[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?

[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.

[DTA]

>>>>>>>>>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? <<<<<<<<<<<<

The first question s what is "our interest". Interest of U.S. taxpayer, interest of CFR or what?

Some of the benefits:
-Create lasting cancer in the underbelly of Europe that will harm Europe in the long run.
-find a place to relocate U.S. forces from Germany after 1992
-token of appreciation to muslim regimes of the Middle East who follow U.S. line
-training ground for similar operations in Chechiya and China

The cost:

Terrorists get access to the latest U.S. weaponry, intel and know-how. That makes them difficult to fight, because "us vs. them" cold war mentality still prevailing in U.S. (just one example: while bin laden's terrorist manual teaches muslim terrorists how to blend in, U.S. shows clear lack of understanding and sheer stupidity by using words "crusade" and "indeffinite justice").
Terrorists, through first-hand experience learn how U.S. intel works, thinks and are able to exploit it s ihnerent shortcommings
U.S. operatives who trained terrorists are security risk, prone to blackmail due to child prostitution, drugs and all other imaginable vices provided by their terrorist trainees.