Russian Bounty on U.S. military in Afghanistan.

[Ronson]

IF Russia was paying bounties for American deaths, that's horrible, but that's the kind of thing that happens in war. For me to go psycho crazy about it doesn't do a thing to bring back any soldier who may have been killed as a result.

Excuse me for attaching this manifesto to your post. I think you might agree with some of it.

I always try to view these things in the same way as a conspiracy theory, in that it first has to pass the smell test: Risk vs. Gain.

Assuming Putin would like to see US soldiers getting killed (which I'm not convinced of in the first place), can you imagine him risking a war with the US just to knock out a handful of US soldiers in Afghanistan? What could that conceivably buy him that would be worth that kind of risk? If undiscovered, all he gets is some evil satisfaction. If discovered, it could develop into a full-scale war with the US and the West (I seem to recall UK soldiers were supposedly targeted too) and could lead to his ultimate undoing. It could lead to an internal revolution since a lot of Russian citizens would be outraged. He might end up with his head on a spike.

Putin would have to be an idiot. A former KGB agent is not an idiot.

Having said this, a more plausible scenario is some local Russian commander did this of his own accord. Since Russia's Industrial Military Complex is an often unanswerable entity in that country, it's possible some field general came up with this on his own. If evidence was strong enough that bounties actually existed, I would take the evidence to Lavrov or Putin and demand an explanation. But I wouldn't be rushing off to the New York Times with the story so they can spin this so the crazies can start bouncing off the walls.

Allegedly, a large pile of cash was found by the US in the possession of Taliban or "criminal" elements, according to the NYT, according to the unnamed source. Those captured Taliban or criminals are the ones who told the bounty story. Now neocons and libs are freaking out and calling for Trump's head and probably war with Russia.

I am prepared to say I'm wrong if credible evidence is reported. As it stands now, nah.

[DivineOb]

I am prepared to say I'm wrong if credible evidence is reported. As it stands now, nah.

And I will continue pointing out that the evidence was deemed credible by FNC and WSJ. The bar for Murdoch owned entities to confirm a story like this is going to be extremely high.

[Ronson]

And I will continue pointing out that the evidence was deemed credible by FNC and WSJ. The bar for Murdoch owned entities to confirm a story like this is going to be extremely high.

1) It is simply safety in numbers. They can't get singled out for being wrong when everybody is wrong.
2) It gets them ratings/cash to cover the story, so they want to jump on the bandwagon.
3) If it turns out to be wrong, they can say "Hey, we just repeated what NYT reported. It's their fault" and shift the blame.

I wouldn't put much stock in the altruistic motives of FNC and WSJ. Or any major news agency.

[Cow Poke]

The fact that you're ok with anything short of absolute candor and transparency about rewarding Russia after they placed *and paid* bounties for American lives.

Well, that'd be yet ANOTHER false assumption your part. I want all the facts, not rumor and innuendo.

Anything short of fury that Trump, apparently, has still not been briefed about this because two days of golfing got in the way. If you don't understand how deeply unAmerican sanctifying that behavior is then there's absolutely nothing that I know which can remind you of what American is and represents. All I can do is take cold comfort in the fact that the days of white America are coming to a close.

Wow, that's quite a steamer you got rolling there.

I understand love of country and honoring those in uniform. Something which should be a slam dunk for a Republican.

A) I'm not a Republican
2) I completely understand why an angry extreme leftist nutter would make such false accusations.

Feel free to peruse the the baby[lover] thread if your memory is so short.

Got a link?

[Cow Poke]

Excuse me for attaching this manifesto to your post. I think you might agree with some of it.

I always try to view these things in the same way as a conspiracy theory, in that it first has to pass the smell test: Risk vs. Gain.

Assuming Putin would like to see US soldiers getting killed (which I'm not convinced of in the first place), can you imagine him risking a war with the US just to knock out a handful of US soldiers in Afghanistan? What could that conceivably buy him that would be worth that kind of risk? If undiscovered, all he gets is some evil satisfaction. If discovered, it could develop into a full-scale war with the US and the West (I seem to recall UK soldiers were supposedly targeted too) and could lead to his ultimate undoing. It could lead to an internal revolution since a lot of Russian citizens would be outraged. He might end up with his head on a spike.

Putin would have to be an idiot. A former KGB agent is not an idiot.

Having said this, a more plausible scenario is some local Russian commander did this of his own accord. Since Russia's Industrial Military Complex is an often unanswerable entity in that country, it's possible some field general came up with this on his own. If evidence was strong enough that bounties actually existed, I would take the evidence to Lavrov or Putin and demand an explanation. But I wouldn't be rushing off to the New York Times with the story so they can spin this so the crazies can start bouncing off the walls.

Allegedly, a large pile of cash was found by the US in the possession of Taliban or "criminal" elements, according to the NYT, according to the unnamed source. Those captured Taliban or criminals are the ones who told the bounty story. Now neocons and libs are freaking out and calling for Trump's head and probably war with Russia.

I am prepared to say I'm wrong if credible evidence is reported. As it stands now, nah.

But, but, but... you didn't come all unglued and make a bunch of hysteric false allegations, so, I'm not sure you're serious!

Yes, sounds much more plausible.

[DivineOb]

1) It is simply safety in numbers. They can't get singled out for being wrong when everybody is wrong.
2) It gets them ratings/cash to cover the story, so they want to jump on the bandwagon.
3) If it turns out to be wrong, they can say "Hey, we just repeated what NYT reported. It's their fault" and shift the blame.

I wouldn't put much stock in the altruistic motives of FNC and WSJ. Or any major news agency.

You keep saying that they are just repeating what the NYT reported and that is false. They independently confirmed the story and reported it themselves. They aren't reporting on what the NYT said. That means they are putting their own reputation on the line.

And I'm putting *negative* stock into FNC/WSJ altruism. By the "criterion on embarrassment" (snicker) we should put extra trust into FNC/WSJ reporting on this issue since we would expect them to minimize / ignore it if at all possible.

[Ronson]

You keep saying that they are just repeating what the NYT reported and that is false. They independently confirmed the story and reported it themselves. They aren't reporting on what the NYT said. That means they are putting their own reputation on the line.

WSJ is behind a paywall for me. But FNC is repeating the WSJ story.

wsj.jpg

And I'm putting *negative* stock into FNC/WSJ altruism. By the "criterion on embarrassment" (snicker) we should put extra trust into FNC/WSJ reporting on this issue since we would expect them to minimize / ignore it if at all possible.

Most of the FNC stories I am seeing are defensive of Trump. Again, I can't see many from the WSJ

[DivineOb]

Well, that'd be yet ANOTHER false assumption your part. I want all the facts, not rumor and innuendo.

You are straining a gnat while swallowing a camel. You accept the say so of the bottom of the gutter RWNJ news sources on the regular. But reporting from both MSM and right wing sources is just not good enough for you.

A) I'm not a Republican

You may not call yourself a Republican but you vote Republican on the regular (I'd wager up and down the ballot). Same difference.

2) I completely understand why an angry extreme leftist nutter would make such false accusations.

No, I'm quite sure my accusations are true. This is 10x worse than Benghazi and UKR's love child.

Here are facts which are beyond dispute. Trump spent two days golfing rather than be briefed on this issue. That alone is disqualifying for a president.

Got a link?

:arglebargle:

[DivineOb]

WSJ is behind a paywall for me. But FNC is repeating the WSJ story.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]46128[/ATTACH]



Most of the FNC stories I am seeing are defensive of Trump. Again, I can't see many from the WSJ

If FNC states the information and then adds "as reported by XXX" they are just repeating another newspaper. The article I saw on FNC did not say that, but reported the information as their own original confirmation. Your screenshot does not demonstrate that FNC stated that they were repeating WSJ reporting as far as I could see.

[Cow Poke]

You are straining a gnat while swallowing a camel. You accept the say so of the bottom of the gutter RWNJ news sources on the regular. But reporting from both MSM and right wing sources is just not good enough for you.

You've yet to convince me.

You may not call yourself a Republican

That would be because I'm not.

but you vote Republican on the regular (I'd wager up and down the ballot). Same difference.

And that would be false. More true LATELY, but many times in the past, I've voted for the Democrat in local elections because I knew them personally, and they were "old school" Democrats. More and more lately, I'd admit, I'm finding fewer and fewer "old school" Democrats.

No, I'm quite sure my accusations are true. This is 10x worse than Benghazi and UKR's love child.

Then there will be more congressional hearings, and facts will come to light, yes?

Here are facts which are beyond dispute. Trump spent two days golfing rather than be briefed on this issue. That alone is disqualifying for a president.

WOW!!!! TRUMP GOLFED?!?!?!?!? Why didn't you LEAD with that! Oh my GODLESSNESS, Comrade, Trump must be arrested at ONCE!!!!!

:arglebargle:

Got a link?

[Ronson]

If FNC states the information and then adds "as reported by XXX" they are just repeating another newspaper. The article I saw on FNC did not say that, but reported the information as their own original confirmation. Your screenshot does not demonstrate that FNC stated that they were repeating WSJ reporting as far as I could see.

If you click on the image you can read the byline. It says "By Gordon Lubold, Warren P. Strobel | The Wall Street Journal".

[DivineOb]

You've yet to convince me.

That's a convenient dodge but it doesn't dispel the truth. You accept the say so of "rumor and innuendo" from utter trash but are disregarding this reporting from MSM and right wing news sources because you don't want the story to be true.

And that would be false. More true LATELY, but many times in the past, I've voted for the Democrat in local elections because I knew them personally, and they were "old school" Democrats. More and more lately, I'd admit, I'm finding fewer and fewer "old school" Democrats.

Good enough for me. You're a Republican in all but name then.

Then there will be more congressional hearings, and facts will come to light, yes?

I sure hope so. The fact that the briefing today was restricted to Republicans is certainly not a promising sign.

WOW!!!! TRUMP GOLFED?!?!?!?!? Why didn't you LEAD with that! Oh my GODLESSNESS, Comrade, Trump must be arrested at ONCE!!!!!

Trump golfed rather than be briefed on Russia, a country he considers an ally, offering money for the murder of Americans. If you don't see that as disqualifying then your understanding of America is just gross and perverse.

Got a link?

Why should I bother, CP? You'll just pull out your "humble country boy" shtick.

[DivineOb]

If you click on the image you can read the byline. It says "By Gordon Lubold, Warren P. Strobel | The Wall Street Journal".

Ok, I didn't realize that. So, just WSJ then. Changes my point in degree but not in kind.

[Cow Poke]

That's a convenient dodge....

One of our local (well, Houston is KINDA local) provides a "moment of Zen" on their nightly newscast to help calm down people... um.. who......

I think it might be helpful for you.

Just Google KHOU 11 News - MOMENT OF ZEN.

[Cow Poke]

Ok, I didn't realize that. So, just WSJ then. Changes my point in degree but not in kind.

Except, of course, the "independently verified" claim, no? Wasn't that a whole lot of your "shtick"?