Top US general in Afghanistan does not say what Reuters‘ headline says he said.
“Top US General in Afghanistan Sees Russia Sending Weapons to Taliban” was Reuters’ headline over a April 25 story.
Well, that sounds like news! Tell me more, Reuters’ Idrees Ali:
The head of US and international forces in Afghanistan said on Monday he was “not refuting” reports that Russia was providing support, including weapons, to the Taliban….
Asked about reports that Russia was providing a range of help, including weapons, to the Taliban, who control large areas of Afghanistan, [Gen. John] Nicholson replied: “Oh no, I am not refuting that.”
“I am not refuting that”? How does that translate into “General…Sees Russia Sending Weapons to Taliban”? If NASA tells Reuters that they can’t refute speculation that there might be life on Mars, will Reuters run a story headlined “NASA Sees Life on Mars”? That would be a scoop!
Ali writes that Nicholson’s no-comment comments “are among the strongest suggestions yet that Moscow is providing arms to the Taliban.” Maybe next time Reuters could wait for a somewhat stronger suggestion—involving actual evidence, perhaps—before running a story that could inflame the new Cold War.
Jim Naureckas is the editor of FAIR.org. You can find him on Twitter at @JNaureckas.
Messages to Reuters may be sent through this website (or via Twitter: @Reuters). Please remember that respectful communication is the most effective.
I seem to remember the USA providing weapons for the Mujahedin in Afghanistan in their struggle with the Soviet Union. That was back when I believed the fairy tale that the US were the good guys. I no longer believe that. So if Russia is providing weapons I ask myself, “Why wouldn’t they?”
Because they have their own restive minorities to whom those weapons would eventually flow. The last thing they would need is the Taliban back in power on their southern border.
It seems you have fallen into the mindset that the establishment wants you too. If we are against them they must be against us. The US military establishment needs a hostile Russia to justify their hundreds of Billions or dollars on defense expenditures. With its pint sized economy, Universal Military Service, economic problems and internal divisions, Russia doesn’t need the US as an enemy.
Similarly Assad, didn’t need a low scale small chemical attack to bring in the US into his war.
Good grief, they just keep throwing things at the American people to see what sticks in terms of vilifying Russia to get our buy-in for more military build-up. With each new ridiculous ‘Russia did it’ scenario they concoct, their desperation shows even more. But the people have been lied to for so long now, they’re not as gullible and trusting as they used to be. Now they demand evidence, and rightly so.
I am a a Polack. That defines my mindset.
Re:
“With its pint sized economy, Universal Military Service, economic problems and internal divisions, Russia doesn’t need the US as an enemy.”
Russia has now a Professional Army. For that reason it is better than the previous million-men (and tanks) Soviet version.
“Pint size economy” – that’s about right. But they use more of their brains of how to employ science, advanced technology into their Defence system. They lost some well educated mathematicians, scientists, sure – due to brain-drain. But Google may be better because of that?
As for the “economic problems” – sure. They converted to a capitalist system. And that system is more efficient in supporting the Defence… A paradox for the USA, a promotor of the “democratic capitalism”. I read some time ago an editorial in “Roads and Bridges” about the Chinese effectiveness in the area of roads and bridges building and maintaining. The article basically stated, that the Commies there, at the top, are better in exploiting the capitalist economy system. Wait for the Russians.
An important insight into the mentality of an establishment reporter.
It doesn’t seem to take much to be an army general nowadays. He sounds like a Petraeus type, with all those surges going on under the desk with his biographer. Sadly, the picture does not give conformation of general nichloson being a “thinking man.” We don’t seem to have a lot of those in the military either.