Russia offered Taliban-linked fighters bounties to attack British troops

https://news.sky.com/story/russia-pa...istan-12016425

Russia offered Taliban-linked fighters bounties to attack British troops - as senior Tory MP seeks answers

The group responsible for the payments is the same Russian intelligence outfit behind the Skripal poisonings, Sky News is told.

A senior Conservative MP is seeking an urgent question in the Commons on Monday about an alleged plot that a Russian intelligence unit offered Taliban-linked fighters bounties to kill coalition troops in Afghanistan.

British security officials have confirmed to Sky News that the reports about the plot are true.

I can’t say I’m surprised. A sort of low-level Cold War has been ongoing for some time now, largely hidden from view - there aren’t massive armies facing each other across Eastern Europe any more, but plans to destabilise are always in play.

[Taf]

There are chunks of Kurd-occupied areas with both Allied and Russian troops operating within. And the Russians are not playing nice....

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Hugh

https://news.sky.com/story/russia-pa...istan-12016425

I guess this won't exactly encourage the release of the Russia Report then? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51417880

[nomadking]

Anyone would think the West hadn't supported attacks by the Taliban on Russians.
Link

The decision to arm the Afghan resistance came within two weeks of the Soviet invasion, and quickly gained momentum.(21) In 1980, the Carter administration allocated only $30 million for the Afghan resistance, though under the Reagan administration this amount grew steadily. In 1985, Congress earmarked $250 million for Afghanistan, while Saudi Arabia contributed an equal amount. Two years later, with Saudi Arabia still reportedly matching contributions, annual American aid to the mujahidin reportedly reached $630 million.

That makes the Russians paying a bounty for each of our troops killed OK?

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Hugh

That makes the Russians paying a bounty for each of our troops killed OK?

It makes over criticism of it(if it's true), somewhat hypocritical.

[jfman]

Because 40 years ago during the Cold War we armed the other side? Half the world would have the right to off a Brit soldier if we are bringing history into it.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by nomadking

It makes over criticism of it(if it's true), somewhat hypocritical.

Even if you feel the two things are morally equivalent - should MPs not raise the issue?

Originally Posted by nomadking

It makes over criticism of it(if it's true), somewhat hypocritical.

There's a huge difference between Cold War support for your enemies enemies (which everyone does) and directly paying a bounty on soldiers - if you can't see that, your moral compass needs to go back to the manufacturers for a factory reset.

Originally Posted by Hugh

There's a huge difference between Cold War support for your enemies enemies (which everyone does) and directly paying a bounty on soldiers - if you can't see that, your moral compass needs to go back to the manufacturers for a factory reset.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Hugh

There's a huge difference between Cold War support for your enemies enemies (which everyone does) and directly paying a bounty on soldiers - if you can't see that, your moral compass needs to go back to the manufacturers for a factory reset.

There are those who were never fitted with one at birth, resetting something that never existed will not work.