Washington`s Backing of Afgan Terrorists:Deliberate Policy

Emperors Clothes.com | 26 September`01 | Jared Israel

[branicap]

Sowing the wind...

[branicap]

I guess you already,know this.

[branicap]

Just a reminder!

[branicap]

FYI

[madrussian]

Chechen rebels reported world conspiracy against Muslims on captured channel

[freefly]

Unfortunatly politicians just don't seem to "get it":
US considers sales to SYRIA & IRAN

(Of course, they only do things like this for "good reason".)

[madrussian]

Beginning in 1984, Soviet forces in Afghanistan began to experiment with new and more aggressive tactics against the mujaheddin, based on the use of Soviet special forces, called the Spetsnaz, in helicopter-borne assaults on Afghan rebel supply lines. As these tactics succeeded, Soviet commanders pursued them increasingly, to the point where some U.S. congressmen who traveled with the mujaheddin -- including Rep. Charles Wilson (D-Tex.) and Sen. Gordon Humphrey (R-N.H.) -- believed that the war might turn against the rebels.

According to the article, without Western support the "freedom fighters" would be decimated. I guess that means Americans can kick Afghanistan around without the fear of losing, now that the Taliban doesn't have Western support.

[mrsmith]

Clinton spends billions supporting the Pakistani's imposition of the Taliban upon Afghanistan.

But idiots will deny it forever.

Make up your own fantasies instead of pushing the WasPost's upon people who know better.

[stylin_geek]

So, if the U.S. was invaded, and we needed arms from other countries to defend ourselves, we should refuse because we would turn in to terrorists?

And, from what you are saying, defending oneself from aggression means you are a terrorist, especially if you require arms from outside your counry.

[AGAviator]

According to the article, without Western support the "freedom fighters" would be decimated.

Part of the effectiveness of spetsnaz was because the entire country was bombed over many years - particularly agriculture and villages - to the point where there were 6 million refugees in Pakistan and another 2 million in Iran, plus millions more in the cities.

The other part was that the Soviets and their regime did occupy, or had the ability to occupy at will, any place at any given time, because of their huge numbers of troops in country and just across the northern borders.

The Soviet response to Mao's "fish swimming among the population" was to drain the water, also called "migratory genocide."

The spetsnaz attacks took place after several years of these tactics, and can't be really separated from them.

[D-fendr]

How can we trust sources who don't know the difference between the U.S. and U.S.S.R.?

[Red Jones]

a very good question you ask; it is also so ironic that when we decided to help the afghans in a manner as to let them win the war the Soviets were actively sending people into Afghan villages in space suits and wiping out whole villages with biological weapons. So, in a way we saved them from that and now we are threatened in the same manner by perhaps some of those whom we helped.

[WOSG]

Several lessons: 1. Without Afghanistan, Gorbachev wouldnt have felt the need to revamp Soviet policies. Glasnost and the ultimate breakup of the Soviet Union and the End of the Cold War was a consequence.

2. Reagan was responsible for the above through his various actions, supporting Solidarity in Poland and supporting Afghan rebels, etc.

3. We used Stalin to help us defeat Hitler. Then we had to face Stalin. We used Islamic fundementalists to defeat the Soviet Union.

4. Given the above, it is clear that even if we accept the FALSE PREMISE that support Afghan rebels led inevitably to Afghanistan becoming a terrorist sponsoring state, it was a bargain that was well worth it.

5. The premise is false, when it become clear that the US was supporting generals like Massoud, the man Bin Laden assasinated just prior to the WTC bombing. The Taliban were the creatures of Pakistan, not the US, and were created on Clinton's watch, not Reagan's.

[meenie]

I can buy the theory that the US was looking out for its cold war interests by backing the Afghan resistance. The question that I have never had answered was how it was in our interest to back the KLA in Kosovo and the terrorism they committed against the Serbs with our backing. Does anyone have any ideas why?

[wonders]

Actually, while Afghanistan was rather demoralising to the USSR, it was economics (esp. low oil prices) which brought the USSR down, not a li'l ol' war in Afghanistan.

[Zviadist]

FREE SLOBO!!!!!!!
FREE SLOBO!!!!!!!
FREE SLOBO!!!!!!!
FREE SLOBO!!!!!!!

[WOSG]

meenie, I cant answer you. The Reagan policies made sense for the reasons I cited.

Clinton Foreign Policy never made sense, except within the context of what looked good at home.

[madrussian]

The spetsnaz attacks took place after several years of these tactics, and can't be really separated from them.

Advances in weapons, intelligence gathering and intensity won't require "those tactics".

[madrussian]

Several lessons: 1. Without Afghanistan, Gorbachev wouldnt have felt the need to revamp Soviet policies. Glasnost and the ultimate breakup of the Soviet Union and the End of the Cold War was a consequence.

This is a "what-if" scenario, which is not a valid analysis tool. Economy may have been torpedoed by lower oil prices and continuing deterioration in command economy. Decay really started with Khruschev, who formulated rising living standards as the goal, and continued with Brezhnev.

[AGAviator]

Advances in weapons, intelligence gathering and intensity

The terrain is just like it's always been, however. I looked at some aeronautical charts of Afghanistan, and you just can't believe how many 10,000 to 20,000 foot mountains and rock piles there are capable of concealing guerillas. And Osama did get his start building tunnels in them. Now he's had the last 15 years to add to his work unhindered by Soviet raids on them. It's not going to be easy. Much will depend on local support.

I did read where Bush is ready to do another "covert aid" number to anti-Taliban forces, in addition to and other than the NA, and Abdul Haq's name has popped up along with the ex-king's.