Russians Are Fighting Near Americans on Same Side of Syria’s Battlefield - Polidicks

[QUOTE] Russian and American troops are within "hand-grenade range" of each other in parts of Syria, according to U.S. commanders, an overlap that highlights Moscow's efforts to bolster its footprint in the Middle East. While the Russians and Americans have traditionally been on opposite sides of the Syrian civil war — with the Kremlin supporting President Bashar al-Assad and Washington working with rebels fighting him. But now the rivals are both backing Kurdish YPG fighters as they take on ISIS there and in neighboring Iraq. Army Lt. Gen. Steven Townsend, the commander of Combined Joint Task Force Operation Inherent Resolve, told reporters earlier this month that all the forces in Syria "have converged literally within hand-grenade range of one another." American and Russian commanders are in contact as a result, according to U.S. Central Command, although the Pentagon stopped military-to-military cooperation after Russia's annexation of the Crimean Peninsula. This tentative cooperation is a result of Russian and American "short and midterm interests" which are "are overlapping to a huge extent," said Andreas Krieg, a professor at the Defense Studies Department at King's College London. "Fighting ISIS and fighting the jihadis is absolutely the first priority of the [Donald] Trump administration. This is why [Defense Secretary James] Mattis is going so hardcore after ISIS. And almost everything goes as long as they are fighting jihadis at the same time." There are big risks to this approach from an American perspective, according to Krieg. The Kurdish forces that the Russians and Americans are both fighting alongside do not take orders from the powers supporting them. "These surrogates are doing their own operations and then the sponsors are doing air cover and artillery cover," he said. Krieg warned that because of the close proximity, Americans or Russian troops could potentially be hit inadvertently despite fighting on the same side. "Escalation is bound to happen," he added. It isn't known exactly how many Americans are fighting on the ground although the figure is believe to be under 1,000. That number may have been boosted by the arrival of several hundred more in recent weeks to support the battle to route ISIS from Raqqa, the extremists' de facto capital. The Kremlin has also not said how many Russians are fighting in Syria, although estimates published in the country's press run into from 1,600 to 4,500. During the first two weeks of March, Russian and Americans both worked with Kurdish YPG fighters — longstanding U.S. allies in the war against ISIS — to stop the Turkish army from entering the town of Manbij. An eyewitness told NBC News that he saw Russian and Syrian as well as American forces outside the Kurdish town in separate bases, but around 3 miles from each other, on March 12. Americans forces are still there. A YPG spokesman confirmed an [URL="https://www.ypgrojava.org/Agreement-made-with-Russia"]"agreement" had been struck with the Russians [/URL]near Afrin in the northeast of Syria close to the Turkish border on March 20. [/QUOTE] [QUOTE] Russia's goal "is to get some concessions from the United States" which will allow it to maintain its military presence in the Middle East and the Mediterranean through bases in Syria, according to Igor Sutyagin, a senior research fellow at London's Royal United Services Institute think tank. It wants "an alliance between Russia and the United States in fighting terrorism, and to be recognized as an equal partner with the United States," both to strengthen its "international standing as a power and its position with its own people," he added. For these reasons, Russia is risking a recent rapprochement with Turkey by working with Kurdish fighters, experts said. Ankara considers the YPG terrorists and fears that they will join forces with Kurds in Turkey to carve out a separate state. Turkey is also a key U.S. ally and an important member of NATO — the key Western defense alliance — so angering them also carries its risks for Washington. In fact, while working with the Kurds, considered the most effective anti-ISIS force in the country, Americans have agreed to stay east of the Euphrates River as a concession to Turkey. So it is a high-stakes game for the U.S. but especially Russia, whose rulers would have been forgiven for hoping that a Trump White House would improve relations after years of tensions under former President Barack Obama, analysts said. The Russians are learning that under the new White House they have to "deliver a service or have nothing," RUSI's Sutyagin said. "It is becoming more and more evident that Trump ... would not be willing to cooperate with Russia without really substantial Russian contribution." [/QUOTE] [QUOTE] Jon Alterman, the director of the Middle East Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, warned against viewing the Russians as allies. "The people in the military have been watching the Russians up close," he said. The Russians "are not allies and they are not going to be allies." Alterman also suggested that Moscow's approach toward terrorism made it an unreliable associate. "The way the Russians view counterterrorism is about cowing people into submission, which makes problems in the future," he said. [/QUOTE] [URL]http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/russians-are-fighting-near-u-s-same-side-syria-s-n739356?cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma[/URL]

[QUOTE]The Russians are learning that under the new White House they have to "deliver a service or have nothing," RUSI's Sutyagin said. "It is becoming more and more evident that Trump ... would not be willing to cooperate with Russia without really substantial Russian contribution." [/QUOTE] When your intelligence officers fuck up badly...

[QUOTE=StrykerE;52033607][URL]http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/russians-are-fighting-near-u-s-same-side-syria-s-n739356?cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma[/URL][/QUOTE] [QUOTE]"The people in the military have been watching the Russians up close," he said. The Russians "are not allies and they are not going to be allies." [/QUOTE] I have a Guy in Quora Saying that this is bullshit, Both Militarys have no problem with one another the tension is just the Civil Governments. [QUOTE=quora]What are the chances of Russian and American special operators engaging one another, directly, in Syria?[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Thierry Etienne Joseph Rotty]Zero. Contrary to what you read in the popular press US and Russian actions in Syria are coordinated. The Israelis were kind enough to provide the necessary facilities.[/QUOTE]

iirc some Kurdish fighter wrote on reddit that he was seeing Russian and American flags being printed at the same printing store. Russian and American interests now seem to align with both sides wanting to defeat ISIS.

[QUOTE=OmniConsUme;52033676]I have a Guy in Quora Saying that this is bullshit, Both Militarys have no problem with one another the tension is just the Civil Governments.[/QUOTE] Quora is about as reliable as Yahoo Answers Mattis and many of the US Military upper leadership don't trust the Russians. There is some coordination, but it's mostly to make sure that they stay out of each other's way [QUOTE] Mr. Mattis, for his part, made clear that his criticism of Russia had not changed. Appearing before reporters, Mr. Mattis, a former Marine general, said Russia needed to “live by international law like we expect all mature nations on this planet to do.” There was no doubt, he added, that Russia had “interfered or attempted to interfere in a number of elections,” implying, although not specifically saying, that the Russians had meddled in the process that led to his own boss’s election as president. And while Mr. Mattis said that American political leaders would look for common ground with the Russians, he added that when it came to real intelligence sharing and military cooperation, “Russia is going to have to prove itself first.” Mr. Mattis’s comments are significant because more than any other cabinet member or top administration official, with the possible exception of Stephen K. Bannon, Mr. Trump’s chief strategist, he is regarded by Mr. Trump as the most trusted on a number of national security issues.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE] On Wednesday, Mr. Mattis told fellow NATO ministers that he had no illusions about warmer relations with Moscow. The alliance, he said, “needed to be realistic in our expectations and ensuring our diplomats negotiate from a position of strength.” That statement went over poorly in Moscow. The news agency Tass quoted the Russian defense minister, Sergei K. Shoigu, as saying that “attempts to build a dialogue with Russia from a position of strength” would be “futile.” Mr. Mattis gave the verbal equivalent of a shrug. “I have no need to respond to the Russian statement at all,” he said.[/QUOTE] [URL]https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/16/world/europe/jim-mattis-nato-russia.html[/URL] [URL]http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/16/politics/mattis-russia-military-cooperation/[/URL] [URL]http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/02/16/mattis-rebuffs-russia-cooperation-call-says-little-doubt-moscow-meddling-in-elections.html[/URL] That's not to say that firefights will start to break out between US and Russian forces, but the current situation is more a of temporary mutual agreement rather than cooperation. Who knows where things might go from there, though. Turkey and Russia have [URL="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russia-turkey-join-in-airstrikes-against-islamic-state-in-northern-syria/2017/01/18/4e44ace8-ddbc-11e6-acdf-14da832ae861_story.html"]cooperated on airstrikes earlier this year[/URL], despite the fact that their Euphrates Shield forces are currently at odds with the YPG/SDF that the US and Russia are currently supporting. The whole situation is a mess

[QUOTE=OmniConsUme;52033676]I have a Guy in Quora Saying that this is bullshit, Both Militarys have no problem with one another the tension is just the Civil Governments.[/QUOTE] boots don't have to give a shit. all they have to do it follow orders it's the top brass who have to care about political ramifications trusting "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" implicitly is a good way to end up in a ditch with two bullet holes though your skull

[QUOTE=Jund;52034073]boots don't have to give a shit. all they have to do it follow orders it's the top brass who have to care about political ramifications trusting "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" implicitly is a good way to end up in a ditch with two bullet holes though your skull[/QUOTE] well then trust "keep your friends close, and your enemies closer" instead

this is CSGO all over again, atleast they can speak English from what I've seen. anyhow, while you may see some cooperation between them, don't expect much in the long run, because they have completely opposite interests and goals in the long run, which was pretty much the reason all this fuckery started.

[QUOTE=Vodkavia;52035586]The real conundrum happens after ISIS is done with. The Assad regime really isn't in the interest of either the US government or the Syrian people in the long run and Russia has already done a lot of arms deals in the area.[/QUOTE] Oh well. Every time we overthrow some government it backfires. Just leave the cunt alone, it's better that way.

[QUOTE=Vodkavia;52035586]The real conundrum happens after ISIS is done with. The Assad regime really isn't in the interest of either the US government or the Syrian people in the long run and Russia has already done a lot of arms deals in the area.[/QUOTE] Like how Gaddafi wasn't in the best interest of the US government or the Libyan people, except he was, and Libya went even further to shit without him

[QUOTE=Laserbeams;52036150]Like how Gaddafi wasn't in the best interest of the US government or the Libyan people, except he was, and Libya went even further to shit without him[/QUOTE] tbh it seems like middle eastern countries can't really function without dictators or an oppressive ruling party otherwise there will be a ton of infighting from various factions that all hate each other. Israel and Lebanon seem to be the only exceptions to the rule.

[QUOTE=Svinnik;52036257]tbh it seems like middle eastern countries can't really function without dictators or an oppressive ruling party otherwise there will be a ton of infighting from various factions that all hate each other. Israel and Lebanon seem to be the only exceptions to the rule.[/QUOTE] It's more of a defensive mechanism than a natural order of things. Countries that live in a war-torn areas need strong government to stay alive and keep shit from becoming worse. You can't have democracy when your voters will vote for some moderate islamist party anyway, and they will, because that's how it usually goes.

[QUOTE=Svinnik;52036257]tbh it seems like middle eastern countries can't really function without dictators or an oppressive ruling party otherwise there will be a ton of infighting from various factions that all hate each other.[/QUOTE] It's the chicken or the egg sort of situation there. Dictators create, facilitate or abuse the existing power struggles between factions, it helps them suppress the dissent. But at that point, should the dictator fall - the situation worsens considerably. Oh, and yeah, religious tensions play a major role too.

[QUOTE=Laserbeams;52036150]Like how Gaddafi wasn't in the best interest of the US government or the Libyan people, except he was, and Libya went even further to shit without him[/QUOTE] US involvement or not, Libya would have still gone to shit, probably much much worse than it is now, if Gaddafi had been left with his (remaining) army. Libya might be a clusterfuck politically, but the civilian death toll is actually very very small, especially compared to Syria. If Gaddafi had stayed for longed in the fight, we would see something similar to Syria in the death toll, so around 100x times more.

Russia and the US are very similar on a macro level. I don't see why they have to butt heads. Is it because they're so similar? I don't know about russia, but the US seems to always want an enemy, and it'll go great stretches to find one. Fascism works awfully similar. You need an enemy to distract from your own systemic problems.

Both US and Russia have been helping YPG/J with air strikes and supplies. After ISIS is done for, the SDF will likely be primarily fighting the Assad regime and/or Turkish forces. I hope the coalition doesn't betray the Kurds though, Rojava is the first real attempt to install an actual functioning democracy for the people in the middle east.

The main reason why the U.S. is not so keen on having Russia as a close ally is because of their presence withing the Middle East. The only base that exists for Russia is in Tartus, Syria, which is their only foothold to maintain influence in the Middle East. This all sums down to the pipeline that Saudi Arabia wants which was supposed to go through Syria and Turkey all the way to Europe. As Russia is one of the largest importers of gas in Europe, this would be considered as an economic threat to their economy. Because the U.S. has closer ties to Saudi Arabia (oil/weapon imports) they are more inclined to be in their best interests to make sure the Saudis get the best deal.