The U.S. military's aid to the mujahadeen in the 1980's guaranteed a hell of a lot more than that. And not much of it was in any way good.

Oh, I'm sure we could have just sat back and let the Soviets expand their land grab as it tried to slither its way towards the middle east. Seems to be not such a big deal now, but hindsight is 20/20, after all. Realpolitik is a biatch, isn't it?

What? The US is responsible?

SHOCKING!!

Nabb1: Seems to be not such a big deal now, but hindsight is 20/20, after all.

Yes, hindsight is 20/20, and things that were very muddy then certainly seem clear now.

What disturbs me are the astonishing number of people in this country who simply refuse to want to learn anything from history. Or accept that the history even exists to be learned from.

Pocket Ninja: Nabb1: Seems to be not such a big deal now, but hindsight is 20/20, after all.

Yes, hindsight is 20/20, and things that were very muddy then certainly seem clear now.

What disturbs me are the astonishing number of people in this country who simply refuse to want to learn anything from history. Or accept that the history even exists to be learned from.

Same people that believe that we did nothing to induce the 9/11 other than being free.

Pocket Ninja: Nabb1: Seems to be not such a big deal now, but hindsight is 20/20, after all.

Yes, hindsight is 20/20, and things that were very muddy then certainly seem clear now.

What disturbs me are the astonishing number of people in this country who simply refuse to want to learn anything from history. Or accept that the history even exists to be learned from.

That and the fact that even well-intended acts can have both good and bad consequences. Our involvement in Afghanistan was a mixed bag of good and bad results. That's how it goes with most proxy wars.

So I guess the Taliban took Rambo III too seriously?

Nabb1

Oh, I'm sure we could have just sat back and let the Soviets expand their land grab

Get their asses kicked is more like it. No one has ever fared well in Afghanistan for at least the past several hundred years. Even the British at the height of their empire couldn't control the place.

Nabb1: Oh, I'm sure we could have just sat back and let the Soviets expand their land grab as it tried to slither its way towards the middle east. Seems to be not such a big deal now, but hindsight is 20/20, after all. Realpolitik is a biatch, isn't it?

Yeap. People only live in the present. In the '80s everything took a backseat to our convoluted chess game with the Soviets, and now that that policy has had negative consequences we criticize foreign interventionism (albeit with plenty of justification.) But it was easy to justify the Russian threat, too. Who knows. In some circuitous way, supporting the Mujahedeen might have prevented nuclear holocaust.

Senescent Dawn: In some circuitous way, supporting the Mujahedeen might have prevented nuclear holocaust.

I think in some sense it did. Hopefully it didn't just delay it. There at least was some weird sense of security in detente and mutually assured destruction, wasn't there? Now, with Russia not sure where all of its arsenal went, and Iran's rush to become a member of the nuclear weapons club, instability within Pakistan and recent sabre-rattling with India - another nuclear power - over Kashmir... Good times.

Nabb1: Oh, I'm sure we could have just sat back and let the Soviets expand their land grab as it tried to slither its way towards the middle east. Seems to be not such a big deal now, but hindsight is 20/20, after all. Realpolitik is a biatch, isn't it?

Yep. Unintended consequences are a biatch, but to expect American foreign policy to either be (a) consistent over time or (b) taking a long term approach is naivety. The nature of our two party system, passing the Presidency back and forth, means that its almost guaranteed that we will not have a stable and lasting comprehensive foreign policy strategy. Some things will stay the same over time (relations with Britain or Cuba for example), but others will take moves that they believe to be correct that may end up having unintended consequences (like arming the mujahedeen).

Nabb1: Now, with Russia not sure where all of its arsenal went, and Iran's rush to become a member of the nuclear weapons club, instability within Pakistan and recent sabre-rattling with India - another nuclear power - over Kashmir...

This is the reason I support most efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons technology. The more actors who have access to these weapons, the more likely it is they will be used.

Speaking of nuclear holocaust, I recently tried to turn in my geomapper module data to Reilly's Rangers at their compound, and they've gone hostile on me. WTF? My karma level is at "paragon." Any other Fallout 3 addicts have this happen? I've got to finish this game before my son can make out the pretty colors on the TV screen and I have to start playing tamer games again.

KaponoFor3

The more actors who have access to these weapons, the more likely it is they will be used

Considering how unstable Pakistan is, it's only a matter of time before India gets nuked. That would wake some people up.

Whether you think the actions were wrong or right, well-intentioned or malicious, the effects can't be denied and we shouldn't simply ignore them. That's what I hate about this whole argument.

It's not kneejerk America-blaming to look back at history and realize, "Yes, these things we did have resulted in the situation we are in now." Al Qaeda and the Taliban didn't spring fully-formed out of Muhammed's forehead. Before the end of the Cold War, we funded, trained, and armed these people.

Nabb1 and KaponoFor3, I'm not accusing either of you of this, but far too often when this point comes up in a discussion, whether it's on a message board or with right-wing pundits, the response is almost always, "Oh, you're a blame America firster. You hate America. You blame us for these evil people." I would love discussion about what we could have done instead, what things would have been like if we hadn't acted, and what we can do now to mitigate the effects of our actions, but we simply cannot have that discussion as long as so many people get defensive and close their ears as soon as the point comes up.

Hell, the payoffs and collaborations we've been attempting in Iraq could very well turn out to be terrible deals with devils a decade or two in the future when power shifts.

The problem with Afghanistan wasn't that we armed the crazies against the russians. It was that after the russians pulled out we just farked off.

This is basically because a large portion of people in power have more of a hard on for war than they do for building schools and government institutions - they don't actually give a shiat about the consequences.

Nabb1: Speaking of nuclear holocaust, I recently tried to turn in my geomapper module data to Reilly's Rangers at their compound, and they've gone hostile on me. WTF? My karma level is at "paragon." Any other Fallout 3 addicts have this happen? I've got to finish this game before my son can make out the pretty colors on the TV screen and I have to start playing tamer games again.

I have become a Fallout 3 addict but haven't got that far in the game yet. I'm planning on playing some serious hours this weekend so I'll let you know if anything like that ever happens to me.

Bloody William: Whether you think the actions were wrong or right, well-intentioned or malicious, the effects can't be denied and we shouldn't simply ignore them

Oh, I absolutely agree 100%. That's part of learning from past history. To not examine the effects of the actions taken by past leaders would be foolish. It's like the NFL draft -- you can't really grade a team's draft until 3-4 years after the fact. With matters of foreign policy, that sometimes will take 10-20 years.

Hell, the payoffs and collaborations we've been attempting in Iraq could very well turn out to be terrible deals with devils a decade or two in the future when power shifts.

An unfortunate truth. I'm personally worried that once we get a large portion of our troops out of the country, al-Sadr will take power by force and we will see a proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia through their respective sectarian brothers in Iraq. It would lead to lots and lots of death, but perhaps it wouldn't be a bad thing for the US for the militant Islamic radicals that both countries harbor to fight each other instead of the US?

From the time the Soviets were driven out of Afghanistan until 2001, no one paid much attention to Afghanistan. It wasn't the formation of the Taliban that was troublesome, they were nomadic herders with no ambitions beyond the boundaries of Afgh and only formed under Mullah Omar to dismantle the corrupt police roadblocks. They may have been, and they remain, pig-ignorant zealots with a world-view that has not yet risen to the level of 'medieval', but they certainly did not pose an iota of an international threat.

It was only when bin Laden started augmenting their ranks with the Saudis, setting up training camps and ensuring Afgh would achieve international pariah status through actions like blowing up the Buddahs - to make reconciliation with the west impossible and avoid getting kicked out of that country like he did from Sudan - that things went to hell and stayed there. But no one was paying attention.

I saw that movie. Phillip Seynmour Hoffman kicked ass in it.

Nonsense. Our chief export is freedom.

Nabb1: Speaking of nuclear holocaust, I recently tried to turn in my geomapper module data to Reilly's Rangers at their compound, and they've gone hostile on me. WTF? My karma level is at "paragon." Any other Fallout 3 addicts have this happen? I've got to finish this game before my son can make out the pretty colors on the TV screen and I have to start playing tamer games again.

I understand they hate Fawks. Or so I hear. You might have also been caught stealing, or otherwise annoyed them. You only get caps for it anyway. I have like 45k caps, so whatever. Ya know?

Bloody William: Whether you think the actions were wrong or right, well-intentioned or malicious, the effects can't be denied and we shouldn't simply ignore them. That's what I hate about this whole argument.

It's not kneejerk America-blaming to look back at history and realize, "Yes, these things we did have resulted in the situation we are in now." Al Qaeda and the Taliban didn't spring fully-formed out of Muhammed's forehead. Before the end of the Cold War, we funded, trained, and armed these people.

Nabb1 and KaponoFor3, I'm not accusing either of you of this, but far too often when this point comes up in a discussion, whether it's on a message board or with right-wing pundits, the response is almost always, "Oh, you're a blame America firster. You hate America. You blame us for these evil people." I would love discussion about what we could have done instead, what things would have been like if we hadn't acted, and what we can do now to mitigate the effects of our actions, but we simply cannot have that discussion as long as so many people get defensive and close their ears as soon as the point comes up.

Hell, the payoffs and collaborations we've been attempting in Iraq could very well turn out to be terrible deals with devils a decade or two in the future when power shifts.

No, I think at the time, considering recent history and the political environment, helping the Mujahadeen was the right call. We couldn't have foreseen, at least not with any real confidence, the rise of the Taliban in the rather extreme form it took on. Also, yes, many of the members of al Qaeda were Mujahadeen, but not all Mujahadeen joined al Qaeda. That said, I don't know that if the Soviets had stuck around longer than they did or even eventually won that one could say with any degree of confidence that the lot of women in Afghanistan would be any better. As for mitigation, well, I'd say we have to straighten out the military issues first, otherwise there won't be a stable environment to foster any political progress. Which is why I'm glad to see Obama has committed 21,000 additional troops to Afghanistan. I think he needs to go on a full court press there, quickly.

WRONG subby.

The Afghanistan resistance was a large group of different organizations, with many different agendas.

Plus, it was the Afghanis themselves who chose that treatment. The US had nothing to do with.

It's not like they thought "Well, we WERE going to make sure women have equal rights, but since the US gave us money, lets oppress them"

40below: But no one was paying attention.

Somebody was but I recall being told he was just "wagging the dog".

Nabb1: Speaking of nuclear holocaust, I recently tried to turn in my geomapper module data to Reilly's Rangers at their compound, and they've gone hostile on me. WTF? My karma level is at "paragon." Any other Fallout 3 addicts have this happen? I've got to finish this game before my son can make out the pretty colors on the TV screen and I have to start playing tamer games again.

sounds like a bug, did you happen to accidently hit on of them with your bullets?

It was a choice of the lesser of two evils unfortunately. At the time there were soviets in helicopters shooting at villages and land mines made to look appealing to kids. Its too bad we couldn't find any better people to back.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Rule #1 of human relations:

If a wrong has been performed on some party, at the most base level the person with the most power has a proportionate level of responsibility with the amount of power he has relative to the other members of the group.

In other words, the buck stops here. The US is the undisputed king of power in the world. Hardly anything happens to us on an international level that isn't blowback in some way.

Tickle Mittens: Nabb1: Speaking of nuclear holocaust, I recently tried to turn in my geomapper module data to Reilly's Rangers at their compound, and they've gone hostile on me. WTF? My karma level is at "paragon." Any other Fallout 3 addicts have this happen? I've got to finish this game before my son can make out the pretty colors on the TV screen and I have to start playing tamer games again.

I understand they hate Fawks. Or so I hear. You might have also been caught stealing, or otherwise annoyed them. You only get caps for it anyway. I have like 45k caps, so whatever. Ya know?

Yeah, I haven't gotten Fawkes yet. The first time it happened, I showed up with Charon and thought they were just attacking him. So, I went back to my last save and went alone - same thing. Then I went back and started at a saving point before I even "bought" Charon. Same thing. The only thing I can think is I stumbled on the leftovers of a firefight in the wastes that left some Super Mutants and Donovan dead, and I took Donovan's armor. None of the other Rangers were around when that happened, though. But, I chose the perk that makes you find caps more easily a long time ago, and my cash flow isn't that much of an issue. Now, if I could just keep from breaking those damned bobby pins.

Of course, the Afghan men themselves have absolutely no responsibility whatsoever that the place is a grade A shiathole in more ways than I care to even think about.

It clearly must be ze americans fault.

Nabb1: Oh, I'm sure we could have just sat back and let the Soviets expand their land grab as it tried to slither its way towards the middle east. Seems to be not such a big deal now, but hindsight is 20/20, after all. Realpolitik is a biatch, isn't it?

That's not Realpolitik at all. That's the exact opposite. The Soviets invaded for ideological reasons, and we intervened for ideological reasons.

That's why it turned out bad for the both of us.

The idea the Soviet's invaded for strategic purposes was debunked when the Soviet Union fell and the internal documents emerged that showed it was just another pointless Vietnam.


You like to think you're rational, but believing the blind faith of 1980's neo-cons is not the way to do it.

Podna: Nabb1: Speaking of nuclear holocaust, I recently tried to turn in my geomapper module data to Reilly's Rangers at their compound, and they've gone hostile on me. WTF? My karma level is at "paragon." Any other Fallout 3 addicts have this happen? I've got to finish this game before my son can make out the pretty colors on the TV screen and I have to start playing tamer games again.

sounds like a bug, did you happen to accidently hit on of them with your bullets?

Nah, like I said, the only thing I can think of is I took Donovan's armor after some muties killed him in a firefight. I was too far away to help and got there at the tail end and mopped up the last remaining mutant. Donovan was already dead. I didn't think it was a big deal after looting Theo for all he was worth when I rescued them from the hospital.

I love how people are agreeing with Carter's foreign policy.

Nabb1: Oh, I'm sure we could have just sat back and let the Soviets expand their land grab as it tried to slither its way towards the middle east. Seems to be not such a big deal now, but hindsight is 20/20, after all. Realpolitik is a biatch, isn't it?

Or, one could have realized just how retarded 'Domino Theory' was to begin with, and just let the Soviet ambitions peter out on their own.

Does this mean that FDR is responsible for Stalin's murdering of millions?

Nabb1: Oh, I'm sure we could have just sat back and let the Soviets expand their land grab as it tried to slither its way towards the middle east. Seems to be not such a big deal now, but hindsight is 20/20, after all. Realpolitik is a biatch, isn't it?

The problem with this theory is that WE actually instigated the Soviet invasion in hopes that we'd be creating a Vietnam War scenario for the USSR. It worked. Maybe it played a role in bringing down the USSR, but it had the unfortunate side effect of creating the Taliban.

DarnoKonrad: You like to think you're rational, but believing the blind faith of 1980's neo-cons is not the way to do it.

I'm not even going to discuss this with you. I find you completely incapable of discussing this without being inflammatory, judging by that sentence. Grow up. You aren't on my ignore list, but you may consider yourself there for this thread.

LEAVE SAINT REAGAN ALONE!

Nabb1: helping the Mujahadeen was the right call

No it wasn't. If they had lost, the Soviets just would have acquired another dependent whose major export is rocks.

It was exceedingly stupid on their part and ours.

Nabb1: Podna: Nabb1: Speaking of nuclear holocaust, I recently tried to turn in my geomapper module data to Reilly's Rangers at their compound, and they've gone hostile on me. WTF? My karma level is at "paragon." Any other Fallout 3 addicts have this happen? I've got to finish this game before my son can make out the pretty colors on the TV screen and I have to start playing tamer games again.

sounds like a bug, did you happen to accidently hit on of them with your bullets?

Nah, like I said, the only thing I can think of is I took Donovan's armor after some muties killed him in a firefight. I was too far away to help and got there at the tail end and mopped up the last remaining mutant. Donovan was already dead. I didn't think it was a big deal after looting Theo for all he was worth when I rescued them from the hospital.

Have you tried the DLC yet? "the pit" was pretty fun for me, going to head to area for ankorage DLC eventually, need to finish RE5

Nabb1: DarnoKonrad: You like to think you're rational, but believing the blind faith of 1980's neo-cons is not the way to do it.

I'm not even going to discuss this with you. I find you completely incapable of discussing this without being inflammatory, judging by that sentence. Grow up. You aren't on my ignore list, but you may consider yourself there for this thread.

You ever read your own posts Nabb1? Why don't you drag some people's mother's into it?

Better'n third-class.

I'll just leave this here:

On July 3, 1979, US President Jimmy Carter signed an executive order authorizing the CIA to conduct covert propaganda operations against the communist regime.

Carter advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski stated: "According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the mujahideen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, December 24, 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise." Brzezinski himself played a fundamental role in crafting US policy, which, unbeknownst even to the mujahideen, was part of a larger strategy "to induce a Soviet military intervention." In a 1998 interview with Le Nouvel Observateur, Brzezinski recalled: "We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would...That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Soviets into the Afghan trap...The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the Soviet Union its Vietnam War."[20]

Additionally, on July 3, 1979, Carter signed a presidential finding authorizing funding for anticommunist guerrillas in Afghanistan.[21] As a part of the Central Intelligence Agency program Operation Cyclone, the massive arming of Afghanistan's mujahideen was started.

source

I think our "leaders" do a 100% brain wipe every 4-5 years or so. It's like they forget everything that happens in the world so quickly.

DarnoKonrad: Nabb1: helping the Mujahadeen was the right call

No it wasn't. If they had lost, the Soviets just would have acquired another dependent whose major export is rocks.

It was exceedingly stupid on their part and ours.

Not to mention the way the Mujahedeen were helped - I guess it just never occurred to anyone that funneling large amounts of money and arms through a government headed by an Islamic fundamentalist dictator might not be the best way to go about things.

I'm so sick of you "Blame America First" people. If you don't like the way we arm, train and fund terrorists in this country than get the fark out.

Nabb1: Tickle Mittens: Nabb1: Speaking of nuclear holocaust, I recently tried to turn in my geomapper module data to Reilly's Rangers at their compound, and they've gone hostile on me. WTF? My karma level is at "paragon." Any other Fallout 3 addicts have this happen? I've got to finish this game before my son can make out the pretty colors on the TV screen and I have to start playing tamer games again.

I understand they hate Fawks. Or so I hear. You might have also been caught stealing, or otherwise annoyed them. You only get caps for it anyway. I have like 45k caps, so whatever. Ya know?

Yeah, I haven't gotten Fawkes yet. The first time it happened, I showed up with Charon and thought they were just attacking him. So, I went back to my last save and went alone - same thing. Then I went back and started at a saving point before I even "bought" Charon. Same thing. The only thing I can think is I stumbled on the leftovers of a firefight in the wastes that left some Super Mutants and Donovan dead, and I took Donovan's armor. None of the other Rangers were around when that happened, though. But, I chose the perk that makes you find caps more easily a long time ago, and my cash flow isn't that much of an issue. Now, if I could just keep from breaking those damned bobby pins.

That might have been it, sometimes if you take from something that's not yours the script engine can give instantanious knowledge about it to interested parties. Well, the only thing you're missing out on is the ranger armor (which is what I use even in preference to tesla power armor or prototype medic powerarmor), and Eugene which I gave to Charon (stole Eugene). Vengence is much better anyway, though gatling lasers are pretty rare.

I had a similar kind of thing happen with the slavers in Paradise Falls. So I killed them. F them in their A's. Although killing the rangers might jack your karma, not sure about that.

Biological Ali: Or, one could have realized just how retarded 'Domino Theory' was to begin with, and just let the Soviet ambitions peter out on their own.

The "domino theory" had more to do with countries embracing communism from within, hence our incursion into SE Asia and our covert involvement in Central and South America. The Soviets' interest in the middle east and surrounding area was all about resources. Maybe the Soviets would have fallen on their own, but it's impossible to say for sure, and would have been a gamble at the time.

Edsel: The problem with this theory is that WE actually instigated the Soviet invasion in hopes that we'd be creating a Vietnam War scenario for the USSR. It worked. Maybe it played a role in bringing down the USSR, but it had the unfortunate side effect of creating the Taliban.

Unintended consequences. As I said, you couldn't look into a crystal ball and know for sure what threat was looming twenty years down the road. The debate for historians is whether the trade-off, on balance, was better or worse. The chapter of the Soviet Empire is closed (or, it appears to be for now). The struggle against the Taliban is ongoing.

The people solely responsible for the oppression of these women are their direct oppressors.



/the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

MugzyBrown: Does this mean that FDR is responsible for Stalin's murdering of millions?

Yup! and Walt Disney and Hitler...Same thing!