It's Official - The Report of Bounties On US Troops Is a Hoax

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
31,979
5,844
Visit site
✟868,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I see Russia's principal crimes in the U.S. as interfering with both the 2016 and 2020 elections and hacking into the entire federal computer system.

Certainly putting bounties on American soldiers' heads is horrible--but unproven.

Election interference had more far reaching overwhelmingly negative consequences, and has been proven by the Mueller investigation where 30 Russians have been indicted.

Is it your argument that America has not interfered with other nations?
 
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
31,979
5,844
Visit site
✟868,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Biden's tone yesterday was not one of retribution....rather, setting the terms of our relationship going forward:

Good afternoon, everyone. Earlier this week, I spoke with President Putin of Russia about the nature of our relationship — the relationship between our two countries. And I was candid and respectful; the conversation was candid and respectful.

Two great powers with significant responsibility for global stability. And President Putin and I have had a significant responsibility to steward that relationship. I take that responsibility very seriously, as I’m sure he does.

Russia and Americans are both proud and patriotic people. And I believe the Russian people, like the American people, are invested in peaceful and a secure future of our world.

....

Today, I’ve approved several steps, including expulsion of several Russian officials, as a consequence of their actions. I’ve also signed an executive order authorizing new measures, including sanctions to address specific harmful actions that Russia has taken against U.S. interests.

I was clear with President Putin that we could have gone further, but I chose not to do so, to be — I chose to be proportionate.

The United States is not looking to kick off a cycle of ecs- — of escalation and conflict with Russia. We want a stable, predictable relationship.

If Russia continues to interfere with our democracy, I’m prepared to take further actions to respond. It is my responsibility, as President of the United States, to do so.

But throughout our long history of competition, our two countries have been able to find ways to manage tensions and to keep them from escalating out of control.

There are also areas where Russia and the United States can and should work together. For example, in the earliest days of my administration, we were able to move quickly to extend, for five years, the New START Treaty, and maintain that key element of nuclear stability between our nations. That was in the interest of the United States, of Russia, and, quite frankly, of the world, and we got it done.

When I spoke to President Putin, I expressed my belief that communication between the two of us, personally and directly, was to be essential in moving forward to a more effective relationship. And he agreed on that point.

To that end, I proposed that we meet in person this summer in Europe, for a summit to address a range of issues facing both of our countries. Our teams are discussing that possibility right now.

Remarks by President Biden on Russia | The White House

Kind words, but sanctions nonetheless. "Proportionate" sanctions, but sanctions nonetheless.

That is still the cycle of retribution. We are just making sure the retribution is "proportionate" as we determine it.

However, it is true that if they have this meeting there is hope of a better path. So let's give that time.
 
Upvote 0

Kentonio

Well-Known Member
Jan 25, 2018
7,467
10,458
48
Lyon
✟266,564.00
Country
France
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Kind words, but sanctions nonetheless. "Proportionate" sanctions, but sanctions nonetheless.

That is still the cycle of retribution. We are just making sure the retribution is "proportionate" as we determine it.

However, it is true that if they have this meeting there is hope of a better path. So let's give that time.

Russia has behaved appallingly over the last decade. They've assassinated dissidents living in NATO countries using nerve agents that also killed totally innocent bystanders, annexed parts of Ukraine, taken land by proxy off at least 3 counties and conducted extensive cyber-warfare against the US and many other Western democracies. Plus of course interfering in the electoral systems of a number of those countries.

It's time to stop acting like Putin responds to good faith and nice words. Russia is a huge threat that will keep pushing boundaries until they are shown there are consequences that are worse for them than their enemies.
 
Upvote 0

wing2000

E pluribus unum
Supporter
Aug 18, 2012
20,775
17,082
✟1,389,831.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
31,979
5,844
Visit site
✟868,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Russia has behaved appallingly over the last decade.

They've assassinated dissidents living in NATO countries using nerve agents that also killed totally innocent bystanders, annexed parts of Ukraine, taken land by proxy off at least 3 counties and conducted extensive cyber-warfare against the US and many other Western democracies. Plus of course interfering in the electoral systems of a number of those countries.

Are you suggesting the US doesn't meddle in elections, kills bystanders or spy on other nations, or get involved in conflicts with questionable rationales?

I am not saying we can trust Russia. But we also can't blame them for not trusting us.
 
Upvote 0

SoldierOfTheKing

Christian Spenglerian
Jan 6, 2006
9,223
3,039
Kenmore, WA
✟276,939.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
You believe everything that comes out of "Deep State"?

I certainly don’t believe anything that comes out of the NYT based on anonymous sources. If anything, when reports like that come out, believe the opposite, and you won’t be too far off from the truth.
 
Upvote 0

Kentonio

Well-Known Member
Jan 25, 2018
7,467
10,458
48
Lyon
✟266,564.00
Country
France
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Are you suggesting the US doesn't meddle in elections, kills bystanders or spy on other nations, or get involved in conflicts with questionable rationales?

I am not saying we can trust Russia. But we also can't blame them for not trusting us.

Despicable as it seems, there are boundaries in international politics that countries are expected to stay within while still doing quite vile things. Spying is pretty much expected. Meddling is pretty much expected (although within quite defined boundaries). The danger with Russia currently is that they're going way beyond those previously accepted boundaries, especially with their raw expansionist behavior.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Fantine
Upvote 0

Hank77

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2015
26,368
15,457
✟1,099,338.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I certainly don’t believe anything that comes out of the NYT based on anonymous sources. If anything, when reports like that come out, believe the opposite, and you won’t be too far off from the truth.
Either way, there are many news outlets and often very few people who know the details of White House deliberations or the state of the Russia investigation. So the sources have the power to set the terms with the journalists, and one of those terms is often, “don’t use my name.”
When To Trust A Story That Uses Unnamed Sources
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
31,979
5,844
Visit site
✟868,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Despicable as it seems, there are boundaries in international politics that countries are expected to stay within while still doing quite vile things. Spying is pretty much expected. Meddling is pretty much expected (although within quite defined boundaries). The danger with Russia currently is that they're going way beyond those previously accepted boundaries, especially with their raw expansionist behavior.

What about assisting in siege warfare and the Saudi's targeting of civilians in Yemen which we did under the Obama and Trump administrations, causing one of the largest humanitarian crisis in the world?

And in regards to election meddling:

Russia Isn’t the Only One Meddling in Elections. We Do It, Too. (Published 2018)

“If you ask an intelligence officer, did the Russians break the rules or do something bizarre, the answer is no, not at all,” said Steven L. Hall, who retired in 2015 after 30 years at the C.I.A., where he was the chief of Russian operations. The United States “absolutely” has carried out such election influence operations historically, he said, “and I hope we keep doing it.”


Loch K. Johnson, the dean of American intelligence scholars, who began his career in the 1970s investigating the C.I.A. as a staff member of the Senate’s Church Committee, says Russia’s 2016 operation was simply the cyber-age version of standard United States practice for decades, whenever American officials were worried about a foreign vote.

“We’ve been doing this kind of thing since the C.I.A. was created in 1947,” said Mr. Johnson, now at the University of Georgia. “We’ve used posters, pamphlets, mailers, banners — you name it. We’ve planted false information in foreign newspapers. We’ve used what the British call ‘King George’s cavalry’: suitcases of cash.”

A Carnegie Mellon scholar, Dov H. Levin, has scoured the historical record for both overt and covert election influence operations. He found 81 by the United States and 36 by the Soviet Union or Russia between 1946 and 2000, though the Russian count is undoubtedly incomplete.

“I’m not in any way justifying what the Russians did in 2016,” Mr. Levin said. “It was completely wrong of Vladimir Putin to intervene in this way. That said, the methods they used in this election were the digital version of methods used both by the United States and Russia for decades: breaking into party headquarters, recruiting secretaries, placing informants in a party, giving information or disinformation to newspapers.”

 
Upvote 0

Triumvirate

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2020
1,200
1,517
40
London
✟21,962.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
What about assisting in siege warfare and the Saudi's targeting of civilians in Yemen which we did under the Obama and Trump administrations, causing one of the largest humanitarian crisis in the world?

What do you seriously expect to be the result of such an argument?

'Oh you're right, we suck. Best we do nothing!'

The appeals to hypocrisy are an argument for inaction. If we have to wait for our nations to be perfect to act then we will never get anywhere.

And on balance, yes, our values are better than Russia's (though I can see why a lot of US Christians like Russia given some of the groups the Russian government has chosen to support vs oppress). You can write this guff about the US in the US. You couldn't write what we write about Russia in Russia. Ultimately, I am far more comfortable at the notion of a liberal democracy pushing liberal democracy, than I am Christofascist authoritarians pushing Christofascist authoritarianism, because the former is miles better than the latter.

And in regards to election meddling:

Russia Isn’t the Only One Meddling in Elections. We Do It, Too. (Published 2018)

“If you ask an intelligence officer, did the Russians break the rules or do something bizarre, the answer is no, not at all,” said Steven L. Hall, who retired in 2015 after 30 years at the C.I.A., where he was the chief of Russian operations.
The United States “absolutely” has carried out such election influence operations historically, he said, “and I hope we keep doing it.”

I would imagine the quote is worth finding in full and has perhaps been misrepresented, because the idea that Russia didn't engage in this behaviour until after 2015 is absolute grade-A horse apples. He might be talking about Russian actions towards the US in particular, but he (or rather, the interviewer or the one citing his words in that piece) might want to talk to some Eastern Europeans at some point.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: wing2000
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
31,979
5,844
Visit site
✟868,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
What do you seriously expect to be the result of such an argument?

'Oh you're right, we suck. Best we do nothing!'

I expect that we have a right to call out our government's wrong actions. Biden now stepped back from support in Yemen, which was the right thing to do, and should have happened sooner. So yes, inaction in this case is by far best.

The appeals to hypocrisy are an argument for inaction. If we have to wait for our nations to be perfect to act then we will never get anywhere.

If you mean inaction in supporting the Saudis in war crimes, yes, that would be great. We should definitely not act.

If you mean towards Russia, I said we should not trust them. I also said they have reason not to trust us.

And on balance, yes, our values are better than Russia's (though I can see why a lot of US Christians like Russia given some of the groups the Russian government has chosen to support vs oppress). You can write this guff about the US in the US. You couldn't write what we write about Russia in Russia.

I didn't defend Russia's values. I simply pointed out we don't live up to our values.

Ultimately, I am far more comfortable at the notion of a liberal democracy pushing liberal democracy, than I am Christofascist authoritarians pushing Christofascist authoritarianism, because the former is miles better than the latter.

The person being bombed probably is not concerned whether the cluster munition was from a liberal democracy or an authoritarian. But in the case of Yemen, both were working together on the project.


I would imagine the quote is worth finding in full and has perhaps been misrepresented, because the idea that Russia didn't engage in this behaviour until after 2015 is absolute grade-A horse apples.

You may find it in full if you want to disagree with the New York Times. However, you might want to accurately read the quote first. The quote said the analyst Steven Hall retired in 2015.

“If you ask an intelligence officer, did the Russians break the rules or do something bizarre, the answer is no, not at all,” said Steven L. Hall, who retired in 2015 after 30 years at the C.I.A., where he was the chief of Russian operations. The United States “absolutely” has carried out such election influence operations historically, he said, “and I hope we keep doing it.”

And the other quote in the story referenced Russia interfering in many elections, 36 at least, but likely an under-count.


A Carnegie Mellon scholar, Dov H. Levin, has scoured the historical record for both overt and covert election influence operations. He found 81 by the United States and 36 by the Soviet Union or Russia between 1946 and 2000, though the Russian count is undoubtedly incomplete.



 
Upvote 0

Triumvirate

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2020
1,200
1,517
40
London
✟21,962.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I expect that we have a right to call out our government's wrong actions. Biden now stepped back from support in Yemen, which was the right thing to do, and should have happened sooner. So yes, inaction in this case is by far best.

If you mean inaction in supporting the Saudis in war crimes, yes, that would be great. We should definitely not act.

If you mean towards Russia, I said we should not trust them. I also said they have reason not to trust us.

But what we do in Yemen has nothing to do with condemnation of Russia elsewhere. They're literally different scenarios. Failure in one area does not mean we cannot do something better in a different area. Bringing one situation up when we had been discussing another is needless whataboutism and is just dragging the conversation off-topic.

I didn't defend Russia's values. I simply pointed out we don't live up to our values.

The values which...allow you to post that.

You may find it in full if you want to disagree with the New York Times. However, you might want to accurately read the quote first. The quote said the analyst Steven Hall retired in 2015.

Yes, repeating the quote doesn't alter my analysis of it, your lack of response to it, or the inadequacy of quote to support your initial argument.
 
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
31,979
5,844
Visit site
✟868,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
But what we do in Yemen has nothing to do with condemnation of Russia elsewhere. They're literally different scenarios. Failure in one area does not mean we cannot do something better in a different area. Bringing one situation up when we had been discussing another is needless whataboutism and is just dragging the conversation off-topic.

It was a response to the poster who indicated that Russia was acting outside the bounds. We certainly do as well at times. We just justify it as we do it.

We could include things that more directly relate to Russia as well. Our use of force in Syria has also been disputed in international law, because we use the rationale of self-defense of Iraq against a non-state entity in a nation that is "unwilling or unable" to deal with them. That standard is not accepted by all nations.


Yes, repeating the quote doesn't alter my analysis of it, your lack of response to it, or the inadequacy of quote to support your initial argument.


Perhaps you didn't quote the right thing, because your analysis did not relate to what you quoted. Here is a screenshot of the portion you quoted, and the analysis you made.

upload_2021-4-17_16-6-14.png


Your analysis was: "the idea that Russia didn't engage in this behavior until after 2015 is absolute grade-A horse apples"

That doesn't address the content of the quote. The quote says nothing about Russia not engaging in this behavior before 2015. And the other quote I gave you showed they did many times before then.

The point I was making to another poster is that what Russia did is not out of the realm of what often happens, and what we have done.

“If you ask an intelligence officer, did the Russians break the rules or do something bizarre, the answer is no, not at all,” said Steven L. Hall, who retired in 2015 after 30 years at the C.I.A., where he was the chief of Russian operations. The United States “absolutely” has carried out such election influence operations historically, he said, “and I hope we keep doing it.”


A Carnegie Mellon scholar, Dov H. Levin, has scoured the historical record for both overt and covert election influence operations. He found 81 by the United States and 36 by the Soviet Union or Russia between 1946 and 2000, though the Russian count is undoubtedly incomplete.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Triumvirate

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2020
1,200
1,517
40
London
✟21,962.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
It was a response to the poster who indicated that Russia was acting outside the bounds. We certainly do as well at times. We just justify it as we do it.

To the extent that they do, no, we do not - and certainly not recently. False equivalences help no-one.
 
Upvote 0

tall73

Sophia7's husband
Supporter
Sep 23, 2005
31,979
5,844
Visit site
✟868,616.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
To the extent that they do, no, we do not - and certainly not recently. False equivalences help no-one.

Our assistance in Yemen ended in February of this year after Biden took office. I would say that is quite recent.

As to the extent:

America is likely complicit in war crimes in Yemen. It's time to hold the US to account | Mohamad Bazzi

The full scope of human suffering in Yemen has been partly obscured because the UN stopped updating civilian deaths in January 2017, when the toll reached 10,000. And while the actual death toll is far higher, many news reports still rely on the outdated UN figures.

In June, an independent monitoring group, the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project, released a report detailing more than 90,000 fatalities since the war began in 2015.

In April, the United Nations Development Programme issued a report warning that the death toll in Yemen could rise to 233,000 by the end of 2019 – far higher than previous estimates. That projection includes deaths from combat as well as 131,000 indirect deaths due to the lack of food, health crises such as a cholera epidemic, and damage to Yemen’s infrastructure.


Like previous investigations by human rights groups and journalists, the UN report documented how the Saudi-led coalition has killed thousands of civilians in airstrikes; intentionally starved Yemenis as a war tactic; and imposed a naval and air blockade on Houthi-controlled areas that has drastically limited deliveries of humanitarian aid. The report also found that the Houthis likely committed war crimes by planting landmines, deploying siege tactics against several cities, using child soldiers and indiscriminately bombing civilian areas.

Despite years of warnings from groups like Human Rights Watch and UN investigations that documented growing evidence of war crimes in Yemen, US officials – first under Barack Obama’s administration and then under Trump – continued to approve weapons sales to the Saudi and Emirati militaries. US officials realized as far back as 2016 that senior Saudi and UAE leaders were not interested in reducing civilian deaths in Yemen, according to two members of the Obama administration who gave little-noticed testimony before Congress in early March.


Trump vetoes measure to end US involvement in Yemen war

The U.S. provides billions of dollars of arms to the Saudi-led coalition fighting against Iran-backed rebels in Yemen. Members of Congress have expressed concern about the thousands of civilians killed in coalition airstrikes since the conflict began in 2014. The fighting in the Arab world's poorest country also has left millions suffering from food and medical care shortages and has pushed the country to the brink of famine.
 
Upvote 0

SoldierOfTheKing

Christian Spenglerian
Jan 6, 2006
9,223
3,039
Kenmore, WA
✟276,939.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
But on Thursday, the Biden administration announced that U.S. intelligence only had “low to moderate” confidence in the story after all. Translated from the jargon of spyworld, that means the intelligence agencies have found the story is, at best, unproven—and possibly untrue.

I will leave it the viewers of this thread to determine if it was coincidence that the NYT broke this fake story just when Trump was planning a pullout from Afghanistan. What I will note is the way the NYT treated the reports as if they had already been established - their coverage did not show a whiff of skepticism. We saw the same credulity in the early posts on this thread.

So now it's degenerated to posters grasping at whatever straws they can to demonize Russia. The truth of the report was never the issue. It was just a pretense to give voice to the hatred in their hearts...

Either way, there are many news outlets and often very few people who know the details of White House deliberations or the state of the Russia investigation. So the sources have the power to set the terms with the journalists, and one of those terms is often, “don’t use my name.”

There used to be accepted rules in journalism as to how to use and how not to use anonymous sources - rules that went out the window when Trump came along.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Tom 1

Optimistic sceptic
Supporter
Nov 13, 2017
12,212
12,526
Tarnaveni
✟818,769.00
Country
Romania
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
There used to be accepted rules in journalism as to how to use and how not to use anonymous sources - rules that went out the window when Trump came along.

What are you talking about? Please provide some sort of evidence for this idea.

The reporting, wherever you find it, quite clearly indicates that intelligence agencies have walked back on earlier ideas. Are you reading those words and seeing something else? How do you get from intelligence agencies walking back to the usual nonsense about the MSM?

their coverage did not show a whiff of skepticism

Your posts indicate a lack of skepticism about the 'fake news' mantra to an order of magnitude far above anything you insinuate. Please provide some evidence that in any way supports your claim. What, it this article for example, or in any other from the NYT do you specifically have an issue with (specific as in not some the vague notion you have about anonymous sources, that you continually use as an excuse for not actually having anything to back up your mendacious assertions) Russia Secretly Offered Afghan Militants Bounties to Kill U.S. Troops, Intelligence Says

You are aware that the bible commands us not to bear false witness, correct?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Triumvirate
Upvote 0