Had it not been for dozens of U.S. airstrikes in recent weeks, the southern hub city Kandahar would be under siege, after Taliban fighters threatened to overrun several surrounding districts, security officials say.

Now with President Donald Trump’s orders to cut US forces in Afghanistan by roughly half — from 4,500 to 2,500 — Kandahar’s fate, and the fate of the Afghan security forces spread across the country, are once more in question.

“If it were not for the air support of US&nbsp;forces, the Taliban would be sitting inside Kandahar city now,” Col. Zabiullah Ghorzang, an Afghan army regimental commander, said Tuesday.

The Pentagon on Tuesday formally announced those troop cuts, stopping short of the full withdrawal by Christmas that Trump had mused about publicly and ensuring that the war in Afghanistan will transition to a fourth US administration over almost 20 years of conflict.

Also read|&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/israel-air-strikes-in-syria-kill-three-troops-hit-iranian-targets-343817">Israel air strikes in Syria kill three troops, hit Iranian targets</a>

The reduction, though expected by Afghan officials, is coming at a desperate time for Afghanistan: Peace negotiations in Qatar between the Afghan government and the insurgency are stalled, Taliban offensives are surging near important cities in the south and north, and morale has been plunging among the Afghan government forces as they take heavy casualties, officials say.

The withdrawal plan has ramifications beyond Afghanistan, including troop cutbacks in the Middle East and Africa.

In Iraq, the American troop presence, which is seen as a hedge against a resurgence of the Islamic State and against powerful Iranian influence, has already come down to about 3,500 troops this year. Under the new orders, Pentagon officials say it will come down to around 2,500 in January. Unlike in Afghanistan, the cuts have not been a source of alarm: Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi has described the cuts as being agreed to and desirable for both sides.

In Somalia, the withdrawal plan — no formal numbers were announced on Tuesday — is coming as al-Shabab, a terrorist group linked to al-Qaida, continues to intensify its attacks on both military and civilian targets in an effort to topple the country’s Western-backed government.

Had it not been for dozens of U.S. airstrikes in recent weeks, the southern hub city Kandahar would be under siege, after Taliban fighters threatened to overrun several surrounding districts, security officials say.

Had it not been for dozens of U.S. airstrikes in recent weeks, the southern hub city Kandahar would be under siege, after Taliban fighters threatened to overrun several surrounding districts, security officials say. Now with President Donald Trump’s orders to cut US forces in Afghanistan by roughly half — from 4,500 to 2,500 — Kandahar’s fate, and the fate of the Afghan security forces spread across the country, are once more in question. “If it were not for the air support of US forces, the Taliban would be sitting inside Kandahar city now,” Col. Zabiullah Ghorzang, an Afghan army regimental commander, said Tuesday. The Pentagon on Tuesday formally announced those troop cuts, stopping short of the full withdrawal by Christmas that Trump had mused about publicly and ensuring that the war in Afghanistan will transition to a fourth US administration over almost 20 years of conflict. Also read| Israel air strikes in Syria kill three troops, hit Iranian targets The reduction, though expected by Afghan officials, is coming at a desperate time for Afghanistan: Peace negotiations in Qatar between the Afghan government and the insurgency are stalled, Taliban offensives are surging near important cities in the south and north, and morale has been plunging among the Afghan government forces as they take heavy casualties, officials say. The withdrawal plan has ramifications beyond Afghanistan, including troop cutbacks in the Middle East and Africa. In Iraq, the American troop presence, which is seen as a hedge against a resurgence of the Islamic State and against powerful Iranian influence, has already come down to about 3,500 troops this year. Under the new orders, Pentagon officials say it will come down to around 2,500 in January. Unlike in Afghanistan, the cuts have not been a source of alarm: Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi has described the cuts as being agreed to and desirable for both sides. In Somalia, the withdrawal plan — no formal numbers were announced on Tuesday — is coming as al-Shabab, a terrorist group linked to al-Qaida, continues to intensify its attacks on both military and civilian targets in an effort to topple the country’s Western-backed government.

US troops are packing up, ready or not

Several hundred protesters gathered in Baghdad on Saturday and demanded ouster of US troops from Iraq. Iraqi Parliament had voted to this effect earlier this year.

"We will choose resistance if parliament's vote is not ratified!" read one of the banners at the demonstration, which took place near an entrance to the high-security Green Zone, where the US embassy and other foreign missions are located.&nbsp;

Some of the protesters carried sign having logo of Hashed-al-Shaabi. It is a state-sponsored network of armed groups including many supported by Iran.

In January, after US airstrike killed top Iranian general Qasem Soleimani and the Hashed's deputy head, outraged Iraqi parliamentarians had voted to oust all foreign forces deployed in the country.

The US has sent thousands of troops to Iraq since 2014 to lead an international coalition helping Baghdad fight the Islamic State jihadist group.

Washington has drawn down those forces in recent months to around 3,000, and other coalition countries have also shrunk their footprint.

Starting in October 2019, rockets regularly targeted those troops as well as diplomats at the US embassy. 
Over the summer, there was a marked increase in attacks against coalition logistics convoys using roadside bombs.

Enraged by the ongoing attacks, the US in late September threatened to close its Baghdad embassy and carry out bombing raids against hard-line elements of the Hashed.

Pro-Iran factions announced a temporary truce in October that put an end to the attacks, with no rockets targeting the embassy or foreign troops since.

Iraq has long been caught in the struggle for influence between its two main allies, the US and Iran, with the tug-of-war intensifying under US President Donald Trump.

Baghdad has been closely monitoring the results of the US presidential elections, seeing a change in the White House as a sign that tensions between Washington and Tehran could decrease.&nbsp;

(With inputs from AFP)

Several hundred protesters gathered in Baghdad on Saturday and demanded ouster of US troops from Iraq. Iraqi Parliament had voted to this effect earlier this year.

Several hundred protesters gathered in Baghdad on Saturday and demanded ouster of US troops from Iraq. Iraqi Parliament had voted to this effect earlier this year. "We will choose resistance if parliament's vote is not ratified!" read one of the banners at the demonstration, which took place near an entrance to the high-security Green Zone, where the US embassy and other foreign missions are located. Some of the protesters carried sign having logo of Hashed-al-Shaabi. It is a state-sponsored network of armed groups including many supported by Iran. In January, after US airstrike killed top Iranian general Qasem Soleimani and the Hashed's deputy head, outraged Iraqi parliamentarians had voted to oust all foreign forces deployed in the country. The US has sent thousands of troops to Iraq since 2014 to lead an international coalition helping Baghdad fight the Islamic State jihadist group. Washington has drawn down those forces in recent months to around 3,000, and other coalition countries have also shrunk their footprint. Starting in October 2019, rockets regularly targeted those troops as well as diplomats at the US embassy. Over the summer, there was a marked increase in attacks against coalition logistics convoys using roadside bombs. Enraged by the ongoing attacks, the US in late September threatened to close its Baghdad embassy and carry out bombing raids against hard-line elements of the Hashed. Pro-Iran factions announced a temporary truce in October that put an end to the attacks, with no rockets targeting the embassy or foreign troops since. Iraq has long been caught in the struggle for influence between its two main allies, the US and Iran, with the tug-of-war intensifying under US President Donald Trump. Baghdad has been closely monitoring the results of the US presidential elections, seeing a change in the White House as a sign that tensions between Washington and Tehran could decrease. (With inputs from AFP)

Hundreds demand US ouster from Iraq in Baghdad

US President Donald Trump's announcement of completing the troop withdrawal from Afghanistan by Christmas has taken aback nation's military, with officials saying they haven't been informed about the process and concerned over its impact on Taliban-Afghanistan peace talks.&nbsp;

Trump on Wednesday tweeted that the remaining number of "brave" US military personnel would return by Christmas, a move welcomed by the Taliban.&nbsp;

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/nato-chief-says-allies-will-leave-afghanistan-together-333582">NATO chief says allies will leave Afghanistan together</a>

He elaborated his announcement in an interview to Fox News, saying: "We're down to 4,000 troops in Afghanistan. I'll have them home by the end of the year. They're coming home, you know, as we speak. Nineteen years is enough. They're acting as policemen, OK? They're not acting as troops."

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/donald-trump-wants-us-forces-to-pull-out-from-afghanistan-by-christmas-333352">Donald Trump wants US forces to pull out from Afghanistan by Christmas</a>

Several US officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity said they were not informed about any new deadline, reported news agency The Associated Press.

In fact, they pointed to remarks by National Security Adviser Robert O'Brien on Wednesday, in which he said: "as of today, there are under 5,000 and that will go to 2,500 by early next year".

The US military has also continually said that counterterrorism personnel would remain in Afghanistan for some time in view of threats by al-Qaida and Islamic State.&nbsp;

The US has earlier maintained that any troop withdrawal from Afghanistan would depend on the situation on the ground and a considerable reduction in Taliban attacks.&nbsp;

US President Donald Trump's announcement of completing the troop withdrawal from Afghanistan by Christmas has taken aback nation's military, with officials saying they haven't been informed about the process and concerned over its impact on Taliban-Afghanistan peace talks.

US President Donald Trump's announcement of completing the troop withdrawal from Afghanistan by Christmas has taken aback nation's military, with officials saying they haven't been informed about the process and concerned over its impact on Taliban-Afghanistan peace talks. Trump on Wednesday tweeted that the remaining number of "brave" US military personnel would return by Christmas, a move welcomed by the Taliban. Also read | NATO chief says allies will leave Afghanistan together He elaborated his announcement in an interview to Fox News, saying: "We're down to 4,000 troops in Afghanistan. I'll have them home by the end of the year. They're coming home, you know, as we speak. Nineteen years is enough. They're acting as policemen, OK? They're not acting as troops." Also read | Donald Trump wants US forces to pull out from Afghanistan by Christmas Several US officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity said they were not informed about any new deadline, reported news agency The Associated Press. In fact, they pointed to remarks by National Security Adviser Robert O'Brien on Wednesday, in which he said: "as of today, there are under 5,000 and that will go to 2,500 by early next year". The US military has also continually said that counterterrorism personnel would remain in Afghanistan for some time in view of threats by al-Qaida and Islamic State. The US has earlier maintained that any troop withdrawal from Afghanistan would depend on the situation on the ground and a considerable reduction in Taliban attacks.

US military startled with Trump's announcement of complete troop withdrawal from Afghanistan

US President Donald Trump on Wednesday said his administration wants all US forces to pull out of Afghanistan by Christmas, speeding up the process to end America's longest war.&nbsp;

"We should have the small remaining number of our BRAVE Men and Women serving in Afghanistan home by Christmas!" Trump said on Twitter.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
We should have the small remaining number of our BRAVE Men and Women serving in Afghanistan home by Christmas!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1313984510749544450?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 7, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Trump's remarks came when the presidential election in the US is less than 30 days away and he aspires to show that he delivered on his promise that the country should stop "endless wars".

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/taliban-afghan-negotiators-set-ground-rules-to-safeguard-peace-talks-sources-332896">Taliban, Afghan negotiators set ground rules to safeguard peace talks: Sources</a>

Washington, in a historic deal with the Taliban on February 29, vowed to pull out its forces from Afghanistan by mid-2021 and the insurgent group in return committed to not let other extremist groups flourish in the region.&nbsp;

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/eight-killed-in-attack-targetting-afghan-governor-332763">Eight killed in attack targetting Afghan governor</a>

Last month, talks between the Taliban and Afghan government began in Doha, although the discussions soon ended up in a deadlock.

Trump's decision for troop withdrawal gained widespread support, including his Democratic rival Joe Biden who during his vice-presidential tenure had pushed to limit the nation's involvement in Afghanistan.&nbsp;

(with inputs from AFP) 
&nbsp;

US President Donald Trump on Wednesday said his administration wants all US forces to pull out of Afghanistan by Christmas, speeding up the process to end America's longest war.

US President Donald Trump on Wednesday said his administration wants all US forces to pull out of Afghanistan by Christmas, speeding up the process to end America's longest war. "We should have the small remaining number of our BRAVE Men and Women serving in Afghanistan home by Christmas!" Trump said on Twitter. We should have the small remaining number of our BRAVE Men and Women serving in Afghanistan home by Christmas! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 7, 2020 × Trump's remarks came when the presidential election in the US is less than 30 days away and he aspires to show that he delivered on his promise that the country should stop "endless wars". Also read | Taliban, Afghan negotiators set ground rules to safeguard peace talks: Sources Washington, in a historic deal with the Taliban on February 29, vowed to pull out its forces from Afghanistan by mid-2021 and the insurgent group in return committed to not let other extremist groups flourish in the region. Also read | Eight killed in attack targetting Afghan governor Last month, talks between the Taliban and Afghan government began in Doha, although the discussions soon ended up in a deadlock. Trump's decision for troop withdrawal gained widespread support, including his Democratic rival Joe Biden who during his vice-presidential tenure had pushed to limit the nation's involvement in Afghanistan. (with inputs from AFP)

Donald Trump wants US forces to pull out from Afghanistan by Christmas

Iran-backed militias launched rockets to target US troops in the semi-autonomous Kurdistan region of Iraq. There has been no casualties in the incident.

Iran-backed militias launched rockets to target US troops in Kurdistan

A digital advertisement launched by the fundraising arm of the Trump campaign asking people to support US troops features Russian jets, according to Politico magazine.

The Trump Make America Great Again Committee,&nbsp;run by the Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee (RNC), made the&nbsp;advertisement.

<img alt="Trump" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="3b3debd8-29cc-4afb-9ca8-fc9764cc5fa7" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/httpscdn.i-scmp.comsitesdefaultfilesstyles768x768publicd8imagesmethode20200915d4fac6ee-f6f6-11ea-a41c-8cbd1416100a_image_hires_102553.jpg" />

An ad, made by the Trump Make America Great Again Committee, featuring silhouettes of three soldiers walking as Russian-made fighter jets fly over them. | Twitter

Pierre Sprey, who helped design both the F-16 and A-10 planes for the US, said “That’s definitely a MiG-29.&nbsp;I’m glad to see it’s supporting our troops.”

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-calls-for-resignation-of-reporter-for-fake-news-325457">Trump calls for resignation of reporter for 'fake news'</a>

Director of the Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies in Moscow&nbsp;Ruslan Pukhov confirmed in an interview that the advertisement features Russian&nbsp;fighter jets Russian MiG-29 and AK-74 assault rifle.

Trump's reputation has been marred by recent rumours that he called&nbsp;the fallen US soldiers as "losers" and "suckers". He has also been accused of not taking action against a report that Russia paid bounty to Afghanistan's Taliban to execute US soldiers.

It is&nbsp;not uncommon for advertisement campaigns&nbsp;to incorrectly source images from other countries in their messaging. In July,&nbsp;Trump campaign used an image from 2014 pro-democracy protest in Ukraine to&nbsp;to show a police officer under assault in the ''chaos and&nbsp;violence''&nbsp;of the summer’s demonstrations.

A digital advertisement launched by the fundraising arm of the Trump campaign asking people to support US troops features Russian jets, according to Politico magazine.

A digital advertisement launched by the fundraising arm of the Trump campaign asking people to support US troops features Russian jets, according to Politico magazine. The Trump Make America Great Again Committee, run by the Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee (RNC), made the advertisement. An ad, made by the Trump Make America Great Again Committee, featuring silhouettes of three soldiers walking as Russian-made fighter jets fly over them. | Twitter Pierre Sprey, who helped design both the F-16 and A-10 planes for the US, said “That’s definitely a MiG-29. I’m glad to see it’s supporting our troops.” Also read: Trump calls for resignation of reporter for 'fake news' Director of the Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies in Moscow Ruslan Pukhov confirmed in an interview that the advertisement features Russian fighter jets Russian MiG-29 and AK-74 assault rifle. Trump's reputation has been marred by recent rumours that he called the fallen US soldiers as "losers" and "suckers". He has also been accused of not taking action against a report that Russia paid bounty to Afghanistan's Taliban to execute US soldiers. It is not uncommon for advertisement campaigns to incorrectly source images from other countries in their messaging. In July, Trump campaign used an image from 2014 pro-democracy protest in Ukraine to to show a police officer under assault in the ''chaos and violence'' of the summer’s demonstrations.

Russian jets identified in Trump campaign ad asking people to support US troops

The United States military formally announced on Wednesday that it would be reducing its military presence in Iraq from 5,200 to 3,000 troops starting September 2020.

This cements a move that was long expected. In August, Reuters reported that the US planned to reduce its troops presence in Iraq by about a third.

Currently, the US has 5,200&nbsp;troops in Iraq to fight the Islamic State group. According to the US led coalition, Iraqi forces are now able to handle what remains of Islamic State without requiring assistance from foreign players.

"We are continuing to expand on our partner capacity programs that enable Iraqi forces and allow us to reduce our footprint in Iraq," Marine General Frank McKenzie, the head of US Central Command, announced during a visit to Iraq.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-election-2020-trump-administration-to-ban-imports-from-china-over-forced-labour-326184" hreflang="en">US election 2020: Trump administration to ban imports from China over forced labour</a>

On Tuesday, a senior administrative official who represents Trump said that the US president would be announcing troop reduction measures soon.

In June, both the US and Iraq had promised to reduce the number of US troops in the country over the course of this year. As of now, the US has no plans to maintain permanent bases in Iraq.

In 2016, during his election campaign, Trump had promised to end America’s “endless wars” by reducing global troops.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-president-donald-trump-nominated-for-nobel-peace-prize-2021-following-israel-uae-deal-326247">US President Donald Trump nominated for Nobel Peace Prize 2021</a>

During a meeting with Iraq’s prime minister in August, Trump reiterated his plans to withdraw US troops from Iraq.

Amid all this, tensions between Iran and the US have spiked, after US announced it would be reinstating sanctions that were suspended.&nbsp;

Earlier this year, Iraq’s parliament had voted to remove foreign troops from Iraq.

The United States military formally announced on Wednesday that it would be reducing its military presence in Iraq from 5,200 to 3,000 troops starting September 2020.

The United States military formally announced on Wednesday that it would be reducing its military presence in Iraq from 5,200 to 3,000 troops starting September 2020. This cements a move that was long expected. In August, Reuters reported that the US planned to reduce its troops presence in Iraq by about a third. Currently, the US has 5,200 troops in Iraq to fight the Islamic State group. According to the US led coalition, Iraqi forces are now able to handle what remains of Islamic State without requiring assistance from foreign players. "We are continuing to expand on our partner capacity programs that enable Iraqi forces and allow us to reduce our footprint in Iraq," Marine General Frank McKenzie, the head of US Central Command, announced during a visit to Iraq. Also read: US election 2020: Trump administration to ban imports from China over forced labour On Tuesday, a senior administrative official who represents Trump said that the US president would be announcing troop reduction measures soon. In June, both the US and Iraq had promised to reduce the number of US troops in the country over the course of this year. As of now, the US has no plans to maintain permanent bases in Iraq. In 2016, during his election campaign, Trump had promised to end America’s “endless wars” by reducing global troops. Also read: US President Donald Trump nominated for Nobel Peace Prize 2021 During a meeting with Iraq’s prime minister in August, Trump reiterated his plans to withdraw US troops from Iraq. Amid all this, tensions between Iran and the US have spiked, after US announced it would be reinstating sanctions that were suspended. Earlier this year, Iraq’s parliament had voted to remove foreign troops from Iraq.

United States announces reduction of troops in Iraq to end 'endless wars'

US President Donald Trump on Sunday again defended his support for American troops after reports that he had disparaged fallen US soldiers in Europe. Reports also claimed that he had declined to visit an American cemetery during a 2018 trip to France.

The Atlantic magazine reported on Thursday that Trump referred to Marines buried in an American cemetery near Paris as "losers" and declined to visit their graves in November 2018 because of concern the rain that day would mess up his hair, an account the president denied on Thursday and again on Sunday said was false.

Bloomberg reported on Sunday that Trump subsequently spent the free time selecting artwork to remove from the US ambassador's residence and send back to the White House.

Trump, a Republican who is seeking re-election in part on his vocal support of the US military, blasted Democrats and the news media on Sunday, tweeting: "They will say anything, like their recent lies about me and the Military, and hope that it sticks... But #MAGA gets it!" referring to his supporters who back his "Make America Great Again" slogan.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
The Democrats, together with the corrupt Fake News Media, have launched a massive Disinformation Campaign the likes of which has never been seen before. They will say anything, like their recent lies about me and the Military, and hope that it sticks... But <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MAGA?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MAGA</a> gets it!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1302601868313538560?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 6, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Democratic former Vice President Joe Biden, who is challenging Trump in the November 3 presidential election, called Trump's comments about the fallen soldiers, "a disgrace" if true.

US Secretary of Veterans Affairs Robert Wilkie on Sunday echoed remarks last week by US Defense Secretary Mark Esper telling CNN's "State of the Union" that Trump respected the troops and that he had never heard the president disparage US military members or veterans.

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin also backed Trump's support of the military.

"The president has always been 100% supportive of the military," Mnuchin told reporters at the White House. 
&nbsp;

US President Donald Trump on Sunday again defended his support for American troops after reports that he had disparaged fallen US soldiers in Europe. Reports also claimed that he had declined to visit an American cemetery during a 2018 trip to France.

US President Donald Trump on Sunday again defended his support for American troops after reports that he had disparaged fallen US soldiers in Europe. Reports also claimed that he had declined to visit an American cemetery during a 2018 trip to France. The Atlantic magazine reported on Thursday that Trump referred to Marines buried in an American cemetery near Paris as "losers" and declined to visit their graves in November 2018 because of concern the rain that day would mess up his hair, an account the president denied on Thursday and again on Sunday said was false. Bloomberg reported on Sunday that Trump subsequently spent the free time selecting artwork to remove from the US ambassador's residence and send back to the White House. Trump, a Republican who is seeking re-election in part on his vocal support of the US military, blasted Democrats and the news media on Sunday, tweeting: "They will say anything, like their recent lies about me and the Military, and hope that it sticks... But #MAGA gets it!" referring to his supporters who back his "Make America Great Again" slogan. The Democrats, together with the corrupt Fake News Media, have launched a massive Disinformation Campaign the likes of which has never been seen before. They will say anything, like their recent lies about me and the Military, and hope that it sticks... But #MAGA gets it! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 6, 2020 × Democratic former Vice President Joe Biden, who is challenging Trump in the November 3 presidential election, called Trump's comments about the fallen soldiers, "a disgrace" if true. US Secretary of Veterans Affairs Robert Wilkie on Sunday echoed remarks last week by US Defense Secretary Mark Esper telling CNN's "State of the Union" that Trump respected the troops and that he had never heard the president disparage US military members or veterans. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin also backed Trump's support of the military. "The president has always been 100% supportive of the military," Mnuchin told reporters at the White House.

Trump again defends himself, blasts media over report stating he disparaged US troops

A small number of US troops were injured during an interaction with Russian forces in Syria, two US officials told Reuters on Wednesday.

While such interactions between American and Russian forces are not rare, the incident highlights the risks of troops from both countries operating in close proximity in northern Syria and the potential for an escalation in tensions.

One of the officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the injuries were a result of a collision and not any exchange of fire.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/turkey-and-greece-mobilize-their-navies-come-close-to-military-confrontation-323263">Also read:&nbsp;Turkey and Greece mobilize their navies; come close to military confrontation</a>

The other official said the incident took place earlier this week in northeastern Syria and the injuries were mild.

The Pentagon and the US military's Central Command, which oversees US forces in the region, declined to comment.

The US military does not generally comment on injuries. However, last month a paratrooper was killed during a vehicle rollover accident in eastern Syria.

Videos on social media showed Russian military vehicles, backed by a pair of helicopters, driving dangerously close to US&nbsp;armored vehicles. The origin of the videos was unclear.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/russian-opposition-leader-navalny-poisoned-with-cholinesterase-inhibitors-says-german-hospital-322864">Also read:&nbsp;Russian Opposition leader Navalny poisoned with cholinesterase inhibitors, says German hospital</a>

Earlier this year, another video showed a close interaction between troops on a Syrian road.

About 500 US forces remain in northern Syria after a sharp reduction in troops that were initially there to drive out Islamic State militants from all of their strongholds in the country.

Some of the areas also have oil resources, something President Donald Trump has cited as a justification for keeping US troops partnered with Kurdish allies in the region.

The injuries were first reported by Politico.

A small number of US troops were injured during an interaction with Russian forces in Syria, two US officials told Reuters on Wednesday. While such interactions between American and Russian forces are not rare, the incident highlights the risks of troops from both countries operating in close proximity in northern Syria and the potential for an escalation in tensions.

A small number of US troops were injured during an interaction with Russian forces in Syria, two US officials told Reuters on Wednesday. While such interactions between American and Russian forces are not rare, the incident highlights the risks of troops from both countries operating in close proximity in northern Syria and the potential for an escalation in tensions. One of the officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the injuries were a result of a collision and not any exchange of fire. Also read: Turkey and Greece mobilize their navies; come close to military confrontation The other official said the incident took place earlier this week in northeastern Syria and the injuries were mild. The Pentagon and the US military's Central Command, which oversees US forces in the region, declined to comment. The US military does not generally comment on injuries. However, last month a paratrooper was killed during a vehicle rollover accident in eastern Syria. Videos on social media showed Russian military vehicles, backed by a pair of helicopters, driving dangerously close to US armored vehicles. The origin of the videos was unclear. Also read: Russian Opposition leader Navalny poisoned with cholinesterase inhibitors, says German hospital Earlier this year, another video showed a close interaction between troops on a Syrian road. About 500 US forces remain in northern Syria after a sharp reduction in troops that were initially there to drive out Islamic State militants from all of their strongholds in the country. Some of the areas also have oil resources, something President Donald Trump has cited as a justification for keeping US troops partnered with Kurdish allies in the region. The injuries were first reported by Politico.

US troops injured in interaction with Russian forces in Syria: US officials

Iran is accused of offering bounties to attack American and coalition troops stationed in Afghanistan, which includes more than 6 attacks. Watch report.

Iran bounties on US troops: US pinpoints payments at Iran's behest

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has sealed a defence cooperation deal with Polish officials that will pave the way for the redeployment of American troops from Germany to Poland.

Pompeo and Polish Defence Minister Mariusz Blaszczak signed an Enhanced Defence Cooperation Agreement in Warsaw that sets out the legal framework for the additional troop presence.

The pact supplements an existing NATO Status of Forces Agreement and allows for the enhancement and modernisation of existing capabilities and facilities by granting US forces to access additional Polish military installations. It also sets out a formula for sharing the logistical and infrastructure costs of an expanded US presence in the country.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-to-send-troops-from-germany-to-poland-to-send-signal-to-russia-308394">Trump to send troops from Germany to Poland to send signal to Russia</a>

Some 4,500 US troops are currently based in Poland, but about 1,000 more are to be added, under a bilateral decision announced last year.

Last month, in line with President Donald Trump's demand to reduce troop numbers in Germany, the Pentagon announced that some 12,000 troops would be withdrawn from Germany with about 5,600 moving to other countries in Europe, including Poland.

Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/donald-trump-orders-9500-us-troops-to-depart-from-germany-303873">Donald Trump orders 9,500 US troops to depart from Germany</a>

In addition, several US military commands will be moved out of Germany, including the US Army V Corps overseas headquarters that will relocate to Poland next year.

Trump has long and loudly complained that Germany does not spend enough on defense and has repeatedly accused Germany of failing to pay NATO bills, which is a misstatement of the issue. NATO nations have pledged to dedicate 2 per cent&nbsp;of their gross domestic product.

In addition, several US military commands will be moved out of Germany, including the US Army V Corps overseas headquarters that will relocate to Poland next year.

Saturday's signing came just a day after the Trump administration suffered an embarrassing diplomatic loss at the United Nations when its proposal to indefinitely extend an arms embargo on Iran was soundly defeated in a UN Security Council vote that saw only one country side with the US Pompeo will visit that country, the Dominican Republic, on Sunday for the inauguration of its new president.

Pompeo has used his Europe trip to warn the region's young democracies about threats posed by Russia and China and has received a warm welcome.

In Poland, the reception was particularly kind given the friendship between Trump and conservative Polish President Andrzej Duda, who was sworn in for a second five-year term earlier this month after a hotly contested election.

Many of Duda's Law and Justice party's policies have put Poland at odds with the European Union, which is concerned that government efforts to reshape the judiciary and other actions have eroded the rule of law and democracy in the EU member country.

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has sealed a defence cooperation deal with Polish officials that will pave the way for the redeployment of American troops from Germany to Poland.

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has sealed a defence cooperation deal with Polish officials that will pave the way for the redeployment of American troops from Germany to Poland. Pompeo and Polish Defence Minister Mariusz Blaszczak signed an Enhanced Defence Cooperation Agreement in Warsaw that sets out the legal framework for the additional troop presence. The pact supplements an existing NATO Status of Forces Agreement and allows for the enhancement and modernisation of existing capabilities and facilities by granting US forces to access additional Polish military installations. It also sets out a formula for sharing the logistical and infrastructure costs of an expanded US presence in the country. Also read: Trump to send troops from Germany to Poland to send signal to Russia Some 4,500 US troops are currently based in Poland, but about 1,000 more are to be added, under a bilateral decision announced last year. Last month, in line with President Donald Trump's demand to reduce troop numbers in Germany, the Pentagon announced that some 12,000 troops would be withdrawn from Germany with about 5,600 moving to other countries in Europe, including Poland. Also read: Donald Trump orders 9,500 US troops to depart from Germany In addition, several US military commands will be moved out of Germany, including the US Army V Corps overseas headquarters that will relocate to Poland next year. Trump has long and loudly complained that Germany does not spend enough on defense and has repeatedly accused Germany of failing to pay NATO bills, which is a misstatement of the issue. NATO nations have pledged to dedicate 2 per cent of their gross domestic product. In addition, several US military commands will be moved out of Germany, including the US Army V Corps overseas headquarters that will relocate to Poland next year. Saturday's signing came just a day after the Trump administration suffered an embarrassing diplomatic loss at the United Nations when its proposal to indefinitely extend an arms embargo on Iran was soundly defeated in a UN Security Council vote that saw only one country side with the US Pompeo will visit that country, the Dominican Republic, on Sunday for the inauguration of its new president. Pompeo has used his Europe trip to warn the region's young democracies about threats posed by Russia and China and has received a warm welcome. In Poland, the reception was particularly kind given the friendship between Trump and conservative Polish President Andrzej Duda, who was sworn in for a second five-year term earlier this month after a hotly contested election. Many of Duda's Law and Justice party's policies have put Poland at odds with the European Union, which is concerned that government efforts to reshape the judiciary and other actions have eroded the rule of law and democracy in the EU member country.

Pompeo signs deal for US troops move from Germany to Poland

The US is set to withdraw almost 12,000 troops from Germany in what it described as a "strategic" repositioning of its forces in Europe.

U.S, European troops carry out training ops in Bavaria

The US is moving forward with President Donald Trump's plan to withdraw nearly 12,000 troops from Germany, a plan that will cost billions to execute and will take years.

Trump announced the decision on Wednesday, citing Berlin was not spending the NATO target of 2% of its GDP on defence and because Germany was taking "advantage" of the US.

"We spend a lot of money on Germany, they take advantage of us on trade and they take advantage on the military, so we're reducing the force," he told reporters at the White House.

The plan to pull US troops from the long-time NATO ally has been met with broad bipartisan opposition amid concerns that it will weaken the US military's position vis a vis Russia, however the Trump Administration has decided to proceed with the move.

To this end, &nbsp;approximately 11,900 US troops, a mix of Army and Air Force units, will be removed from Germany to meet Trump's mandated cap of 25,000 US forces in Germany, according to a senior US defense official, a number higher than the figure of 9,500 that was used when the reduction was first announced.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-to-move-11900-troops-out-from-germany-says-pentagon-316779">Also read |&nbsp;US to move 11,900 troops out from Germany says Pentagon</a>

Of the troops leaving Germany some 5,400 will be "staying in Europe," the official said. The remaining 6,400 forces and their families will be returned to the US and will in time redeploy to Europe.

Secretary of Defence Mark Esper said this would cost billions of dollars as new military construction will likely be required both in Europe and the US to house the additional troops.

The timeline suggests that the plan could be reversed should Trump lose the election in November.

Key US command centres will also be repositioned as part of the move, Esper and top military leaders confirmed Wednesday.

The US is moving forward with President Donald Trump's plan to withdraw nearly 12,000 troops from Germany, a plan that will cost billions to execute and will take years.

The US is moving forward with President Donald Trump's plan to withdraw nearly 12,000 troops from Germany, a plan that will cost billions to execute and will take years. Trump announced the decision on Wednesday, citing Berlin was not spending the NATO target of 2% of its GDP on defence and because Germany was taking "advantage" of the US. "We spend a lot of money on Germany, they take advantage of us on trade and they take advantage on the military, so we're reducing the force," he told reporters at the White House. The plan to pull US troops from the long-time NATO ally has been met with broad bipartisan opposition amid concerns that it will weaken the US military's position vis a vis Russia, however the Trump Administration has decided to proceed with the move. To this end, approximately 11,900 US troops, a mix of Army and Air Force units, will be removed from Germany to meet Trump's mandated cap of 25,000 US forces in Germany, according to a senior US defense official, a number higher than the figure of 9,500 that was used when the reduction was first announced. Also read | US to move 11,900 troops out from Germany says Pentagon Of the troops leaving Germany some 5,400 will be "staying in Europe," the official said. The remaining 6,400 forces and their families will be returned to the US and will in time redeploy to Europe. Secretary of Defence Mark Esper said this would cost billions of dollars as new military construction will likely be required both in Europe and the US to house the additional troops. The timeline suggests that the plan could be reversed should Trump lose the election in November. Key US command centres will also be repositioned as part of the move, Esper and top military leaders confirmed Wednesday.

US move to withdraw troops from Germany can cost billions and take years

President Donald Trump said he never questioned Russian leader Vladimir&nbsp;Putin&nbsp;about U.S. intelligence reports that Moscow paid the Taliban to kill American troops in Afghanistan, casting doubt on the reports in an interview.

Trump, who has sought to cultivate warmer relations with Moscow, has said he was not briefed on the matter before it emerged in news media in late June. He has called the reports a hoax and casts doubt on them.&nbsp;Russia has denied the reports.

"I have never discussed it with him," he told Axios in an interview. Trump talked by phone with&nbsp;Putin&nbsp;as recently as last Thursday.

In all, he has spoken with the Kremlin leader at least eight times since late February, when intelligence flagging alleged Russian bounties was included in the secret daily presidential briefing.

Also read-<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/inaccurate-white-house-rubbishes-reports-of-trumps-failed-actions-on-russian-bounties-case-309084">Inaccurate: White House rubbishes reports of Trump's failed actions on Russian bounties' case</a>

Asked why he did not confront&nbsp;Putin&nbsp;on the issue in their call last Thursday, Trump said, "That was a phone call to discuss other things, and frankly that's an issue that many people said was fake news."

He said he and the Russian president discussed nuclear nonproliferation in that phone call. As he left the White House later on Wednesday, Trump made clear he did not believe the report.

"If it were true, I'd be very angry about it. But if you tell me they're doing it, I would certainly take that under consideration," he said. "I would respond appropriately."

Trump is also dismissing reports that Russia is arming the Taliban, which has fought US-led forces in Afghanistan to a standstill and is now negotiating for their withdrawal.

Also read-<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-not-briefed-because-russia-bounty-reports-uncorroborated-white-house-309949">Trump not briefed because Russia bounty reports uncorroborated: White House</a>

The top US commander in the country in 2018, General John Nicholson, openly accused Moscow of supplying the Taliban, saying "we know that the Russians are involved."

After Trump's latest comments, White House director of strategic communications Alyssa Farah said the bounty reports "were based on unverified intel. But we still take it extremely seriously."

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
The safety of U.S. forces is the President’s top priority in Afghanistan. 
 
The same intelligence, which was an unverified asssesment, was shared with Capitol Hill.
— Alyssa Farah (@Alyssafarah) <a href="https://twitter.com/Alyssafarah/status/1288513860803211264?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 29, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Democrats in Congress have accused Trump, a Republican who is seeking re-election in November, of not taking intelligence information concerning soldiers' deaths seriously enough. They have pressed for more information from the intelligence community and the White House.

Trump has been dogged by criticism that he was too friendly toward Moscow since taking office. The US&nbsp;intelligence community found that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election to boost his chances of winning the White House. Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report last year determined his campaign had numerous contacts with Russian officials but that there was not enough evidence to establish a criminal conspiracy.

National security adviser Robert O'Brien has said Trump was not verbally briefed on the Russian bounty intelligence because his CIA briefer concluded the reports were uncorroborated.

White House officials have not denied the information was included in the President's Daily Brief, a daily summary of classified information and analysis on national security. Some news outlets reported the issue was included in the brief in February but that Trump may not have read it.

Trump has said many intelligence officials doubted the report's veracity, a stance contradicted by four U.S. and European sources and by its inclusion in a widely read CIA report in May.

The New York Times first reported in June that US&nbsp;intelligence had concluded that a Russian military intelligence unit had offered the Taliban payments of up to $100,000 for each US&nbsp;or allied soldier killed.

President Donald Trump said he never questioned Russian leader Vladimir Putin about U.S. intelligence reports that Moscow paid the Taliban to kill American troops in Afghanistan, casting doubt on the reports in an interview.

President Donald Trump said he never questioned Russian leader Vladimir Putin about U.S. intelligence reports that Moscow paid the Taliban to kill American troops in Afghanistan, casting doubt on the reports in an interview. Trump, who has sought to cultivate warmer relations with Moscow, has said he was not briefed on the matter before it emerged in news media in late June. He has called the reports a hoax and casts doubt on them. Russia has denied the reports. "I have never discussed it with him," he told Axios in an interview. Trump talked by phone with Putin as recently as last Thursday. In all, he has spoken with the Kremlin leader at least eight times since late February, when intelligence flagging alleged Russian bounties was included in the secret daily presidential briefing. Also read-Inaccurate: White House rubbishes reports of Trump's failed actions on Russian bounties' case Asked why he did not confront Putin on the issue in their call last Thursday, Trump said, "That was a phone call to discuss other things, and frankly that's an issue that many people said was fake news." He said he and the Russian president discussed nuclear nonproliferation in that phone call. As he left the White House later on Wednesday, Trump made clear he did not believe the report. "If it were true, I'd be very angry about it. But if you tell me they're doing it, I would certainly take that under consideration," he said. "I would respond appropriately." Trump is also dismissing reports that Russia is arming the Taliban, which has fought US-led forces in Afghanistan to a standstill and is now negotiating for their withdrawal. Also read-Trump not briefed because Russia bounty reports uncorroborated: White House The top US commander in the country in 2018, General John Nicholson, openly accused Moscow of supplying the Taliban, saying "we know that the Russians are involved." After Trump's latest comments, White House director of strategic communications Alyssa Farah said the bounty reports "were based on unverified intel. But we still take it extremely seriously." The safety of U.S. forces is the President’s top priority in Afghanistan. The same intelligence, which was an unverified asssesment, was shared with Capitol Hill. — Alyssa Farah (@Alyssafarah) July 29, 2020 × Democrats in Congress have accused Trump, a Republican who is seeking re-election in November, of not taking intelligence information concerning soldiers' deaths seriously enough. They have pressed for more information from the intelligence community and the White House. Trump has been dogged by criticism that he was too friendly toward Moscow since taking office. The US intelligence community found that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election to boost his chances of winning the White House. Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report last year determined his campaign had numerous contacts with Russian officials but that there was not enough evidence to establish a criminal conspiracy. National security adviser Robert O'Brien has said Trump was not verbally briefed on the Russian bounty intelligence because his CIA briefer concluded the reports were uncorroborated. White House officials have not denied the information was included in the President's Daily Brief, a daily summary of classified information and analysis on national security. Some news outlets reported the issue was included in the brief in February but that Trump may not have read it. Trump has said many intelligence officials doubted the report's veracity, a stance contradicted by four U.S. and European sources and by its inclusion in a widely read CIA report in May. The New York Times first reported in June that US intelligence had concluded that a Russian military intelligence unit had offered the Taliban payments of up to $100,000 for each US or allied soldier killed.

Trump says he never confronted Putin about Russia bounty reports

The United States will slash its military presence in Germany by 11,900 troops, relocating some to Italy and Belgium in a major shift of Washington's NATO assets, Defense Secretary Mark Esper announced Wednesday.

Of the 34,500 US military personnel in Germany, some 6,400 will be sent home while nearly 5,600 others will be moved to other NATO countries. The&nbsp;key aim of the rotation is to reinforce NATO's southeastern flank near the Black Sea, Esper said.

According to Esper some troops could also go to Poland and the Baltic states if Warsaw follows through on an agreement already sketched out by the two sides.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/donald-trump-orders-9500-us-troops-to-depart-from-germany-303873">Donald Trump orders 9,500 US troops to depart from Germany</a>

Earlier, US President Donald Trump had&nbsp;ordered the US military to remove nearly 9,500 troops from Germany which raised concerns in Europe about the US commitment to the region.

The move is the latest twist in relations between Berlin and Washington, which have often been strained during Trump’s presidency. Trump has pressed Germany to raise defence spending and accused Berlin of being a captive of Russia due to its energy reliance.

In May, the then US ambassador to Germany,&nbsp;Richard Grenell, accused Berlin of undermining Nato’s nuclear deterrent, taking aim at Merkel’s junior coalition partners after some of their leaders called for nuclear disarmament.

The United States will slash its military presence in Germany by 11,900 troops, relocating some to Italy and Belgium in a major shift of Washington's NATO assets, Defense Secretary Mark Esper announced Wednesday.

The United States will slash its military presence in Germany by 11,900 troops, relocating some to Italy and Belgium in a major shift of Washington's NATO assets, Defense Secretary Mark Esper announced Wednesday. Of the 34,500 US military personnel in Germany, some 6,400 will be sent home while nearly 5,600 others will be moved to other NATO countries. The key aim of the rotation is to reinforce NATO's southeastern flank near the Black Sea, Esper said. According to Esper some troops could also go to Poland and the Baltic states if Warsaw follows through on an agreement already sketched out by the two sides. Also read: Donald Trump orders 9,500 US troops to depart from Germany Earlier, US President Donald Trump had ordered the US military to remove nearly 9,500 troops from Germany which raised concerns in Europe about the US commitment to the region. The move is the latest twist in relations between Berlin and Washington, which have often been strained during Trump’s presidency. Trump has pressed Germany to raise defence spending and accused Berlin of being a captive of Russia due to its energy reliance. In May, the then US ambassador to Germany, Richard Grenell, accused Berlin of undermining Nato’s nuclear deterrent, taking aim at Merkel’s junior coalition partners after some of their leaders called for nuclear disarmament.

US to move 11,900 troops out from Germany says Pentagon

As part of the US-Taliban peace agreement, US has pulled out troops from the 5 bases in Afghanistan. According to the deal, the US had 135 days to fulfill its pledge to reduce troops to 8,600 from nearly 14,000 in the conflict-hit country

WION Dispatch: Taliban peace deal: US withdraws army troops out of 5 Afghan bases

Russia has denied reports that it offered Taliban-linked militants bounties to kill US troops in Afghanistan, a BBC report said. Earlier, The New York Times reported that a Russian military intelligence unit offered the alleged bounties last year.

Russia has denied reports that it offered Taliban-linked militants bounties to kill US troops in Afghanistan, a BBC report said. Earlier, The New York Times reported that a Russian military intelligence unit offered the alleged bounties last year. The same unit has been linked to assassination attempts in Europe. Nobody briefed or told me, @VP Pence, or Chief of Staff @MarkMeadows about the so-called attacks on our troops in Afghanistan by Russians, as reported through an “anonymous source” by the Fake News @nytimes. Everybody is denying it & there have not been many attacks on us..... — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 28, 2020 × The Russian embassy in the US said the claims had led to threats to diplomats. The Taliban also denied doing any deal with Russian intelligence, the report added. The reports come as the US attempts to negotiate a peace deal to end the 19-year war in Afghanistan. Stop producing #fakenews that provoke life threats, @nytimes. We demand the relevant #US authorities take effective measures to ensure the fulfillment of their international obligations under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961. @StateDept @FBI @DHSgov ⬇️ https://t.co/Ows7srg3IH — Russia in USA 🇷🇺 (@RusEmbUSA) June 27, 2020 × The purported bounties gave incentives to the guerrillas to target US forces, just as President Donald Trump tries to withdraw troops and end America's longest war. The newspaper, citing anonymous officials, said that Trump was briefed on the findings in March, but has not decided how to respond.

Russia denies paying militants to kill US troops in Afghanistan

US President Donald Trump told his advisors at one point this past week he wanted 10,000 troops to deploy to the Washington D.C. area to halt civil unrest over the killing of a black man by Minneapolis police, according to a senior U.

US President Donald Trump told his advisors at one point this past week he wanted 10,000 troops to deploy to the Washington D.C. area to halt civil unrest over the killing of a black man by Minneapolis police, according to a senior U.S. official. The account of Trump's demand during a heated Oval Office conversation on Monday shows how close the president may have come to fulfilling his threat to deploy active duty troops, despite opposition from Pentagon leadership. At the meeting, Defense Secretary Mark Esper, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, and Attorney General William Barr recommended against such a deployment, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. The meeting was "contentious," the official added. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Trump has since appeared satisfied with deployments by the National Guard, the option recommended by the Pentagon and a more traditional tool for dealing with domestic crises. Pentagon leaders scrambled to call governors with requests to send Guard forces to Washington. Additional federal law enforcement were mobilized too. But also key for Trump appears to have been Esper's move to preposition -- but not deploy -- active duty soldiers from the 82nd Airborne Division and other units in the Washington D.C. area in case they were needed. Those troops have since departed. "Having active duty forces available but not in the city was enough for the president for the time," the official said. Trump's bid to militarize the U.S. response to the protests has triggered a rare outpouring of condemnation from former U.S. military officials, including Trump's first defense secretary, Jim Mattis, and retired four-star generals who normally try to steer clear of politics. Those comments reflect deep unease inside and outside the Pentagon with Trump's willingness to inject the U.S. military into a domestic race relations crisis following the killing of George Floyd, 46, who died on May 25 after a Minneapolis policeman knelt on his neck for nearly nine minutes. Floyd's death has led to a wave of protests and national soul-searching over the country's legacy of violence and mistreatment of African Americans and other minorities. It has also led some Pentagon leaders of color to issue unprecedented statements https://bit.ly/30mxTlD about their experiences dealing with issues of race in the U.S. military.

Trump wanted to deploy 10,000 troops in Washington DC, official says

The world is fighting a war against a deadly virus. It is a common enemy. But that doesn't mean old foes are forgotten. Also read: Global coronavirus: Cases, death-toll and hotspots!

The world is fighting a war against a deadly virus. It is a common enemy. But that doesn't mean old foes are forgotten. Also read: Global coronavirus: Cases, death-toll and hotspots! Even in a pandemic, militaries around the world don't miss the change to flex their muscle. The South China sea remains a battleground. Japan is prepping to safeguard its turf with a hypersonic missile. It travels faster than five times the speed of sound and has been described as a game-changer. Also read: COVID-19: Intelligence dossier says China's secrecy amounts to a cover-up Reports say Japan plans to deploy it by 2026. The missile is being viewed as a direct threat to the Chinese navy in the South China sea. Meanwhile, the US air force has sent B-1 bombers back to the Pacific island of Guam. It is being called a temporary deployment and comes just a few weeks after the bombers were pulled back. For the first time in 16 years, the United States air force had no heavy bombers on Guam. US pacific air forces have announced that four of the B-1s had arrived at the Andersen air force base on Guam. The forces said the bombers will carry out "strategic deterrence missions" in the Indo-Pacific region. This is part of a plan to move the massive warplanes to spots around the world. Why? To send out a message of "operational unpredictability''. In other words, to keep the enemy guessing. How long the bombers will be stationed on Guam has not been specified. But as with most strategic moves. The timing here is crucial. Just last week, Beijing announced it had 'expelled' a US guided-missile destroyer out of the South China sea. Tensions have been escalating. It's not just the South China Sea dispute. This military posturing also comes amid the raging blame game between the United States and China. They are bombarding each other with accusations and threats over the pandemic. There's a war of narratives and military posturing. Old conflicts-- that the Wuhan virus--- has failed to lockdown.

Despite coronavirus! Japan, US flex their military muscle in South China sea

On February 29 the United States and Taliban signed a landmark deal at Doha calling for all US troops to withdraw from the country within the next 14 months. Strategic Baluchistan has always been a target in the war against the Taliban. So ho are the Balochs viewing this peace deal. Watch report:

How Balochs are looking at Afghan US peace deal

All eyes are on the peace talks in Qatar. 30 nations are expected to be present at the historic signing of a deal in Doha on February 29. &nbsp;Indian envoy in Doha, Kumaran, will be representing India after the invite was sent by the Qatari government.

Over 1,00,000 lives were lost and millions were displaced in two decades of conflict. It's the longest war in American history. A war that cannot be won.

The future of Afghanistan is at stake &nbsp;- once again. Washington and the Taliban are set to sign a peace deal this Saturday in order&nbsp;to secure America's long-pending exit from the war-torn country.

The agreement could mark the start of a new era for Afghanistan, but there are questions about the Taliban's intentions. And a political crisis threatens to plunge the country deeper into crisis.

Among the elected elite, there's a dispute over who will lead Afghanistan. There are two contenders - Ashraf Ghani and Abdullah Abdullah, both of whom have claimed victory in the recently concluded elections.

Under the US pressure, they have both stopped mid-way in their bid to take office momentarily.&nbsp;

This deal is significant - it would see the pentagon pull out troops after 18 years of war. In return, the Taliban has promised to give up arms. The agreement, however, doesn't amount to a full ceasefire.

The United States insists that some troops must remain to tackle the Islamic State and Jihadist groups.

And there's also a fear that the Taliban could go back to its days of repression. To make matters worse, the Afghan government is not part of the peace process, and would also not be attending the ceremony for the peace agreement.

The countdown has begun - the Afghan peace plan is a historic breakthrough. But the haste with which the deal has been struck could spell trouble.

And one quarter which could be the source of trouble is the elected government of Afghanistan being kept out of the peace process. 
 
&nbsp;

All eyes are on the peace talks in Qatar. 30 nations are expected to be present at the historic signing of a deal in Doha on February 29. Indian envoy in Doha, Kumaran, will be representing India after the invite was sent by the Qatari government.

All eyes are on the peace talks in Qatar. 30 nations are expected to be present at the historic signing of a deal in Doha on February 29. Indian envoy in Doha, Kumaran, will be representing India after the invite was sent by the Qatari government. Over 1,00,000 lives were lost and millions were displaced in two decades of conflict. It's the longest war in American history. A war that cannot be won. The future of Afghanistan is at stake - once again. Washington and the Taliban are set to sign a peace deal this Saturday in order to secure America's long-pending exit from the war-torn country. The agreement could mark the start of a new era for Afghanistan, but there are questions about the Taliban's intentions. And a political crisis threatens to plunge the country deeper into crisis. Among the elected elite, there's a dispute over who will lead Afghanistan. There are two contenders - Ashraf Ghani and Abdullah Abdullah, both of whom have claimed victory in the recently concluded elections. Under the US pressure, they have both stopped mid-way in their bid to take office momentarily. This deal is significant - it would see the pentagon pull out troops after 18 years of war. In return, the Taliban has promised to give up arms. The agreement, however, doesn't amount to a full ceasefire. The United States insists that some troops must remain to tackle the Islamic State and Jihadist groups. And there's also a fear that the Taliban could go back to its days of repression. To make matters worse, the Afghan government is not part of the peace process, and would also not be attending the ceremony for the peace agreement. The countdown has begun - the Afghan peace plan is a historic breakthrough. But the haste with which the deal has been struck could spell trouble. And one quarter which could be the source of trouble is the elected government of Afghanistan being kept out of the peace process.

US-Taliban peace deal: What to expect?

The&nbsp;US&nbsp;military on Monday disclosed a&nbsp;more&nbsp;than&nbsp;50 per cent&nbsp;jump in cases of traumatic&nbsp;brain&nbsp;injury stemming&nbsp;from&nbsp;Iran's missile&nbsp;attack&nbsp;on a base in Iraq last month, with the number of service members&nbsp;diagnosed&nbsp;climbing to over&nbsp;100.

Also read:&nbsp;<a data-ctorig="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/the-killing-of-iranians-general-qasem-soleimani-and-its-consequences-271884" data-cturl="https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-element-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;q=https://www.wionews.com/opinions/the-killing-of-iranians-general-qasem-soleimani-and-its-consequences-271884&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=2ahUKEwi2tbXNu8jnAhUdxzgGHe_UDCA4ChAWMAV6BAgEEAI&amp;usg=AOvVaw05eSIcZyp9AkiUmmYhaEGN" dir="ltr" href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/the-killing-of-iranians-general-qasem-soleimani-and-its-consequences-271884" target="_blank">The killing of&nbsp;Iranian&nbsp;General Qasem Soleimani and its consequences</a>

No&nbsp;US&nbsp;troops&nbsp;were killed or faced immediate bodily injury when&nbsp;Iran&nbsp;fired missiles at the Ain al-Asad base in Iraq in retaliation for the&nbsp;US&nbsp;killing of Revolutionary Guard General Qassem Soleimani in a drone strike at the Baghdad airport on January&nbsp;3.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/iran-fires-missiles-at-us-bases-in-iraq-272811">Iran fires 'more than a dozen' ballistic missiles at US bases in Iraq</a>

The missile&nbsp;attacks capped a spiral of violence that had started in late December. Both sides have refrained&nbsp;from&nbsp;further military escalation, but the mounting number of&nbsp;US&nbsp;casualties could increase scrutiny on the Trump administration's approach to&nbsp;Iran.

Reuters was first to report earlier on Monday that there were over&nbsp;100&nbsp;cases of TBI, up&nbsp;from&nbsp;the 64 previously reported last month.

The Pentagon, in a statement, confirmed that so far 109&nbsp;US&nbsp;service members had been&nbsp;diagnosed&nbsp;with mild traumatic&nbsp;brain&nbsp;injury. It added that 76 of them had returned to duty.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="http://13.235.153.162/videos/50-us-troops-diagnosed-with-brain-injuries-after-iranian-missile-strike-277266/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The&nbsp;US&nbsp;military in the past had said to expect an increase in numbers in the weeks after the&nbsp;attack&nbsp;because symptoms can take time to manifest and&nbsp;troops&nbsp;can sometimes take longer to report them.

Army General Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said last month that the service members suffering&nbsp;from&nbsp;traumatic&nbsp;brain&nbsp;injuries&nbsp;had been&nbsp;diagnosed&nbsp;with mild cases. He added that the diagnosis could change as time passed.

Symptoms of concussive&nbsp;injuries&nbsp;include headaches, dizziness, sensitivity to light and nausea.

Pentagon officials have repeatedly said there has been no effort to minimize or delay information on concussive&nbsp;injuries. But the disclosures following Tehran's&nbsp;attack&nbsp;have renewed questions over the&nbsp;US&nbsp;military's policy regarding how it internally reports suspected&nbsp;brain&nbsp;injuries&nbsp;and whether they are treated publicly with the same urgency as loss of limb or life.

US&nbsp;Republican Senator Joni Ernst said&nbsp;more&nbsp;answers were needed.

"I've called on the Pentagon to ensure the safety &amp; care of our deployed forces who may be exposed to blast&nbsp;injuries&nbsp;in Iraq," Ernst said on Twitter.

US&nbsp;President Donald Trump appeared to play down the&nbsp;brain&nbsp;injuries&nbsp;last month, saying he "heard that they had headaches and a couple of other things" following the&nbsp;attack, prompting criticism&nbsp;from&nbsp;lawmakers and a&nbsp;US&nbsp;veterans group.

Various health and medical groups&nbsp;for years have been trying to raise awareness about the seriousness of&nbsp;brain&nbsp;injuries, including concussions.

Since 2000, about 408,000 service members have been&nbsp;diagnosed&nbsp;with traumatic&nbsp;brain&nbsp;injury, according to Pentagon data.

The US military on Monday disclosed a more than 50 per cent jump in cases of traumatic brain injury stemming from Iran's missile attack on a base in Iraq last month, with the number of service members diagnosed climbing to over 100.

The US military on Monday disclosed a more than 50 per cent jump in cases of traumatic brain injury stemming from Iran's missile attack on a base in Iraq last month, with the number of service members diagnosed climbing to over 100. Also read: The killing of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani and its consequences No US troops were killed or faced immediate bodily injury when Iran fired missiles at the Ain al-Asad base in Iraq in retaliation for the US killing of Revolutionary Guard General Qassem Soleimani in a drone strike at the Baghdad airport on January 3. Also read: Iran fires 'more than a dozen' ballistic missiles at US bases in Iraq The missile attacks capped a spiral of violence that had started in late December. Both sides have refrained from further military escalation, but the mounting number of US casualties could increase scrutiny on the Trump administration's approach to Iran. Reuters was first to report earlier on Monday that there were over 100 cases of TBI, up from the 64 previously reported last month. The Pentagon, in a statement, confirmed that so far 109 US service members had been diagnosed with mild traumatic brain injury. It added that 76 of them had returned to duty. × The US military in the past had said to expect an increase in numbers in the weeks after the attack because symptoms can take time to manifest and troops can sometimes take longer to report them. Army General Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said last month that the service members suffering from traumatic brain injuries had been diagnosed with mild cases. He added that the diagnosis could change as time passed. Symptoms of concussive injuries include headaches, dizziness, sensitivity to light and nausea. Pentagon officials have repeatedly said there has been no effort to minimize or delay information on concussive injuries. But the disclosures following Tehran's attack have renewed questions over the US military's policy regarding how it internally reports suspected brain injuries and whether they are treated publicly with the same urgency as loss of limb or life. US Republican Senator Joni Ernst said more answers were needed. "I've called on the Pentagon to ensure the safety & care of our deployed forces who may be exposed to blast injuries in Iraq," Ernst said on Twitter. US President Donald Trump appeared to play down the brain injuries last month, saying he "heard that they had headaches and a couple of other things" following the attack, prompting criticism from lawmakers and a US veterans group. Various health and medical groups for years have been trying to raise awareness about the seriousness of brain injuries, including concussions. Since 2000, about 408,000 service members have been diagnosed with traumatic brain injury, according to Pentagon data.

More than 100 US troops diagnosed with brain injuries from Iran missile attack

Two American soldiers were killed while six others were injured after an Afghan soldier armed with a machine gun opened fire, news agency AFP reported quoting US military on Sunday.

Two American soldiers were killed while six others were injured after an Afghan soldier armed with a machine gun opened fire, news agency AFP reported quoting US military on Sunday. The incident took place late Saturday in Nangarhar province in eastern Afghanistan when US and Afghan commandos were conducting a "key-leader engagement" at a base in Sherzad district. "Current reports indicate an individual in an Afghan uniform opened fire on the combined US and Afghan force with a machine gun," the report stated US Forces-Afghanistan spokesman Sonny Leggett as saying in a statement. Provincial governor Shah Mahmood Meyakil said in an audio message to reporters that three Afghan commandos were wounded. He said it was not immediately clear if the incident was a deliberate act by an "infiltrator" or an accident. "It was not a clash between the forces. We are investigating," Meyakil said. Leggett also stressed the cause or motive behind the attack were not immediately known. “Several 7th SFG(A) Soldiers were injured or killed during combat operations in Afghanistan on February 8, 2020. The families of the deceased and wounded are being notified. In accordance with DoD policy, the names of the causalities are being withheld until 24 hours. pic.twitter.com/R22ilulOcx — 7th Special Forces Group (Airborne) (@7thForces) February 9, 2020 × In a tweet, the US Army's 7th Special Forces Group (Airborne) said "several" of its soldiers had been killed or injured during combat operations in Afghanistan. No group has claimed responsibility for the attack so far. (With inputs from AFP)

Afghanistan: Two US soldiers killed by Afghan soldier in Nangarhar province 

By Andrew G Jones

A US strike which killed Iranian general Qasem Soleimani in Baghdad in January, and the counter-strike by the Iranian military on US targets in Iraq, raised serious questions about the legitimate use of force. When military force was used against targets within its territory, Iraq’s sovereignty was breached.

As a country caught in the middle of the long-running feud between the US and Iran, Iraq has already suffered a great deal in this latest escalation. A senior Iraqi militia commander, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, was also killed in the US strike.

In the weeks since, thousands of protesters have taken to the streets in Iraq. While some continue to demonstrate against the government, others – many of them supporters of Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr – are demanding the withdrawal of US troops from the country.

The continued US military presence in the country, against the wishes of the Iraqi government and parliament, is a breach of international law.

Force and intervention

Public international law maintains a tight grip on the rules surrounding the use of force. Article 2(4) of the UN Charter prohibits the use of force, except in self-defence against an armed attack or collective action authorised by the UN Security Council.

Beyond this, there are very few truly accepted justifications which a country can rely on to legitimately use force within another’s territory. One exception is a doctrine called “intervention by invitation”, where one country is given express permission to take military action in another country by that country’s government.

Alongside other rules that govern this kind of interaction, there are also rules on when a state overstays its welcome and becomes in breach of its international obligations. For example, the Definition of Aggression, a text adopted by the UN which outlines what is considered aggression under international law, sets out that if the state intervening breaks the conditions, or extends its presence on the territory, this counts as an act of aggression.

This was put forward as a claim in a case between the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Uganda in 2005. The DRC claimed that Uganda’s ongoing use of force on its territory after it had stopped giving consent, amounted to aggression.

Although in this particular case the International Court of Justice did not find Uganda’s actions were an act of aggression, the court did rule that Uganda had breached the UN Charter’s basic prohibition of force. As a result it was clearly established that a country cannot maintain a military presence within another country after it has been asked to leave.

US refusal to withdraw

The presence of US troops in Iraq dates to the invasion which overthrew Saddam Hussain’s regime in 2003. Whatever the legal status of that conflict, the presence of US forces has been legitimised since that point through the consent of the Iraqi government. In more recent years, American and Iraqi forces have maintained friendly relations, working together to fight the threat of Islamic State.

The closeness of Iraq’s relationship with the US is part of a wider balancing act. Iraq also needs to maintain its relationship with Iran, to which it has become much closer since the fall of Hussein. But since the drone attack which killed Soleimani and al-Muhandis, this balance has shifted. The country’s alliances have been put under increased strain amid growing anti-US sentiment.

In the aftermath of the US strike in January, Iraq’s parliament voted on the future presence of US troops in the country. MPs passed a non-binding resolution stating that the Iraqi government should: “Work to end the presence of any foreign troops on Iraqi soil and prohibit them from using its land, airspace or water for any reason.”

During a subsequent phone call with US secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, Iraq’s prime minister, Adel Abdul-Mahdi, requested a US withdrawal. But instead of heeding the Iraqi authorities’ decision, the US State Department declared that it would not discuss the withdrawal of US troops as their presence in Iraq was “appropriate”. It claimed that there was instead a need for “a conversation between the US and Iraqi governments not just regarding security, but about our financial, economic, and diplomatic partnership.”

Implications under international law

Despite the undeniable power and influence the US has over global events and international policy, the country remains subject to international law. By refusing to withdraw its troops as the Iraqi government requested, the US finds itself at least in breach of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter. A case could also be made that this amounts to an act of aggression.

There is a very real danger of Iraq becoming the battleground for a fight between Iran and the US to which it is not a party. In a country already scarred by decades of conflict, Iraq urgently wants to avoid such a circumstance. As such, it’s now for the US to heed the country’s request and to withdraw its troops in line with its international obligations, and for both the US and Iran to avoid further escalating an already tense situation.

It is up to the international community as a whole to ensure respect of the rule of law. But as the world’s most powerful nation, the US must demonstrate its willingness to comply with its responsibilities and uphold the ideals of international law.

(Andrew G Jones is Lecturer of Law, Coventry University)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/us-refusal-to-withdraw-troops-from-iraq-is-a-breach-of-international-law-131088">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)&nbsp;

 
&nbsp;

By Andrew G Jones A US strike which killed Iranian general Qasem Soleimani in Baghdad in January, and the counter-strike by the Iranian military on US targets in Iraq, raised serious questions about the legitimate use of force.

By Andrew G Jones A US strike which killed Iranian general Qasem Soleimani in Baghdad in January, and the counter-strike by the Iranian military on US targets in Iraq, raised serious questions about the legitimate use of force. When military force was used against targets within its territory, Iraq’s sovereignty was breached. As a country caught in the middle of the long-running feud between the US and Iran, Iraq has already suffered a great deal in this latest escalation. A senior Iraqi militia commander, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, was also killed in the US strike. In the weeks since, thousands of protesters have taken to the streets in Iraq. While some continue to demonstrate against the government, others – many of them supporters of Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr – are demanding the withdrawal of US troops from the country. The continued US military presence in the country, against the wishes of the Iraqi government and parliament, is a breach of international law. Force and intervention Public international law maintains a tight grip on the rules surrounding the use of force. Article 2(4) of the UN Charter prohibits the use of force, except in self-defence against an armed attack or collective action authorised by the UN Security Council. Beyond this, there are very few truly accepted justifications which a country can rely on to legitimately use force within another’s territory. One exception is a doctrine called “intervention by invitation”, where one country is given express permission to take military action in another country by that country’s government. Alongside other rules that govern this kind of interaction, there are also rules on when a state overstays its welcome and becomes in breach of its international obligations. For example, the Definition of Aggression, a text adopted by the UN which outlines what is considered aggression under international law, sets out that if the state intervening breaks the conditions, or extends its presence on the territory, this counts as an act of aggression. This was put forward as a claim in a case between the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Uganda in 2005. The DRC claimed that Uganda’s ongoing use of force on its territory after it had stopped giving consent, amounted to aggression. Although in this particular case the International Court of Justice did not find Uganda’s actions were an act of aggression, the court did rule that Uganda had breached the UN Charter’s basic prohibition of force. As a result it was clearly established that a country cannot maintain a military presence within another country after it has been asked to leave. US refusal to withdraw The presence of US troops in Iraq dates to the invasion which overthrew Saddam Hussain’s regime in 2003. Whatever the legal status of that conflict, the presence of US forces has been legitimised since that point through the consent of the Iraqi government. In more recent years, American and Iraqi forces have maintained friendly relations, working together to fight the threat of Islamic State. The closeness of Iraq’s relationship with the US is part of a wider balancing act. Iraq also needs to maintain its relationship with Iran, to which it has become much closer since the fall of Hussein. But since the drone attack which killed Soleimani and al-Muhandis, this balance has shifted. The country’s alliances have been put under increased strain amid growing anti-US sentiment. In the aftermath of the US strike in January, Iraq’s parliament voted on the future presence of US troops in the country. MPs passed a non-binding resolution stating that the Iraqi government should: “Work to end the presence of any foreign troops on Iraqi soil and prohibit them from using its land, airspace or water for any reason.” During a subsequent phone call with US secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, Iraq’s prime minister, Adel Abdul-Mahdi, requested a US withdrawal. But instead of heeding the Iraqi authorities’ decision, the US State Department declared that it would not discuss the withdrawal of US troops as their presence in Iraq was “appropriate”. It claimed that there was instead a need for “a conversation between the US and Iraqi governments not just regarding security, but about our financial, economic, and diplomatic partnership.” Implications under international law Despite the undeniable power and influence the US has over global events and international policy, the country remains subject to international law. By refusing to withdraw its troops as the Iraqi government requested, the US finds itself at least in breach of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter. A case could also be made that this amounts to an act of aggression. There is a very real danger of Iraq becoming the battleground for a fight between Iran and the US to which it is not a party. In a country already scarred by decades of conflict, Iraq urgently wants to avoid such a circumstance. As such, it’s now for the US to heed the country’s request and to withdraw its troops in line with its international obligations, and for both the US and Iran to avoid further escalating an already tense situation. It is up to the international community as a whole to ensure respect of the rule of law. But as the world’s most powerful nation, the US must demonstrate its willingness to comply with its responsibilities and uphold the ideals of international law. (Andrew G Jones is Lecturer of Law, Coventry University) (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

US refusal to withdraw troops from Iraq is a breach of international law

US President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/donald-trump-calls-juan-guaido-as-true-president-of-venezuela-278669">Donald Trump</a> reiterated&nbsp;his vow to negotiate troop withdrawal from <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/latest-world-news-taliban-takes-to-twitter-accuses-us-government-of-halting-peace-talks-278705">Afghanistan </a>in his <a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/donald-trump-calls-juan-guaido-as-true-president-of-venezuela-278669">State of the Union address</a> on Wednesday.

He said that he will put an end to ''America's longest war'' as he had no desire to kill "hundreds of thousands" in an endless fight.

Trump said that his administration is working on bringing the US troops back home.

Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/latest-world-news-taliban-takes-to-twitter-accuses-us-government-of-halting-peace-talks-278705">Taliban takes to Twitter; accuses US Government of halting peace talks</a>

"I am not looking to kill hundreds of thousands of people in <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/latest-world-news-taliban-takes-to-twitter-accuses-us-government-of-halting-peace-talks-278705">Afghanistan</a>, many of them totally innocent," Trump said during his address at Capitol Hill.

Trump has questioned the wisdom of keeping troops overseas for a long time and has described the war in Afghanistan as a ''drain on blood and treasure''.

The US had launched attacks on the country in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 terror attacks in New York and Washington.

The US president was planning to withdraw about half of the 14,000 US forces in <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/latest-world-news-taliban-takes-to-twitter-accuses-us-government-of-halting-peace-talks-278705">Afghanistan </a>last year even as he tried to secure a&nbsp;peace agreement with the Taliban which finally fell through in the end.

Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/taliban-slams-us-for-stalling-peace-talks-278581">Negotiation process has been harmed by Trump and US demands: Taliban</a>

Trump&nbsp;abruptly called off the talks to end the 18-year-long war in September last year after an attack killed a US soldier.&nbsp;

The talks resumed but were interrupted again in December after a suicide attack on a US base outside <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/taliban-slams-us-for-stalling-peace-talks-278581">Kabul </a>in which two civilians were killed.

He later allowed US negotiator <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/taliban-slams-us-for-stalling-peace-talks-278581">Zalmay Khalilzad </a>to resume talks, which had taken place for months in Qatar.

Under a draft deal, the United States will withdraw troops&nbsp;and the Taliban will promise not to allow extremists to use Afghanistan as a base as well as to open talks with the internationally recognized government in Kabul.

US President Donald Trump reiterated his vow to negotiate troop withdrawal from Afghanistan in his State of the Union address on Wednesday. He said that he will put an end to ''America's longest war'' as he had no desire to kill "hundreds of thousands" in an endless fight.

US President Donald Trump reiterated his vow to negotiate troop withdrawal from Afghanistan in his State of the Union address on Wednesday. He said that he will put an end to ''America's longest war'' as he had no desire to kill "hundreds of thousands" in an endless fight. Trump said that his administration is working on bringing the US troops back home. Also read: Taliban takes to Twitter; accuses US Government of halting peace talks "I am not looking to kill hundreds of thousands of people in Afghanistan, many of them totally innocent," Trump said during his address at Capitol Hill. Trump has questioned the wisdom of keeping troops overseas for a long time and has described the war in Afghanistan as a ''drain on blood and treasure''. The US had launched attacks on the country in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 terror attacks in New York and Washington. The US president was planning to withdraw about half of the 14,000 US forces in Afghanistan last year even as he tried to secure a peace agreement with the Taliban which finally fell through in the end. Also read: Negotiation process has been harmed by Trump and US demands: Taliban Trump abruptly called off the talks to end the 18-year-long war in September last year after an attack killed a US soldier. The talks resumed but were interrupted again in December after a suicide attack on a US base outside Kabul in which two civilians were killed. He later allowed US negotiator Zalmay Khalilzad to resume talks, which had taken place for months in Qatar. Under a draft deal, the United States will withdraw troops and the Taliban will promise not to allow extremists to use Afghanistan as a base as well as to open talks with the internationally recognized government in Kabul.

Trump reiterates pledge to withdraw US troops from Afghanistan in State of the Union addresss

Fifty US military personnel have now been diagnosed with shocks and traumatic brain injuries following the Iranian missile attack on US forces in Iraq earlier this month. That's an increase of 16 from late last week when the Pentagon said 34 cases had been diagnosed. Watch report:

50 US troops diagnosed with brain injuries after Iranian missile strike

The United States stopped all weapons deliveries to Iraq in the midst of the growing tensions with the government in Baghdad, the US-based Inside Defense news site reported.

The freeze includes halting supplies for the new F-16 fleet, the report said on Monday citing Air Force spokesperson Brian Brackens.

The Pentagon will resume shipments "when the environment in Iraq is safe enough," Brackens said, according to the report.

On Sunday, three missiles landed on the US embassy's territory in Baghdad, with one of the missiles hitting the embassy’s restaurant. Several people were reportedly injured.

In early January, the Iraqi parliament voted to expel all foreign forces from the country and also raised the voice for ceasing cooperation with the international coalition. This came as a response to Washington's operation, in which Abu Mahdi Muhandis, the deputy commander of the Iraqi Shia militia, and Qasem Soleimani, an Iranian top general - both allegedly involved in the attack on the US embassy in Baghdad on December 31 - were killed.

Washington has threatened that it will impose sanctions on Iraq if the US forces are expelled. Meanwhile, when Salih met with US President Donald Trump on Wednesday, the latter reiterated US’s support for stability in Iraq.&nbsp;

The United States stopped all weapons deliveries to Iraq in the midst of the growing tensions with the government in Baghdad, the US-based Inside Defense news site reported.

The United States stopped all weapons deliveries to Iraq in the midst of the growing tensions with the government in Baghdad, the US-based Inside Defense news site reported. The freeze includes halting supplies for the new F-16 fleet, the report said on Monday citing Air Force spokesperson Brian Brackens. The Pentagon will resume shipments "when the environment in Iraq is safe enough," Brackens said, according to the report. On Sunday, three missiles landed on the US embassy's territory in Baghdad, with one of the missiles hitting the embassy’s restaurant. Several people were reportedly injured. In early January, the Iraqi parliament voted to expel all foreign forces from the country and also raised the voice for ceasing cooperation with the international coalition. This came as a response to Washington's operation, in which Abu Mahdi Muhandis, the deputy commander of the Iraqi Shia militia, and Qasem Soleimani, an Iranian top general - both allegedly involved in the attack on the US embassy in Baghdad on December 31 - were killed. Washington has threatened that it will impose sanctions on Iraq if the US forces are expelled. Meanwhile, when Salih met with US President Donald Trump on Wednesday, the latter reiterated US’s support for stability in Iraq.

US stops weapons delivery to Iraq amid tensions with Baghdad: Reports

Iraqi security forces raided Baghdad's main protest site at Tahrir Square on Saturday, firing live rounds and tear gas at <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/islamic-state-resurgence-possible-if-america-leaves-iraq-us-general-276003">anti-government demonstrators </a>who have camped out there for months, Reuters reporters said.

There were no immediate reports of casualties but at least seven people were wounded in clashes with police earlier in the day, medics and security sources said.

The clashes took place after authorities began <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/islamic-state-resurgence-possible-if-america-leaves-iraq-us-general-276003https://www.wionews.com/world/islamic-state-resurgence-possible-if-america-leaves-iraq-us-general-276003https://www.wionews.com/world/islamic-state-resurgence-possible-if-america-leaves-iraq-us-general-276003">removing concrete barriers near Tahrir Square</a> and across at least one main bridge over the Tigris River in Baghdad.

In the southern city of Basra, security forces raided the main anti-government sit-in overnight and deployed in force to stop protesters gathering there again, security sources said. Police arrested at least 16 protesters in Basra, they said.

The actions appeared to be an attempt to fully clear out anti-government sit-ins and end months of popular demonstrations that have called for the removal of Iraq's entire ruling elite.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/4-people-including-two-policemen-killed-as-protests-erupt-in-iraq-275553">Security forces</a> began the raids just hours after populist cleric Moqtada al-Sadr said he wound halt the involvement of his supporters in the anti-government unrest.

Sadr had supported the demands of protesters for the removal of corrupt politicians and provision of services and jobs soon after the demonstrations began in October but stopped short of calling all his followers to join in.

Many of Sadr's millions of supporters who hail from Baghdad's slums have been involved in demonstrations, however.

Sadr's followers held a march on Friday calling for a removal of US troops from the country in a rally separate from the anti-government protests. The march, which some observers expected to descend into violence, dissipated after several hours.

Sadr wrote on Twitter late on Friday that he would "try not to interfere in the issue (of protesters), either negatively or positively, so that they can shepherd the fate of Iraq." He did not elaborate.

In Basra, protesters urged Sadr to reconsider what they said was a withdrawal of support for popular demonstrations. In a letter circulated on social media, they called for the support of Sadrists, without whom they feared attacks by security forces.

Iraqi security forces raided Baghdad's main protest site at Tahrir Square on Saturday, firing live rounds and tear gas at anti-government demonstrators who have camped out there for months, Reuters reporters said.

Iraqi security forces raided Baghdad's main protest site at Tahrir Square on Saturday, firing live rounds and tear gas at anti-government demonstrators who have camped out there for months, Reuters reporters said. There were no immediate reports of casualties but at least seven people were wounded in clashes with police earlier in the day, medics and security sources said. The clashes took place after authorities began removing concrete barriers near Tahrir Square and across at least one main bridge over the Tigris River in Baghdad. In the southern city of Basra, security forces raided the main anti-government sit-in overnight and deployed in force to stop protesters gathering there again, security sources said. Police arrested at least 16 protesters in Basra, they said. The actions appeared to be an attempt to fully clear out anti-government sit-ins and end months of popular demonstrations that have called for the removal of Iraq's entire ruling elite. Security forces began the raids just hours after populist cleric Moqtada al-Sadr said he wound halt the involvement of his supporters in the anti-government unrest. Sadr had supported the demands of protesters for the removal of corrupt politicians and provision of services and jobs soon after the demonstrations began in October but stopped short of calling all his followers to join in. Many of Sadr's millions of supporters who hail from Baghdad's slums have been involved in demonstrations, however. Sadr's followers held a march on Friday calling for a removal of US troops from the country in a rally separate from the anti-government protests. The march, which some observers expected to descend into violence, dissipated after several hours. Sadr wrote on Twitter late on Friday that he would "try not to interfere in the issue (of protesters), either negatively or positively, so that they can shepherd the fate of Iraq." He did not elaborate. In Basra, protesters urged Sadr to reconsider what they said was a withdrawal of support for popular demonstrations. In a letter circulated on social media, they called for the support of Sadrists, without whom they feared attacks by security forces.

Iraqi security forces raid Baghdad's main protest camp, shoot at demonstrators

The Islamic State group is weakened but a resurgence is possible if the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/.../trump-tears-into-environmental-doom-mongers -at-davos-forum-275841">United States</a> leaves Iraq, US Major General Alexus Grynkewich, the number two commander for the international anti-jihadist coalition in Iraq and Syria, said Wednesday.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-iran-tensions-washington-turns-down-iraqi-request-to-remove-troops-273509">US-Iran tensions escalate as Washington refuses Tehran's request to remove troops</a>

The group "certainly still remain a threat," he said. "They have the potential to resurge if we take the pressure off of them for too long."

The general said he did not see the threat of an immediate IS comeback.

"But the more time we take pressure off of them, the more of that threat will continue to grow," he said.

At a <a href="https://www.wionews.com/.../pentagon-restricts-access-to-guns-for-foreign- trainees-after-shooting-at-base-274969">Pentagon</a> press conference, he said the structural weakness of IS is shown by their failure to take advantage of demonstrations in Iraq calling for political reforms since October.

More than 460 protesters have been killed, and demonstrators are angry that few Iraqi security personnel have been charged for the violence.

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/iraqs-parliament-votes-to-expel-all-5000-us-troops-272384/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

The allies at the heart of the international coalition have over the last few months been evaluating the position of the jihadist movement whose self-declared "caliphate" once spanned parts of Iraq and Syria. It collapsed last March after years of battle with coalition-backed forces.

IS went underground and reverted to well-honed guerrilla tactics that continued to do damage.

The coalition wanted to determine whether the group is "executing some sort of strategic patience, waiting for an opportunity that they can exploit, or are they truly on the ropes a bit more and lacking in capability and capacity?" Grynkewich said.

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/wion-dispatch-what-remains-of-us-largest-base-where-us-troops-sheltered-during-iran-missile-attack-274459/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

He said the Iraqi protests helped the coalition to refine its assessment "that it's actually ISIS is a little bit more on the lack of capability and capacity side, than strategically patient," using another acronym for the jihadists.

Tensions between Washington and Tehran boiled over onto Iraqi soil this month. The US killed top Iranian general Qasem Soleimani in Baghdad and Tehran retaliated against an Iraqi base hosting American soldiers, some of whom were hurt.

Furious at the US hit, Iraq's parliament voted January 5 to oust all foreign troops, including about 5,200 American soldiers deployed alongside local forces.

Coalition troops have ostensibly reduced their operations in Iraq since then, even if cooperation with the Iraqi army continues discreetly, according to several US military sources.

US President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/.../trump-tears-into-environmental-doom-mongers -at-davos-forum-275841">Donald Trump</a> and his Iraqi counterpart Barham Saleh agreed Wednesday in Davos, Switzerland on the need for a continued US military role in the country, the White House said.

"That's really kind of a government-to-government discussion on when we get back to full restoration of that partnership. They certainly have an interest in it, as do we," Grynkewich said.

The Islamic State group is weakened but a resurgence is possible if the United States leaves Iraq, US Major General Alexus Grynkewich, the number two commander for the international anti-jihadist coalition in Iraq and Syria, said Wednesday.

The Islamic State group is weakened but a resurgence is possible if the United States leaves Iraq, US Major General Alexus Grynkewich, the number two commander for the international anti-jihadist coalition in Iraq and Syria, said Wednesday. Also read: US-Iran tensions escalate as Washington refuses Tehran's request to remove troops The group "certainly still remain a threat," he said. "They have the potential to resurge if we take the pressure off of them for too long." The general said he did not see the threat of an immediate IS comeback. "But the more time we take pressure off of them, the more of that threat will continue to grow," he said. At a Pentagon press conference, he said the structural weakness of IS is shown by their failure to take advantage of demonstrations in Iraq calling for political reforms since October. More than 460 protesters have been killed, and demonstrators are angry that few Iraqi security personnel have been charged for the violence. The allies at the heart of the international coalition have over the last few months been evaluating the position of the jihadist movement whose self-declared "caliphate" once spanned parts of Iraq and Syria. It collapsed last March after years of battle with coalition-backed forces. IS went underground and reverted to well-honed guerrilla tactics that continued to do damage. The coalition wanted to determine whether the group is "executing some sort of strategic patience, waiting for an opportunity that they can exploit, or are they truly on the ropes a bit more and lacking in capability and capacity?" Grynkewich said. He said the Iraqi protests helped the coalition to refine its assessment "that it's actually ISIS is a little bit more on the lack of capability and capacity side, than strategically patient," using another acronym for the jihadists. Tensions between Washington and Tehran boiled over onto Iraqi soil this month. The US killed top Iranian general Qasem Soleimani in Baghdad and Tehran retaliated against an Iraqi base hosting American soldiers, some of whom were hurt. Furious at the US hit, Iraq's parliament voted January 5 to oust all foreign troops, including about 5,200 American soldiers deployed alongside local forces. Coalition troops have ostensibly reduced their operations in Iraq since then, even if cooperation with the Iraqi army continues discreetly, according to several US military sources. US President Donald Trump and his Iraqi counterpart Barham Saleh agreed Wednesday in Davos, Switzerland on the need for a continued US military role in the country, the White House said. "That's really kind of a government-to-government discussion on when we get back to full restoration of that partnership. They certainly have an interest in it, as do we," Grynkewich said.

Islamic State resurgence possible if America leaves Iraq: US General

The United States treated 11 of its troops for symptoms of concussion after an Iranian missile attack on an Iraqi base where US forces were stationed, Reuters report said quoting US military on Thursday.

The United States treated 11 of its troops for symptoms of concussion after an Iranian missile attack on an Iraqi base where US forces were stationed, Reuters report said quoting US military on Thursday. President Trump and the US military denied casualties after the strike on the Ain al-Asad air base in western Iraq and a facility in its northern Kurdish region. The attack on the US forces by Iran military was in retaliation to the killing of Qasem Soleimani, the commander of the elite Quds Force of Iran's Revolutionary Guard. "While no US service members were killed in the January 8 Iranian attack on Al Asad air base, several were treated for concussion symptoms from the blast and are still being assessed," Captain Bill Urban, spokesman for US Central Command, said in a statement. As a measure of caution, some service members were taken to US facilities in Germany or Kuwait for "follow-on screening," he added. "When deemed fit for duty, the service members are expected to return to Iraq." As many as 1,500 Americans were deployed at the vast base deep in Iraq's Anbar desert. (With inputs from Reuters)

11 US troops injured in January 8 Iran missile attack in Iraq: US military

Iran reportedly fired four rockets into an Iraqi airbase north of Baghdad where US troops are based, news agency AFP's report said quoting military sources, with security forces saying four Iraqi airmen were wounded.

Iran reportedly fired four rockets into an Iraqi airbase north of Baghdad where US troops are based, news agency AFP's report said quoting military sources, with security forces saying four Iraqi airmen were wounded. A majority of US airmen stationed at the Al-Balad airbase north of Baghdad had already left, the military sources said, following tensions between the US and Iran over the killing of Iran military commander Qasem Soleimani. US airmen have left the airbase in the last two weeks amid rising tension between the two countries. Military bases hosting US troops have been subject to volleys of rocket and mortar attacks in recent months that have mostly wounded Iraqi forces but also killed one American contractor last month. Meanwhile, Iran's Revolutionary Guards said Sunday it did not aim to kill US troops when it fired a wave of missiles last week at Iraqi bases hosting American forces. "Our aim was not really to kill enemy soldiers. That was not important," the Guards' commander, Hossein Salami, told parliament, referring to last Wednesday's missile operation launched to avenge the killing of a top Iranian general. (With inputs from AFP)

Four rockets fired at Iraqi airbase hosting US troops: Military sources

us-troops

Us Troops, News on Us Troops, stories on Us Troops, articles on Us Troops, Us Troops stories at Wion, Us Troops news, Us Troops latest news

us troops