Jul 252017
 

The official story is that Russia is in Syria in order to fight ISIS and other jihadis… *not* that they’re there in order to get them selves a strategic foothold in the region by way of supporting Assad so he’ll give ’em a port. But then there’s this:

Videos suggest Russian government may be arming Taliban

Hmmm.

Some might suggest that this is irony,or turnabout s fair play. The US armed the proto-Taliban against the Soviets, after all. But in the 80’s, the great threat was the Soviet Union, not global jihadi terrorism. Now that the Russian government claims that jihadis are enough of a threat that they’re willing to carpet bomb cities full of civilians, they are *apparently* arming the very same jihadis.

 Posted by at 9:55 am
  • xvdougl

    And Brezhnev rolls over in his grave.

  • Paul451

    Mil.Intelligence people apparently say that Putin is considered excellent at tactics but poor at strategy. Tactically, you can see how this plays into the whole “increase general chaos and undermine the US” thing. Strategically… yeah.

    • Scottlowther

      There’s military strategy, and there’s political strategy. If you assume that the Russians really are supply arms to the Taliban, imagine the fun the Russian anti-Putin crowd will have with this. “Remember those people we fought in Afghanistan back in the 80’s, who killed a whole lot of our boys, drove us out in disgrace and led in part to the collapse of the Soviet Union? Guess who Putin is providing arms to…”

      • Paul451

        Putin controls the means of Russian-language mass communication, and dominates the rest. He controls the message.

        If anti-Putin messages worked, then “Stole billions, squandered trillions, of Russia’s wealth from the Russian people to enrich himself and his friends” would have already worked.

        • Scottlowther

          He certainly controls the message, but his control isn’t complete.

          • James

            Yep it seems to be like most things. Enough to control those who want to be swayed but not enough to convince everyone…but enough to silence those he needs to.

        • se jones

          his control isn’t complete
          Scott’s right. I have friends and colleagues in Russia that I correspond with all the time, they have normal internet service and can watch the same YouTube videos we do. Sure, Putin controls the major media, but the Russian public has a healthy scepticism of it after all these decades.

      • publiusr

        Russia is hardly a monoblock. That ocean of land has all kinds of low level fiefdoms quite isolated from the Kremlin.

        I would like to think the Russians aren’t this stupid. Hind pilots won’t like this a damn.

        We should have let the Russians have them.

        Folks need to quit playing this “the enemy of our enemy is our friend” crap.

  • CrisCros

    >CNN

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Totally unbiased CNN, totally reliable, not like they have any reason to spread lies about Russia, nope, not at all, I mean no reason to make Russia look bad so they can use that to further connect them to Trump…

  • CrisCros

    https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2017/07/robert-farago/cnn-the-russians-are-arming-the-taliban-fake-news/

    >“The videos [below and at the CNN link] don’t provide incontrovertible proof of the trade, of which Moscow has categorically denied involvement,” cnn.com reports. “Yet they offer some of the first battlefield evidence of a flow of weapons that has the Afghan and American governments deeply concerned about Moscow’s intentions here.”

    >That’s one carefully worded non-disclaimer disclaimer. The story is based on an American general’s statement at an April press conference, raising the alarm about possible Russian interference in Afghanistan.

    >As the caption underneath the video below relates, “With Defense Secretary Jim Mattis at his side, Gen. John Nicholson, the American commander in Afghanistan, wouldn’t provide specifics about Russia’s role in Afghanistan. But said he would ‘not refute’ that Moscow’s involvement includes giving weapons to the Taliban.”

    >Speaking of refutation, let’s take a closer look at the “evidence” CNN presents for this Russia-Taliban arms connection:

    >”In one video the Herat group are seen brandishing the guns, which they said were taken from the mainstream Taliban, led by Mullah Haibatullah, after that group attacked them. Eighteen of their rivals were killed in the attack and six were captured, they said. “These weapons were given to the fighters of Mullah Haibatullah by the Russians via Iran,” said their deputy leader, Mullah Abdul Manan Niazi. He went on to repeat the often-heard rationale behind the arming — which Moscow denies — that the weapons were supplied to help the Taliban better fight ISIS. “The Russians are giving them these weapons to fight ISIS in Afghanistan, but they are using them against us too,” he said.

    >The Taliban have Russian weapons? Only since ever. Sourced from wherever. Not to mention the fact that this “evidence” relies on second-hand information. Or the Russian weapons used by our Afghani allies. Or the American and Russian weapons the U.S. gave the Afghanis to fight the Russians, back when their military occupied the country.

    >”The second video was shot nearer Kabul and features a masked Taliban fighter parading arms he says he obtained through the northern province of Kunduz. He said he did not pay for the weapons — insurgents often pay for guns with opium crops — and that his group received the guns via the Tajik border. “These pistols have been brought to us recently,” he says. “These are made in Russia, and are very good stuff.”

    >How is “made in Russia” equal to “directly supplied by Russia”? This is, indeed, fake news. As CNN’s own report explains . . .

    >”Weapons experts from the Small Arms Survey studied the videos and said there was little in them to directly tie the guns to the Russian state. The weapons were not particularly modern or rare, and even some of the more elaborate additions, like a JGBG M7 scope on one machine gun, were Chinese made and readily available online, they said.”

    >Without anything like proof, this “Russian arming our enemies” story is without substance or context. I mean, what are the odds that America is arming Russia’s enemies? Again. Still.

    >The idea — and that’s all it is at the moment — that Russia is giving guns to combatants dedicated to killing U.S. soldiers, against U.S. interests, fits CNN’s ongoing narrative: President Trump secretly cut a deal with the Russians, aiding and abetting our once and future foe, who’s determined to undermine truth, justice and The American Way.

    >The article’s title: Videos suggest Russian government may be arming Taliban. I suggest CNN should operate according to a basic journalistic principle: treat everyone as a liar, find and report the truth. Simply repeating a rumor to perpetuate an agenda — without adopting a properly skeptical tone — is propaganda. Not news.

  • Siergen

    Scott, why did you delete the link someone just posted here proving the CNN article a lie?

    • Scottlowther

      Because I… didn’t. I assume the commenter deleted his own comment.

      • James

        Posted it. Then deleted it to make it look like you were trying to silence him thus give himself credibility.

        • Siergen

          You cannot “delete” a comment made on Disqus, I have tried before because of a big grammar error but it didn’t give me the option.

          But anyways I remember the website, it was a pro-2nd amendment blog, and yeah the CNN accusation is total crap:

          https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2017/07/robert-farago/cnn-the-russians-are-arming-the-taliban-fake-news/

          “The Taliban have Russian weapons? Only since ever. Sourced from
          wherever. Not to mention the fact that this “evidence” relies on
          second-hand information. Or the Russian weapons used by our Afghani allies. Or the American and Russian weapons the U.S. gave the Afghanis to fight the Russians, back when their military occupied the country.

          How is “made in Russia” equal to “directly supplied by Russia”? This is, indeed, fake news.”

          ***From the CNN article itself: “Weapons experts from the Small Arms Survey studied the videos and said there was little in them to directly tie the guns to the Russian state. The weapons were not particularly modern or rare, and even some of the more elaborate additions, like a JGBG M7 scope on one machine gun, were Chinese made and readily available online, they said.”***

          Without anything like proof, this “Russian arming our enemies” story is without substance or context. I mean, what are the odds that America is arming Russia’s enemies? Again. Still.

          The idea — and that’s all it is at the moment — that Russia is giving
          guns to combatants dedicated to killing U.S. soldiers, against U.S.
          interests, fits CNN’s ongoing narrative: President Trump secretly cut a
          deal with the Russians, aiding and abetting our once and future foe,
          who’s determined to undermine truth, justice and The American Way.

          The article’s title: Videos suggest Russian government may be arming Taliban. I suggest CNN should operate according to a basic journalistic
          principle: treat everyone as a liar, find and report the truth. Simply
          repeating a rumor to perpetuate an agenda — without adopting a properly skeptical tone — is propaganda. Not news.”

          • Scottlowther

            > You cannot “delete” a comment made on Disqus,

            Apparently you can. Though it seems not to be the case *here.* I went to the Disqus moderation page for the blog and looked up the “deleted” comments, of which there is precisely one, from about two weeks ago. It referenced Babylon 5, so it’s not clear why it was deleted, but there was this appended to the message:

            This comment has been deleted by the user and can’t be changed.

            However, when I looked in the “spam” tab, there it was. I don’t know why it would’ve posted the comment and them decided it was spam, though it doesn’t really seem to be. Maybe Disqus thinks large quantities of copy/paste = spam. I’ve re-approved the comment, so it *should* be back.

            Seems difficult to delete a comment from the thread directly, but you should be able to edit it into nothing. You might be able to delete it from your Disqus moderation page.

          • Siergen

            Weird, I will have to look into that and test this on some sample page on my own blog

  • B-Sabre

    Then there’s this: http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/06/06/socom-wants-u-s-made-pkm-nsv/

    SOCOM is looking for US sourced Russian machine guns. The paranoid may note the opportunity for false-flag weapons deliveries to frame somebody.