Let’s look what Kurdish sources report about the Turkish operation against ISIS in the Syrian town of al-Bab.
Photo: AFP
Pro-Kurdish sources spread interesting information about ‘Turkish success’ in Syria and compare results of the military operations of the Turkish Army and the Free Syrian Army (FSA) in al-Bab and achievements of the People’s Protection Units (YPG) and the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) in Manbij.
So, a map, showing ‘advances’ of the Turkish coalition in al-Bab and results of the Kurdish military operation in Manbij, made during the last three months, was published online. An author of the map noted that the YPG and the SDF are “heroes,” while Turkey and its allies are just “terrorist clowns.”
Left: #Manbij Opr. by #YPG/#SDF Heros
Right: #AlBab Opr by terrorist clown #turkey#twitterkurds #pyd #syria #syrien #türkei #pkk #erdogan pic.twitter.com/TxL92R0Go7
— Mahone (@mahoneee10) February 22, 2017
At the same time, pro-Kurdish sources claim that Turkey provides false information on its advances in al-Bab, and tries to hide the real number of losses and casualties. As the Kurdish side says, by February 20, 2017, more than 64 Turkish soldiers have been killed, while over 386 others have been wounded on the al-Bab’s battlefield. According to the kurdish version, over 469 fighters of the FSA have been killed and at least 1,712 of them have been injured during the battle. The Turkish Army has lost over 30 battle tanks and more than 20 armored fighting vehicles. According to official data, about 444 local civilians lost their lives during the battle for al-Bab, while unofficial sources claim that the number of civilian victims is over 2,000 people.
Turkey is lying about its gains in #alBab #Turkey #TFSA #ISIS pic.twitter.com/WW6xl4GmcU
— Rojava Revolution (@RojavaRev) February 21, 2017
Even taking into account that the information is presented in not entirely objective way, it clearly shows the difference between statements of the Turkish authorities and real achievements of pro-Turkish fighters on the battlefield.
Personally I take the battlefield claims of all sides with a grain of salt. Those of the Kurds, the SAA, the Russians, the Americans, and the Turks. Everyone has their own agenda. As usual the trick is in reading in between the lines.
Agreed. It seems to me the credibility gap of Turks is one of the widest and is widening.
The turks are clowns, but kurds are overrated.
If not for constant US airstrikes, embeded western special forces, training, intel, weapons (Kurds don’t have anything to stop VBIEDS, MiLAN rockets helped them greatly, plus SFs use Javelins for that too), various supplies and equipment, and all types of western support, i doubt that the kurds would have taken much territory. The US launched 1500 airstikes for the defence of Kobane alone, when the kurds were on the verge of losing it, if not for massive air bombardments the kurds would have lost Kobane.
They did hold out in Shieik Masqod against all the odds.
With this? ISIS is ever be better armed than Kurds. What we speak of? Quality of generals/soldiers or quality of equipment?
You are not completely wrong but where you say SDF is overrated, you might be partially right, then so are the SAA and Iraqi Army/PMU.
In the fight for Aleppo, SAA depended strategically partially on the kurds, shielding the north of the city from the Azaz corridor and cutting Castello Road.
The SAA depended heavily on RuAF, russian artillery and special forces and militia from Iran and Hezbollah. Where the SAA fought on their own, in august 2015, Hassakah, they had to be saved by YPG and in the end YPG, now SDF, controls the city.
As for Mosul, the SDF is not there, so no comparison. As for the pesh merga, they did their appointed job and did it both rapidly and efficiently. The PMU’s did an awfully bad job in Ramada and elsewhere. Where they fight on their own, they do not fight well. And you must not forget, the PMU’s do have the heavy weapons neither Iraqi nor Syrian kurds have.