|A picture taken on April 3, 2018, shows vehicles of US-backed coalition forces driving in the northern Syrian town of Manbij|
I’m going to use the same wording but present this post as a question by adding the word "do"& the question mark to the title of my post. Which I will then answer with the information from the armytimes article.
|A US military base in the al-Asaliyah village, between the city of Aleppo and the northern town of Manbij, is seen April 2, 2018|
As openly admitted/acknowledged in this article- See below
My Answer: Targeting Turkey with an eye to annexing more Syrian territory for Kurdistan aka Israel 2.0- As you will see this is in fact the correct answer. The Pentagon propagandist admits that once we get through the spin of impeding ISIS
“The final pockets of Islamic State fighters in Syria are hundreds of miles from the northern Syrian town of Manbij, but U.S. forces will remain there to prevent ISIS fighters from returning, the Pentagon said Tuesday
While most ISIS fighters are located farther south and along the Syria-Iraq border, Manbij is still vulnerable to ISIS resurgence, Dillon said.
The bulk of the remaining ISIS fighters are located in two areas: along the Syria-Iraq border around the town of Haijin, in the Euphrates River Valley north of Abu Kamal, and just west of Deir ez-Zoir”Very clearly, ISIS has no presence in Manbij. It's admitted. But the US has to stay in Manbij just in case ISIS returns? Gibberish!
1- ISIS is located hundreds of miles away, as admitted, meaning US presence is not required in Manbij.
2- The whole reason for US presence in Syria is to rid the globe of the ISIS scourge. If that is true, then the US should be relocating to undertake their alleged duty. But they are not.
3- Since the US has got their ‘best ISIS fighters” already present in Manbij, that would be SDF/PKK/YPG, as has been stated so many times. We should be confident that these fierce brave men and women can prevent ISIS from returning. Which shouldn't require US presence, right?
“Dillon would provide no figures on the numbers of ISIS fighters remaining in the country”Typical.
Military Times then goes on to recall that incident that occurred in Manbij as proof of the ISIS intent to relocate. Which, of course it wasn't. This claim is also a contradiction to the initial claim. Presence must remain in Manbij to keep ISIS away- because ISIS is not present: deterred by the US presence which must remain in Manbij
“On March 30, Master Sgt. Johnathan Dunbar, 36 and a British service member were killed by an IED near Manbij. The patrol was tracking an “ISIS high-value target” in the area at the time, said Operation Inherent Resolve spokesman Col. Ryan Dillon.”Spot the contradiction? ISIS is hundreds and hundreds of miles away from Manbij according to the Pentagon. So, how would they be tracking an "ISIS high value target"? Of course nothing like that was reported at that time. I covered the special ops soldiers, blowing themselves up, while on "presence patrols" aka perping a false flag- and yah, that’s my opinion on that incident!
Flashback: Syria's North: Is the US Readying A Provocation Or Deterrent for Turkish Forces?
Flashback: 2 Coalition Forces Killed by IED In Syria. In The Process of Deploying Them?
When going back to re-read these posts it's clear the US obfuscated the incident, obviously, so it could be spun for future use - The spin direction is clear in the Military Times article.
Finally one nugget of fact/truth in the entire article that explains the US presence in Manbij-
"Turkish president Recep Erdogan has repeatedly challenged the coalition’s presence in Manbij and vowed to remove many of the same fighters the U.S. has worked with from the border region"
And there it is. Turkey. Challenging the presence of the US military and their proxy force. Usrael Kurds want to keep hold of the stolen territory with a plan to annexing still more.