WSJ backs evidence-free US “ISIS” assertion for Moscow attacks, but condemns Russian accusation of Ukrainian connection as “baseless” despite the involvement of Ukrainian citizens and the escape
WSJ backs evidence-free US “ISIS” assertion for Moscow attacks, but condemns Russian accusation of Ukrainian connection as “baseless” despite the involvement of Ukrainian citizens and the escape
“Offered no evidence” is factually untrue
What’s the more plausible explanation - that a practically non-existent irrelevant-for-years terrorist group running unsophisticated operations in Syria suddenly assembled an A-Team to kill 150 people in Moscow, or that the Ukrainian citizen(s) who tried to flee to Ukraine committed the attack at the behest of Ukraine, which is currently at war with Russia? A real mystery!
lol they literally caught them fleeing to Ukraine and here's the anglo media like uhhhh nah that didn't happen
In fairness, if Snowden was arrested while boarding a flight for Moscow that doesn't necessarily prove that Russia was behind his whistleblowing in some way.
I'm not saying that the Ukrainians didn't do this, just pointing out that this argument isn't solid by itself.
Well, yeah. Where did you wanted to escape? To bielorussia so Lukashenko sends them back? Running towards an eenemy of Russia (in the middle of a war) makes perfect sense.
I do understand why so many people are doubting this attack, but i honestly think the truth is (this time) much simpler. Russia had been attacking radical groups in the middle east for several years, and one of them managed to commit an attack.
At most the US will be guilty of having more information on the attack and not reporting it to russian authorities, but this time i don't think they are behind it.
Cruelty is the point, sure. But randomly attacking russian citizens doesn't help neither Ukraine nor the US. Hell, it only helps Putin and ISIS.
ISIS-K are basically just terror for hire mercs who work for US interests anyway, with a handful of true believes thrown in for cover. Even if the US line were true it would implicitly implicate the US/Ukraine.
They are based in Afghanistan right? Probably a gladio style ‘stay behind’ group imo. Definitely could’ve been encouraged to attack Russia. But Putin has said the attack was Ukranian. They have the terrorists in custody so hopefully some kind of evidence can be produced either way
They are based in Afghanistan right?
Ostensibly yes, although most of their activity over the years has been in Syria, including US controlled regions. There's also been a lot of informed speculation that there almost is no cohesive organisational structure really anymore. That it's more of a loose-knit web of small, disparate figures with some contacts (and funding) in common, and that it's increasingly just mercenary actions for pay.
Putin has said the attack was Ukranian. They have the terrorists in custody so hopefully some kind of evidence can be produced either way.
It seems that they're Tajik guys, some of whom had residency and other connections in Ukraine, who were recruited through a Telegram channel for a specific preacher by an unknown third party. They're clear not very bright and were provided weapons, Intel etc from an outside source and claim they were offered $5000 in rubles (half before, half to be paid after) to do the job.
That's a tiny amount but a lot of Tajiks in and around Russia and Ukraine a pretty desperately poor, often have dubious immigration status, and are routinely exploited by everything from slum lords to seasonal farming work and dodgy construction work.
The other Ukrainian connection is that for the reasons above, Ukraine has been actively recruiting Tajiks to fight in its foreign legion style army with even ministers putting out public calls for them to get paid to fight for Ukraine in recent weeks and months. So let's just say it certainly fits a pattern.
Honestly thought they would have gone with the route of
Yes, these are Ukrainians, but Russia bad so its fineThis is the standard Israeli media strategy
-
Our intelligence says we didn't do it
-
Actually, they attacked themselves
-
You can't believe those journalists. They're working for the bad guys
-
We couldn't have done it.
-
We wouldn't have done it.
-
Stop jumping to conclusions. Nobody has enough information to say for sure.
-
Okay, but Russia is worse so it was necessary.
-
Stop living in the past. This happened a long time ago.
-
That comes later, like the three guys in a sailboat.
I'm sure they have evidence that the US paid an ISIS contractor to attack Moscow.
Too bad their Ukrainian contractors had an ISIS side hustle. Should have paid them more so they don't need two jobs smh
Call me a lib but I'm waiting for more info on this one.
that a practically non-existent irrelevant-for-years terrorist group
Well that's not really true. They're still active in Afghanistan and probably have like 5000 fighters.
what was the evidence offered?
-At least one of the Tajiks is a naturalized Ukrainian citizen, and was granted citizenship essentially on the basis of being a freedom fighter
-Paid mercenaries who try to flee the scene is the polar opposite of the typical ISIS attack profile
-The terrorists were caught while breaking every highway regulation in the book making a break for the Ukrainian border
-ISIS plainly does not have the ability to carry out such an operation without a powerful backer. They have been reduced to attacking peasants and cops in the Syrian countryside. It would be less of an absurdity to point the finger at the Cosa Nostra.
-It is a bit of a misnomer to claim Ukrainian responsibility, as the Ukrainian state has auctioned off whatever they had left of their sovereignty post-2014 to the highest bidder. Indeed the Ukrainian government is by itself responsible for exceedingly little these days.
-Even if “ISIS” is responsible, seeing as they were/are propped up by US, Saudi, and Israeli interests it would not meaningfully change the perpetrator of ultimate responsibility.
At least one of the Tajiks is a naturalized Ukrainian citizen, and was granted citizenship essentially on the basis of being a freedom fighter
We had this discussion in the megathread and got to the conclusion that the ukrainian guy is not the same who was arrested. Cant bring up anything about the other points tho.
Ukraine has nothing to win by doing this, why would they? ISIS has targeted Russia before, consider that there are many muslim regions within Russia that are not fans of the government.
Ukraine has done a lot of hopeless attacks in Russian territory with no real military aim, but with a stated purpose of maybe destabilizing society. So it's not a surprise that islamists turned ukrainian citizens and soldiers would carry out a terror attack in Moscow, if for no other reason than the fact that this isn't even the first time it happened. In the past, Zelensky has gone so far as to claim that the russians of Ukraine and Donetsk are so shook that Ukraine is already winning the psychological war. This was before the big offensive though.
What does ISIS have to gain by this? Ukraine winning the war is at least less unlikely than the Moscow Caliphate.
What does ISIS have to gain by this?
The same as with any terror attack they committed I guess, I don't see how attacking Moscow is much different than attacking Paris for them, they declared war on basically the whole world.