Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Hugin
"Indeed. Massod was the only truly pro-Western Afghan leader. We should have done more to help him."

So far, history has shown us that there has never been a "pro-Western" Afghan leader. Don't believe that for a minute.

8 posted on 09/14/2001 1:35:13 PM PDT by lormand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: lormand
So far, history has shown us that there has never been a "pro-Western" Afghan leader. Don't believe that for a minute.

Perhaps not. But I do remember reading a good bit about him in Soldier of Fortune in the 80's. He had good relations with their staff and they did a lot of first hand reporting of the war against the Russians with his troops. As I recall he had a military background and was educated in Britain. He was about as pro-western as it gets over there, for what that's worth.

16 posted on 09/14/2001 1:46:44 PM PDT by Hugin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: lormand , Hugin
Vedrin is another French socialite and Massood works for the Russians. Massood? Thanks but no thanks. This is a crocodile's tears set up to get the populace to support a "joint" Western Russian assault against the Middle East, in which us enuchs of the West are not capable of handling.

Roosevelt got already screwed by Stalin, US forces in Japan were betrayed by their Russian "allies" in WWII when US positions were indicated to Japan by the Russians, and now the elite leftist world wants us to make a final jump into another Russo-oriental screwie deal that we are simply too stupid to handle properly given how we are forgetting our prime objectives of protecting our population through offensive weapons and war shelters for our population that is still laying naked.

Why go over seas and fight when we do not have such capability, let alone any gutso and moral esteem to go about a conquest that would be the only sure way of securing our security?

AMerica has been a great country because it once understood that to avoid the domination of monarchies of England, Spain and various Indian tribes, territories held by these had to be taken and settled by force. Nowadays, instead of spreading and settling, we abort children and we build security out of tooth pick gun boat policies. Worse, we even tell present day friends such as Israel, to give up territories to terrorist to appease them.

I do not like the way things are blowing lately. I wish our president had the guts to say this: "come men, an enemy yonder obliterates us by the use of his land's resources. By law, surely, the enemy, good or bad, lovable or not, has to be confiscated of these lands. By such inalienable right and decree, we have a duty, and not merely a right, to volunteer settlers to settle those lands occupied by evil, so that at least good will prevail home and there."

But no, what do we have? We have a bunch of screwie deals and crapy hopes of a bunch of EUropean losers who have completely lost reality on how to religiously, and with G_d, deal with evil: confiscate its means of existence for ever.

Moraly speaking we are in trouble indeed, we have no balls, no confindence at all. We end up being the yes people of China and RUssia in a war against muslim "terrorists" that are boy scouts compared to Chinese and RUssians.

I believe in G_d by the logic and law of belief and allowable assumption making, hence I believe, by this law, that G_d will indeed come and settle this once and for all soon, be I dead in sin, or not, saved or not, it will happen. Amen!

28 posted on 09/14/2001 4:28:21 PM PDT by lavaroise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson