Russia offered bounty to Afghan militants to kill US soldiers and Trump knew

[Ihavewaffles]

Russia cannot replace things it cannot make. And it cannot make a lot. Your fantasy land where it can is not real.
There are no others which can replace USA in certain spheres without long term investment of shitload of money and manpower.

That is not a problem, ur shooting yourself in the foot really. That investment will happen regardless, you are just being pathetic

Wagner suffered losses in Syria when they were bombed to shit in that infamous failed attack. You are denying that? Really? xD

Chest pumping us propaganda, fake news, got nothing to do with reality, and no proof, another US "cuz, we say so"

[Blur4stuff]

At worst he's helping a foreign enemy kill US soldiers and at best he just doesn't give a shit.

I'm not sure what's left on the table for Trump to do at this point. Republicans have already had to excuse/ignore his rapey behavior, corruption, incompetence, racism, and just about every other horrible quality that human beings can have.

Maybe if video footage of him kicking a dog or something like that.

[caervek]

The one thing that doesn't add up to me about this theory, is that Putin isn't an idiot.

Yes the idea of offering bonuses to the Taliban to kill US soldiers and make the US/Trump look incompetent would make sense in a cold calculating politician way if it happened in a vacuum. However this is Afghanistan, and back when Russia were the ones occupying it the USA did this exact thing, and it resulted in a terrorist attack that destroyed seven buildings in NYC and damaged dozens more.

The idea that Putin/Russia would take part in the same game knowing the eventual outcome just doesn't sit right.

[Yetanothernewbie]

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2020/...-add-up-a70772

How many turnips did you get for sharing that whopper?

[Shalcker]

At worst he's helping a foreign enemy kill US soldiers and at best he just doesn't give a shit.

How exactly would you propose he should stop it? Previous moves on various occasions didn't do the trick. In fact, getting Russia to re-join G7 is one of better ways to disincentivise such behaviour.

And how exactly "doing nothing about uncertain bounties" helps anyone kill US soldiers if they are inclined to do so? Afghans already supposedly caught people who were part of the scheme and got confession from them.

If anything, finally withdrawing from Afghanistan would actually save them for certain from Taliban hitmen.

[Xarkan]

How exactly would you propose he should stop it? Previous moves on various occasions didn't do the trick. In fact, getting Russia to re-join G7 is one of better ways to disincentivise such behaviour.

If you give a puppy a treat every time it pees on the floor then maybe it will think that is the way to go instead.

Granted if you beat the puppy up when it pees on the floor then you belong in jail imo.

[Shalcker]

If you give a puppy a treat every time it pees on the floor then maybe it will think that is the way to go instead.

Countries are not puppies.

But if you beat puppy every time and never give it a treat, it will bite and bark and never listen to you.

[Xarkan]

Countries are not puppies.

But if you beat puppy every time and never give it a treat, it will bite and bark and never listen to you.

Nonetheless that is what you ask

If other countries think your actions are wrong they should reward you

That is patently absurd

Also you are not significant enough for G8 (you were never in G7)

[Shalcker]

Nonetheless that is what you ask

If other countries think your actions are wrong they should reward you

That is patently absurd

Also you are not significant enough for G8 (you were never in G7)

Countries are not some kind of single-minded entity and can do multiple things at once. Like cooperate in some areas while remaining antagonistic in others.

Do you want to change things or do you want to posture?

I understand that posturing is more attractive to many, but it would not change anything. If bounties were be posted, sanctions/diplomat expulsion will not stop them - because it hurts different people from ones doing it, and GRU is already quite insulated from any significant pressure because of their previous actions.

If they could be stopped by a few stern words they would not be military intelligence/election interference/assassination arm of the government.

If you remain antagonistic in every way then all you will get is more antagonism. If you cooperate in other areas eventually cooperation can bleed elsewhere as well.

[SirBeef]

If you give a puppy a treat every time it pees on the floor then maybe it will think that is the way to go instead.

Granted if you beat the puppy up when it pees on the floor then you belong in jail imo.

This is an earnest request. Heed your own comments advise with Shalcker and the other Russian propagandists. Put them on ignore. You only give them power by recognizing them with responses. If no one responded to him or Yadryonych they would probably leave. They only exist here to sow misinformation and spread propaganda. people who engage with them are basically giving them a treat every time they pee.

[Easo]

That is not a problem, ur shooting yourself in the foot really. That investment will happen regardless, you are just being pathetic

Ah yes, surely Russia has couple of hundred billion lying around and decades of know-how to quickly replace Intel/AMD. Surely

[Levelfive]

This is an earnest request. Heed your own comments advise with Shalcker and the other Russian propagandists. Put them on ignore. You only give them power by recognizing them with responses. If no one responded to him or Yadryonych they would probably leave. They only exist here to sow misinformation and spread propaganda. people who engage with them are basically giving them a treat every time they pee.

Not to mention spreading their shitty lies for them at no charge. It's like multi-level marketing scheme.

[Themius]

Countries are not some kind of single-minded entity

I'd challenge this, Russia is currently a dictatorship, and is virtually being controlled by a single minded entity.

[caervek]

I'd challenge this, Russia is currently a dictatorship, and is virtually being controlled by a single minded entity.

Dictatorships don't let people elect the dictator, it's more of a Authoritarian state.

[Draco-Onis]

Dictatorships don't let people elect the dictator, it's more of a Authoritarian state.

But it's not an election it's Kabuki theater, there's zero chance Putin will lose.

[draynay]

Dictatorships don't let people elect the dictator

Sure they do, they don't let you elect anyone but the dictator.

[Shalcker]

Actually not true at all. If you beat a puppy every day of it's life it will be extremely submissive and scared all the time.

Well, Russia isn't at total mercy of US (or anyone else) like puppies do, so it is more like Russia is old dog with his own turf and you can try coming there to beat it - and get bitten yourself - but there is little hope of teaching it new tricks that way.

[Breccia]

This OP ED comes from an author who poses some interesting ideas.

1) Russians supporting the Taliban against the US could just be payback for what we did in the same country a generation ago.

2) The Russians have been supporting the Taliban for ages. The bounties aren't so much "new" as "different"

3) Even if the Taliban refused the offer, there are other agents in Afghanistan who would happily take Russian money to kill Americans.

4) And finally, the author suggests maybe Russia isn't doing this so much as creating misinformation that they're doing this, specifically to cause disarray in the US -- which would, therefore, be a sign they've squeezed out enough usefulness from Trump and are ready to flush.

[caervek]

But it's not an election it's Kabuki theater, there's zero chance Putin will lose.

That's not really true. Putin's record has more to do with the lack of a better opponent than with his actual popularity, to put it in perspective:

1991: Yeltsin wins with 58% of the Vote.
1996: Yeltsin wins with 54% of the vote.
2000: Putin wins with 53% of the vote, he can't even outdo a drunk.
2004: Putin wins with 71% of the vote, this was due to the collapse of the main rival party not a boost for Putin.
2008: Medvedev wins with 71% of the vote, against much more credible opponents than Putin has ever faced, arguably the best result of any Russian leader.
2012: Putin wins with 63% of the vote, yet another mediocre performance.
2018: Putin wins with 76% of the vote, this is a record however it is mostly due to the high anti-Russia rhetoric from the west at the time.

Putin is not as popular as many assume and his staying in power is not guaranteed, this should be obvious from the fact that most of the Russian posters on this forum don't seem to like him, he's very unpopular with their younger generations and that's something that's only going to get worse with time..

[Draco-Onis]

That's not really true. Putin's record has more to do with the lack of a better opponent than with his actual popularity, to put it in perspective:

1991: Yeltsin wins with 58% of the Vote.
1996: Yeltsin wins with 54% of the vote.
2000: Putin wins with 53% of the vote, he can't even outdo a drunk.
2004: Putin wins with 71% of the vote, this was due to the collapse of the main rival party not a boost for Putin.
2008: Medvedev wins with 71% of the vote, against much more credible opponents than Putin has ever faced, arguably the best result of any Russian leader.
2012: Putin wins with 63% of the vote, yet another mediocre performance.
2018: Putin wins with 76% of the vote, this is a record however it is mostly due to the high anti-Russia rhetoric from the west at the time.

Putin is not as popular as many assume and his staying in power is not guaranteed, this should be obvious from the fact that most of the Russian posters on this forum don't seem to like him, he's very unpopular with their younger generations and that's something that's only going to get worse with time..

But these numbers are made up there's no validity to them just look up how these "elections" are conducted. The opponents running in these elections even say if by some chance I win I will cede power to the dear leader.