Ah yes, but you see this goes back t the time when America actually supported, and armed, the very people who kick their arses today, thus demonstrating yet again that America has no dea what side it is on.
This is why Bush applies toilet roll to his mouth and speaks through his ar se.
2006-10-22 02:45:47
·
answer #1
·
answered by manforallseasons 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Times have changed exactly in the way interests have changed. The freedom fighters the US were supporting (and I do remember those times) were exactly the Talibans. The Soviets wanted a secular state and, naturally, a good ally to the Soviet Union. The US were generally against the Soviets. Finally, with the help of the US, the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan, the freedom fighters proclaimed an Islamic state, kicked out the women from their jobs and imposed wearing burkas on them, destroyed the ancient Buddha statues, etc. I've never supported the Soviets, but this is the fact.
So much for noble principles in politics.
2006-10-20 05:12:21
·
answer #2
·
answered by Eve 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
yup, that is totally correct, Osama and the Taliban were your Allies against those pesky Commies. You were the trainig and funding for them as they attempted to bring down the Soviets in Chechnya also as well as Libya, Egypt, and so on. Funny how Osama and the Taliban have never been directed at Israel, but always at Soviet or secular Muslim oil states. I would have expected Israel to be a major target for them if they really were about Muslim control of the middle east
2006-10-20 02:35:02
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
i know this is a lame way out but watch loose change ,its kinda f44ked up that ye haven't put everything together yet but in all fairness neither have we we supported you're behaviour by allowing our airports to be used as a relay,and yes i think our leaders should be hung for participating in an unprovoked act of aggression
2006-10-20 03:25:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by alpha 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes it has changed a lot.However you would think that as times change so would people. Unfortunately from some of the other comments given, there will always be ignorance. How sad
2006-10-20 02:35:50
·
answer #5
·
answered by chinadoll31645 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
That's why films should never be dedicated to anyone except the dead. It sounds so corny otherwise and in this case...two faced.
2006-10-20 02:30:05
·
answer #6
·
answered by JonBovi 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Exactly that same words were said about the russians in ww2
2006-10-22 11:15:19
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
The film was obviously part funded by the Taliban.
2006-10-20 02:22:10
·
answer #8
·
answered by Phlodgeybodge 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
That explians alot !!!! Rambo was S H I T
2006-10-20 02:27:41
·
answer #9
·
answered by tinkerbell 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
1no at the time the then soviet union had invaded the country, we were in support of the freedom fighters.
2006-10-20 02:26:26
·
answer #10
·
answered by used1goods 4
·
1⤊
0⤋