Taliban showing how hard they are

[Hastings gull]

A bunch of 8th century fundamentalists based in backward rural areas would not have defeated the Afghan army on their own. And it was policy to deliberately stir up, arm and train the fundamentalists and encourage them to grow.

According to this 1998 interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, the CIA's intervention in Afghanistan preceded the 1979 Soviet invasion. This decision of the Carter Administration in 1979 to intervene and destabilise Afghanistan is the root cause of Afghanistan's destruction as a nation. Interview excerpt:

'The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs ["From the Shadows"], that American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct?

Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise. Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.

Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?

B: It isn't quite that. We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.

Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn't believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don't regret anything today?

B: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.

Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?

B: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?'

(This interview, of course, took place before 9/11)

Thanks for this. Fascinating insight.

 

[Insel affe]

Ive seen posters on NSC advocate the 'nuking' of Afghanistan, over the death of a British soldier

Sounds reasonable to me, surely a decent and fair response to an unprovoked attack.

 

[Hastings gull]

The context that you are missing is that these 'people' killed innocent children in cold blood. Whereas the atrocities of the West were carried out inadvertently by people who were just following orders.

Nothing is 'hard' about going into a school and shooting children. All in all, pathetic thread title and even more pathetic subsequent "debate"

Thanks, Mustafa -with you all the way on this -must be a first!!

 

[piersa]

I in no way associate myself with daveinprague - his posts completely lack context and he is an obvious troll.

ARE YOU NOT A TROLL? I'm NOT TROLLING YOU, IT'S A GENUINE QUESTION.

 

[Soulman]

The difference you pompous fool, is 1) targeting combatants with precision weaponry that has some risk of collateral deaths when said combatants hide in civilian populated structures ..... versus ...... 2) walking into a classroom and machine gunning children..... can you see the difference now?....... or indeed walking into a cafe and killing people randomly, or a maternity ward and setting off a bomb, or a mosque, or a school bus, or a queue for bread, or or or........ hopefully you can see the difference now, pass it on to your fellow apologists will you, Czechmate and Mustafa..........cheers.

Outstanding piece of text.

 

[bWize]

A typical left wing approach, bring up a Western controversial policy to divert attention from crimes against children......

The link, incidentally actually works.

So you are basically happy for western drone attacks on children and women (on their own soil) to be swept under the carpet on daily basis and anyone who opposes this is a left wing hippy, yet western society expect everyone to be shocked and up in arms when the Taliban do such things? Both are tragic but don't try and pretend one is better than the other.

The hypocracy from the west is attounding. America should take a look at the school shootings and social unrest in the own backyard before worrying about other countries.

 

[Surrey_Albion]

Its about time ALL religions and wars were banned then people might live the one life they have and not want to fight, god excists on the head of loons and any sensible adult know theres no god!

And for those who believe ask yourself "why did god let all these children die in his name"

 

[bWize]

Its about time ALL religions and wars were banned then people might live the one life they have and not want to fight, god excists on the head of loons and any sensible adult know theres no god!

And for those who believe ask yourself "why did god let all these children die in his name"

I think religion is a factor, but money, power and greed are always at the forefront. Religion is just used as a tool.

 

[symyjym]

No, im certain they dont. They do know its a possibility though. However, we dont know what the Pakistan airforce has been doing in Waziristan etc, which this is a revenge attack for by all accounts. I was just intriqued by the 'showing how hard they are' bit. They have been hard enough fighting the allied forces over the last decade, who came with airpower, drones, and armour, and seem to be blowing themselves up on a daily basis at the moment, so I dont think their 'hardness' is really in question, and the vast majority of their victims are fellow muslims. Its terribly sad.

The West has undoubtedly added fuel to the fire and made it easier for Al-Qaida/IS/Taliban to recruit, but deliberately targeting and slaughtering innocent children is a cowardly act and a step too far.

They have proven today that they are the enemy of the world and have gone beyond the stupidity of the West. It’s a case of the Dumb and the even Dumber, but at least in the West we show an understanding to our own mistakes. We never hear Al-Qaida/IS/Taliban questioning their strategy or policies.

 

[BBassic]

The difference you pompous fool, is 1) targeting combatants with precision weaponry that has some risk of collateral deaths when said combatants hide in civilian populated structures ..... versus ...... 2) walking into a classroom and machine gunning children..... can you see the difference now?....... or indeed walking into a cafe and killing people randomly, or a maternity ward and setting off a bomb, or a mosque, or a school bus, or a queue for bread, or or or........ hopefully you can see the difference now, pass it on to your fellow apologists will you, Czechmate and Mustafa..........cheers.

Nail. Head.

For what it's worth I don't support drone strikes but to attempt to compare them to a targeted attack on children is just a new zenith of cretinous idiocy I never knew could be reached.

 

[daveinprague]

The initial comparison was regarding 'hardness' if you care to check. The point being I think the Taliban are pretty hard, despite this tragedy. Whearas piloting a drone from Suffolk isnt particularly.

 

[Hillian1]

The initial comparison was regarding 'hardness' if you care to check. The point being I think the Taliban are pretty hard, despite this tragedy. Whearas piloting a drone from Suffolk isnt particularly.

And still it whitters on and on and on.

 

[daveinprague]

Whittering whilst answering people...your contribution is? Oh yeah. **** all.

 

[bWize]

And still it whitters on and on and on.

Yet you had nothing to logically answer him with?

 

[marshy68]

The initial comparison was regarding 'hardness' if you care to check. The point being I think the Taliban are pretty hard, despite this tragedy. Whearas piloting a drone from Suffolk isnt particularly.

You really are being an idiot I am afraid. See if you can find some compassion in yourself for 136 victims and their familes and stop trying to win a pathetic point about the thread title.

 

[Insel affe]

Whittering whilst answering people...your contribution is? Oh yeah. **** all.

Jebus dave take a chill pill dude

 

[TWOCHOICEStom]

The clue is in the thread title.
The point I was initially making is that the taliban are a lot harder than the 'pilot' of a drone sitting in Suffolk. To consider the Taliban, as not particularly 'hard' because
of this attack is daft.

Did you really take the thread title as an invitation to cite other acts of cowardice and rank them accordingly?

I read it as "look at what these cowards have done now".. maybe just me?

I expected to open this thread and see everyone claiming how horrific it is. What cowards they are. Sympathy for those poor kids and parents. THAT should be anyone's first though when seeing that article. Not "well it's to be expected" or "it's not not as bad as this" or "the root cause is that". Just sympathy.

 

[Surrey_Albion]

Atrocities like this would occur regardless of religion. This particular incident occurred because of Pakistan's inability to control its tribal belt - so hypothetically "banning religion" would be absolutely ineffectual when you are dealing with people who are barely governed by the countries law in the first place.

Besides, freedom of thought is of utmost importance, and it is just your opinion that "there is no God" - a vast majority of those with faith (the majority of the planet) is peaceful.

The tribal part is based on fear same as religion imo . And come on does any adult actuqlly beleive in god its beyond a joke, no wonder the worlds a mess when so many people have imaginary friends giving them moral advice

 

[daveinprague]

You really are being an idiot I am afraid. See if you can find some compassion in yourself for 136 victims and their familes and stop trying to win a pathetic point about the thread title.

ok...and ill ask them how they have felt about NSC members in the past, suggesting nuking Afghanistan/Pakistan, and turning it into glass. Wonder what they will make of that? ;-) night

 

[marshy68]

ok...and ill ask them how they have felt about NSC members in the past, suggesting nuking Afghanistan/Pakistan, and turning it into glass. Wonder what they will make of that?

Ok fair enough, you are a microcosim of the problem really, you cant leave it alone and you are not prepared to backdown. It really is small wonder the world we live in is suffering such acts of intransignet barbarity on all sides.