below) the Times is really angling at Putin downplaying involvement due to concerns that US attacking Russian troops could worsten ties between the 2 countries. BBC is a different angle just presenting the incident as more of an accident. I think it is in the Times where it intimates the "Russian" or not really Russian but mercs thought they were attacking ISIS. Also the US thought they were being attacked by...insurgents whatever that means these days. The point that worries me is it seems as if both sides were mislead. Who is doing the misleading? Also the Israeli jet shot down by Syrians that was responding to the attack from the Iranian drone... These incidents may seem small in wake of all that usually goes on in the area over the long civil war but BOTH of these incidents are huge. If there were really 200 Russian troops killed that hasn't happened for a really long time, also never by Americans. The Israeli jet was the first shot down since 1983. I could be wrong but...it's like false incoming nuclear missle alerts who employees at the center were sure were real... These "mistakes" are how wars get started. So many proxies, middlemen how can one side tell who is even pulling the strings? Scary stuff.

www.bbc.com...

Oil. It's all about oil. There is an agenda here and I don't think it has much to do with what anyone is trying to make it sound like.

Assuming this was in relation to the attack on the Syrian assault last week? So the rumors now are they were led by Russian mercenaries??

If there were any validity to these rumors, which I sincerely doubt, then it just shows that Russia clearly lacks the backbone to directly respond with force to US dominance. We won, nobody dare attack us except suicidal rebels. Thew US truly rules the world. And people said we could not wage multiple wars on multiple fronts and multiple continents? NEWS FLASH, we are!

We are truly the masters of this Earth. Go on world, prove us wrong. Dare to strike? Anybody? Any takers?