Intel on Russia’s “Bounty” of Unstable U.S. Army


The Daily Beast

U.S. Intel claims Russians pay U.S. military incentives

Reuters It was a blockbuster that Russia returned to the “Great Game” of the Afghan empire. The Kremlin had spread money around the battlefields of Central Asia for many years to allow militants to kill the rest of the US military. It caused massive protests from Democrats and their # Resistance amps about the White House’s rebellious Russian dolls whose praise for Vladimir Putin endangered US troops. But on Thursday, after all, in the story, the Biden administration announced that US intelligence had only “low to medium” confidence. Translated from Spyworld jargon, it means that intelligence agencies have discovered that the story is at best unproven and probably not true. “This information puts a burden on the Russian government to explain its actions and take steps to deal with this disturbing pattern of behavior,” said a senior government official, Biden not ready to go all the way back to the story. Hmm. Importantly, the Biden team announced a series of sanctions on Thursday. However, these sanctions on Russia’s sovereign debt market will only be driven by Russia’s intervention in the 2020 elections and Russia’s alleged role in SolarWinds cyber spying. (In contrast, Biden officials said their assessment of the breach of technology company SolarWinds as a result of hackers from the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service was “highly credible.”) Diplomacy, intelligence. We have delivered a strong and direct message on this issue through military channels, but we are not specifically linking the actions we are taking today to the issue, “said a senior government official. He told reporters in connection with the bounty claim. On Thursday’s phone, officials said the alleged “reward” report came from the “detainee’s report”-someone needed to get them out of the cage to their U.S.-lined Afghan guards. He raised a ghost who said what he thought was. Specifically, authorities cited “information and evidence of the relationship between Afghan criminals and elements of the Kremlin” as a source of intelligence assessments. Without additional support, such reports are notorious for being unreliable. A detainee’s report from a man known as Ibn Sheikh al-Ribi, drawn from torture, was used to invade Iraq about Saddam Hussein’s training to make poisonous gas in Alcaeda. It infamously fueled the administration’s claims. The “difficult operating environment in Afghanistan” has complicated US efforts to identify the equivalent of rumors. When asked if Moscow would reward US troops in Afghanistan, spokesman Jen Psaki said at a press conference Thursday that the Biden administration “felt a report.” As part of this overall assessment, it was a sufficient source of concern for our intelligence agencies to review this report. The Taliban’s promise to the US military in the final Afghanistan “Nightmare” Stretch Psaki reiterated low-to-moderate confidence in intelligence agencies. An assessment of Russia’s bounty potential, U.S. intelligence agencies said that Russian troops “managed personal interactions in Afghanistan’s criminal network,” and “this unit’s involvement was in the U.S. and Afghanistan. Consistent with Russia’s incentive attacks on coalition personnel. ” Low to medium reliability. While it is clear that Russia and other adversaries are providing assistance to Afghan agents, it has been a permanent challenge to identify the type and amount of such assistance very specifically. ” Jason Campbell, an Afghan policymaker at the Obama Pentagon, said. The Daily Beast. There was a reason to doubt the story from the beginning. The first story not only emphasized the grounds based on the reports of the detainees, but the bounty represented a qualitative change in recent Russian involvement with Afghan militants. Russian operatives have long been suspected of transferring money to various Afghan militants. Unfavorable former Taliban officials told The Daily Beast on records that Russia had given them cash for years. However, there was no doubt that the Russians were fully sponsoring the attack on the US military. This was an escalation that endangered the conflict with the United States and occurred long after it could change the war. Also, it seems that there was no “causing link”. At the discretion of General Frank Mackenzie, a senior US general in the Middle East and South Asia, the actual death of the United States. Former US diplomats and agents told The Daily Beast last summer that they were skeptical of bounty hunters. A retired diplomat suspected that “someone leaked this and delayed the withdrawal of the army.” The main reasons for believing in this story were rarely discussed. The CIA actually funded Afghan guerrillas to kill Russian troops during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s. At the time, the large intelligence agencies, including both battlefield intelligence agencies and the world’s most sophisticated surveillance networks, said they did not produce a bounty story. In September, Mackenzie said intelligence activities remained unsubstantiated. “It hasn’t proven to a level of certainty that will satisfy me,” he told NBC News. Weeks after the existence of the first unsubstantiated Russian bounty hunter in the New York Times last summer, then President Trump knows what happened at the time, according to sources and former executives. Anyone who leaks information is repeatedly required at private meetings to be found, punished, or even “trapped”. The number of senior White House employees who were initially unsuspecting, scrambled to understand what was happening. One of the president’s first instincts at the time was, of course, that this was passed on to the press and made him look bad. He said he further convinced five individuals near him that the United States should withdraw its troops from Afghanistan. But at various White House meetings and personal conversations that followed that summer, Trump will continue to speculate on how or why this was published in the media, three people familiar with the matter said. Said. From time to time, he said he believed that Joe Biden was done by officials who wanted to win the 2020 elections or stay “forever” in Afghanistan to fight. He demanded that he know who in the CIA or the intelligence community could do this. At least one time that summer, Trump said he had heard that Intel was “totally fake” or could have been manufactured. It was drawn from a source that didn’t know what they were talking about, making up a wild story, or what someone was saying after “pushing out the junk from them.” Comments at the time, just because Trump has repeatedly said that torture “absolutely works” over the years, and that the United States should revive waterboarding and other brutal measures against terrorist suspects. Was familiar with. “It really [then-]The president just knew what he could say, “remembered one of these people. “He was told by the administration that the report was based on an unconfirmed claim, and I think he spun from it.” Whether or not the intelligence was fully substantiated, this was done by the top executives of the Trump administration. Notification to Russian counterparts who did not stop sending. As the Daily Beast first reported in July, the U.S. Department of State warned the Kremlin and actually saw Moscow paying Taliban fighters a bounty for the killing of U.S. troops in Afghanistan. He warned that he would respond if caught. President Trump at the time publicly claimed that he did not take up the topic of Russian leader Vladimir Putin that month. “It was a phone call to discuss other things, and frankly it’s a problem that many people said was fake news,” Trump said in an interview with Axios. The story at the time of the election. Candidate Biden at the time called it a “horrible revelation” if it was true. Senate Foreign Relations Committee senior Democrat Robert Menendez (D-NJ) has introduced measures to sanction Russia on suspicion of bounty. Democrats in Congress claimed that the account Trump’s White House called a “hoax” wasn’t fully explained, suggesting cover-ups were underway. When Trump himself denied being briefed on the story, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) said: “I think we knew the White House perspective. All we need to know is the intelligence perspective.” Now he knows. Read more on The Daily Beast. Did you get a hint? Send it to The Daily Beast here. Put your top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now! DailyBeast Membership: Beast Inside digs deeper into the stories that matter to you. learn more.

Posted on