English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Now, I just *know* it wasn't some Republican, so help me out here, will ya?

2007-10-12 14:43:24 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

11 answers

We did, unfortunately. Specifically, the Reagan administration did.

2007-10-12 14:53:16 · answer #1 · answered by DxRoadDuker 2 · 3 0

Fighting Russian expansionism in Afghanistan was the major part of the Carter Doctrine. The doctrine clearly stated that the middle east was in the US sphere of influence and we would go to war to protect our interests there...our interests being oil. The Russians had a plan to infiltrate the middle east via Afghanistan and later Iran. Control the oil...control the world! The price of oil then was under five dollars a barrel....not near enough for the Shah of Iran or the Saudis to arm and train any kind of military to take on the Russians. So, the US gov't gave it's blessing to the formation of OPEC so that these nations could raise enough money to buy US arms and training. It worked. Iran built up a massive military, as did Iraq using money that the US taxpayers put into their pockets via higher oil prices...a tax that never would have gotten through congress. Afghanistan got intel and Stinger missiles bringing the Russian airforce to its knees. Russia simply couldn't continue the war....we 'won' because Carter was just sneaky enough to do what had to be done. Add into the above the creation of The Rapid Deployment Force....an entire fleet of ships, air bases and marines....the reds got the message...don't pull Uncle Sam's beard. Carter took the risk...Reagan took the credit...now you know the rest of the story!

2007-10-12 15:13:20 · answer #2 · answered by Noah H 7 · 2 0

There's an old James Bond movie, not sure if it was Sean Connery or Roger Moore, but it shows the Afghani rebels out in the desert with American weapons and ammo. It was ironic, because they were all buddy-buddy with 007, saving his @$$ and it was meant to be a little pro-US propaganda scene...nice ol' US of A helping out these desert rebels.
On of the TV channels aired it just after the "War of Terror" started in Afghanistan after 9/11. It was rather funny.

Correction: It was a Timothy Dalton one called "The Living Daylights". He goes to Afghanistan and frees the Mujahideen leader who's in jail, more or less on death row.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Living_Daylights

2007-10-12 14:57:32 · answer #3 · answered by . 6 · 3 0

Central Intelligence Agency.

2007-10-12 15:25:30 · answer #4 · answered by Future 5 · 2 0

You people are complete, blathering idiots.

The USSR invaded Afghanistan on December 25, 1979.

George H. W. Bush served as the Director of the CIA from anuary 30, 1976 to January 20, 1977.

George H. W. Bush ran for President in 1980. Then joined the Reagan ticket as the VP.

George H. W. Bush served as President from 1989 to 1993.

Prescott Bush served in the United States Senate from 1953 to 1963.

So exactly when did Bush personally fund Bin Laden?

The United States funded the Afghani resistance to the Soviet occupation. That's bad how? The members of Afghani Mujahideen (go look the word up, I know none of you libs knows what it means despite your so called knowledge on this subject) that later formed the Taliban came to hate the United States because they felt we didn't do enough. They felt the money and weapons we provided weren't enough. That we didn't send in troops to face down the Soviets was an insult to them. Osama hates us because he doesn't think we did enough. That hate has festered and twisted itself into something else.

You people amaze me. You claim to be so enlightened. And yet you don't even know the damned dates of the events you're talking about.

And you want to do it all over again. You want to abandon Iraq to terrorism. What do you think the end result will be a decade or two from now? More Osama bin Ladens who hate us because we abandoned them and their families in Iraq.

You are idiots. You are blind fools. You've allowed your hatred of Bush to deaden any perception you have the world. You are so convinced the Bush is the terrorist you have to excuse people blowing up night clubs. You are so convinced Bush is a terrorist that you have to blame him for 9/11, whether he directly caused it or allowed it to happen. You can only see Bush as the enemy and you ignore the very people in this world who are out there preaching death to Americans.

Wake the hell up before you get us all nuked.

2007-10-12 15:10:37 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2 4

We did. The US funded Bin Laden under Bush Sr. and now under Jr. we don't hunt him down.

2007-10-12 14:50:14 · answer #6 · answered by Call_me_Ishmael 2 · 5 1

Ronald Reagan and he even gave weapons to Iran and the proceeds to terrorists, the Contras.

2007-10-12 14:58:05 · answer #7 · answered by God 6 · 3 0

At the time, he was actually the lesser of two evils. Of course, in retrospect, it certainly doesn't seem like a good idea, but on the other hand, at the time, anything was preferable to letting the Soviets expand.

2007-10-12 14:54:43 · answer #8 · answered by Jadis 6 · 0 3

George H W Bush

btw the reason George W was so sure Saddam had all those WMD's was his fatrher still had the receipts!!

2007-10-12 14:51:27 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 5 1

Look through the Bushes, they are sure to hiding in there, somewhere.

2007-10-12 14:51:17 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

fedest.com, questions and answers