Yes you did. Ask the CIA.
I suppose you have evidence to present CLEARLY DETAILING the ties that you assert?
Steve Coll, who wrote "Ghost Wars", was unable to discover any. And if anyone had the access to former and current CIA sources, it would be him.
Yes, that's right. One of the ways that that unfolded was that we, from the beginning of our engagement with Afghanistan, never grappled with Afghanistan as a place, Afghanistan as a people, Afghanistan as a polity. We just were there to challenge the Soviet Union. So, we poured in guns and money but we allowed the Pakistanis to shape the political agenda on the frontier, to choose who would be the leaders of the resistance, what methods of assassination, sabotage, and guerrilla war would be acceptable. We essentially supported their agenda and reinforced it without ever understanding or attempting to shape Afghan leadership in the resistance that might be more consonant with Afghan national traditions, more friendly to the United States, and just more sensible all around.
globetrotter.berkeley.edu
globetrotter.berkeley.edu
What YOU FAIL TO RECOGNIZE Sarman, is that Bin Ladin was ALREADY fabulously wealthy and didn't need to "sully" himself by being some kind of paid operative of the CIA.
Peter Bergen, who conducted the first western interview with Bin Ladin in 1997, sounds like a pretty credible source and he says that OBL/CIA connection is "hogwash":
cnn.com
Oh there is a big deference. The Lebanese democracy was created after Lebanon independence from the French. Iraq is still occupied by the US. Like or not, this is how Iraq is viewed by Iraqis as occupation.
Not at all.. Lebanon was occupied for 30 years by the Syrians, a nation that didn't even recognize Lebanon as a sovereign country. Even when the Lebanese people wanted them to leave, the Syrians refused to go, and instead increased their support for Hizbullah. I don't suspect that's the case with the current Iraq-US relationship. Were the Iraqi government to demand that we leave, we'd have little recourse but to comply.
Isn't that what every one wants.
Doesn't sound as if you do when you justify the destruction of entire countries.. especially democratic ones like Israel.
Isn't that correct? Isn't it true that you'd like nothing better than to see Israel destroyed by the Arabs?
Even if so called "Islamo-Fascist" get elected, you have to respect the will of the majority of the people.
So you believe in a tyranny of the majority, eh?? No minority rights to be preserved? No freedom of opposition?
Can the "will of the people" be respected when it calls for denying equal representation for the minorities?
Democracy is not truly democracy when it is required to sign a political "suicide pact".
Hawk |
