US Fighter Jet Downed Iranian-made Armed Drone Over Syria – Reports

Donate

US Fighter Jet Downed Iranian-made Armed Drone Over Syria - Reports

FILE IMAGE

A US F-15 fighter jet has reportedly downed an Iranian-made armed drone (allegedly Shahed 129) in the area near the town of At Tanf in southeastern Syria, according to media reports.

At Tanf is controlled by the US-led coalition. US troops stationed there allegedly train opposition fighters to “combat ISIS.” However, according to experts, the coalition uses the area in order to oppose the Syrian government attempting to restore control over the borders with Iraq and Jordan.

According to CNN, the US-led coalition “believed” that the drone was a threat to coalition forces.

If confirmed, this was the second Iranian-made armed drone downed by the coalition in the area. The previous incident took place earlier in June when the coalition was attempting to stop the government advance in the border area with some airstrikes.

Despite this, the Syrian army and its allies reached the border with Iraq northeast of At Tanf.

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • Joe Doe

    American just proof again that Russia is incapable to track, monitor and defend Syria. Therefore, Russian statements are baseless and no weight

    • John Whitehot

      here we go.

    • Bernardo Morais

      Just shut the fuck up. You only talk shit here. Go home eat mud.

    • Daniel Schilling

      Iranians(& Russians) have the most advanced Drones the are even able to track precisely all your MOM’s holes ptrecisely target her holes. Don`t doubt about it, if you realy like ur MOM in Mossad.

  • rudy

    The real treath in that region overthere are the Americans and ISraeHELLi’s !

    • Spanker Dane

      Thank you for your well-researched and exceedingly comprehensive comment.

      I am left speechless, and completely in awe, by the depth and breadth of your analytical skills.

      • tigbear

        Analysis doesn’t have to be longwinded to be good. It can be short and straight to the point.

  • Joe Doe

    Syria really needs to get high tech Air Defence System and VERDA MANPAT, than attack and transport helicopter nad SU-29, SU-30 and SU-34. Assad does not protect his army and nation buy avoiding getting such military hardware and Russia at this stage can’t fully protect him or SYria, because americans does not attacking Russian. Assad needs get his own system and military hardware

    • John Whitehot

      shooting down american drones is currently well within the capability of Syria, especially with the RuAF in the country. Moreover, american drones can be armed, something which, along with the fact that US have struck pro-SA forces lately, gives Syria enough reasons to blast them out of the sky.

      • BlueInGreen

        The problem at hand is that the US doesn’t respond proportionately. It will use an attack on it’s drones as a means to start a wider conflict agains the SAA and Iranian backed militias.

        US is basically saying “give me an excuse”. I know a lot of us are just raging on the inside but waiting and beating the US backed forces is the best we can for the time being.

        • tigbear

          What’s the alternative? Putting your hands up and say, “I’m admitting defeat”? Sooner or later, Assad has to face the US. IF he wants to take back the country. If he doesn’t care that much, just admit defeat now. He doesn’t have any strategy to cope with the US attacks but he still sends his troops into battle zones where they can be hit at by the US. What a terrible leader. Give the troops cover or don’t send them into war zones. If he doesn’t send them into war zones, admit that he lost the battle and organize a truce and a plan of how the nation will be carved up.

          • Ma_Laoshi

            Well at least this Su-22 in Raqqa province *was* sent into battle with (Russian top) cover it seems. The only conceivable threat for that top cover to guard against, was being shot down by the US. Assad and the SyAF learned the hard way that such top cover is–fake.

            Assad is far from perfect, and sure he sends troops into battle knowing that losses will be inevitable even though progress is being made as well. Is that being a terrible leader? I’d call it a hard decision.

          • tigbear

            No, he sends them in without cover, no protection. That’s what makes him a terrible leader.

    • Alex Black

      You are talking insanity, even with these jets, taking on the american air assets would be insane for Syria. These jets would be destroyed on the ground the moment they land by tomahawk missiles, assuming they survived the encounter in the first place, and who would pilot these planes? Syria needs to continue capturing ISIS territory despite US harassment, because that is the game. Taking the bait and getting into a shooting war with the Americans is unwise and contrary to Syrian interests.

      • Joe Doe

        You wrong. Syria is already destroyed and couple additional bomb will not make a difference. Americans will have no stomach for more americans deads and costly wars. With such High Tech and shutting down cople american Air Plans will put americans on notice. Many high ranking figures already pointing that any additional escalation by americans will be the americans fold

        • Alex Black

          Maybe I am wrong, maybe I am not. Syria is far from destroyed. A lot of damage has been done over six years of war, but Syrian government and armed forces are functional and effective. You fail to realize that in the US there are different opinions, even within the government about the American presence in the Syria theater and what level of involvement is appropriate. Picking a losing fight is never smart, especially when it would give more power to the voices calling for a larger military involvement in Syria.

          • Joe Doe

            At this stage Syria has no chance and you right, the SAA will lose. That’s I specifically wrote in my statement Syria need better military hardware, before can stand up against americans and again Syria is destroyed, all cities are almost flat, therefore for Syria does not make a difference if some cities will be level even more. You don’t want start war after you rebuild your country

          • Alex Black

            The hardware you call for, Syria has no ability to operate, maintain or protect. It is better, and far cheaper to proceed as the Syrians do right now. While the situations is untenable as is in high points of any conflict, there is going to be a flare, some people will die on both sides, and the mainstream of war will go on with the momentum behind the SAA and their allies. An attack on Americans would lead to a massive response that could change that. Never change anything while you are winning.

          • Joe Doe

            You can’t have such approach as: ability to operate, maintain or protect. As you will never be able to accomplish. They need to get those weapons now and while they wining the war with ISIS, tested and training and experience the new weapons and in time and the time will come the SAA will be ready.

          • Alex Black

            In the mean time, there are more pressing concerns.

          • Joe Doe

            Yes, the are, but are not stoppers do other things, such as above

          • tigbear

            Nah, Syria is not winning. It’s losing. If Syria defines winning the war as kicking all the foreigners out and exerting Syrian government sovereignty over all regions of Syria, it had better think of a way of attacking USA successfully NOW. The longer it puts off doing that, the more entrenched the US will be and the more able it will be able to defeat Syrian forces. It will start building bases in captured territory. It will start making the SDF people the legitimate government of the various towns they take over. Syria will have a much harder time then.

            And John Doe is right. When it’s a battle between a weaker nation and a powerful invader, the weaker nation has to take lots of losses if it’s going to win. There is no getting around that. What a weaker nation can do is make the sacrifices in order to inflict unbearable losses on the other side. Normally, an invader has an upper limit on the losses it’s going to take before it withdraws. This is much lower than that for the invaded nation. So that’s what the Syrians can do. They will take a hit but they can make strikes at the US too, and make it intolerable for them to stay. The people back home won’t accept a high loss. This isn’t really Vietnam or even Korea, so they aren’t going to keep shelling out money for it. The war in Syria never had much support back home so Assad has this on his side.

            And as John Doe said, there is no point building and then starting a war after that. The country is already devastated in many parts — Syria doesn’t have much to lose from that point of view.

            Whether this war happens against the Americans or not depends on Assad, whether he has the will to do this or not.

            As I said, he doesn’t have much to lose. At this rate, SDF and USA will take over large chunks of the nation. Assad controlled Syria will be down to half. So he will lose half of Syria and the lost part can be called something else.

            If that’s what he wants, he should go ahead. He might get one or two ISIS towns, but what would be the point. He will have a US puppet as a neighbor.

            He needs to decide NOW what he wants for the end game. If he doesn’t make up his mind, what happened in the past few days is going to keep repeating. The SDF will keep muscling in on whatever area they want to take over. If SAA come too close, the SDF will call its attack dogs, the USAF, to shoot at the SAA forces on the ground or in the air.

            SAA will grumble that it wasn’t shooting at SDF, which everyone knows is true, and its troops will remain unprotected. Assad is being selfish sending his troops to advance without adequate protection. Don’t advance or make them advance but give them adequate protection. And if that protection involves shooting down American planes, so be it.

            Assad has to make up his mind. The USA doesn’t care about rules of engagement or what safe zones Russia has set up or who Assad’s troops were aiming at. Their mission is to take over as much territory as they can and to weaken Assad’s army as much as possible by taking pot shots at it.

            Assad has shown he’s totally unprepared for this war. He has no strategy. He has been outwitted since the war started.

            I really advise him to step down and let a stronger and more capable leader take over the reins of government.

            The SAA are losing faith in him. You can’t trust a leader who sends you into a battle zone and leaves you unprotected.

            The Americans do not care. At this stage, they are just killing machines. They follow orders. They are given a mission and they will do anything to achieve the goal of that mission, regardless of whether they have to lie and act otherwise immorally. They know they are in the wrong, invading a nation that has done nothing wrong, but MIGHT MAKES RIGHT.

            You can whine all you want and plead your case in the UN, but at the end of the day, might will win out.

            If this keeps happening: Assad sending his troops here and there, and they get attacked by the US, even the troops might start rebelling.

            Assad has to regroup and rethink his strategy because the current one is failing and his troops are dying without any cover.

            If the troops are dying in a situation where the leader gives them cover but the battle is hard, troops are willing to make the sacrifice and head into dangerous areas. When the leader doesn’t give them any cover, troops are understandably upset about this. Assad looks weak. Since this has happened, all he’s done is whine. Whining may get you some sympathy, but sympathy doesn’t win the war. He needs to protect his troops OR NOT SEND THEM OUT THERE.

            Assad has to a lot of thinking to do. What does he want from the war? How many troops is it worth sacrificing for that goal?

            My advice is go for the Big Win. Appoint someone as president, who will take over the role that Assad is doing at the moment, directing the war, and Assad can create a new position, as prime minister, and take over that position. In this role, he can do ceremonial duties and act as an ambassador and so on. It will mainly be a ceremonial position. In this way, people can have the continuity of leadership and it won’t look as if Syria is giving in to the USA’s demands for change of government or “regime change” as they call it, and Syria will have the benefit of a better leader who can handle the current crisis better.

            Then this new leader should think about a new strategy of getting rid of America from the nation.

          • Thegr8rambino

            SAA is not gonna lose

  • Mountains

    The Americans crossing from Jordan lol

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCu4JplUAAAHWa_.jpg

    • Graeme Rymill

      Where did the photo come from? Not from official US sources….

    • Alex Black

      Just about 30 years ago these tanks were impressive, today they would be burning all over Syria due to advancement in portable missile technology.

      • Mountains

        I agree. Due to advancement Tanks are becoming more and more irrelevant

      • Spanker Dane

        Saddam Hussein wishes you were right.

        • Alex Black

          Its not a new concept, Israeli tanks got similarly shreded in lebanon in the last war, scared the piss out of the IDF.

          • Spanker Dane

            No, it’s not a new conept. In fact, US armor was surprised by the abundance of Komet-Es in the hands of Iraqi troops during the Iraq War. Caused some adjustments, but it didn’t alter the timeline for the drive on Baghdad.

          • Alex Black

            So then maybe your previous propaganda post about the killing of Sadam was a misrepresentation that you do not actually believe. Sadam got hit by an overwhelming force. I made a comment regarding introduction of US Abram platform into a theater where it will not make a large impact. Thank you for your thought. I can tell that you are on here to talk smack rather than discuss, i have no use for that.

          • Spanker Dane

            You seem to have seriously misunderstood my post. I gave you zero propaganda, and 100% historical facts about the war in Iraq. Not sure which part of my post you misunderstood.

          • Alex Black

            Sadam was attacked twice, both times his army, which was one of the largest in the world was destroyed by US air power. The contribution of US armor did more to spread uranium based munitions and expose our soldiers to hazard that create meaningful impact on the battle field even then. Today, these tanks can be best described as a grave for three brothers.

          • Spanker Dane

            You wrote “30 years ago these tanks were impressive, today they would be burning all over Syria due to advancement in portable missile technology.” My point was that U.S. armored divisions have already faced just such a threat. It did not slow them down back then, it would not slow them down now (and, of course, they’d go in with CAS).

            As to DU, I know something about this, and I can assure you that I would have no qualms sleeping next to DU munitions for the rest of my life.

          • Alex Black

            There have been substantial improvements in armor penetrators, current generation of Anti Tank weapons substantially increases the lethality of highly mobile AT squads. You may not have issues with depleted uranium, but if you knew more about the subject, and the DNA damage that results, you might feel differently.

          • Jacek Wolski

            “Tanks are not the tech of the future” So why would the Russian army put in an order for 2300 T-14 if tanks are not the future?

          • Alex Black

            Russia is a land power but tanks are still not the tech of the future. Armata concentrates on a small cruebprotected by a capsule because Russians know that. There future versions will be robotic

          • Solomon Krupacek

            they were not slowed down, necause they bribed iraqi generals and they did not fight.

          • John Whitehot

            not only that.

            Their families are likely in danger too as the radioactive material can embed into clothes and stay there even after several regular washes.

          • Alex Black

            Sure, remove closing step 1 after checking airway and pulse.

          • John Whitehot

            wtf is that supposed to mean?

          • Alex Black

            I was responding to your comment about how to handle a person exposed to a toxin or a radioactive substance, you make sure they are breathing, they got a pulse, then you cut of their clothing and wash them. That is is the protocol.

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/3b3cea201fe626a6cde991b7ee6956d8718d2eb7ca95dc2c3cb54d22164e326f.png

          • John Whitehot

            ok

    • John Whitehot

      one company of M1A2s is not going to change anything on the terrain in Syria. These tanks are probably intended to defend the US base in the area from lightly armed forces.

    • Kell

      That pic looks like its some kind of desert firing range, possibly in Iraq, Saudi or Egypt with Iraqi, Saudi or Egyptian M1s.

      https://southfront.org/m1-(((abrams)))-spends-autumn-years-arab-winter/

      https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b4c3c7bdab1ee4b15de857e03e130566ef4cdf125ac18f237e02debff29004b0.jpg

  • chris chuba

    The Pentagon never gives the exact location of these events. How many miles was it from Al Tanf, was it downed over ISIS or US proxy territory?

  • Ma_Laoshi

    …that didn’t take long, as expected. The Americans are showing that, in spite of Russian bloviating, they still fly where they want and shoot at what they want.

  • General Surena

    drone iran yapımıdır, su 22 de rus yapımıdır, fakat suriye kullanıyor.
    konunun iranla ne ilgisi var… hahah. ezik bu ABD.

  • Spanker Dane

    It would appear as though there is now a de facto no-fly zone encompassing certain air vectors in Syria.

  • Solomon Krupacek

    did not this happen west from euphrat?

  • goingbrokes

    They can take these pot-shots outside Syrian airspace.

  • Daniel Schilling

    This conflict will cdertainly spill over into israHELL and Jordan.

  • Daniel Schilling

    Hopefully devil-israHELL is destroyed soon.
    All these conflicts in west-Asia is because of devil-israHELL.

  • Daniel Schilling

    The war between israHELL and Lebanon will beginn soon.
    Tel-Aviv will be the first TARGET for Hezbollah Missiles.

  • Behold a Pale Horse

    We’re at the border. we’re at the border, you’re in the sand, and we’re at the border, nah nah nah nah nah naaaaah

  • Gerhard Pleyer

    I´m sure in the next few weeks americans will lose some of their planes there.

  • Solomon Krupacek

    what happens? no gresh article on SF, no fresh aricle on AMN.

  • AMHants

    Iran is legally in Syria, at the invite of the elected Government of the Sovereign Nation, just like Russia.

    The US never received the invite and have no reason or permission to be in Syria.

  • kurdi aram

    they don`t show any photo.
    US-americans r big liers nobody believes their propaganda.