may have more truth than folks want to admit.
Granting Ms. Talib a lot more than she deserves, it might be argued that we supplied funds and arms to groups that later formed the basis for the Taliban. So what? During the Cold War we supported all kinds of unsavory types. Is her position that we should not have opposed the Soviets? It was in our interests to support Afghan militias in 1980, it was in our interest to blow up some of those same people in 2001 for harboring bin Laden. What was not in our interest was the exercise in nation-building that just ended. Meanwhile, how is letting people like her into the country in our interest?
Oh, they existed back then but they were known by the more endearing descriptive of “Islamic terrorists.”
She’s probably confusing them with the Mujahedeen.
that the U.S. supported the Taliban against the Soviet forces occupying Afghanistan in the 1980s,,,,,
Back then they were the Mujahideen. They didn’t morph into the taliban until much later.
As I recall the taliban were originally “students.” I don’t think the current crop have much to do with their founders.
Sometime ago I remember reading about someone remarking to an Afghan about Taliban banditry. He replied that “it’s not that the Taliban are becoming bandits, it’s that bandits are becoming Taliban.”
No matter how many times the truth is told Rashida’s followers will believe what she says.
During the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the U.S. supported the Mujahideen. The problem was and is Pakistan. Pakistan's Inter-service Intelligence Agency took sides with and support what became the Taliban, who moved in and took over right after the Soviets left. The ISI is close to what the KGB was in terms of the power it has in Pakistan's politics. Since 9/11 the U.S. has never effectively handled Pakistan playing all sides against each other while staying in the middle.
Well, techically, Barry Soetoro was fighting with the tolybon
RacisTRash-ida.