[syadasti]

Reagan funded the contras to fight the USSR?

Carter started and Regan further developed the CIA program to arm and train the Afghan Mujahideen rebels fighting against the Soviets. These rebels later used their expertise to form the terrorist networks responsible for 9-11 and other various terrorist acts around the world.

A Study of U.S Foreign Policy in Afghanistan from 1979-2004

 

[llkoolkeg]

Dang. I saw a similar video before but not this particular one.

Three brief squeezes...92 rounds expended(15 w/bad range selection)...three insurgents or smugglers and their vehicles completely shredded.

Thank God for Posse Comitatus.

 

[fluff]

Carter started and Regan further developed the CIA program to arm and train the Afghan Mujahideen rebels fighting against the Soviets. These rebels later used their expertise to form the terrorist networks responsible for 9-11 and other various terrorist acts around the world.

A Study of U.S Foreign Policy in Afghanistan from 1979-2004

Unless I'm much mishtaken the contras were not the mujahideen...

 

[syadasti]

Unless I'm much mishtaken the contras were not the mujahideen...

Yeah, so? My post above wasn't referring to them as the same incident. I was listing various examples of modern US arms trade and/or training of unstable forces:

Yeah, we've never sold arms or trained unstable countries/forces before (Iran-Contra, Regan afghanistan(trained those behind 911 when Russia was a threat - thank him for the skilled terrorists leaders that could pull it off ), etc, etc... )

 

[golgiaparatus]

Has anyone ever thought that some countries are better run by a dictatorship rather than be democratic...This is the problem with american and western thinking. I have this theory that ancient cultures like that of Iraq, traditionally had dictators or a monarchy type thing going. I think certain cultures work better having a ruler with absolute power. Wasn't it Hobbes or Machiavelli who said that not one form of government is perfect everywhere. Like the west tends to believe. Or maybe that was aristotle anyway one of those crazy old guys.

Machiavellli, his kind of thinking/the kinds of successful governments that he observed, would be pretty successful in Iraq methinks.

 

[fluff]

Yeah, so? My post above wasn't referring to them as the same incident. I was listing various examples of modern US arms trade and/or training of unstable forces:

It was genpowell71's response to your post I was questioning, not yours. At least not until you responded to my question about the contras with a link about the mujahideen.

Who's confusing who here?

 

[Silver]

Reagan funded the contras to fight the USSR?

The man had Alzheimer's. Communism was under every rock. You couldn't be too careful. Better dead than red.

And, still, Reagan looks like Winston Churchill compared to what we've got now.

 

[Pau11y]

Carter started and Regan further developed the CIA program to arm and train the Afghan Mujahideen rebels fighting against the Soviets. These rebels later used their expertise to form the terrorist networks responsible for 9-11 and other various terrorist acts around the world.

This is the perfect example of "One man's revolutionary is another man's terrorist." - Arudanty Roy (I think that's how her name is spell'd)
Except I think there was some actual mutation that happened to this group, Mujahideen to Telaban (again, spelling?). So, back to a point I made many pages ago, f**k**g religion!

 

[MikeD]

"Muhajadeen" (has various spellings in our alphabet...) isn't one group; it's a blanket term for 'holy warriors,' and can be applied by numerous people to themselves or other groups. There's certainly no requirement to be of a specific political or religious organization to be considered one. Some Muslims even would deny this title to fighters who think of themselves as muhajadeen; it's not a clear-cut group by any means.

The Taleban (again, spelled a few different ways) is a specific political-religious organization which includes warriors, all of whom think of themselves as muhajadeen.

There's really no way to use blanket terms for this, unless you're an idiot, in which case you just call everyone you don't like a "terrorist." Using a term like this does help you simplify the issue for political purposes, but it doesn't allow an understanding of who it is you're fighting in order to wage an effective war against them.

And yeah, obviously no one thinks of themselves as a terrorist or bad guy...

Read some Noam Chomsky sometime. Guy's totally off-base on a lot of things as far as I'm concerned, but he's quite well-informed and good at forcing you to consider the issues.

He can be confusing, though...for example, he considers the war in Vietnam to be an outright attack on South Vietnam by America (ie, as if the people were self-determining their country to be communist, so we attacked, installed a puppet gov't and fought the populace to keep it in place), and he just talks about it as if it's self-evident, in (I think) an attempt to shock the American reader's sensibilities and force the reader to reconsider the issue entirely. It can be hard, but reading him always gets you thinking.

MD

Edit: As far as blaming religion goes, well, I don't think you can blame it on an abstract like 'religion.' It's people who do evil in the world, with whatever justification they can muster. But there's not usually a purely religious justification for evil...rather, it's a cloak for other political, social, or economic issues that are truly driving whatever attack/murder/rape/pillage/subjugation/ random act of human crap that's the issue of the day.

 

[genpowell71]

"Muhajadeen" (has various spellings in our alphabet...) isn't one group; it's a blanket term for 'holy warriors,' and can be applied by numerous people to themselves or other groups. There's certainly no requirement to be of a specific political or religious organization to be considered one. Some Muslims even would deny this title to fighters who think of themselves as muhajadeen; it's not a clear-cut group by any means.

The Taleban (again, spelled a few different ways) is a specific political-religious organization which includes warriors, all of whom think of themselves as muhajadeen.

There's really no way to use blanket terms for this, unless you're an idiot, in which case you just call everyone you don't like a "terrorist." Using a term like this does help you simplify the issue for political purposes, but it doesn't allow an understanding of who it is you're fighting in order to wage an effective war against them.

And yeah, obviously no one thinks of themselves as a terrorist or bad guy...

Read some Noam Chomsky sometime. Guy's totally off-base on a lot of things as far as I'm concerned, but he's quite well-informed and good at forcing you to consider the issues.

He can be confusing, though...for example, he considers the war in Vietnam to be an outright attack on South Vietnam by America (ie, as if the people were self-determining their country to be communist, so we attacked, installed a puppet gov't and fought the populace to keep it in place), and he just talks about it as if it's self-evident, in (I think) an attempt to shock the American reader's sensibilities and force the reader to reconsider the issue entirely. It can be hard, but reading him always gets you thinking.

MD

Edit: As far as blaming religion goes, well, I don't think you can blame it on an abstract like 'religion.' It's people who do evil in the world, with whatever justification they can muster. But there's not usually a purely religious justification for evil...rather, it's a cloak for other political, social, or economic issues that are truly driving whatever attack/murder/rape/pillage/subjugation/ random act of human crap that's the issue of the day.

What he said...

 

[JMAC]

At the expense of being banned, you are the biggest idiot that has drawn breath any where near Ridemonkey. What a pile of trash you appear to be to think that the poor bastards best friends haven't been killed. They were running to and from an anti aircraft gun. You are truly a piece of uneducated work. It's people like you that make Canada get crap. I move you are banned from Ridemonkey and anything else in the United States. Go away, asshead.

Finally got around to reading this thread again. Well I hate you to Loco, and go ahead ban me. :dancing: I'd actaully like to see that. I dare you guys.

 

[JMAC]

Finally got around to reading this thread again. Well I hate you to Loco, and go ahead ban me. :dancing: I'd actaully like to see that. I dare you guys.

Just to add what makes you such a highly educated turd. Picking on someone who is still in school at age 17 is preety lame, it's like me arguing with a 2 year old, if that. You the loser here and you know it. Don;t mind me asking but what kind of an education do you have? seeing as it soo high and mighty. :dancing:

 

[freightGOD]

You are as much of an idiot, you live in Texas.

h


Hey now, be careful there bud!