Syrian Troops Develop Momentum In Countryside Of Al-Bukamal (Map)

Donate

The Syrian Arab Army (SAA) and Hezbollah have been developing momentum in the countryside of al-Bukamal since the liberation of the city from ISIS on Sunday. ISIS has conducted a series of counter-attacks against the SAA near al-Bukamal, but has not been able to stop the goovernment advance.

The SAA, Hezbollah, the Tiger Forces and their allies, backed up by the Russian Aerospace Forces, are now working to drive the remaining ISIS members out from the villages located on the western bank of the Euphrates.

Syrian Troops Develop Momentum In Countryside Of Al-Bukamal (Map)

Click to see the full-size map

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • Ivanus59

    I read on Al Masdar yesterday that SAA’s units captured 2 or 3 villages north-east of Al Bukamal, on the eastern side of the river bank…

  • Don’t read butthurt replies

    Just don’t let the Kurds cross!

    • Gary Sellars

      Kurds lack any battlefield engineering vehicles to conduct crossing by armoured formations.

      • Jens Holm

        You dont know that at all. We have also seen annouced that USA should have helicoptercapacity for almost any transportation. You do not know if SDF fx could take Maydden, if they wished to block anything.

        But realisme seemes to be replaced by Your systematic evil assumptions making no solutions at all.,

    • Jens Holm

      They dont want to. Just propaganda from Your side and inclusive Iran. We see it all the time, propganda systematicly misleading Your own people as well.

      • Don’t read butthurt replies

        They don’t want to? and what propaganda?

        • Jens Holm

          Yes, same thing all the way from Al Bab and down and also before that.

          Only evil talk making SDF and Kurds into something, they are not and also making excuses for Damaskus and Ankara.

          Very strange You have not noticed that.

        • Politolog Externista

          tis butthurt self-righteous hypocrisy of a joohadi sympathizer, making nonsense replies, which imply you are incorrect. Manipulative lying and saying nothing of substance at the same time. Trying to sow confusion.

          • Jens Holm

            Take a russian wideo or Abu Kamal one more time.

            None of that is not propaganda.

            Around Tabqa = Same thing.

            SDF would take the oilfields, SDF would block for taking Tabqa already alomost taken and Raqqa neutralized, bombarment of SDf troops west of Tabqa …

            Focus around Tabqa blaming SDF to let Raqqa open for retreat of ISIS troops. When it was closed it was killing all the civilians even numbers today say its a kind of low rekord for few civilians died, but You focused on building. 2000 from SDF dies for Eufrat Wrats of SDF or was hard woundes, 2500 of SDF were wounded for ful repair -Thats no resistance or´the soldiers of SDF are coiminnting suicide in bunches.

            SDF only took villages, hamlets and derserts. Hard to take anything eklse, when there is almost only that. But they took Raqqa once 220.000 and before that Tabqa at least 60.000 as well.

            SDF was blamed not to help at DEZ. When they rapidly came, they were artillerystriked hard and blamed for taking oilfields, pipes and equipment.

            Twice the stupidist having lack of everything crosses Eufrat there right into well prepared ISIS defences, both having a hard time. And afterwards SDF was blamed having relative light forces or none.

            The ususal talk, here blaming SDF for something totally stupid slow blind elefant getting wounded.

            The SDF pland was to cut ISIS at the DEZ borders in 2, but You spoiled it and instead made many more fronts, so You had big losses at Sukna right after that having no troops to cover most of it.

            That was explained as ISIS focused on only SAA. Thats kind of true, because You made Yourself perfect for as much counterattack as they were able to. Stupid=again.

            You also again forget, that SDF are much smaller then You and do a lot to keep their soldiers alive. So their asvances are mainly smaller but also like knives, and by their way of fighting, their troops dont fell apart as SAA has done so many times. So You lie telling SDF is not fighting to cover Your soldiers are in too often bad planned spendables conditions.

            The list for that is much longer. You here call mere jihadist, but I tell about military warfare, which is totally neutral to that.

            You by that support, that SAA has to stay in the low level is mainly has and have had since 1967 because of Your culture and religion and its fatalism filled up with ineffective production as well as corruption.

            You support a modern state can be driven as an old Emirate and deny to see why not even You are told that many times as well.

            Some Emir Dicatator in the Baathista style can run a Emirat of Damaskus or something, but certainly not a country in seize of Syria or Iraq.

            There are 2 directions, which can improve. 1) to divide into peaces and Emir and friends can handle or 2) To divide the power very much in trust to the rest.

            We have local elections here yesterday and changes here and there, because some has done a bad job and some seemes to nake inprovements possible. Those Counties and the smaller units take in and rund 50% of all tax. Our statetake in the rest, where fx equal pension to all old and hancicapped aere the main part.

            The state and the others are helping each other in trust. Yours are made in fear and no trust.

            You forget that SDF has made no armed uprice against You. They just cant see Damaskus can see and care fo them and know their real problems. Therefore they will solve them themselves by own taxes and own responsability.

      • Politolog Externista

        crafty liar, arent you?
        “they”,- who?
        “dont want to” – source?
        “just propaganda” – you said it yourself, but source? Non-joohadi pls.
        “from your side” – it is apparent you do it, but nonjoohadi source.
        “inclusive Iran” – Iran is inclusive? Source?
        “we” – who?
        “see it all the time” – blind people see nothing, anyway, nonjoohadi source.
        “PropGnda systematicly misleading” – yes, you do that, since you claim it, back it up with a nonjoohadi source.
        “Your own people as well” – source?

        • Jens Holm

          Thats right.

  • Garga

    I read on a Persian source that BuKamal was not captured before. It was a deception to slow the SDF and US moving there.

    Doesn’t seem so convincing, this may work on average Joe but militaries (and one that cooperates with ISIS) have their own in-the-field sources.

    Anyway it’s liberated now, despite all troubles they could throw at SAA and allies. General Soleymani wrote a letter to Ayatollah Khamenei and talks about these things.

    • @Inc2Get

      You are very right bro. As I’ve previously stated, one tiger forces commander/general said that abukamal never was liberated and that they didn’t lose the city because they didn’t have full control over it. He also said that while the SAA said Isis had fully withdrawn from the city back then, they merely hid in the rubbles instead of retreating. The most probable argument as of why that information was spread is because, as you said, to stop SDF advance. However, it could also be a missconduct of information as we’ve previously seen.

      • Jens Holm

        I dont understand why SDF should be any part of that cirkus Damaskus and Russia videoshow.

    • Jens Holm

      Yes, they dont have internet or something.

    • Deo Cass

      Instead it had been captured by the Iraqi Iranian backed PMU. However the US made pressure on the Iraqi government to force the PMU out of al-Bukamal threathening to target them. Then came the announcement by the Iraqi government that Iraq does not intend to intervene in Syria. Following which the PMU retreated back to Iraq and ISIS returned to their previous positions within the city. The SAA was not far though, but had not yet surrounded the city at the time.