Tuesday, August 29, 2017

Pretext Alert? US Claims Troops Exchanged Fire With Turkish Backed Rebels.

But, this exchange took place last week.
If it took place at all? So why report this specific news, at this time?
An entire week later.
Is this the pretext needed by the US/PKK/YPG to annex all of Northern Syria by running through the Turkish backed rebels, enabling the joining of the claimed Kurdish cantons?
First on CNN?
US troops in northern Syria came under direct attack last week by Turkish-backed rebels, a (unnamed!) military official with the coalition fighting ISIS told CNN Tuesday. The official said that while US troops returned fire there were no casualties on either side.
The coalition believes the attackers are part of the Turkish-backed opposition forces, a loose grouping of Arab and Turkmen fighters that have helped the Turkish military clear ISIS from the Turkish-Syria border area. 
Many of these Turkey-supported forces originated as part of the opposition to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and they have also clashed with the US-backed and Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces in a struggle for influence in the region.
While Turkey has in the past backed these fighters with tanks, airstrikes and special forces, the coalition official made it clear that Turkish soldiers were not involved in the recent attacks on US personnel.

But the (unnamed!) official added that the coalition had delivered a demarche, or diplomatic protest, to Ankara following the attack on US forces by Turkey's allies.
Did any of this actually occur last week? As of now this is reading like suspiciously timed innuendo.
The incident occurred around the same time US Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis visited Turkey to meet with his Turkish counterpart and the country's President Recep Erdogan. There was no mention of any conversations about the incident in the official readout of the meeting provided by the Pentagon. 
No mention of the incident in the official readout provided by the Pentagon. Why not?
The recent clash comes weeks after attacks against US troops in the area were first reported and confirmed by coalition spokesman Col. Ryan Dillon. Following those attacks, Dillon said US and coalition troops "reserve the right to defend ourselves."
US forces have been in northern Syria for months where they are performing a de facto "peacekeeping" role in an effort to prevent clashes between various armed groups in the region. While Pentagon spokesman US Navy Capt. Jeff Davis declined to call the troops "peacekeepers" upon their initial deployment in March, he referred to them as "a visible reminder for anybody looking to start a fight."
Lebanon, Hezbollah suspend ISIS fight for soldiers' release
The whole narrative is questionable!

The first report "US Army Col. Ryan Dillon told reporters at the Pentagon that the US forces came under attack by small arms fire and that the engagement had resulted in "no damage to equipment or casualties on our side."

No group mentioned as the attackers. Small arms fire? Could have been just about anyone, then? This whole report has me feeling uncomfortable. Is the US and their Kurdish lackies looking for a pretext?
Rehash: Dillon said at the time ( reference back to first report)  that the attacking forces were most likely aware that they were firing on US troops.
None of the information below, nor the sentence immediately above, are related to this latest incident. It's just a rehash of the news from nearly three weeks ago
Rehash: "These patrols are overt. Our forces are clearly marked and we have been operating in that area for some time," Dillon said, adding, "It should not be news to anyone that we are doing this, operating in that particular area."
US troops have been performing "overt patrols" in the area since March, often flying the American flag from armored vehicles, in a bid to deter forces in the region from attacking one another and undermining the fight against ISIS.
The US trains and advises the Manbij Military Council, a group of local Arab fighters that is allied to the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces. But Turkey and its local Syrian allies are strongly opposed to both US-backed groups which they see as linked to Kurdish separatists in Turkey.
"We take appropriate measures to try and minimize the risk of those events happening. But they do happen, and of course, all coalition forces have the inherent right of self-defense at their disposal, should they feel the need," the Deputy Commander of the counter ISIS coalition, UK Army Maj. Gen. Rupert Jones, told reporters at the Pentagon last week.
 And is the new above related to the earlier post?

Is this the basis for, the beginnings of, balkanizing Syria?

  To be considered with the information from yesterday


  1. Hi Penny:

    Could the link below possibly be connected with your post?


    "Over the last 24 hours, the United States has made clear its status as a hostile occupational force in Syria. Yesterday, the US issued a communique to the legitimate Syrian government and the Russian anti-terrorist coalition assisting the Syrians. The United States has indicated that it has carved out a swath of Syria with boots on the ground fulfilling the roles of active duty personnel, such as special ops forces, advisors, trainers, mechanics, and supporting units. The US has declared a no fly zone and threatened to target and shoot down Syrian and Russian planes within Syrian airspace [over the Kurdish autonomous region - ed]. 

    As RT reports, US Commander of American forces in Iraq and Syria Lt. General Stephen Townshend stated: "“We’ve informed the Russians where we’re at ... (they) tell us they’ve informed the Syrians, and I’d just say that we will defend ourselves if we feel threatened." Since, as Reuters reports, clashes between Kurdish and Syrian forces have intensified."

    I saw the link above about two days ago but nothing since to support it.

    1. So, is the US wanting to move against Turkish backed rebels in order to aid the Kurds in their connecting of cantons before their election in rojova, preceding the referendum in Iraq- so the two kurdish entities can become as one, fully occupied by the US of course- with the aid of Israel too!

    2. And yet there are russian peacekeepers in the western canton of ypg.

    3. That is exactly what I thought when I read it.
      The US wants the entire line from Iran to the
      Mediterranean before the elections so that 'Kurdistan' can be viable. They want the Jarablus - Azaz - Al-Bab line now.
      They are laying the foundations for saying that they are coming under attack from Turkish backed rebels and therefore had to attack them and connect the cantons.
      It has to be said that that won't happen, it is impossible. There are thousands of Turkish troops and heavy equipment in the area. The US can't take it, and Russia won't allow them to use their airforce there.

    4. Also, we should remember the thousands and thousands of trucks filled with arms and armoured vehicles delivered to YPG. This was delivered for this battle, with Turkey and in Idlib, IMO.

    5. Kaz: So will the peacekeepers keep the peace?

      I covered the very large delivery of trucks, (white toyotas- ISIS vehicles of choice, oops I mean PKK/YPG vehicle of choice, oops I mean UK special ops vehicle of choice) weapons etc to the Kurds over a couple of posts..

    6. Penny : I don't know anymore. It might be ypg trying to buy time by inviting them. Or they are getting desperate and somehow trying to make some deal with the Russians/Assad.

      The situation is silly.

      - YPG wants to connect the cantons, Turkey does not want to allow it.

      - Turkey wants to remove YPG from it borders, but that would mean that it would connect Idlip province and Turkish supported rebel areas. Which I can understand Assad/Russia not wanting.

      But at the same time if lets say Russia were to police that area, There are still YPG militants with their weapons, so this is not a solution either.

      Afrin Situation == impasse

    7. Hi Penny
      I haven't been here for a long time, so I hadn't read your posts about the weapons deliveries.
      I think there are a couple of very important things that has happened in Turkey, that I think deserve your attention.

      Firstly, we now have complete certainty that General Akar was behind the coup attempt.
      Every single putschist has said they followed his orders. In fact, probably the entire top cadres were involved. It seems the intent wasn't to remove Erdogan, but to purge the army from G├╝lenists pro-NATO elements.

      Also, Akar invited the Iranian chief of staff to to Turkey, this was a first since the revolution.
      Akar and Erdogan will visit Iran soon and this opens up the prospect of Iran cooperation in the fight against the PKK. This is important as Iran is one of the PKK's main backers.

      All in all, Akar has taken complete power in Turkey, there is no Erdogan anymore. Akar will use Erdogan for now, but eventually he will remove him and replace him.

    8. -_-..... Source or it didn't happen, and no Google is not an way out.

    9. Hi Rescue:
      indeed, I haven't seen you here for a while,but, it's nice your back :)

      I'm not sure about Akar being behind everything wrt the coup- And still do think the US was involved with the coup... but did cover here the Iran/Turkey meeting. I'm sure this meeting does
      "opens up the prospect of Iran cooperation in the fight against the PKK."

      But Iran mainly backing the PKK? I think the PKK has their own means of support.
      Plus the PKK affiliates are attacking in Iran, why would they support that?
      Can you clarify?

    10. I have studied the coup attempt in detail now, and there is no doubt in my mind that Akar was behind it. Was the US involved some how? I don't know, but certainly the pro-NATO officers corps were the leadrs of the coup attempt. There is a direct overlap between the pro-NATO camp and the G├╝lenists.

      Iran has backed the PKK for a long time. The IRGC has close ties to the PKK. It was Iran that invited the PKK to Syria in 2012, to close the border with Turkey.
      PJAK rarely attacks Iran, to get the PKK to go to war with iran is a US project which failed after the Iraq war, but which the US seems to be trying to revive again.
      As you know Syria too was a major backer of the PKK. Hafez Al-Assad armed and supported them against Turkey throughout the 80's and 90's.
      this is the truth, but yes, as the US gains more control over the PKK, they are becoming enemies of Iran and Syria also.

  2. http://www.citynews.ca/2017/08/29/canadian-troops-helping-jordan-lebanon-secure-borders-against-isil/

    Canada is keeping this on the qt, but, I find it suspicious

    " Canadian soldiers have been quietly helping Jordan and Lebanon secure their borders amid fears of Islamic State fighters slipping from Iraq and Syria to launch attacks in Europe and North America.

    Military officials say the Canadians are not actually working on the borders, but otherwise won’t say how many troops are in Jordan and Lebanon or where they are located, citing operational security.

    Jordan’s King Abdullah referenced the efforts to strengthen his country’s borders during a news conference with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in Ottawa on Tuesday."

    abdullah let the cat out of the bag?

  3. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-40860485

    AWACs for the ISIS air force


    1. just got this out of the spam file
      apologies for tardiness
      and thanks!