Russia offered bounties to kill american troops. (1 Viewer)

[The moose]

Russia Secretly Offered Afghan Militants Bounties to Kill U.S. Troops, Intelligence Says (Published 2020)

The Trump administration has been deliberating for months about what to do about a stunning intelligence assessment.

www.nytimes.com

An amazing read.

Trump was told about this in March. Then tries to get Russia back into the g8.

The timing is just plain horrible.

 

[LA - L.A.]

Right, but it's only evidence if they're real (the monetary transaction records). That was really my point. We don't know if it even really exists.

I think there's enough to warrant Congressional investigations to discover what evidence does or does not actually exist.

 

[bdb13]

I think there's enough to warrant Congressional investigations to discover what evidence does or does not actually exist.

That may be the case.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

Right, but it's only evidence if they're real (the monetary transaction records). That was really my point. We don't know if it even really exists.

I think we can agree that it's enough to at least start an investigation and let Congress get to the bottom of it, right?

 

[bdb13]

I think we can agree that it's enough to at least start an investigation and let Congress get to the bottom of it, right?

We may be talking about the same thing, but I think it's enough for Congress to look into the basic claims to determine the veracity and from there determine if a full-blown investigation is warranted.

I'd like to see something concrete in public though honestly, for as much as I hate Trump and want him long gone, I also don't trust that Democrats won't unnecessarily politicize something to hurt Trump (a few months prior to the election) even if there's no "there" there, 'cause that's just how it is.

*If it falls along party lines like usual

 

[cuddlemonkey]

We may be talking about the same thing, but I think it's enough for Congress to look into the basic claims to determine the veracity and from there determine if a full-blown investigation is warranted.

I'd like to see something concrete in public though honestly, for as much as I hate Trump and want him long gone, I also don't trust that Democrats won't unnecessarily politicize something to hurt Trump (a few months prior to the election) even if there's no "there" there, 'cause that's just how it is.

*If it falls along party lines like usual

I think that's reasonable. Dismissing the claims out of hand when there is evidence is not.

If someone comes forward and gives an anonymous tip to the police, we expect a cursory check at the very least. I see no reason not to expect the same here.

 

[MT15]

SFL, why do you think Crow’s amendment is based on reporting and not on any briefing he may have had? Or any knowledge he may have on his own?

This is worth looking into at the very least. It’s also very odd that Trump claims to not know anything about it until just now, and still doesn’t want to find out about it. I haven’t seen anything about the troops or to the families in this case.

I mean, how hard is it to say “If this is true, it’s unacceptable. I pledge to find out if it is true and hold Putin accountable if he was behind this.”

 

[barbar]

SFL, why do you think Crow’s amendment is based on reporting and not on any briefing he may have had? Or any knowledge he may have on his own?

This is worth looking into at the very least. It’s also very odd that Trump claims to not know anything about it until just now, and still doesn’t want to find out about it. I haven’t seen anything about the troops or to the families in this case.

I mean, how hard is it to say “If this is true, it’s unacceptable. I pledge to find out if it is true and hold Putin accountable if he was behind this.”

This is exactly why we need an investigation. Currently, we have allegations backed up by some anonymous sources and circumstantial evidence that seems to back it up, but that is not proof. The allegations are VERY serious and need to be looked into thoroughly and vetted. Burying our heads in the sand and pretending that it cannot be true because "anonymous sources are not real" is a very strange hill to die on. And Trump is just ignoring it like the corona virus. He seems to think that by doing nothing, problems will just pass him by.....which sadly has been mostly true for the last 3.5 years. I don't think it will work this time.

If there is nothing there we can all breathe a sigh of relief that bounties are not being paid to target American soldiers. Hopefully the evidence is more than just some numbers written on a napkin....lol.

 

[MT15]

So, here is a sourced piece on what may well have emboldened Putin to think he could get away with paying for dead American soldiers. I haven’t had time to read the entire thing, but just scanning it is somewhat alarming. Would like others’ thoughts.

Trump Pushed CIA to Give Intelligence to Kremlin, While Taking No Action Against Russia Arming Taliban

"Trump directed the CIA to share intelligence information on counterterrorism with the Kremlin despite no discernable reward," while at the same time not backing up the Pentagon in addressing concerns about Russia's arming the Taliban.

www.justsecurity.org

 

[TaylorB]

So, here is a sourced piece on what may well have emboldened Putin to think he could get away with paying for dead American soldiers. I haven’t had time to read the entire thing, but just scanning it is somewhat alarming. Would like others’ thoughts.

Trump Pushed CIA to Give Intelligence to Kremlin, While Taking No Action Against Russia Arming Taliban

"Trump directed the CIA to share intelligence information on counterterrorism with the Kremlin despite no discernable reward," while at the same time not backing up the Pentagon in addressing concerns about Russia's arming the Taliban.

www.justsecurity.org

My thoughts are that if I had friends or family members in Afghanistan, I would not be confident that our president has any interest in protecting them from being killed by the Taliban using weapons provided by Russia. And if I were another NATO member helping the US in the region, I would be gravely concerned by the president's body of work in weakening NATO and other Western alliances, all of which exist to counter-balance the threat from Russia and similarly situated enemies. And given this administration's history of using "counterterrorism" as a cover for clandestine behavior with Russia and other bad actors in the region, I do not take seriously any suggestion that what he's doing with the Russians has a legitimate basis in countering terrorism.

What interest does Trump have in placating Putin? I really don't know. I think it's a combination of things. He seems to have a genuine distaste for democratic (small "d") ideals, He prefers Russia-style oligarchies where rules don't apply to the wealthy, and admires leaders like Putin who aren't constrained by those rules (he resents the rules that led to him going bankrupt multiple times, half of his buddies going to prison, and him getting his teeth kicked in by the Supreme Court when he's too incompetent to rescind DACA or tinker with the census). He likely perceives a benefit electorally through ongoing and future interference operations. He likely perceives that there will be post-presidency financial windfalls rewarding his loyalty through real estate deals. He cares about those things more than advancing legitimate foreign policy or protecting soldiers abroad. None of those things require Putin having pee-pee tapes; they're all what you'd expect from a malignant narcissist with no morals.

What would we expect a malignant narcissist president with no morals to do when it finally becomes public that Russia was funding the Taliban which was fighting us and our allies, that he knew about it and didn't do anything about it? Claim he never got the intelligence? Claim the intelligence wasn't accurate? Claim it's a hoax designed to bring him down? Not take any steps to reassure the public that he gives a damn? Persuade his supporters to repeat his lies? Not once, ever, say anything negative about Putin or the fact that he's funding an enemy of the US?

 

[TaylorB]

So, here is a sourced piece on what may well have emboldened Putin to think he could get away with paying for dead American soldiers. I haven’t had time to read the entire thing, but just scanning it is somewhat alarming. Would like others’ thoughts.

Trump Pushed CIA to Give Intelligence to Kremlin, While Taking No Action Against Russia Arming Taliban

"Trump directed the CIA to share intelligence information on counterterrorism with the Kremlin despite no discernable reward," while at the same time not backing up the Pentagon in addressing concerns about Russia's arming the Taliban.

www.justsecurity.org

And I guess my last reply was not particularly responsive to the article you posted. It's so hard to be able to verify every single thing they claim in the article without knowing who the sources are, etc., but the narrative seems to be well-sourced, and I generally find JustSecurity's articles to be straightforward and factual. The notion of Trump attempting to share counterintelligence with the Kremlin without getting anything in return is consistent with much of his foreign policy with nations led by strongmen, and specifically with Putin.

It seems to me that the only missing link in the bounty story is that there is not 100% proof of any specific payments being made for the targeting of US troops. Without knowing what the IC is relying on to form that conclusion, it is hard to make a fair judgment as to what we should do about it. But as usual there seem to be more pieces to the puzzle than we were initially led to believe, and it's something the media and Congress should keep pressing for information on. The resignation of Mattis and pushback from other high-ranking military officials have always suggested to me that they did not like what was happening over there.

 

[SaintForLife]

Well, well, well. Yet another Russiagate story that fizzled out. Russiagate need a 72 hour rule. After 72 hours most of the bombshells fall apart after closer scrutiny.

 

[samiam5211]

The president’s initial reaction to the information is more important than the accuracy of the information.

 

[SaintForLife]

The president’s initial reaction to the information is more important than the accuracy of the information.

I'm hoping your post is sarcasm.

 

[samiam5211]

I'm hoping your post is sarcasm.

No sarcasm. I said the same thing weeks ago.

The Russian government is our enemy. It would not be surprising to find they were offering money to people who already wanted to kill our soldiers.

Whether or not our commander in chief is interested should be much more concerning.

 

[SaintForLife]

No sarcasm. I said the same thing weeks ago.

The Russian government is our enemy. It would not be surprising to find they were offering money to people who already wanted to kill our soldiers.

Whether or not our commander in chief is interested should be much more concerning.

If Russia wasn't paying the bounties, there isn't a story or issue to be interested in.

 

[FullMonte]

Well, well, well. Yet another Russiagate story that fizzled out. Russiagate need a 72 hour rule. After 72 hours most of the bombshells fall apart after closer scrutiny.

Wow...what a confusing bunch of tweets that severely muddy the claim you are apparently trying to make...

You've got a link to an NYT article that says that a memo produced by the National Intelligence Council acknowledges " that the C.I.A. and top counterterrorism officials have assessed that Russia appears to have offered bounties to kill American and coalition troops in Afghanistan, but emphasized uncertainties and gaps in evidence, according to three officials."
--So the first article says that the CIA believes that Russia offered bounties, but they aren't certain.

You have an article that says that Russia didn't offer bounties, but that it was Afghan disinformation.

You have a quote from the CENTCOM commander saying that the intelligence was enough to worry him, but not enough for him to use in court, which he says is standard for battlfield intelligence.

So, what are you saying is true? That the report is completely false? Or that the intelligence was believed but not verified?

 

[samiam5211]

If Russia wasn't paying the bounties, there isn't a story or issue to be interested in.

We have different priorities and won’t agree until one of us has no choice but to admit our mistake.

 

[MT15]

It’s a bunch of tweets from people who have sacrificed their credibility for various reasons.

After Trump is no longer President and all the dirty secrets come out, will anyone feel bad about carrying his water for so long? I have no problem admitting that I don’t get the motivation of people who staunchly defend him. Not the “journalists”, I do think I get their motivation. They have a narrative to sell, and their own reasons for pushing that narrative.

What I don’t get is why are some ordinary people convinced that the whole world is out to get this man? It’s obvious that he is a moral vacuum, a pathological liar, that his overriding interest is himself and nobody else. What makes people fall for the grift he puts out that everyone is out to get him? That vast numbers of media and lifetime civil servants are all conspiring against him? That every time he gets caught doing something awful, he’s the victim?

I don’t know that I will ever understand that.