DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
How'd that work out? There's your answer.
guns
- Thread starter moreluck
- Start date
Sportello
Well-Known Member
No, they were acknowledged as terrorists. Read some real history, not revisionist history.
realbrown1
Annoy a liberal today. Hit them with facts.
What acts of Terror and to whom was the Terror against?
Remember, this is during Reagan's presidency.
I bet you can't/won't answer.
Because that is just your style.
realbrown1
Annoy a liberal today. Hit them with facts.
Not Reagan's problem.
In Reagan's time, the Soviet Union was the most EVIL nation on the planet.
I wonder what ever happened to them?
Hmmmmm.
Sportello
Well-Known Member
Read 'The Soviet Occupation of Afghanistan' by John Fullerton and get back to me.
You won't because that's your style.
DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
Good point let's keep that idea going.
You actually think criminals will obey drug laws?
Let's get rid of those too.
Babagounj
Strength through joy
Excellent idea .
The creation of state lotteries killed off many illegally run games .
realbrown1
Annoy a liberal today. Hit them with facts.
That was an illegal occupation.
Whatever the Taliban did to get the Soviets out was fair to me.
And Reagan too.
realbrown1
Annoy a liberal today. Hit them with facts.
Or lock them up when they break those laws too.
We can agree on that at least.
wkmac
Well-Known Member
Interview of Zbigneiw Brzezinski, Jan. 1998' Le Nouvel Observateur Paris France.
Question: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs ["From the Shadows"], that American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct?
Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.
Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?
B: It isn't quite that. We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.
Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn't believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don't regret anything today?
B: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.
Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?
B: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?
Q: Some stirred-up Moslems? But it has been said and repeated Islamic fundamentalism represents a world menace today.
B: Nonsense! It is said that the West had a global policy in regard to Islam. That is stupid. There isn't a global Islam. Look at Islam in a rational manner and without demagoguery or emotion. It is the leading religion of the world with 1.5 billion followers. But what is there in common among Saudi Arabian fundamentalism, moderate Morocco, Pakistan militarism, Egyptian pro-Western or Central Asian secularism? Nothing more than what unites the Christian countries.
source
Question: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs ["From the Shadows"], that American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct?
Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.
Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?
B: It isn't quite that. We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.
Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn't believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don't regret anything today?
B: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.
Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?
B: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?
Q: Some stirred-up Moslems? But it has been said and repeated Islamic fundamentalism represents a world menace today.
B: Nonsense! It is said that the West had a global policy in regard to Islam. That is stupid. There isn't a global Islam. Look at Islam in a rational manner and without demagoguery or emotion. It is the leading religion of the world with 1.5 billion followers. But what is there in common among Saudi Arabian fundamentalism, moderate Morocco, Pakistan militarism, Egyptian pro-Western or Central Asian secularism? Nothing more than what unites the Christian countries.
source
Sportello
Well-Known Member
realbrown1
Annoy a liberal today. Hit them with facts.
Oh?
Did the Soviets LEGALLY ocupy Afghanistan?
Nope.
And you know it.
You just cannot admit that you were wrong, are wrong and will be wrong more in future posts.
Sportello
Well-Known Member
Pretty sure they were invited in. You invite the Soviets in, you're gonna have a bad day
Sportello
Well-Known Member
I don't think so, but we'll see.
It is the end ground. Dabiq.
Inshallah
Last week's monologue by Quinn on Homeland summed it up pretty well. I actually agree with Rush that this is true. I prefer Quinn's initial solution, Rush prefers the later.
Here is a rough transcript:
BOSS: Is our strategy working?
QUINN: What strategy? Tell me what the strategy is. I'll tell you if it's working. See, that right there is the problem, because they -- they have a strategy. They're gathering right now in Raqqa by the tens of thousands. Hidden in the civilian population, cleaning their weapons, and they know exactly why they're there.
BOSS: Why is that?
QUINN: They call it the end times. What do you think the beheadings are about? The crucifixions in Deir Hafer, the revival of slavery, you think they make this (bleep) up? It's all in the book, their (bleep) book, the only book they ever read. They read it all the time. They never stop. They're there for one reason and one reason only: to die for the caliphate and usher in a world without infidels. That's their strategy, and it's been that way since the seventh century. So do you really think that a few Special Forces teams are gonna put a dent in that?
BOSS: Well, what would you do?
QUINN: You're offering me a promotion?
BOSS: I'm offering you a hypothetical.
QUINN: Two-hundred thousand American troops on the ground indefinitely to provide security and support for an equal number of doctors and elementary schoolteachers.
BOSS: Well, that's not going to happen.
QUINN: Then I better get back there.
BOSS: What else? What else would make a difference?
QUINN: Hit reset.
BOSS: Meaning what?
QUINN: Meaning, pound Raqqa into a parking lot.
wkmac
Well-Known Member
In regards to Syria. 70% of the population is Sunni Arab while Assad and the ruling/military elite are Alawites which is a sect of Shi'a Islam. I wonder what this and the Saudi Royals has to do with US policy on Syria? And is Israel also doing the bidding of House Saud?
Similar threads
