Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (29279)	5/12/2002 12:46:05 AM
From: Rollcast...	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Yes, it would have been difficult... particularly with the state of the military after the 70's.... wishful thinking. Carter had to be the weakest US president of the last 60 years.

To: LindyBill who wrote (29279)	5/12/2002 2:07:13 AM
From: Doc Bones	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Remember how Carter was "Shocked, Shocked," when Russia invaded Afghanistan? I'd agree that Carter was ineffectual, and his grain embargo and Moscow Olympic boycott were much criticized. Reagan, his successor, acted more decisively, and helped to force the Russians out of Afghanistan. But at the price of arming, supporting and training the mujahadeen - radical muslims from around the world, including Bin-Laden. I'd say it was a policy driven by blind hatred for Russia, and payback for Vietnam, ignoring the consequences. The dangers of radical Islam were rather obvious after the Iranian revolution. It doesn't surprise me that the Americans abandoned Afghanistan after the Russians were defeated. No one wanted to be associated with the horrible mess they had created. Doc