BEIRUT, LEBANON (3:10 P.M.) – The U.S. Coalition carried out another airstrike against a group of pro-government Iraqi paramilitary fighters near the Syrian border-crossing, Iraq’s Afaq TV reported yesterday.

According to the Afaq report, members of the Iraqi paramilitary unit, Sayyed Al-Shuhada Regiment, were attacked, yesterday, by the U.S. Coalition near the Albukamal Border-Crossing in the Deir Ezzor Governorate.


The report added that at least one Sayyed Al-Shuhada fighter was killed and another six were badly injured by the U.S. attack near Albukamal.

The Sayyed Al-Shuhada Regiment is part of the Popular Mobilization Units (Hashd Al-Sha’abi); they have participated in several offensives that have been backed by the U.S. military.

This attack was under reported because of the large strike by the U.S. Coalition on a Syrian military convoy near the Tanf Border-Crossing in southeast Homs.

Share this article:
ALSO READ  Trouble in jihadist paradise: Turkistani emir arrested by fellow jihadists in Latakia

Notice: All comments represent the view of the commenter and not necessarily the views of AMN.

All comments that are not spam or wholly inappropriate are approved, we do not sort out opinions or points of view that are different from ours.

If your comment is held for moderation, please just be patient, it will be published unless it falls into one of the two categories as mentioned above.


  1. I really want to condemn Americans but let’s be fair. Isn’t it a bit late for SAA and its allies for securing the area near the Jordan border? SAA and its allies had this opportunity to move toward this area until the March 2016 but they did not use this opportunity. Instead halted their operation in Allepo after signing that fucking ceasefire. Actually Russia withdrew from Syria instead of keeping its operation against ISIS. It was the best time but pity.

    • SAA are fighting in their own land and have every right to attack wherever they want, whenever they want to clear the country from terrorists. But yea i agree that there could’ve been a more suitable time

    • In theory this is Syrian territory and doesn’t belong to anybody else. If the Syrian army wants to secure its own territory no other external power is allowed to step in and prevent that. This is usually in layman’s terms called “interfering in internal affairs” and soon to be followed by a “declaration of war”. How does India react when Pakistan shells Kashmir? They shoot back. How does Israel react when Hesbollah shoots at them? They shoot back. That is the right of a country. Just because the Nato is doing it doesn’t make it right. Let’s shoot down a couple of Nato planes and see what happens.

    • The problem of course for the SAA is man power and the issue of US illegal aggression. Had the SAA been able to spare the manpower when the ISIS gangs were stronger the US would not have had to expose their duplicity . The world now can see that the US supports any terrorist gangs they need to BUT today the USAF may as well proudly fly with the ISIS flag on their wings.

      It is clear for all to see.

    • y me pregunta asi estan la situacion porque no mandar un viejo scud o toshka contra la base enemiga en TALAFAD y resolver de fondo el problema es evidente que se envian tropas sin cobertura de helocoptero ni aeronaves es sacrificar personal de infanteria y medios blindados (antiguos) cual es el motivo de una escuadra mixta ruso siria de aviones que ataquen el nucleo rebelde y aliado??

    • I agree with you.
      Now, also, were the strikes deliberate or not?
      Simply not being accustomed to have SAA or NDF operating an area, especially with NDF as they’re paramilitaries so you’re likely to see guys with technicals and with civilian clothes added by tactical harness. You have hundreds of groups around so when you see them in the electro-optics/FLIR, an error is very easy to make.
      Note that even Russians did a few “blue on blue” : at least 2 in 2016, surely more.
      Now we can be sure many will accuse them to stand with ISIS but, was it really the case, we’d see things like the 1991 infamous ‘Highway of Death’ : +2600 vehicles destroyed in 6 hours, +10k dead.
      Many not seem to get what western air support means, I mean when they’re not here as posers as it’s really the case with CJTFOIR. Same thing values for the Jews and it’s clear that if it may not have been really possible in 1991, was it wanted, a Russian actual large extent strike-pack would be crazy devastating too.
      It’s clear that I’m pretty unhappy with ALL the forces around as, no matter whose AF are implied, aerial operations are really a joke! There is NO air campaign, just an advertising campaign! Those who really fight terrorists in Syria or Iraq are boots, no matter the group they belong to.

      • Al Masdar: The Pentagon claimed a Syrian military convoy was heading towards their positions, when they decided to issue a warning; this was ignored, so the Coalition attacked the convoy.

        Slate: In one incident, 27 regime vehicles drove within 18 miles of al-Tanf, which breached the 34 mile radius of the army convoy. U.S. aircraft attempted to buzz the regime, but when the convoy didn’t turn around, they conducted a strike against some of the vehicles.

        Were’s the doubt wether “deliberate or not”? I see only a makeshift no-trespass-zone imposed by USA on Syrian soil.

      • Fair point. We mustnt underestimate US incompetence. Russian friendly fire is called red on red. But i am still awaiting a single French accidental strike on Israels or even Americans . Like me tripping up my real life bosses some accidents happen less often than others. Strange innit.

    • Its late for Syria and Iraq to secure their own remote bits of Territory? Really? Is it only fair to keep the New Syrian Qaeda in the region they have first infested on direct orders from CENTCOM?? Man you should gat a job with Soros.

        • Thanks for calling me A FM :D. It’s also my first time that have been called a Marshal! Anyway, not late for Syria and Iraq to secure their own remote bits of Territory but it seems late for SAA and its allies not to be engaged directly and deliberately with US military aircraft.

    • No they had not the oportunity … The only thing that allowed the Tanf offensive is the de escalation zones deal wich allowed SAA to free up thousands of fighters to deploy them against the islamic state

      • Who is engaged in Tanf offensive now? SAA and its allies or its allies and SAA 😉 ? Its allies and SAA. The majority are Shiite militants and they were always ready to be deployed from Iraq or Iran to this particular area but were not allowed. I don’t know why. If somebody knows why then I wait for a convincing and persuasive answer.

          • But this empty desert is the most strategic empty desert of Syria. So called rebels had and have the protection of US but SAA and ts allies are engaged with them now so they could engage sooner. Not with US aircraft but ISIS without any US excuse.

          • The only reason they go now is because they have tons of men available following the de escalation zones deal and they cannot attack other places in syria beacause of that same deal .

            You can’t just throw militias in the open and call it an offensive . It has te be carefully planned . These militias were much more useful to back SAA in big offensives in Damascus , Hama, Aleppo …

  2. “near the Albukamal Border-Crossing ”

    senseless news… Abu Kamal (Syria ) and the other towns on the Euphrates river are islamic state strongholds, neither PMU or SAA can just waltz in

    There is no SAA or PMU there . The closest force to Abu Kamal are the US backed FSA

  3. Cutting the Syr-Irq-Irn corridor not only isolates Damsq/Lebanon, but also cuts/prevents:
    a. Potential pipelines
    b. Silk road
    c. Ruaf air corridor from Caspian-Irn-Irq-Syr-Mediterranean

    Without this corridor, Trts naval facility and Hmaymim AB lose most of their meaning & purpose.

    Only, Us’s appears not to be in a very strong position, either. Air strikes really show desperation & suggest that militants are based out of Jordan and do not really control the Syr desert. After all, it is one thing to color in a map, and another to actually control the territory.