There are four times as many U.S. troops in Syria as previously acknowledged by the Pentagon

[خره مينه لګته وي]

A U.S. Marine waits to guide an armored vehicle towing an M777A2 howitzer to a firing position in Syria on May 14. (Sgt. Matthew Callahan/U.S. Marine Corps)

There are about 2,000 U.S. troops deployed in Syria, the Pentagon said Wednesday — a number that is four times more than any official figure that U.S. officials have previously acknowledged, and yet still lower than at the height of operations in Syria.

Army Col. Rob Manning, a Pentagon spokesman, disclosed the number in a gathering with journalists. He said he was doing so as part of a new effort by Defense Secretary Jim Mattis to be transparent about how many troops are deployed in harm’s way.

“That’s where we are now,” Manning said. “If a major shift occurs, then we’ll come back out with a new, official number.”

The actual number of troops has been in decline for months. Last week, about 400 Marines in an artillery unit — 1st Battalion, 10th Marines — that was carrying out strikes against the Islamic State in the city of Raqqa returned to the United States. The city once served as the de facto capital of the militant movement, but fell to the U.S.-led military coalition and its local partners in October. About 3 percent of Syria remained under Islamic State control.

Manning said Wednesday that it took weeks for the Pentagon to release the new official number because military officials wanted to make sure that it was right. Asked what the top number of U.S. troops in Syria was, he said he would have to check.

The disclosure comes about five weeks after a senior U.S. military officer, Army Maj. Gen. James B. Jarrard, told reporters during a news conference that there were about 4,000 U.S. troops in Syria. Moments later, a Pentagon spokesman, Eric Pahon, interjected in the same news conference that the number of U.S. troops actually was about 500, the number the Defense Department has long used for Syria.


[A top U.S. general just said 4,000 American troops are in Syria. The Pentagon says there are only 500.]

But that figure — known as the “force management level” — did not include a variety of U.S. troops who deploy to war zones on assignments of 90 days or less. It also does not include some service members who are deployed on highly sensitive missions.

Over the summer, hundreds of U.S. troops — including Special Operations forces and artillerymen — deployed to Syria as the assault on Raqqa was prepared. Separately, the Pentagon also temporarily deployed Army Rangers to northern Syria over the summer, an attempt to keep the peace as Syrian Kurdish fighters liberated cities in areas where other armed groups were loyal to nearby Turkey.

Mattis said last week that the U.S. effort in Syria is pivoting from a military-led operation to a diplomatic-led endeavor.

“The troops are changing their stance as a result,” he said.

But U.S. military operations in Syria are expected to continue. Mattis said last month that the United States “won’t just walk away” from efforts it has made in the country, and will focus on creating safe zones for civilians as other efforts to stabilize the country continue.



washingtonpost

 

[Path-Finder]

Occupation will be easier now that indigenous population are no longer there. I wonder if Afghanistan is headed for the same with isis cleansing Pashtun areas.

 

[Dalit]

Wow. Still being on the losing side is mind boggling. Russia surely owned the US in Syria. Too bad America can't blame Pakistan.

No wonder Trump is squealing like a b!tch about America first LOL When you start pumping this kind of money in overseas wars the economy is surely to suffer.

 

[rohailmalhi]

Occupation will be easier now that indigenous population are no longer there. I wonder if Afghanistan is headed for the same with isis cleansing Pashtun areas.

I dont think so , Afghans have been in war for so long, ISIS is newer more lethal version of Talibans which were created to meet objective in middle east. Now that those objectives are met , even though partially, they are being transported to Afghanistan to contain Afghan Taliban. But fighting talibans is different than killing un-armed or ill trained civilians.

Afghans are more battle hardened, they have been kicking Uncles Sam *** for quite a while now and they have managed to acquire better training and better gadgets as well .

But all of this will have impact on Pakistan , which we need to very very aware and careful of.

I even heard (not verified ) that Pakistan Security forces managed to kill many ISIS fighter , while they were being air dropped in the area near Pakistan Afghan border , soon after that American started threatening Pakistan with consequences.

 

[Path-Finder]

I dont think so , Afghans have been in war for so long, ISIS is newer more lethal version of Talibans which were created to meet objective in middle east. Now that those objectives are met , even though partially, they are being transported to Afghanistan to contain Afghan Taliban. But fighting talibans is different than killing un-armed or ill trained civilians.

Afghans are more battle hardened, they have been kicking Uncles Sam *** for quite a while now and they have managed to acquire better training and better gadgets as well .

But all of this will have impact on Pakistan , which we need to very very aware and careful of.

I even heard (not verified ) that Pakistan Security forces managed to kill many ISIS fighter , while they were being air dropped in the area near Pakistan Afghan border , soon after that American started threatening Pakistan with consequences.

I shared my point of view. The US after withdrawal is once again shifting heavy material into Afghanistan for building more and more fortresses. Clearly making their intentions known. All of it will be Pakistan centric.

Pakistan needs to start creating a buffer inside Afghanistan because isis will be strengthened where others wìll arm the Taliban.

 

[DarX]

America is opening more war fronts than ever before. It seems as if things are out of its control.

 

[rohailmalhi]

I shared my point of view. The US after withdrawal is once again shifting heavy material into Afghanistan for building more and more fortresses. Clearly making their intentions known. All of it will be Pakistan centric.

Pakistan needs to start creating a buffer inside Afghanistan because isis will be strengthened where others wìll arm the Taliban.

Yes exactly. They are making efforts for disruption in region esp in Pakistan.

America is opening more war fronts than ever before. It seems as if things are out of its control.

Guess what , every front they open is in Muslims majority country.......

 

[Dalit]

It is all going to haunt America as it always has. Pakistan needs to be cautious and take the required precautions. America is in grape sour mode. From CPEC to our nukes. They can't accept any of it.

 

[LeGenD]

Wow. Still being on the losing side is mind boggling. Russia surely owned the US in Syria. Too bad America can't blame Pakistan.

No wonder Trump is squealing like a b!tch about America first LOL When you start pumping this kind of money in overseas wars the economy is surely to suffer.

Loosing side?

US have been violating Syrian sovereignty since 2014 in order to eradicate ISIS from Syrian lands (i.e. Operation Inherent Resolve) and now this objective have been met, US has decided to prolong its stay in Syria for "unknown reasons."

Perhaps you don't know but Vladimir Putin sought assurances from Obama administration to not deter Russian intervention in Syria on the behalf of Syrian leadership, in 2013.

Holistically, US have made a mockery of Syrian sovereignty and if it decides to prolong its stay in the country, neither Syrian leadership and nor Russia can do anything about it.

I suspect that US will play a role in the end-game for Syrian Civil War.

I shared my point of view. The US after withdrawal is once again shifting heavy material into Afghanistan for building more and more fortresses. Clearly making their intentions known. All of it will be Pakistan centric.

Pakistan needs to start creating a buffer inside Afghanistan because isis will be strengthened where others wìll arm the Taliban.

That is correct but they are taking action against Taliban after the latter's spring offensive. They might reverse the gains made by Taliban against the Afghan government since 2015.

Afghans are more battle hardened, they have been kicking Uncles Sam *** for quite a while now and they have managed to acquire better training and better gadgets as well .

This is fallacious.

Taliban represents a credible threat to ANA and Afghan government due to its expertise in asymmetric warfare tactics but haven't defeated US army in any battle as far as I recall. In-fact, US army has killed thousands of Taliban combatants in various battles since 2001.

However, war in Afghanistan does not seem to end as Taliban continues to find new recruits from within Afghanistan and Pakistan, and the rise of new terror networks in the region. On top, prevalence of corruption, incompetence of ANA and political differences among warlords are not helping the situation. Under the shadow of these problems, it is a monumental task to expand the mandate of Afghan government across the country. Even if US defeats Taliban in the battlefield (decisively), other problems will not disappear overnight. This country is a mess and reforms will take time to deliver desired results.