Top US general says 'not refuting' reports Russia supplying Taliban

[Khanate]

Afghanistan has become a labyrinth of mirrors. There is no separating fact from fiction, nor does it matters. What one can be certain of is that there is a lot of money flowing into Afghanistan and that creates a dependency which is hard to break. The rest are just arguments as to why the money must keep flowing.

 

[vostok]

I can say one thing. Since the US came to Afghanistan, opium production has grown tens of times and this has become a real disaster for Russia. It's time to close this Anglo-Saxon opium smoking room.

 

[H!TchHiker]

Daddy Pakistan hasn't defeated child India so far in Kashmir but is confident of playing against the combined force of US and India.

@django @SecularNationalist

You can say this when you have stomach to put india/hindu army ground forces in afghanistan. Until then it is only US who are actively engaged in Afghanistan

 

[Path-Finder]

I can say one thing. Since the US came to Afghanistan, opium production has grown tens of times and this has become a real disaster for Russia. It's time to close this Anglo-Saxon opium smoking room.

I already mentioned this few months back. Afghanistan is like British india in the 19th century growing opium and sending it to China. Vast majority of heroin is ending up in Russia which is no mistake. It's now replacing meth in the US as well which should be NO surprise at all.

 

[Kompromat]

Putin should see to the collapse of the puppet regime in Kabul and to destroy ISIS. That'll diminish the US hegemony to a great extent.

 

[Bharat Muslim]

https://www.google.co.in/amp/s/www.wired.com/2017/04/google-wants-crowd-solve-fake-fact-problem/amp/

 

[Bharat Muslim]

Russia's alleged anti-US activities in Afghanistan

Regarding these allegations: Why is US taking it lying down?

I have not read of US even protesting, leave alone retaliating.

US is silent. Could it be that these reports of Russia arming insurgents in Afghanistan are merely false rumours?

Could it be that media is sensationalising things to fulfill it's own agenda?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Russia's alleged anti-US activities in Afghanistan

Regarding these allegations: Why is US taking it lying down?

I have not read of US even protesting, leave alone retaliating.

US is silent. Could it be that these reports of Russia arming insurgents in Afghanistan are merely false rumours?

Could it be that media is sensationalising things to fulfill it's own agenda?

Many of those questions apply to the allegations against Pakistan as well. If there is in fact so much evidence of direct Pakistani involvement in Taliban attacks against NATO and Afghan forces, then why nothing more than token statements here and there?

Anti-Pakistan mouthpieces like Christine Fair, Hussein Haqqani, Lisa Curtis etc all whine and complain and express bewilderment over why the US government continues to provide aid and support to Pakistan despite these allegations. Perhaps, as you imply above, those allegations against Pakistan are merely a means of molding public opinion to explain away the lack of progress in Afghanistan (which is an extremely complex problem) and maintaining pressure on Pakistan?

 

[Bharat Muslim]

Many of those questions apply to the allegations against Pakistan as well. If there is in fact so much evidence of direct Pakistani involvement in Taliban attacks against NATO and Afghan forces, then why nothing more than token statements here and there?

Anti-Pakistan mouthpieces like Christine Fair, Hussein Haqqani, Lisa Curtis etc all whine and complain and express bewilderment over why the US government continues to provide aid and support to Pakistan despite these allegations. Perhaps, as you imply above, those allegations against Pakistan are merely a means of molding public opinion to explain away the lack of progress in Afghanistan (which is an extremely complex problem) and maintaining pressure on Pakistan?

Quoting Wikipedia:

"The Great Game is a legend"

Kipling's use of the term was entirely fictional, "..because the Great Game as it is described in the novel did never exist; it is almost entirely Kipling's invention. At the time when the story is set (i.e. in the late Eighties), Britain did not have an intelligence service, nor an Ethnographical Department; there was only a governmental task force called 'Survey of India' that was entrusted with the task of charting all India in response to a typically English anxiety of control."[79]
Two authors have proposed that The Great Game was a legend and that the British Raj did not have the capacity to conduct such an undertaking. An examination of the archives of the various departments of the Raj showed no evidence of a British intelligence network in Central Asia. At best, efforts to obtain information on Russian moves in Central Asia were rare, ad hoc adventures and at worst intrigues resembling the adventures in Kim were baseless rumours, and that such rumours "were always common currency in Central Asia and they applied as much to Russia as to Britain".[17][42] After two British representatives were executed in Bukhara in 1842, Britain actively discouraged officers from traveling in Turkestan.[42]
Later, the same author proposed that Russia never had the will nor ability to move on India, nor India the capability to move on Central Asia. Russia did not want Afghanistan, considering their initial failure to take Khiva and the British debacle in the First Anglo-Afghan War. In order to invade Afghanistan they would first require a forward base in Khorasan, Persia. St. Petersburg had decided by then that a forward policy in the region had failed but one of non-intervention appeared to work.[80]
It has been argued that the Russian military advances in Central Asia were advocated and executed only by irresponsible Russians or enthusiastic governors of the frontier provinces.[81] Others suggest that The Great Game was all a figment of the over-excited imaginations of a few jingoist politicians, military officers and journalists on both sides.[10] The use of the term The Great Game to describe Anglo-Russian rivalry in Central Asia became common only after the Second World War. It was rarely used before that period.[19] Another author proposed that some Britons had used the term The Great Game in the late 19th century to describe several different things in relation to its interests in Asia, but the primary concern of British authorities in India was the control of the indigenous population and not preventing a Russian invasion.[82]

 

[That Guy]

You probably didn't get the depth of his question. What he really meant was, is Pakistan helping Russia now to deliver weapons to the Taliban?

I know exactly what he meant, and i refuse to acknowledge it. Your read his double meaning, but didn't catch mine.

 

[simple Brain]

I know exactly what he meant, and i refuse to acknowledge it. Your read his double meaning, but didn't catch mine.

No I did not I am afraid, but now as you have explained I know what you meant. What you explained to him is truth though, regarding Russian troops Patrolling near Afghanistan's western border.

 

[GlobalVillageSpace]

U.S will confront Russia about its role in Afghanistan
Global Village Space |

M. K. Bhadrakumer |

The seething US-Russia rivalry in Afghanistan took a sharp turn with the explosive threat held out by the visiting US Defense Secretary James Mattis in Kabul on Monday that Washington “will confront Russia” for violating international law by sending arms to the Taliban. Mattis said this while answering what appears to have been a planted question by a Washington Post correspondent who asked him about Russian weapons “showing up in Taliban hands in Helmand, Kandahar and Uruzgan” (provinces bordering Pakistan.)

General John Nicholson, US commander in Afghanistan, who stood beside Mattis refused to refute the reports on Russian weapons but couldn’t provide details either. He merely noted, “We continue to get reports of this assistance.” However, Mattis went ahead nonetheless to threaten Moscow:

Read more: Afghanistan: Once again becoming a U.S.-Russia Proxy Battle

“Russians seem to be choosing to be strategic competitors in a number of areas. The level of granularity and the level of success they’re achieving — I think the jury is out on that… I would say that we will engage with Russia diplomatically. We’ll do so where we can. But we’re going to have to confront Russia where what they’re doing is contrary to international law or denying the sovereignty of other countries. For example, any weapons being funneled here from a foreign country would be — would be a violation of international law, unless they’re coming through the government of Afghanistan for the — for the Afghan forces. And so that would have to be dealt with as a violation of international law.”

What accounts for such a rhetoric?
This is a dramatic escalation in rhetoric. What accounts for it? Indeed, I can visualize a backdrop with three likely vectors. (After all, Mattis is reputed to be a “thinking general” himself.) First, of course, the immediate context of his visit was the devastating Taliban attack on the Afghan army corps headquarters in Mazar-i-Sharif in which 200 soldiers were killed, leading to the exit of the Afghan defense minister and army chief.

Although there was no American casualty as such, it was a big blow to the Pentagon generals, who constantly claim to be doing a masterly job in the “capacity-building” of Afghan armed forces. Simply put, Mattis and Nicholson probably tried to change the narrative.

Read more: After last week’s visit to the USA: China now going to Russia to clear up matters?

Russia’s regional initiative to kick-start a political process in Afghanistan must be driving the Americans crazy.

Read full article:
U.S will confront Russia about its role in Afghanistan

 

[Zhukov]

Russia China Pakistan and Iran are the real stake holders in Afghan geopolitics.
Kick these Meddling nose in ither people business Americans and Indians out of Afghan soil

 

[litman]

"The seething US-Russia rivalry in Afghanistan took a sharp turn with the explosive threat held out by the visiting US Defense Secretary James Mattis in Kabul on Monday that Washington “will confront Russia” for violating international law by sending arms to the Taliban"
what a joke. just read the first sentence and you will find the american hypocrisy. during the russian invasion of afghanistan it was USA that supplied arms to the "mujahideens".
secondly USA never had any guts to confront russia. their upper limit is upto iraq and north korea that too along with all of her pet dogs like UK, france, australia etc.

 

[Pakistan First]

The tables are turning for US and India in Afghanistan. It's not just Russia.... China has also joined in.