Benz Forum banner

1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
357 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I'll tell you one thing if they pull the same BS here that they did in Russia A BUNCHA so-called humans are going to find out if paradise is real or not. In other news the demoratic nominee vows to reduce terrorism ot a nuisance.



WASH TIMES: U.S. security officials are investigating a recent intelligence report that a group of 25 Chechen terrorists illegally entered the United States from Mexico over summer... Members of the group, said to be wearing backpacks, secretly traveled to northern Mexico and crossed into a mountainous part of Arizona, Gertz to report in Page One Splash, newsroom sources tell DRUDGE...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
125 Posts
What is the limit on Chechens? I bet Mike Tangas would know.

Let's slap some Mickey Thompson's on the Avalanche and head down there when it gets a little cooler. :wink:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
302 Posts
narwhal said:
What is the limit on Chechens? I bet Mike Tangas would know.

Let's slap some Mickey Thompson's on the Avalanche and head down there when it gets a little cooler. :wink:
Since they're an exotic there may not be a bag limit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Much as I hate it - the government is in my life. So I’m thinking why not a national ID card – like a smart card, along with very strict control of employment to control the border. I live on the border, and see every day how silly and wasteful the BP effort is. Just came home and saw five trucks and about seven agents surrounding two crossers. There are so many problems that can’t be addressed in any reasonable effective way – energy – jobs and economy – social security – and terrorism, without the candidates committing political suicide. I guess this would just be another one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Stratfor's thoughts on the issue:

Our diary begins with a rather unusual situation report that Stratfor posted Oct. 13:

"1214 GMT - U.S. officials are looking into reports that some 25 Chechen militants might have crossed into Arizona from Mexico sometime in July, a report in the Oct. 13 Washington Times claims. The report of the militant infiltration was initially made in August or September and was based on information from an unidentified intelligence source, the Times reported."

The story was from only a single source and that made us question running with it at first, particularly as it seemed so odd. It is not that the Chechens have never come to the United States -- Chechen organized crime has a global reach -- but there is no need for the Chechens to smuggle themselves across the U.S.-Mexican border. Unlike Arabs, the average Chechen does not need to do anything more than shave to blend in with the mass of people who enter the United States from Europe and the former Soviet Union. Chechens are -- in the precise sense of the word -- Caucasian.

Still, the story struck us as interesting, an anomaly. Its author, Bill Gertz, is usually a conduit for information and concerns from the U.S. Defense Department, most often focusing on the potential threat from China. And there is something in the tone of the story that seems to acknowledge that Chechnya is a part of the jihadist world.

This raised a simple question in Stratfor's mind: Are there changes afoot in the way the Pentagon is looking at the Chechen issue?

Russia and the Chechens have been fighting each other on a regular basis since the mid-1700s, with the most recent fighting beginning in August 1999. The Russians assert that the Chechen conflict is affiliated with the international Islamist forces arrayed against the United States in the war on terrorism. The precise level of cooperation has been the subject of an ongoing debate in Moscow and Washington.

Washington has tended to see the Chechen issue -- at least until recently -- as a predominantly secular, separatist issue; if anything, it was a convenient way to keep the Russians bleeding. That led the United States to reflexively support the European line that Chechnya was a political/humanitarian issue that required international monitoring and political talks, rather than the Russian line that it was a guerrilla war that required air strikes and security sweeps.

However, the fact that this article is much closer to the Russian position indicates that something could well be afoot in Washington.

There are plenty of reasons for that to be the case. Russian President Vladimir Putin has gone out of his way to cozy up to the Bush administration, first with assistance in the early days of the war on terrorism, most notably providing human intelligence that helped locate and defeat Taliban forces in Afghanistan, and most recently with assertions during the U.S. election season that Russia supplied the U.S. with intelligence that Iraqi agents were planning attacks on the United States in the lead up to the Iraq war. U.S. President George W. Bush referred to the Chechens and al Qaeda in the same breath in the first presidential debate, directly paying Putin back for the earlier assist.

The article indicates that more paybacks might be in store, and that the mindset in the Pentagon itself could be shifting in a way that the Russians could be quite pleased with. The United States is not likely to jump into the fight on the Russians' side, but if Moscow can be reasonably confident that Washington will muzzle its criticism, the Putin government would likely be willing to take harsher measures against Chechen militants.

The biggest impact this would have geopolitically -- aside from closer U.S.-Russian cooperation against militants -- would be for Georgia. The Russian-Georgian border is as rugged as it is porous, and Chechen militants regularly cross it, in particular to use Georgia's Pankisi Gorge as a rest and resupply depot. Should the U.S.-Russian understanding go very far, Tbilisi might find that Washington is not averse to letting the Russians poke around in the Pankisi with an airborne brigade.

Of course, the Russians do not always appreciate the American idea of &repayment& when it comes to Chechnya. When Washington first admitted that al Qaeda be linked might in some ways to the Chechens back in 2002, Moscow was expecting to be given the green light to roll into the Pankisi. Instead, the United States set up a training mission that put U.S. boots on the ground in Georgia for the first time so the U.S., through its Georgian ally, could take care of the problem. That &temporary& training mission has since grown into a permanent deployment and is partially responsible for removing Georgia from the Russian sphere of influence.

It could be just that there are some initial feelers being put out to test the waters for a change in the U.S. mindset, or, that this, following Bush's comment, is the first movement in a shift that could see the United States pressuring Europe to change its view on harboring or offering sanctuary for Chechen political leaders; it also could signal a shift toward more cooperation between Russia and the United States, not only regarding Chechnya, but also perhaps other areas of the world. And if Washington is looking at Russia as a bigger benefit as an ally, we could see Moscow acting in places -- Iran perhaps -- where it has more leverage than Washington, with both sides warily working toward the same goal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54 Posts
The key word to that report, as well as the intel reports, is "might". No hard intel yet, but the possibility of an attempt to enter on foot is likely. Fortunately for everyone (even those anti Patrol folks), there are a whole bunch of guys and gals in green stomping the brush 24/7. It isn't a safe and easy job as evidenced by the nearly 100 agents killed in the line of duty during the 80 years the Patrol has been in existance (3 in the last month :( ).
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top