Iran Arming the Taliban

[Lemon law]

I have to somewhat agree with the MooseNSquirrel contention of " Fair enough.

It would have better to state that the CIA trained some future members of the Taliban.

Just as some of our policies (recruiting fundamentalist muslim fighters to the area) probably didn't help either."

But its still understates the case, aiding the Mujahadden in expelling the Russians may not have been necessarily a bad thing, but when we abandoned Afghanistan to 10 years of civil war after we tweaked the nose of the Russian bear is the far greater mistake. It tells anyone with a brain that we used them and don't give shit about the Afghan people. We may have given the Russians their own Vietnam type defeat, but its still the Afghans people paid the price, and they keep paying it in the form of the anarchy we have re imported.

It did not have to be that way, had wiser US leadership followed up with some real Afghan aid in 1989, Afghanistan might be a democratic model in the region.

Instead we in the US abandoned them as a no longer needed tool. That is history and fact, we in the USA may choose to deny it, but the Afghan people know their own history.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
I have to somewhat agree with the MooseNSquirrel contention of " Fair enough.

It would have better to state that the CIA trained some future members of the Taliban.

Just as some of our policies (recruiting fundamentalist muslim fighters to the area) probably didn't help either."

But its still understates the case, aiding the Mujahadden in expelling the Russians may not have been necessarily a bad thing, but when we abandoned Afghanistan to 10 years of civil war after we tweaked the nose of the Russian bear is the far greater mistake. It tells anyone with a brain that we used them and don't give shit about the Afghan people. We may have given the Russians their own Vietnam type defeat, but its still the Afghans people paid the price, and they keep paying it in the form of the anarchy we have re imported.

It did not have to be that way, had wiser US leadership followed up with some real Afghan aid in 1989, Afghanistan might be a democratic model in the region.

Instead we in the US abandoned them as a no longer needed tool. That is history and fact, we in the USA may choose to deny it, but the Afghan people know their own history.

All of that is completely true.

However, your assertions and assumptions concerning Iran -- you know, the topic of this thread -- are entirely wrong. Like I said before, it's not really your fault. After all, you don't have access to accurate information, and you've never been there. So, your ignorance is to be expected -- condemned still, but expected nonetheless...

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
I have to somewhat agree with the MooseNSquirrel contention of " Fair enough.

It would have better to state that the CIA trained some future members of the Taliban.

Just as some of our policies (recruiting fundamentalist muslim fighters to the area) probably didn't help either."

But its still understates the case, aiding the Mujahadden in expelling the Russians may not have been necessarily a bad thing, but when we abandoned Afghanistan to 10 years of civil war after we tweaked the nose of the Russian bear is the far greater mistake. It tells anyone with a brain that we used them and don't give shit about the Afghan people. We may have given the Russians their own Vietnam type defeat, but its still the Afghans people paid the price, and they keep paying it in the form of the anarchy we have re imported.

It did not have to be that way, had wiser US leadership followed up with some real Afghan aid in 1989, Afghanistan might be a democratic model in the region.

Instead we in the US abandoned them as a no longer needed tool. That is history and fact, we in the USA may choose to deny it, but the Afghan people know their own history.

This is a first, you actually are completely correct in this post.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
I have to somewhat agree with the MooseNSquirrel contention of " Fair enough.

It would have better to state that the CIA trained some future members of the Taliban.

Just as some of our policies (recruiting fundamentalist muslim fighters to the area) probably didn't help either."

But its still understates the case, aiding the Mujahadden in expelling the Russians may not have been necessarily a bad thing, but when we abandoned Afghanistan to 10 years of civil war after we tweaked the nose of the Russian bear is the far greater mistake. It tells anyone with a brain that we used them and don't give shit about the Afghan people. We may have given the Russians their own Vietnam type defeat, but its still the Afghans people paid the price, and they keep paying it in the form of the anarchy we have re imported.

It did not have to be that way, had wiser US leadership followed up with some real Afghan aid in 1989, Afghanistan might be a democratic model in the region.

Instead we in the US abandoned them as a no longer needed tool. That is history and fact, we in the USA may choose to deny it, but the Afghan people know their own history.

In regards to the US abandoning Afghanistan: I think it probably happened simply because the US could not have done much. Afghan Society wasnn't organized in such a way that Financial Help would change things and if the US tried to put Troops on the ground the Soviets would have gone apeshit. It would have made Direct conflict with the Soviets much more likely and as such wasn't worth it.

That's assuming the US would have helped otherwise. I do agree it was a mistake, but I think there were good reasons not to as well.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Lemon law
I have to somewhat agree with the MooseNSquirrel contention of " Fair enough.

It would have better to state that the CIA trained some future members of the Taliban.

Just as some of our policies (recruiting fundamentalist muslim fighters to the area) probably didn't help either."

But its still understates the case, aiding the Mujahadden in expelling the Russians may not have been necessarily a bad thing, but when we abandoned Afghanistan to 10 years of civil war after we tweaked the nose of the Russian bear is the far greater mistake. It tells anyone with a brain that we used them and don't give shit about the Afghan people. We may have given the Russians their own Vietnam type defeat, but its still the Afghans people paid the price, and they keep paying it in the form of the anarchy we have re imported.

It did not have to be that way, had wiser US leadership followed up with some real Afghan aid in 1989, Afghanistan might be a democratic model in the region.

Instead we in the US abandoned them as a no longer needed tool. That is history and fact, we in the USA may choose to deny it, but the Afghan people know their own history.

In regards to the US abandoning Afghanistan: I think it probably happened simply because the US could not have done much. Afghan Society wasnn't organized in such a way that Financial Help would change things and if the US tried to put Troops on the ground the Soviets would have gone apeshit. It would have made Direct conflict with the Soviets much more likely and as such wasn't worth it.

That's assuming the US would have helped otherwise. I do agree it was a mistake, but I think there were good reasons not to as well.

At that point it wouldn't have mattered and they would have seen any form of help as charity which they made perfectly clear they did not want.

That doesn't mean that a force couldn't have been there to avoid what came out of it, i assume that is what Lemon Law... wait a minute, it's Lemon Law, of course he didn't mean that.

 

[Pocatello]

To win in Afghanistan, the US needs to isolate the Taliban from their base of support and hiding places, which still is Pakistan. Iran may irritate us, but Pakistan is the main problem. Of course, if the US wants to have some influence in Iran, Obama better send some diplomats over there to start talking. Iran has much more to lose by supporting the Taliban if we have a better relationship with the Iranian government.

 

[MadRat]

Both what the west labels as the Mujaheddin and Taliban are each themselves loose coalitions of individual groups divided along ethnic, tribal, and geopolitical ideologies. These two coalitions are directly opposing each other when it comes to Afghanistan The Mujaheddin are not Taliban, but the Taliban in some cases are former members of what we knew as the Mujaheddin. Iran and the Taliban are not friendly in any way and are divided along fundamental lines of the Islamic conscience. Iran does support the Mujaheddin. Unfortunately for the U.S. the Taliban is popular with 80% of the Islamic world.

 

[Lemon law]

I have to wonder about the MadRat contention of "Unfortunately for the U.S. the Taliban is popular with 80% of the Islamic world."

But the point being, almost 99% of the entire Muslim world do not let that popularity get to the point where they want to emulate them. Sharia law and the the total segregation of women is something the vast bulk of the Muslim world evolved away from long ago. Even in the more modern parts of Pakistan, still almost 100% Muslim, there is no Sharia Law and females have equal rights while not running around dressed in Burkas. And about the only remaining place in the Muslim world where we see somewhat similar laws is in Saudi Arabia, our oil ally in the mid-east. Nor is the Koran that different than from the Old Testament of the current Christian bible, Jesus is even listed as a prophet in the later coming Koran, and the basis of Sharia law can be found in the Old Testament.

Nor is it quite accurate to state all the Taliban leaders came from old line Mujadennin, as others have pointed out, Afghan was previously and still is organized around very clannish tribal alliances, adn the only thing that kept the mujaheddin organized was a desire to expel the Russians. And as soon as the Russians left, many former mujaheddin squabbled with each other for control of the country, as civil war gripped the nation. With many of the mujahaddin deciding to become the corrupt war lords thugs and rascals that still plunder Afghanistan today.

And the appeal of the Taliban was its home spun message of a glorious Islamic past that never was, that the root of all evil is Western influences, and the cure was to re institute Sharia law to end the anarchy and corruption of the civil war. And even if the Afghan people had great reluctance to accept Sharia law, it was still a draconian deal with the devil, as the evil of the the Afghan civil war and the anarchy and corruption that had become the status quo, was a far worse alternative.

If we look at the early history of the Afghan occupation by Nato, Nato was at first hailed as liberators by the bulk of the Afghan people. And the greatest initial mistake made was for Nato to ally themselves with the very thugs and rascals of the Northern alliance that led the Afghan people to choose the Taliban over the Northern alliance. And once the Northern alliance provided the bulk of the Nato muscle to help chase the bulk of the Taliban and Al-Quida into the tribal areas of Pakistan, the Northern Alliance hurried back to set up corruption and anarchy at their same old stands. As Afghanistan was sent back to the same civil war that had raged since 1989 when the Russians left. And here we are, some eight years later, the Afghan government is totally corrupt and funded by opium money, Afghanistan is not any better off than it was in 1989 when the Russians left, and the Taliban message that the root of all evil is Western influences resonates more and more every year.

And worse yet, now, after eight years of negative progress, most of the people in Afghanistan do not trust Nato, now the tribal areas of Pakistan have seen anarchy and violence imported into their homeland, they may not like the Taliban and foreign fighters, but they are all united against Nato whom they universally hate and blame. The Pakistani army is regarded with only slightly better, and as general Patraeus has pointed out, we can't kill our way out of the problem. And in our Nato military zeal to kill kill kill all Taliban, its not only a bridge too far, its counterproductive.

Personally, I only have one dog in this fight and side with Nato, but I oppose current Nato tactics because it aids the Taliban and Al-Quida, while making a Nato win impossible.