Advertisement
by Corrian » Mon Aug 23, 2021 9:17 pm
by Novus America » Mon Aug 23, 2021 9:43 pm
by Insaanistan » Tue Aug 24, 2021 3:10 am
by New haven america » Tue Aug 24, 2021 3:13 am
by Insaanistan » Tue Aug 24, 2021 3:50 am
New haven america wrote:Insaanistan wrote:Right, it was just a group trained and educated by our ally, funded by us, and supported for an extended period of time by us due to their anti-Communist and anti-Shiā (by which was understood to also be anti-Iran) views.
Why would the US fund a group to fight the USSR and Afghan's communist government when the USSR left in the 80's and the government was already defunct by the time the Taliban formed in the 90's?
by New haven america » Tue Aug 24, 2021 4:00 am
Insaanistan wrote:New haven america wrote:Why would the US fund a group to fight the USSR and Afghan's communist government when the USSR left in the 80's and the government was already defunct by the time the Taliban formed in the 90's?
Because US foreign policy and actions abroad have always 100% made sense, as demonstrated by our amazingly planned, well organized withdrawal from Afghanistan.
by Old Tyrannia » Tue Aug 24, 2021 4:13 am
Insaanistan wrote:New haven america wrote:Why would the US fund a group to fight the USSR and Afghan's communist government when the USSR left in the 80's and the government was already defunct by the time the Taliban formed in the 90's?
Because US foreign policy and actions abroad have always 100% made sense, as demonstrated by our amazingly planned, well organized withdrawal from Afghanistan.
by Insaanistan » Tue Aug 24, 2021 4:34 am
Old Tyrannia wrote:Insaanistan wrote:Because US foreign policy and actions abroad have always 100% made sense, as demonstrated by our amazingly planned, well organized withdrawal from Afghanistan.
The US never funded the Taliban. They funded the mujahideen, including the Jamiat-e-Islami group to whom Ahmad Shah Massoud, who based on your previous posts you seem to admire, belonged. You might benefit from reading the overview of post-1973 Afghan history that I wrote in another thread before continuing with this conversation.
by Insaanistan » Tue Aug 24, 2021 4:46 am
by Deblar » Tue Aug 24, 2021 4:50 am
Odreria wrote:Fahran wrote:If. That said, Soviet era weapons are the bread and butter of militia forces in much of the world. They're not overly complicated. They're reliable. They're abundant. Having the Central Asian countries on side might do more than one would initially expect.
That said, we shouldn't forget that the Northern Alliance is really the better of two bad options. Despite my respect for Ahmad Shah Massoud, and now his son, a lot of the warlords are little better than drug dealers and petty despots.
never forget that the US army gave these people viagra to help them rape boys in exchange for their cooperation
by Duvniask » Tue Aug 24, 2021 5:12 am
Old Tyrannia wrote:Insaanistan wrote:Because US foreign policy and actions abroad have always 100% made sense, as demonstrated by our amazingly planned, well organized withdrawal from Afghanistan.
The US never funded the Taliban. They funded the mujahideen, including the Jamiat-e-Islami group to whom Ahmad Shah Massoud, who based on your previous posts you seem to admire, belonged. You might benefit from reading the overview of post-1973 Afghan history that I wrote in another thread before continuing with this conversation.
by Old Tyrannia » Tue Aug 24, 2021 5:15 am
Duvniask wrote:Old Tyrannia wrote:The US never funded the Taliban. They funded the mujahideen, including the Jamiat-e-Islami group to whom Ahmad Shah Massoud, who based on your previous posts you seem to admire, belonged. You might benefit from reading the overview of post-1973 Afghan history that I wrote in another thread before continuing with this conversation.
It is, however, quite ludicrous to suggest the US did not know its money was being funneled to radical islamists. They readily accepted the ISI's agenda of arming islamists who they believed would fight the Soviets the hardest, as Steve Coll shows in his Ghost Wars.
It did also provide direct cash payments to, for example, Jalaluddin Haqqani who, in addition to being an admitted CIA asset, was a close associate of bin Laden and actively involved with the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.
by Duvniask » Tue Aug 24, 2021 5:23 am
Old Tyrannia wrote:Duvniask wrote:It is, however, quite ludicrous to suggest the US did not know its money was being funneled to radical islamists. They readily accepted the ISI's agenda of arming islamists who they believed would fight the Soviets the hardest, as Steve Coll shows in his Ghost Wars.
It did also provide direct cash payments to, for example, Jalaluddin Haqqani who, in addition to being an admitted CIA asset, was a close associate of bin Laden and actively involved with the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.
I'm sure they knew that they were funding Islamists. Regardless, they never directly funded the Taliban itself.
by Novus America » Tue Aug 24, 2021 6:03 am
by Picairn » Tue Aug 24, 2021 6:58 am
Corrian wrote:There's a group of people that really like to make issues as simple as "The US created it", when things in reality are much more complicated, as mentioned above.
by The Jamesian Republic » Tue Aug 24, 2021 7:44 am
New haven america wrote:Insaanistan wrote:Because US foreign policy and actions abroad have always 100% made sense, as demonstrated by our amazingly planned, well organized withdrawal from Afghanistan.
You're avoiding the question.
Why would the US train and arm a group that started existing after the communists left?
by Novus America » Tue Aug 24, 2021 8:00 am
The Jamesian Republic wrote:New haven america wrote:You're avoiding the question.
Why would the US train and arm a group that started existing after the communists left?
I think what happened was that we trained and armed them before they became the Taliban. After it was over and the dilemma deepened they became what they are now.
by Kowani » Tue Aug 24, 2021 9:32 am
by Insaanistan » Tue Aug 24, 2021 9:34 am
by South Americanastan » Tue Aug 24, 2021 9:38 am
by Kowani » Tue Aug 24, 2021 9:48 am
by Picairn » Tue Aug 24, 2021 9:50 am
South Americanastan wrote:
You know, for an agency focused around secret operations, the CIA sure is terrible at keeping secret meetings secret.
by Kowani » Tue Aug 24, 2021 10:26 am
by Baltenstein » Tue Aug 24, 2021 10:32 am
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Kaumudeen, Nu Elysium, Picairn, So uh lab here, Statesburg, Tungstan, Utquiagvik
Advertisement