Quoted:
From Ringos facebook

Soooo...
Further reporting, such as it is, on the Dair Ezzor Turkey Shoot.
1. Sov... err... Russians built a bridge over the Euphrates which was the designated 'deconfliction line'. Why? Reasons. 'Commite of Nations' or something.
2. 'Hybrid' force of mixed Russian contractors including multiple non-ethnic Russians (Serbs, Kossack, other non Slavics) as well as local Syrian Army
'commandos' attacked across temporary bridge. The 'Russian' side were 'Blackwater' equivalent mercenaries from a company generally called 'Wagner'
which is the nom de plume of the boss. (Like if you called Blackwater 'Prince'.)
3. Unit was partially mechanized, battalion strength. (One thing everyone agrees upon is 'about 600-700 personnel.') Had some towed artillery as well
as 't-55 and T-72 MBT as well as armored personnel carriers.' (Type unknown.) Full on 'we're taking that position and you're not stopping us' full court press.
4. Unit crossed bridge, arty deployed.
5. Arty opened fire while most of unit was still in approach column formation. (Normal) One portion moved to flanking positions.
5A. Minute the arty opened fire SHIT GOT REAL REAL QUICK.
6. Reapers took out artillery and most of armor with Hellfire. From the few videos, pretty much before they knew what hit them. There had to be quite a few Reaper drones up or they were feeding guidance to Hellfire from Apaches (see below.)
7. F-15E Eagles came in for clean-up and to check for anti-air defenses.
8. Warthogs showed up just to go BRRRRRRT!
9. AC-130 Spectre started fucking up their day for the hell of it.
10. To add insult to injury, B-52s which, you know, just HAPPENED to be in the area, just minding our own business, just passing by from Diego Garcia which is a few thousand miles away, on our way to... somewhere... nothing to see here... decided to prove they could drop their entire load as precision guided weapons and just more or less DID A JDAM ARCLIGHT ON THEIR ASS. At that point, more or less because CENTCOM said 'Why not? ARCLIGHT is always pretty to watch...'
11. The whole thing being so over it was ridiculous, AH-64 Apaches basically did 'hostile Bomb Damage Assessment' and complained there were no targets left.
12. Oh, and then the Kurds, to just really FUCK with these guys, released water from a dam upstream and broke their bridge. So they had to ford back with their wounded.
13. Nobody knows how many dead and wounded. Russians are saying 'only 8 Russian citizens' but that doesn't quite cover the whole of who may have been involved. One repeated number is 200 dead (remember, mixed Syrians, Russians and other ethnics) as well as pretty much the rest of the force wounded. (Not to mention pretty thoroughly demoralized.) One Kurd wounded. Probably fell off a stool laughing to tell truth.
14. Military hospitals in Russia are reliably reported 'overflowing.'
This was much less a 'battle' than a message. Towards the end we had to just be pounding ground to make sure they got it.
Messages, really.
A. Don't fucking cross that river.
B. Hey, North Korea! LOOK WHAT I CAN DO!
C. Hey, Putin, about Donbas... This is what we can do to your 'freedom fighters' (AKA: mercenaries) at any time.
D. To everyone in general: You need to remember who's boss.
Mattis is playing dumb. 'What Russians? There were Russians? Really? I'm seeing that in the media but I got no briefing on there being Russians in that column. Our bad. Sorry about that.'
Then there's the fact that the strike was NOT approved by the President.
Because he gave CENTOM the approval on things like that.
And CENTCOM handled it like a BOSS.
Oh, and when the forces crossed the river the Russians were informed and informed that we intended to take 'self-defense' actions.
So they can't even say they weren't warned.
I'm not sure we warned them we'd be using BUFF.
This is more the sort of thing I'd expect in late summer.
'Shit! We haven't expended our budget! Are there any Russians we can fuck up very badly with all these unexpended munitions?'
Last thought: It had to be shitty being on the receiving end of that.

Quoted:

i see. so in this case we're gtg with "anonymous sources."

Quoted:
This thread is fucking glorious. My father was on the front line of the Cold War in West Germany as an Army intel officer in the late 70's, didn't live long enough to see the Berlin Wall come down. I have no doubt he would have loved reading this. Somewhere, out there right now, the thought of lining up against Americans is causing hardened soldiers to shit their pants......LOL. Cheers fellas!

Quoted:

Putin doesnt give a shit about is pawns/troops. Most world media will sweep this under the rug. putins propganda machine will control the reports of this in russia.

For certain the russians will be planning payback for this. My guess is that the russians will want to down a US aircraft. I can see him and his syrian allies start taking shots at any US aircraft. Or he might coherce the turks to roll up as well. Since the russians arent stupid enough to go air to air against the US, the next ground attack will be supported by russian arty to surpress troops on the ground.

Quoted:

So why were these Donbass volunteers set up for failure?  Why no air support for them?

Quoted:

The U.S. objective may well not have been to destroy the bridge.  It could have been the result of SDF initiative.

Quoted:

The Russians have been using military airpower in Syria for how many years now?

https://media1.s-nbcnews.com/j/newscms/2016_21/1549771/160524-syria-may-14-jhc-1216_dc14c38582d632a553cf8ee21d1e63be.nbcnews-ux-2880-1000.jpg

They just had one of their Su-25 pilots show down February 3rd.

https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5a75e325af61d85b028b4d8f-750-375.jpg

If the argument is that they don't know how to use airpower in support of battle groups, I would question the military history awareness of the person making that claim.

If the argument is they don't have aircraft in theater, then I would point you to all the satellite imagery and recent shoot-downs of their aircraft, as well as attacks on their air bases by militants.

http://imagesvc.timeincapp.com/v3/foundry/image/?q=70&w=1440&url=https%3A%2F%2Ftimedotcom.files.wordpress.com%2F2018%2F01%2Fjjajdad14.jpg%3Fquality%3D85

So why were these Donbass volunteers set up for failure?  Why no air support for them?

Comparing them with Blackwater doesn't work well either.  Blackwater did VIP PSD for diplomats, the US Ambassador, construction contractors, food and sanitation workers, people like that.

Nowhere will you ever see Blackwater organized into freaking armored battalions with artillery trying to cross into some other territory to take oil fields in a strategic move within the theater.

Quoted:

Yep, that was quite surprising to hear it was the same guy. Mueller and Rosenstein would have picked him long ago to have rolled out the indictments a few days ago, so that's not the reason they did it, but if we knew he was the owner of Wagner, who were prime assholes in Ukraine and Syria, maybe that helped make the decision to indict. Though I seriously doubt that Mueller/Rosenstein actually care that much about actual Russian relations and more with just naming a top dog to add weight to their legal circle jerk.

Somehow I don't think Putin will authorize his extradition to the US.

Quoted:
I've no doubt that asses were kicked that day, but something about this retelling smacks of creative license.

Practically every combat aircraft we have making its own cameo appearance, like characters in the intro to a fighting game?

All that airpower wasn't able to destroy a shitty bridge, they needed mother nature's help?  Somehow even that didn't wipe out this force, they were still able to cross a now flooded river that was powerful enough to destroy a bridge?

Maybe I'm just overly skeptical but this sounds a lot like a fiction writer's imagination of what could be rather than what actually happened.  Hope I'm wrong cuz it definitely gets the 'murica boner up.

Quoted:
And yet supposedly the Kurds destroyed it anyway.  Either way, that's plausible that we'd want the bridge intact, but something about this telling just seems a bit too 'perfect'.

Quoted:

The supposition is that we were supposed to refuse to engage, fade back and let the Kurds handle it.
We had more backbone than the planners expected.

Kinda like what happened to us in Benghazi.

Quoted:

The aircraft type involved were listed by the pentagon.....

The intent was likely twofold.

-Demonstrate our resolve and ability

and it was a great test of our systems interaction.

-When was the last time we got to test our stuff in an open battle in defense against an attacking combined arms force at scale?

probably korea.

Just about everything in GW-1 and 2 was offensive, or small unit.

Quoted:

It's to our advantage that we have a hand in controlling the distribution of oil in a way that benefits us. We're able to do this by having good relations with a number of our friends. The dollar stays strong due to the agreements concerning oil that  we have with these partners. What American citizens get out of this is a good standard of living.

Quoted:
And yet supposedly the Kurds destroyed it anyway.  Either way, that's plausible that we'd want the bridge intact, but something about this telling just seems a bit too 'perfect'.

Quoted:

Amen brother.

People just don't understand that tyrannical criminal regimes don't bring anything together, they drive everyone apart, while using violence and terrorism to crush dissent to keep the status quo.

Quoted:
https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/459941/8478F184-0882-4B1E-AC2B-08C5D4C4C089-457789.JPG

Quoted:
I've no doubt that asses were kicked that day, but something about this retelling smacks of creative license.

Practically every combat aircraft we have making its own cameo appearance, like characters in the intro to a fighting game?

All that airpower wasn't able to destroy a shitty bridge, they needed mother nature's help?  Somehow even that didn't wipe out this force, they were still able to cross a now flooded river that was powerful enough to destroy a bridge?

Maybe I'm just overly skeptical but this sounds a lot like a fiction writer's imagination of what could be rather than what actually happened.  Hope I'm wrong cuz it definitely gets the 'murica boner up.

Quoted:
https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/459941/8478F184-0882-4B1E-AC2B-08C5D4C4C089-457789.JPG

Quoted:

How is putting our servicemen and women into harms way for another banker's war/military conflict/military engagement of any benefit to our country as a whole? Answer, it isn't. It is all about their globalist view and agenda. We should not be entangling ourselves into areas we have no business being in. That is a fact.

Quoted:

Putin takes a four day powder and that's the best they could come up with?

Hey Vlad, go home and get your fucking shine box.

Quoted:

How is putting our servicemen and women into harms way for another banker's war/military conflict/military engagement of any benefit to our country as a whole? Answer, it isn't. It is all about their globalist view and agenda. We should not be entangling ourselves into areas we have no business being in. That is a fact.

Quoted:

If we had not allowed the Russians and avenue of escape, things could have gotten a lot messier. Russian Air assets may have gotten involved at that point, because otherwise we would have had surrenders, and out of all of this, that is the last thing the Russians would want. They would probably rather have a 100% KIA scenario.

Quoted:

It wasn't infrastructure, but rather a bridge built by PMC or Syrian (or Syrian-aligned) military engineers as a component of their military operations culminating in offensive action across the river.

Quoted:

One of the latest stories is that the Russians were there to retake an oil field and facility for the Syrians, at which point one of the Oligarchs was going to get a pay out, and that oligarch owns Wagner. After the shit with the Turks in the last month attacking the Kurds, these Russians assumed two things: 1. The facility was lightly guarded because main body of Kurds was moved North to stop the Turks (which is what survivors of the attack got caught repeating on radios)  2. That the US, since it didn't stop the Turks attacking the Kurds, wouldn't stop the Russian mercs attacking the Kurds in Deir al-Zor province. Those two assumptions were grossly wrong.

We know they have intelligence apparatus in Syria, but how well do we know it works? How well do we know that intelligence is being controlled, analyzed, or disseminated. The Russians have always had a problem hoarding info, its a key part of all authoritarian govt to covet and hold tight onto information, because knowledge is power. What if this incident was nothing more than one of the Oligarchs coming up with a get rich quick scheme, selling it to Putin that nothing will happen, blah blah blah, and Putin, based off the last decade not realizing fully that things have changed? Or add another complexity, what if Putin wanted the attack to go forward without air support knowing they'd likely encounter the US but he just wanted to see how we'd react? Maybe it was Putin who insisted no jets but otherwise he'd allow it.

Does anyone really think Putin or anyone else involved in planning that abortion thought we'd react the way we did? There hasn't been such a show of force done by the US in quite a long time. OIF was supposed to be a large scale show of force, but the occupation blew up in Bush's face. Obama did fuck all for shows of force, he was a eunuch when it came to being commander-in-chief. But Trump, Mattis, they know. And they crafted a nice giant fuck you to Putin and instead of maybe firing a couple warning shots like Putin might have thought we'd do, we took them all out, back to front, we cut off their primary escape route, and went to work trying to kill as many on the East bank as we could over a number of hours involving what appears to be at least a dozen or more sorties from up to five or more completely different type of aircraft, plus arty support. Aka, the fire support package dudes in Afghanistan could only dream about getting.

Quoted:
A probe with fodder; just checking to see if this was an Obama style "Red Line" or something different.

Quoted:

Post less and read more. You are way over your head in this thread and don't even know what you are talking about.

Quoted:

Combined arms like a motherfucker.

I wonder how we generated targeting for the JDAMs in real time like that. That's pretty awesome, I though they needed a while.

Quoted:

The objective may have not been "destroy the bridge". Sometimes it is beneficial to leave routes of egress intact.

I wasn't there, but from everything I am reading online there WAS a major destruction of a de facto Russian fighting force that was attempting to sieze land and means of oil production in violation of the treaty.

Quoted:

Then please, enlighten me about the "banker's war". You seem ever so knowledgeable. Who exactly are "the bankers".

Quoted:

THIs, does one FAC get bombs 1-8, next 9-19 and so on?or what?

Im just shuddering at the cost of a strike like that? those b52's must have been up there for HOURS with some serious loads prior to bombing, ok i get that but did they need to use JDAM's?wouldnt conventional have been just as effective?(if they were about to expire like the MOAB i guess it was ok).

Quoted:

China, NK and Iran aren't watching this wide eyed. This is an even bigger and better message than the TLAM strike (which was glorious BTW).

Quoted:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States is still unsure who directed a Feb. 7 attack on U.S. and U.S.-backed forces in Syria, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said on Saturday, even as he acknowledged accounts that Russian civilian contractors were involved.

https://s4.reutersmedia.net/resources/r/?m=02&d=20180218&t=2&i=1232615831&r=LYNXNPEE1H02W&w=1200

Reuters has reported that about 300 men working for a Kremlin-linked Russian private military firm were either killed or injured in Syria.

The U.S. has estimated about 100 pro-Syrian government forces were killed by U.S. strikes to repel the Feb. 7 attack.

Russian military officers told the United States during the incident that Moscow was not involved. The Pentagon has declined to comment on the exact makeup of the attacking forces and Mattis appeared at a loss to explain the incident 10 days later.

“I still cannot give you any more information on why they would do this. But they took direction from someone,” Mattis told reporters flying back to Washington with him from a trip to Europe, according to a Pentagon transcript.

“Was it local direction? Was it from external sources? Don’t ask me. I don’t know.”

Mattis said he “understood” that Moscow had acknowledged contractors were involved, without elaborating on whether that understanding came from press reports. Russian officials have told reporters that five Russian citizens may have been killed in clashes with U.S.-led coalition forces.

Still, Russian officials deny they deploy private military contractors in Syria, saying Moscow’s only military presence is a campaign of air strikes, a naval base, military instructors training Syrian forces, and limited numbers of special forces troops.

But according to people familiar with the deployment, Russia is using large numbers of the contractors in Syria because that allows Moscow to put more boots on the ground without risking regular soldiers whose deaths have to be accounted for.

The contractors, mostly ex-military, carry out missions assigned to them by the Russian military, the people familiar with the deployment said. Most are Russian citizens, though some have Ukrainian and Serbian passports.

The United States and Russia, while backing opposite sides in the Syria conflict, have taken pains to make sure that their forces do not accidentally collide. But the presence of the Russian contractors adds an element of unpredictability.

The U.S. military has said that in its effort to repel the attack on Feb. 7, U.S. forces on the ground called in coalition strikes for more than three hours, involving F-15E fighter jets, MQ-9 drones, B-52 bombers, AC-130 gunships and AH-64 Apache helicopters

The U.S. military has said the attacking forces were aligned with the Syrian government and were backed by artillery, tanks, multiple-launch rocket systems and mortars.

“I doubt that 257 people all just decided on their individual own selves to suddenly cross the river into enemy territory and start shelling a location and maneuvering tanks against it,” Mattis said.

“So whatever happened, we’ll try to figure it out. We’ll work with, obviously, anyone who can answer that question, but I cannot, at this time.”

https://www.reuters.com/article/mideast-crisis-syria-pentagon/u-s-still-unsure-who-directed-syria-attack-despite-russian-dead-idUSKCN1G204S

Quoted:

a lot less then setting up a similar training exercise where we had to provide the targets.