9 ms·
Freedom fighters in the 80's, Terrorists now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahideen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahideen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
by kelvin0 5y ago
Freedom fighters in the 80's, Terrorists now.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahideen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahideen
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban%27s_rise_to_power https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban%27s_rise_to_power
"Although no documentation has officially surfaced that the CIA directly supported the Taliban or Al Qaeda, some basis for military support of the Taliban was provided when, in the early 1980s, the CIA and the ISI (Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency) provided arms to Afghans resisting the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and the ISI assisted the process of gathering radical Muslims from around the world to fight against the Soviets.[11] Osama bin Laden was one of the key players in organizing training camps for the foreign Arab volunteers"
- EarthIsHome 5y agoA US company wanted to build a pipeline through Afghanistan in the 90s. Since the Taliban was in control of the area, the US tried to work with them to build the pipeline, but the Taliban didn't didn't agree with having a pipeline through their territory. So, the US went to war for the pipeline, and now, in the past couple of years, the pipeline is being built under the Taliban.
- bluejekyll 5y agoForgive my ignorance, but this is the first I heard of this. Do you have any sources that back up this assertion?
- randomopining 5y agoHe probably doesn't. It's just a mumbo jumbo of something he read on a message board, convoluted after a few years of posting the same thing on multiple boards.
- stephen_g 5y agoI think they mean the TAPI pipeline [1]. I do recall reading something about Taliban representatives being flown to Washington about it before the negotiations broke down due to the embassy bombings. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkmenistan–Afghanistan–Pakistan–India_Pipeline https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkmenistan–Afghanistan–Pakis...
- launchaway 5y ago> So, the US went to war for the pipeline While a tempting thought, no single pipeline is economically viable with $800B in expenses
- buildamedschool 5y agoTurkmenistan–Afghanistan–Pakistan–India Pipeline #History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkmenistan%E2%80%93Afghanistan%E2%80%93Pakistan%E2%80%93India_Pipeline#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkmenistan%E2%80%93Afghanist... Afghanistan Oil Pipeline https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan_Oil_Pipeline https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan_Oil_Pipeline https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reign_Over_Me https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reign_Over_Me Keystone XL Pipeline https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keystone_Pipeline#Issues https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keystone_Pipeline#Issues #Issues, #Protest and opposition, Total Carbon, Aquifer valuation, Total Long Term Costs and Benefits
- teachrdan 5y agoThe original ending of the movie Rambo 3 ended with the following: "This film is dedicated to the brave Mujahideen fighters of Afghanistan." https://youtu.be/Cx4ey-EmLm4?t=553 https://youtu.be/Cx4ey-EmLm4?t=553
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- hnaccy 5y agoThe video you linked claims it's a hoax.
- pgalvin 5y agoFor those who don’t watch the video, this was actually an internet hoax. The end credits never said this.
- teachrdan 5y agoMy apologies! Thank you for pointing this out.
- fellellor 5y agoNo. I clearly remember seeing that in the end credits, when I first watched Rambo 3 on TV, in the late 90s. Rambo 3 was a great movie and I liked it more than the first one, because I was a kid back then. I remember it clearly because that was the first movie I saw exploding arrows. I don’t know if the explosive arrows were made famous in Rambo 3 or in Predator. In any case I watched quite a few reruns of Rambo 3 on TV, and they clearly had that dedicated to mujahideen fighters message in the end credits.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- truetraveller 5y agoNot a hoax. This was on the VHS release of Rambo. "The dedication on the VHS release of the film said "to the brave Mujahideen fighters". It was later changed to "to the gallant people of Afghanistan"." See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rambo_III https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rambo_III
- gunfighthacksaw 5y agoMost of my life, all of many Zoomers’ lives. Twenty years, surpassing even Vietnam. All that money wasted, all those dead civilians, all those broken soldiers. All of it for absolutely nothing. What an abhorrent clown world we live in.
- crazy_horse 5y agoWhat's with the hyperbole? That's still 20 years of attempted infrastructure and education. I knew at least one person in graduate school that would not have been there. Just because this is a tragedy doesn't mean everything is dead.
- Justsignedup 5y agoThen titans fight, it is those who live under their feet who suffer most.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago>All of it for absolutely nothing. Well we did send a strong message about choosing one's house guests wisely. But that message was delivered a decade ago.
- echelon 5y agoShould we have kept 10,000 US soldiers on the ground permanently to prevent this? Seems like a very small cost. Perhaps the US could have purchased land from Afghanistan, which isn't so much of a unified country anyway. They could have established permanent bases from which they could aid the Afghanistan government and project power against other regional adversaries (ie. China, Iran, and "ally" Pakistan). The monetary injection would have helped too. There's no way this pull out doesn't look bad for the Biden administration. This is going to be a major election year topic and we're going to hear how Democrats "hate women" and freedom. What a quagmire.
- ch4s3 5y agoYou might be interested to do a deep dive on the on again off again relationship between Uighur militias and the Taliban. The WSJ and antiwar.com both have some coverage. Really complicated but fascinating stuff. Apparently the Bush era neo-cons we funneling money to Uighur militias with plans to activate them against the CCP at a later date. However they later joined up with the Taliban against NATO, and briefly with DAESH in Syria. While at the same time elements of the Taliban were fighting alongside US forces in Syria agains DAESH, Asad, and those same Uighurs. The US war machine will truly do business with ANYBODY. [EDIT] I'd be interested to hear why anyone takes exception to this. The remarks about US support of Uighur militants should be noted as a pre 9/11 policy. Post 9/11 the Bush administration designated them terrorists to gain Chinese support against the Taliban. And the funneling money claim is I think indirectly supported, but I'm open to counter claims. [EDIT 2] It's a bit odd that people keep downvoting this but have nothing to say about it. It's unambiguously true that we (meaning our government in the US) fund militias for proxy wars then often fight against them and realign with them across time and geography. We aren't very discerning and we're more focused on the broader geopolitics of the proxy wars. It's dumb and bad.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- yyyk 5y agoThe Taliban didn't even exist in the 1980s, and was founded partially as a response to the 1980s people fighting amongst themselves.
- baybal2 5y agoNominally, around 1993-1995, but Omar and co. group was around since 1985-1987 for sure.