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: D. Long who wrote (90841)	4/7/2003 3:33:24 AM
From: Sun Tzu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Derek are you for real? Can you really not see the point? If the Afghan government was really the rightful representative of Afghan people, then why were we trying to overthrow them? And Pakistanis were the direct official patrons of the "insurrection"? What a joke! Since when Pakistan has the clout to face to a super power only a few hindered miles from its borders? And finally you said, "The mujahadeen were tools of Pakistan." And that is wrong. They were the tools of US and that was the problem. Because they did not see themselves as mindless tools. Some of them actually had the expectation that after helping America bring its biggest enemy to its knees, they will at least get to have a say in something as big as conditions of ceasefire. Now if you can't get this, then I have nothing more to add. ST [edit: did it occure to you that may be the Afghans would have wanted compensation and payment in exchange for letting the soviets pull out unharmed? Or that they may want comitments in removing the land mines?]