2007-10-21 21:17:11 · 15 answers · asked by Dangerous 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
100% true. They were funded and aid by the US during the Reagan administration to fight the Soviets in Afganastan, but turned against us during the Gulf War.
2007-10-21 21:30:59 · answer #1 · answered by xg6 7 · 6⤊ 8⤋
Al quada was created after the Russians left Afghanistan. So not created by either man. Why do you libs have an objection to opposing the spread of communism? Seems to me that during the early 70s and 80s that's all Democrats did was to make excuses for the Soviets and back whatever they did. We helped the Afghans drive them out, seemed like the correct thing to do at the time.
2016-05-24 03:16:58 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wrong! Al Qaeda and the Taliban were not created by Reagan. Quit listening to the media idiots who feed you a diet of dried out nonsense.
Is Katie Couric going to tell you along with Ted Turner how bad they feel for those brave terrorists who were driven by us to do the cowardly acts of 9/11?
2007-10-22 00:06:18 · answer #3 · answered by Moody Red 6 · 0⤊ 6⤋
Yes. This is exactly what is referred to as 'blow back'. We butt into other country's business and change things for our own short term benefit and benefit we do. Then decades later our interventionism comes back and bites us in the behind. Our government's politically motivated blind support of Israel will someday come back and bite us in the rear in the same way, but unfortunately we've provided them with the big stuff and our regret will be on a much larger scale.
The only candidtae who so bravely addresses our failed foreign policies is Ron Paul.
2007-10-22 01:16:11 · answer #4 · answered by TJTB 7 · 3⤊ 3⤋
If at all - even at a stretch - inadvertently and unwittingly , yes.
However, Clinton knew full well about their atrocities and revision to terrorism and did absolutely nothing about it throughout his 8 years - all of which they were fully active.
He single-handed and most definitely contributed more to both the Al-Qaeda and Taliban that we all know today than any other president in our history.
2007-10-21 22:01:14 · answer #5 · answered by wider scope 7 · 4⤊ 6⤋
Let me help educate you.
Bin Laden was NOT a resistence fighter while the Soviets were in Afghanistan. He was doing exactly what the CIA was doing.. gun running. He was not funded by the US, and Al Qaeda didn't exist yet.
2007-10-21 23:51:55 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 7⤋
Taliban: No - just funded
Al Qaida: Yes. - USA major reason
And the only falls, Reagan was responsible for, were, Carter
backstabbed in office by treasonous Bushites negotiating with
the former hostage taker and actual Iranian president - maybe
even giving away the liberation plans in panic, Carter could get
re-elected upon success and, the autumn of American culture.
2007-10-21 21:46:29 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 10⤊ 7⤋
Yes in a way we did. We aided them in order to fight a Soviet invasion of their country.
It just goes to show you that like a liberal, helping them is no assurance that they will not try to kill you also when they no longer need you.
2007-10-21 23:08:32 · answer #8 · answered by Tommy G. 5 · 4⤊ 4⤋
Well it was more Bush Sr, he was in charge of the CIA and was responcible for a whole darn lot of dodgy things!
The guy above me is right too- the CIA funded, armed and trained them to fight Soviets.
2007-10-21 21:25:24 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 9⤊ 5⤋
The republicans have demonstrated again and again that they do not read history. As far as they're concerned Al Qaeda is filled with islamo fascists, Lincoln freed the slaves out of morality, and Dolly Parton's t*i*t*s have always been real. Yes, I think it is safe to say that although the liberals are stupid as hell too, the republicans write their own history books, and quote them as well.
2007-10-21 21:39:37 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 9⤋