Terrorist Victory In Spain

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by GePap


Yes, it did, which was destroyed during the war that the west and the saudis helped bankroll. A lot of that infrastructure had been paid for by the soviets, as both the US and USSR helped build p afghanistan to curry favor.

Excuse me, the USSR invaded and used force.. causing the Afghans to backlash.

Also take the airport I think it is in Kabul (or Kandahar) it is US built (and still is standing and has a 50s/60s era look to it).

[GePap]

Originally posted by Giancarlo
Excuse me, the USSR invaded and used force.. causing the Afghans to backlash.]

How perceptive of you...

Also take the airport I think it is in Kabul (or Kandahar) it is US built (and still is standing and has a 50s/60s era look to it).

And since I already addressed this point in my post....

[Az]

Somebody had to fight against the Soviets. Sorry that was how the situation was. That last part about the Soviets turning it into a second world country is questionable... like Somalia? Angola? Or how about some of the other soviet backed regimes in Africa?

You mean the other war-torn countries, due to generous funding of "freedom fighters" like UNITA?

Had the Soviet Union suceeded, Afghanistan would have it much better actually, than those. It was connected by land to the Soviet Union.

And it's not like the US didn't know what was going to happen. Let me remind you, these are the times of Saddat Assassination, and the revolution in Iran that was a major blow for BOTH the USSR, and the USA. The USA was wise enough to realise this by supporting Saddam as the smaller of the two evils, but just couldn't resist the temptetion to **** the Soviets, and with them, a country of 20 Million people.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Azazel
You mean the other war-torn countries, due to generous funding of "freedom fighters" like UNITA?

I don't support either the corrupt Angolan regime or UNITA as both committed horrible atrocities. But it was mostly started by the Soviet Union

Had the Soviet Union suceeded, Afghanistan would have it much better actually, than those.

Nope.

The USA was wise enough to realise this by supporting Saddam as the smaller of the two evils, but just couldn't resist the temptetion to **** the Soviets, and with them, a country of 20 Million people.

The USSR also supported Saddam hence his military was mostly Russian built and supplied.

[Az]

I don't support either the corrupt Angolan regime or UNITA as both committed horrible atrocities. But it was mostly started by the Soviet Union

what was started? a break from the usual Corporation-pandering dictatorship, and turning into a more egalitarian, and a less-murdering dictatorship? Yes, this cannot be forgiven. The USA simply HAD to start a 20 year lasting civil war with millions dead.

Nope.

Good rebuttal of my arguments. You truly are a cunning debater.

The USSR also supported Saddam hence his military was mostly Russian built and supplied.

No denial of that.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Azazel
what was started? a break from the usual Corporation-pandering dictatorship, and turning into a more egalitarian, and a less-murdering dictatorship? Yes, this cannot be forgiven. The USA simply HAD to start a 20 year lasting civil war with millions dead.

WOW. You really are full of bull****. Now you are supporting the USSR... sad.. really sad indeed. The USSR started the war in Angola, more specifically Cuba, a satellite state of the USSR. The big bad US did this, did that.. blahblahblahblah.. do you have anything new to say other than the typical anti-capitalist rants (even though you use the system yourself hypocrite)?

[Az]

WOW. You really are full of bull****. Now you are supporting the USSR... sad.. really sad indeed. The USSR started the war in Angola, more specifically Cuba, a satellite state of the USSR. The big bad US did this, did that.. blahblahblahblah.. do you have anything new to say other than the typical anti-capitalist rants (even though you use the system yourself hypocrite)?

Try actually adressing my arguments.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Azazel

WOW. You really are full of bull****. Now you are supporting the USSR... sad.. really sad indeed. The USSR started the war in Angola, more specifically Cuba, a satellite state of the USSR. The big bad US did this, did that.. blahblahblahblah.. do you have anything new to say other than the typical anti-capitalist rants (even though you use the system yourself hypocrite)?

Try actually adressing my arguments.

Try by actually making an argument.

[GePap]

Afghanistan would most certainly have been better of had the soviet backed communist government had won over a coalition of religious fundamentalist tribal chiefs. Much of afghanistan was destroyed after the USSR pulled out-for example, the city of Kabul, than while the soviets were there. Women in communist countries generally do not have to wear head to toe robes.

NOw, might the Soviet union lasted abit longer without a deblacle in Afghanistan? Who knows-but certainly, if we assume the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan as a given, the people there would have been better of with the other side winning. Only Fez' twisted black and white view of the world - and a general ignorance, drives him to say they were better of the other way.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by GePap
Afghanistan would most certainly have been better of had the soviet backed communist government had won over a coalition of religious fundamentalist tribal chiefs.

Much of Afghanistan was destroyed during the invasion.

Only Fez' twisted black and white view of the world - and a general ignorance, drives him to say they were better of the other way.

You think a stupid commie view like the one you hold is better? I think not.

[Az]

I say:

Had the Soviet Union suceeded, Afghanistan would have it much better actually, than those. It was connected by land to the Soviet Union.

Thus I mean that through easy transportation, the SU could've raised the infrastructure much easier than in Angola, for example.

your answer to that argument is:

Nope

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Pax Africanus
So what happened to the Mujahedeen? Where did they go? was OSL a Mujahedeen?

Yes he was. Most of them went back to their homes after the Soviets were driven out. Afterall, that was the point of them going. I am speaking of the people from all over the world who went to fight the Soviets, not the home grown war lords.

It was a jihad. Many people went who wanted to fight real soldiers with weapons who were invading a Muslim state. That does not mean they all were predisposed to becoming butchers of civies with homicide bomings. Yes, some of the homicidal bent went as well, that does not mean that the lot of them or their cause in that case should be painted with the terrorist brush.

Just a question, do you consider the VC who took on American combat troops to have been terrorists?

[Giancarlo]

nevermind.. I have a bf to attend to.. later..

[Az]

Yes he was. Most of them went back to their homes after the Soviets were driven out. Afterall, that was the point of them going. I am speaking of the people from all over the world who went to fight the Soviets, not the home grown war lords.

It was a jihad. Many people went who wanted to fight real soldiers with weapons who were invading a Muslim state. That does not mean they all were predisposed to becoming butchers of civies with homicide bomings. Yes, some of the homicidal bent went as well, that does not mean that the lot of them or their cause in that case should be painted with the terrorist brush.

Just a question, do you consider the VC who took on American combat troops to have been terrorists?

That's the whole point: from the point of view of the rights of women, personal freedoms, egalitarian society:

North Vietnam > South Vietnam.
Soviet State >> Mujahedeen.

It's THAT simple.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Giancarlo
Much of Afghanistan was destroyed during the invasion.

You really are ignorant.

"the invasion" was done and over with in a few days. The soviets came in, installed the member of the communist party they wanted in power, and secured most of the country. It was AFTER the soviets had secured most cities that IN THE COUNTRYSIDE conservative villagers objected to the foreing troops and the liberalizing commie ideas (like women reading) and begun to strike back. During the war that followed a lot of villages were destroyed, as well as roads and so forth-but the cities remained in the control of the soviets and their puppets the whole time. After the USSR pulls out in 1989 the Mujahadeen leaders then march of the remants of the communist government take the cities. THEN they begin fighting among themselves, and this is when places like Kabul get destroyed. In 1979 there were over 240 factories in Afghanistan. BY 1999 there were 2.

You think a stupid commie view like the one you hold is better? I think not.

No, I think my ability to actually make a coherent point, give suporting evidence or an arguement that is not simply an assertion makes me better.