Jump to content
Carolina Huddle
  • Hey There!

    Please register to see fewer ads and a better viewing experience:100_Emoji_42x42:

rodeo

2020 General Election Candidates thread

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, mav1234 said:

not a fan of maintaining troops in Afghanistan, but there is concern from both Ds and Rs that Trump's decisions are motivated by wholly selfish reasons and do not consider 'security concerns.' These measures are meant to prevent the election from being the only reason troops are being removed. I'm not an expert on Afghanistan and strongly dislike occupying foreign soil, but I also think that there is such a thing as withdrawing personnel too quickly.  TBH, the measure does not seem particularly crazy and should be things we do anyway (and have done in the past from what I have read).  It does not give the military sole power to make that decision either, which was my initial concern.

seems like kind of bullshit reasoning to me. If we agree that troops shouldnt be there then i dont believe there is a scenario of "removing them too quickly." Moreover it quite hypocritical to try to nail trump on the afghan bounties but stop him trying to remove the troops. Like we are at a weird time in politics where trump could do something that everyone agrees with but still find a way to hate it because he did it. 

an example of this is killing the iranian general. Virtually every neocon/pro war establishment type said it was the right move and he had to die but then also said trump was bad for doing it. The are morally inconsistent and this is just another example of it imo 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Posted (edited)

After decades of well documented lies intended to perpetuate wars around the globe, why oh why do many Americans continue to so readily believe these unsubstantiated claims by the CIA and their mouthpieces at the NY Times and Washington Post? 

This easily duped segment of our society should be held culpable for the Afghanistan War, where after almost 20 years of mission creep/moving goal posts, there is no victory/end in sight.

Quote

 

The Times reported Friday that the memo purportedly walks through the intelligence behind the agencies' conclusions. This included reports of meetings between Russian military intelligence officers and leaders of criminal networks with ties to the Taliban, of a GRU account transferring money to the network and of captured lower-level network members confirming Russia's use of bounties to spur such killings.

The two officials who elaborated on the memo in greater detail, however, told the Times that the memo emphasized the lack of proof as to what the GRU officials and network leaders said exactly during the meetings -- and thus could not be certain that Russia explicitly extended bounties for American soldiers' deaths.

It also stressed that the NSA lacked surveillance footage of the captured members' purported accounts of bounties or clear proof that the transferred money was to pay for bounties, the officials told the Times.

The memo also states that the Defense Intelligence Agency lacked evidence directly linking the alleged bounty offers to the Kremlin, the officials told the paper.   https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/new-york-times-new-us-memo-highlights-gaps-in-intelligence-reports-on-russian-bounties/ar-BB16jwrU?li=BBnb7Kz

 

Image

Edited by NanuqoftheNorth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
Quote

President Donald Trump was not verbally briefed on reports Russia paid militants to kill US soldiers, said national security adviser Robert O'Brien, because of a lack of confidence in the intelligence.

The CIA officer decided the intelligence was not verified.

Mr O'Brien did not say if the president was handed a written briefing.

The intelligence reportedly arrived amid US attempts to negotiate a peace deal to end the Afghanistan war.

The New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal, quoting unnamed US officials, said a Russian military intelligence unit had offered Taliban-linked militants bounties to kill US troops.

Russia has denied the reports, while the Taliban said it had not made any deal with agents from Moscow.  https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53258965#

This situation is very reminiscent of a few years ago when Trump announced he intended to withdraw US troops from Syria (twice).  Those announcements were quickly followed by reports in the NY Times and WP of alleged Syrian government chemical attacks on rebel forces, effectively scuttling US military withdrawal. 

The Syrian government was winning the war, the last thing they wanted was for the US to remain in their nation.  Syria also knew the use of chemical weapons was a "red line" that would undermine US withdrawal.  It makes absolutely no sense except to those susceptible to MIC propaganda. 

Now, Trump announces his intent to withdraw US troops from Afghanistan and unsubstantiated reports of bounties has scuttled those plans? 

 

Quote

The imposed conditions are by no means trivial: for these troop reductions from Afghanistan to be allowed, the Defense Department must be able to certify, among other things, that leaving Afghanistan “will not increase the risk for the expansion of existing or formation of new terrorist safe havens inside Afghanistan” and “will not compromise or otherwise negatively affect the ongoing United States counter terrorism mission against the Islamic State, al Qaeda, and associated forces.”

The Crow/Cheney amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) last night passed by a vote of 45-11. The NDAA was then unanimously approved by the Committee by a vote of 56-0. It authorizes $740.5 billion in military spending — roughly three times more than the world’s second-highest spender, China.

President Trump throughout the year has insisted that the Pentagon present plans for withdrawing all troops from Afghanistan prior to the end of 2020. Last week, reports indicated that “the Trump administration is close to finalizing a decision to withdraw more than 4,000 troops from Afghanistan by the fall.” Trump’s plan “would reduce the number of troops from 8,600 to 4,500 and would be the lowest number since the very earliest days of the war in Afghanistan, which began in 2001.” In February, Trump announced an agreement with the Taliban to end the war completely.

Shortly after those White House withdrawal plans were reported, anonymous intelligence officials leaked a series of claims to the New York Times regarding “bounties” allegedly being paid by Russia to Taliban fighters to kill U.S. troops. Those leaks emboldened opposition to troop withdrawal from Afghanistan on the ground that it would be capitulating to Russian treachery. It was that New York Times leak that Liz Cheney, along with GOP Congressman Mac Thornberry, cited in a joint statement on Monday to suggest troop withdrawal would be precipitous.   https://theintercept.com/2020/07/02/house-democrats-working-with-liz-cheney-restrict-trumps-planned-withdrawal-of-troops-from-afghanistan-and-germany/

These unattainable standards ensure NO US President will ever be able to withdraw troops from Afghanistan.  Maybe, just maybe, that was Cheney's intent all along.  

Edited by NanuqoftheNorth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

The only time US MSM tends to compliment Trump's foreign policy is when he is imposing life threatening economic sanctions on other nations or is "acting presidential" by launching missiles or dropping bombs.  Weird.

Edited by NanuqoftheNorth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...