United States Ground Forces

[Bleipriester]

What if the Russians are coming?

 

[DrainBamage]

Our only recent point of reference is the last time the Russians came at the Americans:

How a 4-Hour Battle Between Russian Mercenaries and U.S. Commandos Unfolded in Syria
In the end, 200 to 300 of the attacking fighters were killed. The others retreated under merciless airstrikes from the United States, returning later to retrieve their battlefield dead. None of the Americans at the small outpost in eastern Syria — about 40 by the end of the firefight — were harmed.

Russian mercenaries in body bags while T-72s burned.

 

[Bleipriester]

Our only recent point of reference is the last time the Russians came at the Americans:

How a 4-Hour Battle Between Russian Mercenaries and U.S. Commandos Unfolded in Syria
In the end, 200 to 300 of the attacking fighters were killed. The others retreated under merciless airstrikes from the United States, returning later to retrieve their battlefield dead. None of the Americans at the small outpost in eastern Syria — about 40 by the end of the firefight — were harmed.

Russian mercenaries in body bags while T-72s burned.

Those were not "Russian mercenaries" but the ISIS Hunters, a Syrian army unit. They successfully intercepted an ISIS convoy but then were raided by US airstrikes and had to retreat in small groups.
Has nothing to do with US ground forces, anyway.

 

[DrainBamage]

Those were not "Russian mercenaries" but the ISIS Hunters, a Syrian army unit.

Nice try, even Russia has acknowledged it though they have tried to downplay the true casualty count.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/putin-ally-said-to-be-in-touch-with-kremlin-assad-before-his-mercenaries-attacked-us-troops/2018/02/22/
In a new statement Tuesday, the ministry acknowledged that “several dozen” Russians were killed or wounded in the attack and that the wounded had been “provided assistance to return to Russia . . . where they are undergoing medical treatment at a number of hospitals.” “Russian service members did not take part in any capacity and Russian military equipment was not used,” the statement said. It referred instead to “Russian citizens” who arrived in Syria “of their own free will and for different reasons.” The ministry, it said, “does not have the authority to assess the validity and legality of their decisions.” Russia has acknowledged that many of the attackers, who also included regular Syrian army troops and militias, were mercenaries.

 

[Bleipriester]

Those were not "Russian mercenaries" but the ISIS Hunters, a Syrian army unit.

Nice try, even Russia has acknowledged it though they have tried to downplay the true casualty count.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/putin-ally-said-to-be-in-touch-with-kremlin-assad-before-his-mercenaries-attacked-us-troops/2018/02/22/
In a new statement Tuesday, the ministry acknowledged that “several dozen” Russians were killed or wounded in the attack and that the wounded had been “provided assistance to return to Russia . . . where they are undergoing medical treatment at a number of hospitals.” “Russian service members did not take part in any capacity and Russian military equipment was not used,” the statement said. It referred instead to “Russian citizens” who arrived in Syria “of their own free will and for different reasons.” The ministry, it said, “does not have the authority to assess the validity and legality of their decisions.” Russia has acknowledged that many of the attackers, who also included regular Syrian army troops and militias, were mercenaries.

Foreigners cannot serve in the Syrian military. The thing is made up by your government to increase tensions.

Evidence: "“fast and strong” initiative"
Where is it? You think the Russians walk in the open desert to an US base?

 

[DrainBamage]

Foreigners cannot serve in the Syrian military. The thing is made up by your government to increase tensions.

1. Nobody said the Russian mercenaries were serving in the Syrian military.
2. I'm not Russian, so when Russia says Russian mercenaries were killed it is not something made up by my own government.
3. You fail.

 

[Bleipriester]

Foreigners cannot serve in the Syrian military. The thing is made up by your government to increase tensions.

1. Nobody said the Russian mercenaries were serving in the Syrian military.
2. I'm not Russian, so when Russia says Russian mercenaries were killed it is not something made up by my own government.
3. You fail.

Not a single word about Russians.

U.S. claims self-defense in strikes on Syrian-backed forces

Totally made up.

 

[DrainBamage]

Not a single word about Russians.

U.S. claims self-defense in strikes on Syrian-backed forces

Totally made up.

I see you're using CBS as a source of your information. Let's take that farther using your same source.

From your source CBS later same day as the article you posted:
Forces hit by U.S. in Syria included Russian mercenaries, official says
"Pro-regime" forces that attacked a Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) headquarters in northeastern Syria -- and were hit in return by U.S. airstrikes -- included Russian mercenaries, according to a Pentagon official. If Russians are among those who were killed, this would mark the first time a U.S. airstrike has killed Russians in Syria, CBS News' David Martin reports.

From your source CBS a week later:
Russia says U.S. airstrike killed 5 of its citizens
Russian and U.S. news organizations reported earlier this week that an unknown number of Russian military contractors were killed in the ferocious U.S. counterattack last week. U.S. officials told CBS News there were Russian mercenaries present when the U.S. strikes hit forces allied to Syrian dictator Bashar Assad, in order to repel their attack on a base of U.S.-backed Syrian rebels. There were U.S. troops present at the base of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) rebels. Confirming the fatalities on Thursday, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova said only that five people, "presumably Russian citizens," had been killed, "as a result of the armed conflict, the reasons for which are being clarified." She indicated that Moscow was still seeking verification of the information.

From your source a a week later:
U.S., Russia won't confirm U.S. strikes killed "mercenaries"
It's a scenario many feared in the fog of Syria's multi-front war: a confrontation in which U.S. forces, responding to a provocation, kill Russian soldiers or mercenaries on a crowded battlefield. Russian news reports Tuesday described just such a scenario, with an unknown number of Russian military contractors killed in a ferocious U.S. counterattack last week.

From your source CBS two weeks later:
Putin ally's private army behind attack on U.S.-backed forces?
MOSCOW -- We are learning more about who was likely behind an attack earlier this month on a rebel base in northern Syria, where American forces were embedded with the fighters. The Russian mercenaries who carried out the siege -- which was repelled by U.S. airstrikes -- were reportedly working for oligarch Yevgeny Prigozhin, a close ally of Vladimir Putin and the same man accused of running a troll factory that targeted American voters. As CBS News correspondent Elizabeth Palmer reports, the attack took place on Feb. 7, and the U.S. response resulted in a number of Russian mercenaries being killed. There were no U.S. casualties. When the U.S. soldiers called in airstrikes to defend themselves, they had no idea they would end up killing dozens Russian civilians.

Everyone knows there were Russian mercenaries and even Russia has admitted it. This campaign of yours to say otherwise is idiotic.

That was the last combat between Russians and Americans, which was the subject of your severely lame thread. Americans unscathed, Russians in body bags.

 

[Bleipriester]

Not a single word about Russians.

U.S. claims self-defense in strikes on Syrian-backed forces

Totally made up.

I see you're using CBS as a source of your information. Let's take that farther using your same source.

From your source CBS later same day as the article you posted:
Forces hit by U.S. in Syria included Russian mercenaries, official says
"Pro-regime" forces that attacked a Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) headquarters in northeastern Syria -- and were hit in return by U.S. airstrikes -- included Russian mercenaries, according to a Pentagon official. If Russians are among those who were killed, this would mark the first time a U.S. airstrike has killed Russians in Syria, CBS News' David Martin reports.

From your source CBS a week later:
Russia says U.S. airstrike killed 5 of its citizens
Russian and U.S. news organizations reported earlier this week that an unknown number of Russian military contractors were killed in the ferocious U.S. counterattack last week. U.S. officials told CBS News there were Russian mercenaries present when the U.S. strikes hit forces allied to Syrian dictator Bashar Assad, in order to repel their attack on a base of U.S.-backed Syrian rebels. There were U.S. troops present at the base of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) rebels. Confirming the fatalities on Thursday, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova said only that five people, "presumably Russian citizens," had been killed, "as a result of the armed conflict, the reasons for which are being clarified." She indicated that Moscow was still seeking verification of the information.

From your source a a week later:
U.S., Russia won't confirm U.S. strikes killed "mercenaries"
It's a scenario many feared in the fog of Syria's multi-front war: a confrontation in which U.S. forces, responding to a provocation, kill Russian soldiers or mercenaries on a crowded battlefield. Russian news reports Tuesday described just such a scenario, with an unknown number of Russian military contractors killed in a ferocious U.S. counterattack last week.

From your source CBS two weeks later:
Putin ally's private army behind attack on U.S.-backed forces?
MOSCOW -- We are learning more about who was likely behind an attack earlier this month on a rebel base in northern Syria, where American forces were embedded with the fighters. The Russian mercenaries who carried out the siege -- which was repelled by U.S. airstrikes -- were reportedly working for oligarch Yevgeny Prigozhin, a close ally of Vladimir Putin and the same man accused of running a troll factory that targeted American voters. As CBS News correspondent Elizabeth Palmer reports, the attack took place on Feb. 7, and the U.S. response resulted in a number of Russian mercenaries being killed. There were no U.S. casualties. When the U.S. soldiers called in airstrikes to defend themselves, they had no idea they would end up killing dozens Russian civilians.

Everyone knows there were Russian mercenaries and even Russia has admitted it. This campaign of yours to say otherwise is idiotic.

That was the last combat between Russians and Americans, which was the subject of your severely lame thread. Americans unscathed, Russians in body bags.

Nice time line of Russians added.

 

[DrainBamage]

Nice time line of Russians added.

Thank you, it showed exactly what was said... Russian mercenaries. Now you know, and can stop claiming otherwise.

 

[SandSquid]

Foreigners cannot serve in the Syrian military. The thing is made up by your government to increase tensions.

1. Nobody said the Russian mercenaries were serving in the Syrian military.
2. I'm not Russian, so when Russia says Russian mercenaries were killed it is not something made up by my own government.
3. You fail.

Not a single word about Russians.

U.S. claims self-defense in strikes on Syrian-backed forces

Totally made up.

So this happened months ago. And you intentionally choose an article written just as information was coming out saying "details were still emerging on the attack.".... that links to newer details saying they were Russian Mercenaries in the attack!!

So tell me, why did you specifically search for the article written immediately in the aftermath that specifically said the facts were not yet known? Was it out of blind ignorance you chose the article that said facts were still emerging? Or did you intentionally choose to support a lie that you knew was a lie? EVEN RUSSIA said that Russian nationals were killed in that attack.

Willful ignorance is not a good look.

 

[Bleipriester]

Foreigners cannot serve in the Syrian military. The thing is made up by your government to increase tensions.

1. Nobody said the Russian mercenaries were serving in the Syrian military.
2. I'm not Russian, so when Russia says Russian mercenaries were killed it is not something made up by my own government.
3. You fail.

Not a single word about Russians.

U.S. claims self-defense in strikes on Syrian-backed forces

Totally made up.

So this happened months ago. And you intentionally choose an article written just as information was coming out saying "details were still emerging on the attack.".... that links to newer details saying they were Russian Mercenaries in the attack!!

So tell me, why did you specifically search for the article written immediately in the aftermath that specifically said the facts were not yet known? Was it out of blind ignorance you chose the article that said facts were still emerging? Or did you intentionally choose to support a lie that you knew was a lie? EVEN RUSSIA said that Russian nationals were killed in that attack.

Willful ignorance is not a good look.

Stick to the topic: State of US ground forces. Giving ISIS air support is nothing you can be proud about, whether there were Russians among the fighters or not.

 

[DrainBamage]

State of US ground forces. Giving ISIS air support is nothing you can be proud about, whether there were Russians among the fighters or not.

They weren't giving ISIS air support, they were giving themselves air support. I'm proud of how a relatively small group of US troops from several branches coordinated with air support to obliterate a much larger attacking force that included Russian mercenaries. Those Russians signed up to fight in Syria and got their asses handed to them, it sucks but their wives are now widows.

 

[Bleipriester]

State of US ground forces. Giving ISIS air support is nothing you can be proud about, whether there were Russians among the fighters or not.

They weren't giving ISIS air support, they were giving themselves air support. I'm proud of how a relatively small group of US troops from several branches coordinated with air support to obliterate a much larger attacking force that included Russian mercenaries. Those Russians signed up to fight in Syria and got their asses handed to them, it sucks but their wives are now widows.

Big lie.

Here´s the whole story.
ISIS-Coalition aircraft attacked Syrian forces, 25 killed

 

[SandSquid]

Foreigners cannot serve in the Syrian military. The thing is made up by your government to increase tensions.

1. Nobody said the Russian mercenaries were serving in the Syrian military.
2. I'm not Russian, so when Russia says Russian mercenaries were killed it is not something made up by my own government.
3. You fail.

Not a single word about Russians.

U.S. claims self-defense in strikes on Syrian-backed forces

Totally made up.

So this happened months ago. And you intentionally choose an article written just as information was coming out saying "details were still emerging on the attack.".... that links to newer details saying they were Russian Mercenaries in the attack!!

So tell me, why did you specifically search for the article written immediately in the aftermath that specifically said the facts were not yet known? Was it out of blind ignorance you chose the article that said facts were still emerging? Or did you intentionally choose to support a lie that you knew was a lie? EVEN RUSSIA said that Russian nationals were killed in that attack.

Willful ignorance is not a good look.

Stick to the topic: State of US ground forces. Giving ISIS air support is nothing you can be proud about, whether there were Russians among the fighters or not.

No. I am trying to determine if you are attempting to lie to support your claim. It appears so.

Or did you truly think that article was a good representation of the situation, even though it was clear it was coming out as the situation unfolded and didn't have all the info yet (even though it linked to the Syria page which explained those forces were there).

So it is either you lying for your beliefs, or you completely ignorant on the topic of which you speak correct?

 

[Bleipriester]

Foreigners cannot serve in the Syrian military. The thing is made up by your government to increase tensions.

1. Nobody said the Russian mercenaries were serving in the Syrian military.
2. I'm not Russian, so when Russia says Russian mercenaries were killed it is not something made up by my own government.
3. You fail.

Not a single word about Russians.

U.S. claims self-defense in strikes on Syrian-backed forces

Totally made up.

So this happened months ago. And you intentionally choose an article written just as information was coming out saying "details were still emerging on the attack.".... that links to newer details saying they were Russian Mercenaries in the attack!!

So tell me, why did you specifically search for the article written immediately in the aftermath that specifically said the facts were not yet known? Was it out of blind ignorance you chose the article that said facts were still emerging? Or did you intentionally choose to support a lie that you knew was a lie? EVEN RUSSIA said that Russian nationals were killed in that attack.

Willful ignorance is not a good look.

Stick to the topic: State of US ground forces. Giving ISIS air support is nothing you can be proud about, whether there were Russians among the fighters or not.

No. I am trying to determine if you are attempting to lie to support your claim. It appears so.

Or did you truly think that article was a good representation of the situation, even though it was clear it was coming out as the situation unfolded and didn't have all the info yet (even though it linked to the Syria page which explained those forces were there).

So it is either you lying for your beliefs, or you completely ignorant on the topic of which you speak correct?

You are. If Phrump says eat shit you´ll do.

 

[SandSquid]

1. Nobody said the Russian mercenaries were serving in the Syrian military.
2. I'm not Russian, so when Russia says Russian mercenaries were killed it is not something made up by my own government.
3. You fail.

Not a single word about Russians.

U.S. claims self-defense in strikes on Syrian-backed forces

Totally made up.

So this happened months ago. And you intentionally choose an article written just as information was coming out saying "details were still emerging on the attack.".... that links to newer details saying they were Russian Mercenaries in the attack!!

So tell me, why did you specifically search for the article written immediately in the aftermath that specifically said the facts were not yet known? Was it out of blind ignorance you chose the article that said facts were still emerging? Or did you intentionally choose to support a lie that you knew was a lie? EVEN RUSSIA said that Russian nationals were killed in that attack.

Willful ignorance is not a good look.

Stick to the topic: State of US ground forces. Giving ISIS air support is nothing you can be proud about, whether there were Russians among the fighters or not.

No. I am trying to determine if you are attempting to lie to support your claim. It appears so.

Or did you truly think that article was a good representation of the situation, even though it was clear it was coming out as the situation unfolded and didn't have all the info yet (even though it linked to the Syria page which explained those forces were there).

So it is either you lying for your beliefs, or you completely ignorant on the topic of which you speak correct?

You are. If Phrump says eat shit you´ll do.

Fuck Trump.

Not a Trump supporter at all.

I am just making the point that if you feel the need to lie to make your claim, it is not a claim that can be made.

 

[Bleipriester]

Not a single word about Russians.

U.S. claims self-defense in strikes on Syrian-backed forces

Totally made up.

So this happened months ago. And you intentionally choose an article written just as information was coming out saying "details were still emerging on the attack.".... that links to newer details saying they were Russian Mercenaries in the attack!!

So tell me, why did you specifically search for the article written immediately in the aftermath that specifically said the facts were not yet known? Was it out of blind ignorance you chose the article that said facts were still emerging? Or did you intentionally choose to support a lie that you knew was a lie? EVEN RUSSIA said that Russian nationals were killed in that attack.

Willful ignorance is not a good look.

Stick to the topic: State of US ground forces. Giving ISIS air support is nothing you can be proud about, whether there were Russians among the fighters or not.

No. I am trying to determine if you are attempting to lie to support your claim. It appears so.

Or did you truly think that article was a good representation of the situation, even though it was clear it was coming out as the situation unfolded and didn't have all the info yet (even though it linked to the Syria page which explained those forces were there).

So it is either you lying for your beliefs, or you completely ignorant on the topic of which you speak correct?

You are. If Phrump says eat shit you´ll do.

Fuck Trump.

Not a Trump supporter at all.

I am just making the point that if you feel the need to lie to make your claim, it is not a claim that can be made.

I believe the soldiers who were on the ground, not your anti-Trump press that suddenly turned into Trump agitators.

 

[SandSquid]

So this happened months ago. And you intentionally choose an article written just as information was coming out saying "details were still emerging on the attack.".... that links to newer details saying they were Russian Mercenaries in the attack!!

So tell me, why did you specifically search for the article written immediately in the aftermath that specifically said the facts were not yet known? Was it out of blind ignorance you chose the article that said facts were still emerging? Or did you intentionally choose to support a lie that you knew was a lie? EVEN RUSSIA said that Russian nationals were killed in that attack.

Willful ignorance is not a good look.

Stick to the topic: State of US ground forces. Giving ISIS air support is nothing you can be proud about, whether there were Russians among the fighters or not.

No. I am trying to determine if you are attempting to lie to support your claim. It appears so.

Or did you truly think that article was a good representation of the situation, even though it was clear it was coming out as the situation unfolded and didn't have all the info yet (even though it linked to the Syria page which explained those forces were there).

So it is either you lying for your beliefs, or you completely ignorant on the topic of which you speak correct?

You are. If Phrump says eat shit you´ll do.

Fuck Trump.

Not a Trump supporter at all.

I am just making the point that if you feel the need to lie to make your claim, it is not a claim that can be made.

I believe the soldiers who were on the ground, not your anti-Trump press that suddenly turned into Trump agitators.

So the ones that said they were hearing the RUSSIAN radio chatter from RUSSIANS.

Then why do you continue to lie and try and say they weren't there when the Soldiers on the ground said they were?

 

[Bleipriester]

Stick to the topic: State of US ground forces. Giving ISIS air support is nothing you can be proud about, whether there were Russians among the fighters or not.

No. I am trying to determine if you are attempting to lie to support your claim. It appears so.

Or did you truly think that article was a good representation of the situation, even though it was clear it was coming out as the situation unfolded and didn't have all the info yet (even though it linked to the Syria page which explained those forces were there).

So it is either you lying for your beliefs, or you completely ignorant on the topic of which you speak correct?

You are. If Phrump says eat shit you´ll do.

Fuck Trump.

Not a Trump supporter at all.

I am just making the point that if you feel the need to lie to make your claim, it is not a claim that can be made.

I believe the soldiers who were on the ground, not your anti-Trump press that suddenly turned into Trump agitators.

So the ones that said they were hearing the RUSSIAN radio chatter from RUSSIANS.

Then why do you continue to lie and try and say they weren't there when the Soldiers on the ground said they were?

Who heard that? Trump?