quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN i think the selective nature that some of you adolescent cry babies use when "researching" is a joke. global politics is a dirty game. there are things that were done, and will be repeated, for as long as the world is not an example of harmonious relations. people like you need to open your eyes and understand that pragmatism is a necessary evil in politics. that's just how it is.

Just because dirty politics have been used effectively in the past is not a sound argument for continuing it. People get hurt, maimed, killed all the time, but that doesn't make it any less wrong or outrageous. Perpetuating such evil will continue to affect us in the future, and will only mean that our children and following generations will have to deal with the aftermath.

quote:

for people like you, its always "oooh, what has the US done..." why is the emphasis on the US' role arming the mujahadeen (sp?) instead of the soviet invasion? why is the US' role in support greater on your one-sided "evil" scale? [quote]its a joke. there's no doubt that the US' influence in the region has come back to bite them, but without using your 5yo hindsight, you tell me how arming defenders that were victim of a soviet invasion was the wrong thing to do at the time.

5 year old? Huh, I don't know any 5 year olds who know about the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, much less any that debate politics. I think your choice of words are a bit arrogant.

And we didn't just simply arm the mujahadeen. We taught them sabotage, assassination, and terrorism. We built schools in Pakistan and even recruited Muslims in the US to do these things. We didn't just teach them to defend themselves. We trained them how to become efficient killing machines. But I suppose in your eyes, spawning evil to defeat evil=good. Also, I never said that the Soviets invading Afghanistan wasn't wrong, but the methods we used to handle the situation was wrong.

quote:

countries all over the world make shitty decision that effect millions of innocent people every year. grow up. there's nothing wrong with being an idealist, but an idealist bereft of realistic understanding is just a do-gooder wanker.

Better a do-gooder wanker than an Orwellian globalist. Again, just because people get hurt due to bad policy-making decisions still doesn't make it any more justifiable. If we really needed to arm the mujahadeen, we could have at least done a better job at which factions to fund who may have been more wiser in their choice in defense tactics, rather than choosing the most vicious and despicable leaders to fight the Soviets.

quote:

you tell me what you would have done sunshine.

How about not getting involved in the first place? I don't have much knowledge in what caused the eventual fall of the USSR (Where's Magnetonium when you need him?) but I'd speculate that it would have fallen anyway without the need to arm the mujahadeen in Afghanistan. I would have still condemned the Soviets for such an attack, and kept strict US embargoes on the USSR, perhaps even send food and supplies to the Afghanis, but I wouldn't have given them any weapons, woudn't have opened up any terrorist schools in Pakistan, and I most certainly would not have funded Hekmatyar. I don't know what the outcome would be, I can not open any portals to dimensions with that alternate future, but at the very least, it's safe to say we wouldn't have such a huge global terrorism problem that we do today. And perhaps the Embassies that were bombed in 1998 might not have happened either. That's what I would do...Sunshine.

Last edited by Zharen on Dec-25-2007 at 04:02