It Is All So Much Bullsh*t!

It is election time and Trump has gone on record as promising to end our endless wars…..he likes to call himself the “ender of endless wars”.

Sorry sports fans but it is idle bullsh*t…just election rhetoric that holds on truth…..

I wrote a piece recently about all these promises…..https://lobotero.com/2020/09/14/ender-of-endless-wars/

Nice rhetoric too bad it is so much bullsh*t……and now why would I make such a claim?

Trump may be moving troops around and out of Iraq and Afghanistan….but those are not the only wars we have going (in case you were unaware)……what a bout Syria?

Glad you asked!

The US is sending additional forces into Syria after a series of incidents between US and Russian troops in the country, according to three unnamed Pentagon officials speaking to NBC News. The force will consist of six Bradley Fighting Vehicles and fewer than 100 soldiers, who will be operating in northeast Syria on a 90-day deployment.

The US-led anti-ISIS coalition Operation Inherent Resolve said that the Bradley Fighting Vehicles arrived in eastern Syria on Friday.

The unnamed officials told NBC that the additional soldiers and vehicles will serve as a “show of presence” to discourage Russia from entering the eastern security zone where US forces and the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces operate.

US troops have had multiple encounters with the Syrian government and Russia inside Syria throughout the year. Some of the more serious confrontations occurred last month.

One incident took place on August 17th at a Syrian army checkpoint and resulted in US attack helicopters firing on the position, killing at least one Syrian soldier. A few days after the checkpoint incident, US and Russian military vehicles collided, injuring at least seven US soldiers.

US commanders blame the encounters on Moscow and Damascus, but while the US maintains its presence in the country against the will of the Syrian government, confrontations are bound to happen. These additional forces will only make similar incidents more likely.

(antiwar.com)

These wars are not ending…..just a reallocation of troops to give the appearance of a cessation of hostilities.

Dear Mr. Trump…use your magic pen and end these goddamn wars!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

P.S.

Citing increased complexity in the US operation in Syria, the Pentagon has announced they will send a small contingent of mechanized infantry, and several Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicles back into NE Syria.

Officials are describing this as a “force protection” mission, and are linking it to an incident last month in which a US vehicle was side-swiped by a Russian vehicle. The US forces in Syria are confined to a small area, and officially they are there as part of a mission to take Syria’s oil.

There are currently an estimated 500 US troops in Syria, and this deployment will see an estimated 100 more troops sent to the country. Though media reports are calling this a show of force, it’s not clear that an extra 100 troops are going to mean that much in the grand scheme of things.

These troops will be moving in through Kuwait. Though the US presence in Syria is fairly small, even 100 additional troops could be quite expensive, and make this war for oil even less economical for the Trump Administration.

“Ender of Endless Wars My Ass!

Those Bounties Again

Those alleged “bounties” that Russia and possibly Iran have been accused of paying for the deaths of US troops is still making the rounds with those corporate stoolies that called themselves journalists.

When the story broke I let my readers know about the report and of course what I thought of the BS…..

https://lobotero.com/2020/07/02/mutiny-of-the-bounties/

https://lobotero.com/2020/08/25/more-bounties-claim/

If you read my two posts then you will know why I have not been consumed with these stories as major stories…..

Finally the intel community has stated that these accusations cannot be verified…..

Months after The New York Times reported that Russia secretly offered bounties to the Taliban to kill US troops in Afghanistan, a top US commander says a detailed review of all available intelligence found no corroboration of the story.

Gen. Frank McKenzie, commander of US CENTCOM, spoke with NBC News about the matter. “It just has not been proved to a level of certainty that satisfies me,” McKenzie said. “We continue to look for that evidence. I just haven’t seen it yet.”

An unnamed military intelligence official also told NBC News that after reviewing the intelligence of attacks on US forces in Afghanistan over the past several years, none had been linked to any Russian bounty payments.

McKenzie’s comments reflect statements made by other top military officials shortly after the Times story broke. Secretary of Defense Mark Esper took the position that the Pentagon did not have “corroborating evidence” to support the Times report back in June.

In a hearing in front of the House Armed Services Committee in July, Esper said all the defense intelligence agencies have been “unable to corroborate this report.” In that same hearing, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley took the same position. Both Milley and McKenzie vowed to keep investigating the intelligence, and now, two months later, there is still no evidence to back up the claims.

Other intelligence agencies have strongly dissented from the claim that Russia was paying bounties to the Taliban, most notably the National Security Agency (NSA). The National Intelligence Council produced a memo in July that showed the NSA only gave “low” confidence to the Russian bounty intelligence.

Intelligence agencies use confidence levels to reflect the scope and quality of the intelligence they are assessing. There are three confidence levels, “high,” “moderate,” and “low.” The same memo that said the NSA gave the bounty intelligence “low” confidence also revealed the CIA gave it “moderate” confidence, which still leaves plenty of room for doubt.

(antiwar.com)

This is just noise…..political rhetoric…..

So far nothing about this continuing report can be proven….and yet the media continues to use it to belittle the president…..and they (whoever ‘they’ are) say the MSM is unbiased……my ass!

I am by NO means a fan of the president but he has done so much that is wrong that a lie is not needed to accuse him.

Learn Stuff!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Biden And Endless Wars

Let’s say Biden wins in November and replaces Trump….what would that mean for our two longest wars?

First Trump is trying to look like a good guy just before the election by moving troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq….(personally I feel it is only a campaign ploy)….I wrote about Trump’s approach to these wars…..

Back to Biden….does he have a stand on these two endless wars?

Why yes he does!

Former Vice President Joe Biden gave some of his first foreign policy-related positions in an interview with Stars and Stripes on Thursday, saying the “forever wars have to end” while seemingly ruling out any full-fledged withdrawals, arguing the US still has to worry about terrorism and ISIS.

Biden said the ongoing US wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria are so complicated he can’t promise a withdrawal. He also suggested he may increase military spending even beyond its current record levels as he shifts focus to what he believes should be the military’s priorities.

The priorities, as are so often the case for the US, are fighting Russia, who Biden identified as a “near-peer” power. The US spends more than ten times the amount on its military annually that Russia does, and it is unclear in what way they are a “near-peer.”

Either way, Biden intends to shift the focus toward unmanned drones and cyber-warfare, and suggests that is likely to boil down to not just a shift in where money is spent, but likely an increase in spending as well.

(antiwar.com)

Mostly we will just have to stay awhile longer in the Middle East…..

According to the military newspaper, “Biden said the conditions in Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq are so complicated that he cannot promise full withdrawal of troops in the near future.”

It added that the Democratic candidate “said he does not foresee major reductions in the US defense budget as the military refocuses its attention to potential threats from ‘near-peer’ powers such as China and Russia.” The Pentagon budget has soared under Trump, with overwhelming support from congressional Democrats, to $738 billion.

“In fact,” the article stated, “he [Biden] said defense spending could increase in a Biden administration.” It quoted the former vice president as saying, “I’ve met with a number of my advisers and some have suggested in certain areas the budget is going to have to be increased.”

The article noted that Biden has “vowed” to better equip the National Guard, which is increasingly being deployed in cities across the country to assist local and state police in suppressing left-wing protests.

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/09/12/bide-s12.html

I have said on many occasions that if Biden is elected in November that very little will change….so far everything I have seen would NOT sway me from my predictions.

Learn Stuff!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Ender Of Endless Wars

That is what Trump billed himself as in the 2016 election…..and yet most…scratch that…ALL are still raging and Americans are still dying.

We get lots of lip service and even a bit of shuffling troops around so that it can be said that the president is keeping his campaign promise of 4 years ago.

Let’s start with Afghanistan.

The US has brought some troops out of the country and Trump’s new ambassador has lots to say about the troops….

In a move the could have major implications for the longest running war in US history, the Trump administration is planning to nominate Will Ruger to be the next ambassador to Afghanistan, the Wall Street Journal reported Friday. Ruger, an anti-interventionist conservative, has long championed an immediate withdrawal of American troops from that country.

Ruger’s planned nomination, which a source familiar with the matter confirmed to Mother Jones, speaks to President Trump’s desire to remove troops from Afghanistan as quickly as possible. Though the United States signed a much-criticized peace deal with the Taliban in February, the administration has been hazy about when to expect a full withdrawal of troops. Trump reportedly wants troops home before Election Day, but the Pentagon has advocated for a much “slower withdrawal schedule,” the New York Times reported in May. 

Trump’s Pick for Afghanistan Ambassador Wants to Withdraw US Troops Immediately

On the surface sounds like a good deal…but is it?  Or is it just talk?

Next is our second longest war….Iraq.

There has been some talk about removing our troops from Iraq and so far it has been just that…TALK.

The U.S. will be reducing the number of troops it has stationed in Iraq by about a third, reports The Wall Street Journal, leaving behind roughly 3,500 men and women. This news comes after a long series of brags at the Republican National Convention that President Donald Trump is succeeding in ending America’s foreign wars.

“Unlike previous administrations, I have kept America out of new wars, and our troops are coming home,” said Trump in his acceptance speech last night, promising that in a second term he would “strike down terrorists who threaten our people and keep America out of endless and costly foreign wars.”

Trump, Self-Proclaimed Ender of Endless Wars, Is Reducing the U.S. Troop Presence in Iraq to Where It Was in 2015

Let us not forget our footprint in Syria.

We went for dual reasons….eliminate ISIS’ progress and to rid the country of Assad,  WE did a fair job on the first but failed miserably on the second.

Why are there still thousands of American troops in Syria? The government offers up an official counter-terrorism justification for maintaining an illegal military presence in the country, and the president will sometimes talk about “keeping the oil” there, but the real answer is that no one with any authority or influence in Washington wants to bring them home. The usual mix of inertia, cowardice, and ideology that defines so many of our foreign policy debates also creates perverse incentives for politicians in both parties to defend an illegal, unauthorized mission that has nothing to do with American security.

U.S. troops are in harm’s way in Syria, and they are occasionally engaged in hostilities with pro-regime forces. Four American soldiers were injured in a collision last Wednesday between their armored vehicle and a Russian one. That was just the latest in a string of clashes between U.S. forces and Syrian and Russian government forces that has been going on for months. Last month, a group of American troops came under fire from Syrian government forces. The Syrians claim that a U.S. helicopter had attacked a Syrian government outpost and killed one of their soldiers. There was a bigger clash in February of this year that also resulted in at least one Syrian fatality. These have all been minor incidents, but they show how potentially dangerous it is to keep these troops there.

Get Out of Syria

The noise about action to be taken by the US against Iran is still there in the printed word and the spoken as well.

And finally there is the turmoil in Lebanon, a country that the US has placed troops on two occasions, the country is sliding into a civil yet again….and the US is just waiting for the invite…..

A new flashpoint of the wider tension, however, is in Lebanon. Russia, which has an expensive alliance with Iran in Syria, has declined to take on the same level of involvement in Lebanon. Iranian allies in Beirut – namely, Hezbollah – have therefore eyed eyeing Chinese funds and expertise to restore the city and its port after this month’s devastating ammonium nitrate explosion demolished them. The speediness and lack of conditionality that comes with Chinese support would provide a shortcut for Hezbollah to pre-empt any other powers stepping in as the city’s saviour and to bring its dominance of Lebanese politics to the level of a monopoly.

https://www.thenational.ae/opinion/comment/the-world-s-great-powers-will-soon-face-off-in-lebanon-1.1066963

The Middle East may be out of mind these days but I requires watching closely or we will be ass deep in the region once again.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Iraq In The Rear View Mirror

Out man in Washington has decided to bring US troops home from Iraq….that is a promise that has been wanting to be fulfilled….and now some will leave the country…..

CENTCOM officials say that the process has been considered for months, and confirmed Wednesday what the administration has said recently, that there will be a US drawdown in Iraq before the election. 2,200 troops will leave Iraq by the end of this month.

At times the Pentagon has resisted major troop cuts by the administration, but seems resigned to it this time, emphasizing that the US has made a “great sacrifice” in decades of Iraqi war, and vowing that the US would continue supporting the Iraqi government.

That is not a small point for them to emphasize, either. When the Iraqi parliament asked the US to withdraw, there was talk of the US cutting ties with Iraq entirely to punish them. That no longer seems to be contemplated


With a pro-US premier now, Iraq isn’t pushing for an immediate pullout, and the US may want to lower troop levels this month, but probably won’t be out of Iraq entirely by the election either, leaving open whether the US is on their way out of Iraq until 2021.

(antiwar.com)

A friend asked me who would fill the void created by the departure of US troops……the answer to that question is….France.

French President Emmanuel Macron has declared a raft of aid and support packages to assist the beleaguered Iraqi government, as reports indicate that the United States is planning further troop reductions in the embattled country.

President Macron arrived in Iraq last Wednesday as the first foreign head of state to visit the war-ravaged country since Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi took office in May. 

Speaking from Baghdad, Macron said that Iraq had to assert its “sovereignty” despite being caught up in US-Iran tensions. “Iraq has been going through a challenging time for several years, with war and terrorism,” Macron said.

He noted that the country was still struggling to revive its economy, improve its education system and bring “military elements and militias” under state control. 

https://english.alaraby.co.uk/english/indepth/2020/9/9/the-iraq-report-france-asserts-itself-as-us-withdraws

France has been asserted itself into the region again…..Macron is trying to fill the hole that US is creating by its departure.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

 

One Third Out!

The news coming from the Trump White House is that after his removal of troops from Afghanistan the same will be done with the troop deployment in Iraq…..

The first official figures from the Trump Administration on the Iraq drawdown came Friday, with officials now saying that the 5,200 US troops there currently will be cut to about 3,500 in the next two to three months.

That’s about a third of the US troops in Iraq, and realistically more than that, as there are almost certainly over 5,200 US troops in Iraq now. The US has not kept public figures on troop levels for months, and 5,200, the highest allowed by the US-Iraq troop agreement, and when more troops were sent, the official figure always remained 5,200.

As with other planned US drawdowns, the Pentagon has yet to comment on it at all. In Afghanistan, the drawdown was ongoing for months before the Pentagon even admitted there was an order to cut troop levels, and Iraq may be heading for a similar type of ambiguity.

President Trump announced the intention for a drawdown earlier this month during a visit by Iraq’s premier. The expectation was for troop cuts to come before the election. Though officials did not confirm that this is the total of the cut, the timeframe suggests this is what is being planned for now.

(antiwar.com)

Is this a promise kept by Trump?  Or is it just a move during an election to try a sway voters?

Is this going to be an end to our endless wars?

The Wall Street Journal scoop on the details of the Trump administration’s troop withdrawal from Iraq is welcome news. Reportedly, President Donald Trump is cutting U.S. troop levels by one- third, to about 3,500 troops from 5,200. This move would bring force levels back to where they were in 2015, at the height of the war against ISIL, which in and of itself demonstrates how unnecessary the troop level increases have been mindful of the decimation of the Islamic State.

Yet, the Journal — and the media narrative around this in general — frames this solely as a decision born out of political pressures in Iraq and the United States. The Iraqi public wants the United States to leave — as demonstrated by the Iraqi parliament voting to expel U.S. troops earlier this year – and Trump seeking to deliver on his campaign promise to end the endless wars.

“But both governments have faced political pressures at home from critics who have complained that the U.S. may be engaged in an open-ended mission,” the Journal reports.

What Trump’s troop withdrawal from Iraq means for ending America’s endless wars

Whatcha think?  Is this truly an end to our endless wars?  The beginning of the end?

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Tonkin Resolution

This post is about something that is near to my heart…..

Ever wonder what it was that got the US ass deep on the Vietnam War?

Well August is a busy month….we have had bombs and Marilyn and in 1964 Pres. Johnson got his wish and the US was thrust into the armed conflict in Southeast Asia…..

It was 56 years ago today that a joint session of Congress approved the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, an act that led to the Vietnam War’s escalation and the eventual passage of another measure seeking to curb presidential powers.

The incident between the USS Maddox and several North Vietnamese torpedo boats remains hazy today. On August 4, 1964, President Lyndon Johnson told a national audience that the North Vietnamese had engaged the U.S. Navy in the Gulf of Tonkin. He then asked Congress to approve retaliatory attacks on North Vietnam.

“After consultation with the leaders of both parties in the Congress, I further announced a decision to ask the Congress for a resolution expressing the unity and determination of the United States in supporting freedom and in protecting peace in southeast Asia,” Johnson said the next day.

“As I have repeatedly made clear, the United States intends no rashness, and seeks no wider war. We must make it clear to all that the United States is united in its determination to bring about the end of Communist subversion and aggression in the area,” Johnson added.

On August 7, 1964, Congress approved a resolution that soon became the legal rationalization for the Vietnam War.

https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-gulf-of-tonkin-and-the-limits-of-presidential-power

This resolution sent many Americans like myself into a meat grinder…..a situation that took years to work through.

It took 5 days from the incident to the resolution….and then war comes to us all….

On 2 August 1964, North Vietnamese patrol torpedo boats attacked the USS Maddox (DD-731) while the destroyer was in international waters in the Gulf of Tonkin. There is no doubting that fact. But what happened in the Gulf during the late hours of 4 August—and the consequential actions taken by U.S. officials in Washington—has been seemingly cloaked in confusion and mystery ever since that night.

Nearly 200 documents the National Security Agency (NSA) declassified and released in 2005 and 2006, however, have helped shed light on what transpired in the Gulf of Tonkin on 4 August. The papers, more than 140 of them classified top secret, include phone transcripts, oral-history interviews, signals intelligence (SIGINT) messages, and chronologies of the Tonkin events developed by Department of Defense and NSA officials. Combined with recently declassified tapes of phone calls from White House officials involved with the events and previously uncovered facts about Tonkin, these documents provide compelling evidence about the subsequent decisions that led to the full commitment of U.S. armed forces to the Vietnam War.

https://www.usni.org/magazines/naval-history-magazine/2008/february/truth-about-tonkin

As usual for those that are allergic to the printed word I present a short video that will help in the understanding of this situation.

 

 

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Bounty Of A Different Color

Surely most people have heard about the bounties that were put on our soldiers according to the media and some Neocons…..I originally asked the question….why now?

Don’t take my word…here is the post that I asked that question…..https://lobotero.com/2020/07/02/mutiny-of-the-bounties/

The day after my post someone else had the same idea that I had……https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/07/03/roaming-charges-mutiny-of-the-bounties/

All that history aside…..the media has done an excellent job selling the idea of the bounties to the American people……

Late last month, reports began emerging claiming that Russia had been paying substantial bounties to the Taliban to kill US troops in Afghanistan. A new poll shows that 60% of Americans view that allegation as “believable.”

Claims Russia did something bad are usually easy to sell, and a claim repeated enough usually gets believed by many. Still, the evidence is not at all on the side of this particular allegation, which the Pentagon tried, and failed, to sell to the US intelligence community.

Centcom head Gen. Frank McKenzie says that when he heard the report it was “worrisome,” but that he’s still not clear anyone was killed on the basis of this. Moreover, he says the US did not change its Afghanistan operations.

It seems clear at this point it was never true, but the New York Times ran with the story, and ran hard, and the poll points to Americans buying the story.

The poll shows that they view Russian President Vladimir Putin as a “threat,” and support a new round of US sanctions against Russia. Alarmingly, 9% even supported attacking Russia outright.

This is undercut by the strong evidence that this plot isn’t true, and never was. The danger is, the US could escalate hostilities and the majority of the public is fine with it.

(antiwar.com)

After the troop withdrawal was announced no sooner than the Pentagon started using its contacts in the media to ax the decision and to keep the troops in Afghanistan…..

The New York Times dropped another Russiagate bombshell on June 26 with a sensational front-page story headlined, “Russia Secretly Offered Afghan Militants Bounties to Kill U.S. Troops, Intelligence Says.” A predictable media and political frenzy followed, reviving the anti-Russian hysteria that has excited the Beltway establishment for the past four years.

But a closer look at the reporting by the Times and other mainstream outlets vying to confirm its coverage reveals another scandal not unlike Russiagate itself: the core elements of the story appear to have been fabricated by Afghan government intelligence to derail a potential US troop withdrawal from the country. And they were leaked to the Times and other outlets by US national security state officials who shared an agenda with their Afghan allies.

In the days following the story’s publication, the maneuvers of the Afghan regime and US national security bureaucracy encountered an unexpected political obstacle: US intelligence agencies began offering a series of low confidence assessments in the Afghan government’s self-interested intelligence claims, judging them to be highly suspect at best, and altogether bogus at worst.

How the Pentagon Failed to Sell Afghan Government’s Bunk ‘Bountygate’ Story to US Intelligence Agencies

The longer the story is out there…..the more holes are found in the reports…..even the Pentagon is back peddling…..

Continuing the allegation of Russian bounty payments to Taliban to kill US troops, Defense Secretary Mark Esper and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Mark Milley both told the House Armed Services Committee that they’ve seen no corroboration of the claim, nor do they believe anyone was actually killed on the basis of it.

This allegation emerged last month in the New York Times and has been oft-repeated, despite a lack of evidence. Earlier this week, a poll showed a majority of Americans believe the claim, though the military has repeatedly said they just don’t have the evidence to defend it. Centcom’s commander has also recently doubted it.

Beyond military doubts, US intelligence has also expressed major doubts, saying they have “low confidence” of the allegations. It is unclear why this continues, when between military leadership and intelligence community no one seems to be buying the story.

That said, Milley told the committee that if it turns out this claim is true, something that looks remotely unlikely, he said that the US would respond against Russia in some non-specific way.

(antiwar.com)

Appears this was a campaign put together by the M-IC to keep troops and equipment in Afghanistan thus preserving their profits for longer.

Bring The Troops Home!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

 

 

Mutiny Of The Bounties

Pandemic is growing every day and the protests apparently are not newsworthy anymore….so what can the media be going on about?

Bounties!

There has been a story circulating around the nation…it seems a report has been found that tells of bounties paid by Russia for the killing of American soldiers.

The president has denied the whole affair…..and there is contradictory reports as well…..

The new controversy over allegations that Russia put bounties on US troops in Afghanistan—and whether President Trump himself was briefed about it—continues to gain steam. The White House briefed a group of Republican lawmakers on the issue Monday, and a group of Democratic lawmakers will be briefed on Tuesday, reports Politico. Trump has insisted that he was never told about the allegations, though reports continue to surface challenging that. The AP, for example, is out with a story saying that top White House officials were aware of classified intel on the matter in early 2019 and that it “was included in at least one of President Donald Trump’s written daily intelligence briefings at the time.” The story also reports that former national security adviser John Bolton has told friends he briefed Trump about it.

The New York Times makes a similar assertion in the first paragraph of its latest story: “American officials provided a written briefing in late February to President Trump laying out their conclusion that a Russian military intelligence unit offered and paid bounties to Taliban-linked militants to kill U.S. and coalition troops in Afghanistan, two officials familiar with the matter said.” One of the Republicans in Monday’s briefing, Rep. Michael McCaul of Texas, defended the president afterward, reports NBC News. Yes, the allegation may have appeared in a written briefing to the president, he said, but it wasn’t deemed to be “a credible, actionable piece of intelligence” at the time. “And if at any point it did, it would be raised to his attention.” McCaul, the top Republican on the Foreign Affairs Committee, added that he came out of the briefing concerned that the bounty allegations were true.

As I said there is some opposition to this report….and it comes from NSA……

The Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday that the National Security Agency “strongly dissented from other intelligence agencies’ assessment that Russia paid bounties for the killing of US soldiers in Afghanistan.”

Another account of the NSA not giving much weight to this intelligence was given to CBS News reporter Catherine Herridge on Monday. An unnamed intelligence official told Herridge that the NSA deemed a report on the Russian bounties “uncorroborated.” The official said the report “does not match well-established and verifiable Taliban and Haqqani practices” and lacks “sufficient reporting to corroborate any links.”

The CIA is used as an example in the Journal’s report of an agency the NSA allegedly disagreed with over the intelligence. So far, the CIA has declined to comment on the issue besides a vague statement from CIA Director Gina Haspel. “When developing intelligence assessments, initial tactical reports often require additional collection and validation …  Leaks compromise and disrupt the critical interagency work to collect, assess, and ascribe culpability,” Haspel said.

NSA Dissents From Other Agencies Over Russian Bounty Intel

Are there problems with these reports?

According to the American Conservative there are three problems…..

A bombshell report published by The New York Times Friday alleges that Russia paid dollar bounties to the Taliban in Afghanistan to kill U.S troops. Obscured by an extremely bungled White House press response, there are at least three serious flaws with the reporting.

The article alleges that GRU, a top-secret unit of Russian military intelligence, offered the bounty in payment for every U.S. soldier killed in Afghanistan, and that at least one member of the U.S. military was alleged to have been killed in exchange for the bounties. According to the paper, U.S. intelligence concluded months ago that the Russian unit involved in the bounties was also linked to poisonings, assassination attempts and other covert operations in Europe. The Times reports that United States intelligence officers and Special Operations forces in Afghanistan came to this conclusion about Russian bounties some time in 2019.

Three Glaring Problems with the Russian Taliban ‘Bounty’ Story

Could this report be timed for a specific audience?

Afghan Bounty Scandal Comes at Suspiciously Important Time for US Military Industrial Complex

Looks like confirmation of the accusations…….

But three separate Taliban sources told Insider they were aware of Russian bounty payments being made — though they said only the less-disciplined elements on the fringes of the group would take up such an offer.

https://www.businessinsider.com/russia-did-pay-extremists-attack-american-soldiers-taliban-sources-say-2020-7

Bounties?

If these stories prove to be accurate then there is nothing new…sorry to crap on your parade.

The US has put the bounty on Osama and other AQ leaders as well as ISIS……it has also has put bounties on “criminals” in Africa….

It is not the first time that American soldiers have been targeted with bounties……….My time in Vietnam I was a LRRP and in the Delta there was a bounty on us of 500 dong (Vietnamese money) paid by the North Vietnamese….I am sure that we were not the only targets for these bounties.

I think the bigger story is whether the president knew or not….if not then why?

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Afghanistan Can Be Deadly!

I know…NO SHIT Professor!

There is other ways that it is deadly other than the Taleban and friendlies and IEDs……

It seems that someone put bounties of American soldiers…..and that someone was RUSSIA…..

United States intelligence agents believe that Russia offered Afghan militants bounties to kill U.S. soldiers and other coalition troops during peace talks between the U.S. and the Taliban, The New York Times reports. The talks were part of an effort to wind down U.S. military presence in the Middle Eastern nation, but the covert effort by Russia appears aimed at undermining them. U.S. intelligence officers reportedly reached the startling conclusion months ago and have been debating a response since. President Donald Trump has been briefed on the matter, as has the White House National Security Council, but neither has made a direct response. Islamist militants and their associates killed 20 U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan in 2019, and intelligence officers believe that the insurgents did collect bounties from Russia, but it’s unclear how many of those deaths are considered paid for by Russia.

Read it at The New York Times

Our president was told this back in March by our intel agencies…..

US troops, killed by paid assassins? Maybe so, if this story holds any water. A Russian military spy unit has secretly paid Taliban-linked militants to kill coalition forces in Afghanistan—something President Trump learned about months ago but chose not to act, US officials tell the New York Times. According to US intelligence, the Russian unit shuttled bounty money to Islamist militants (or armed criminals who work with them) back in 2019. Trump and the White House’s National Security Council examined the issue in late March and mulled various options, like making a diplomatic complaint or escalating sanctions, but the White House has not yet responded. This, of course, could become political dynamite if it’s confirmed.

“If true, this is outrageous conduct by Russia,” tweeted Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif), who suggested that Trump might be “beholden to Putin” as he puts “US troops’ lives at risk by doing nothing.” But there are problems. Only a few coalition troops died in Afghanistan amid a wave of attacks in 2019, and just four Americans were killed in combat there in 2019. And if it’s true, why would the Russians do it? Officials say it might be an attempt to derail US-Taliban peace talks or get revenge for Russian mercenaries killed by US troops in a 2018 battle in Syria. Meanwhile, the Kremlin is keeping mum and the Taliban has issued a flat denial. And the revelation has triggered “intense debate” at the White House about how to respond, the Washington Post reports

INTENSE DEBATE?

And in 4 months no one has any idea how to respond?

An Intense debate and Trump knew nothing about this……

President Trump on Sunday denied that he had been briefed on reported US intelligence that a Russian military intelligence unit secretly offered bounties to Taliban-linked militants for killing American troops in Afghanistan, and he minimized the allegations against Moscow. American intelligence officials concluded months ago that Russian officials offered rewards for successful attacks on American service-members last year, at a time when the US and Taliban were holding talks to end the long-running war, per the New York Times. Trump, in a Sunday morning tweet, said “Nobody briefed or told me” or Vice President Mike Pence or chief of staff Mark Meadows about “the so-called attacks on our troops in Afghanistan by Russians.” “Everybody is denying it & there have not been many attacks on us,” he said, per the AP.

The White House issued a statement Saturday denying that Trump or Pence had been briefed on such intelligence. Trump’s director of national intelligence, John Ratcliffe, also said neither the president nor vice president was “ever briefed on any intelligence alleged” in the Times’ report. Trump’s tweet came a day after Joe Biden said that the report, if accurate, was a “truly shocking revelation” about the commander in chief and his failure to protect US troops in Afghanistan and stand up to Russia. Russia called the report “nonsense.” “This unsophisticated plant clearly illustrates the low intellectual abilities of the propagandists of American intelligence, who instead of inventing something more plausible have to make up this nonsense,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said. A Taliban spokesman said the militants “strongly reject this allegation” and are not “indebted to the beneficence of any intelligence organ or foreign country.” Trump responded to Biden on Twitter, saying “Russia ate his and Obama’s lunch during their time in office”

If the president was not briefed then who was having the intense debate?

Truly a country lead by amateurs.

And that amateurish BS gets people killed….

The bounties Russia allegedly put on US troops in Afghanistan led to at least one US soldier’s death, sources tell the New York Times. President Trump has denied reports that he was briefed on the plot, in which Russia promised to pay the Taliban if they killed American troops, but the Times‘ sources say US intelligence officers and Special Operations forces in Afghanistan told superiors about the scheme as early as January. The plot allegedly played out in 2019, and after the US spies and commandos recovered a large amount of US cash during a raid on a Taliban outpost and followed up that find with interrogations of captured militants and other criminals, the intelligence community came to its conclusions about the bounty plot. Officials have since then been reviewing combat casualties over an 18-month period; the Washington Post‘s sources say “several” deaths are believed to have come as a result of the scheme.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”