4 ms·

I thought that was clear from me saying “The Pakistani ISI, and the US by proxy,”. If it wasn’t clear, the US (specifically the CIA) absolutely provided money a

I thought that was clear from me saying “The Pakistani ISI, and the US by proxy,”. If it wasn’t clear, the US (specifically the CIA) absolutely provided money and equipment to the ISI (basically the Pakistan version of the FBI and CIA for anyone that doesn’t know) for them to use to train and equip mujahedeen fighters. But the ISI was not run by the CIA. Pakistan had, and still has, their own agenda and priorities that do not align with the US. So if you are implying that the ISI funding of the Taliban must have actually been the CIA, that is not supported by the evidence.

eurasiantiger 5y ago
If not funding, how about training and materiel?
- 542354234235 5y ago
  You are like a dog with a bone. As far as I have read anywhere and the available evidence, the CIA did not provide funding, training, or material to the Taliban, and the CIA was specifically pushing to support the Northern Alliance against the Taliban. The ISI backed the Taliban before and after 9/11, both to attempt to have some control over them, and to counter Indian attempts at influence through funding the Northern Alliance. ISI’ funding and support of the Taliban in direct contradiction to US efforts is one of the reasons US-Pakistan relations are severely damaged. None of that is to say the CIA misadventures in Afghanistan before 9/11 were somehow harmless. They handed over briefcases of cash to Jalaluddin Haqqani, who became a key ally of the Taliban and the Haqqani Network he created ended up supplying explosives to the Taliban and lauching highly successful suicide attacks on US forces in Afghanistan. I know people like simple narratives and having someone to blame, but the situation in Afghanistan over the past 40 years is not simple and is not because of the actions of just one country.
  - eurasiantiger 5y ago
    > the situation in Afghanistan over the past 40 years is not simple and is not because of the actions of just one country I never made such claims; starting on an ad hominem and ending on a strawman doesn’t really lend much credibility to what lies in between.
    - 542354234235 5y ago
      I mean, you barely said anything, and the few claims you did make were completely incorrect. It seems like you are just throwing out the one thing you think you know "the CIA funded the Taliban!!!" and when that is completely debunked, you ignore all the information, and go for the "your argument is invalid because you used an informal logical fallacy. Checkmate" card. If you have anything at all of substance to say about the situation in Afghanistan, I'd love to hear it.

eurasiantiger 5y ago

If not funding, how about training and materiel?

542354234235 5y ago
You are like a dog with a bone. As far as I have read anywhere and the available evidence, the CIA did not provide funding, training, or material to the Taliban, and the CIA was specifically pushing to support the Northern Alliance against the Taliban. The ISI backed the Taliban before and after 9/11, both to attempt to have some control over them, and to counter Indian attempts at influence through funding the Northern Alliance. ISI’ funding and support of the Taliban in direct contradiction to US efforts is one of the reasons US-Pakistan relations are severely damaged. None of that is to say the CIA misadventures in Afghanistan before 9/11 were somehow harmless. They handed over briefcases of cash to Jalaluddin Haqqani, who became a key ally of the Taliban and the Haqqani Network he created ended up supplying explosives to the Taliban and lauching highly successful suicide attacks on US forces in Afghanistan. I know people like simple narratives and having someone to blame, but the situation in Afghanistan over the past 40 years is not simple and is not because of the actions of just one country.
- eurasiantiger 5y ago
  > the situation in Afghanistan over the past 40 years is not simple and is not because of the actions of just one country I never made such claims; starting on an ad hominem and ending on a strawman doesn’t really lend much credibility to what lies in between.
  - 542354234235 5y ago
    I mean, you barely said anything, and the few claims you did make were completely incorrect. It seems like you are just throwing out the one thing you think you know "the CIA funded the Taliban!!!" and when that is completely debunked, you ignore all the information, and go for the "your argument is invalid because you used an informal logical fallacy. Checkmate" card. If you have anything at all of substance to say about the situation in Afghanistan, I'd love to hear it.