• Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      64
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      2 days ago

      This image is almost 3 years old already lmao.

      If any libs want to learn how tankies see the future you might want to read about the past for once. Pop history doesn’t count.

    • rational_lib@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      19 hours ago

      People are seriously acting like Bin Laden was bait and switched by the US. I somehow remember it differently…

      • Furbag@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        8 hours ago

        …he was, though? We funded the Mujahideen to combat the Soviets in Afghanistan, and then when the USSR collapsed we cut him loose to get all chummy with the Saudi government so we could get that cheap oil.

    • RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      How was Libya, a member of the non-aligned movement, a US ally? They literally were part of a group that took neither side in the Cold War.

      OBL was never an ally. The US gave money to the Pakistani ISI who gave money to fixers who gave money to OBL. There was no direct channel. He was never an ally and it is a weird assertion to make given the history.

      The other two were US allies. Noriega was even friendly with Bush 41. This is just bad history.

        • RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          1 day ago

          Again the CIA gave money to the ISI who gave money to fixers who decided who got money. The US soldiers training them doesn’t make them an ally of the USA.

              • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                8 hours ago

                We signed treaties with a government that was overthrown, and “signing a treaty” does not make a nation an ally. You seem to be the one confused about what an ally is. There was no formal alliance, just informal support, the same kind given to the people who you claim don’t count because they were never allies.

                • RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 hours ago

                  Ukraine didn’t cease to exist when the administration was removed. Why would you think that would be the case? They still go by the same name and hold to all their relative treaties other than those involved in their invasion.

                  We have all sorts of agreements with Ukraine including ones that provide military responses which seems to be a fairly significant sign they are an ally. They are not any more now that the USA is aligned with Russia once again.

                  Why would you think the Ukrainian government isn’t an ally of the USA? Why would you think the treaties and agreements made by previous administrations aren’t still in place?

            • RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              edit-2
              1 day ago

              From your link I have added emphasis to the part you seemed to have missed:

              “ The distribution of the weaponry relied heavily on the Pakistani President Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq, who had a personal relationship with Congressman Wilson. His Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) was an intermediary for funds distribution, passing of weapons, military training and financial support to Afghan resistance groups.[40] Along with funding from Saudi Arabia and the People’s Republic of China,[41] the ISI developed a complex infrastructure that was directly training 16,000 to 18,000 mujahideen fighters annually by early 1986 (and indirectly facilitating training for thousands of others by Afghans that had previously been recipients of ISI instruction).[42] They encouraged the volunteers from the Arab states to join the Afghan resistance in its struggle against the Soviet troops based in Afghanistan.[40] Pakistani President Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq also directed the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) to establish contact with Israel’s Mossad.[43] Intelligence offices were set up at both countries’ embassies in Washington, where the ISI, MI6, CIA and Mossad jointly ran the operation.[44] During this operation, Israel supplied Soviet-made weaponry (seized from Palestinian militants) to the Afghan mujahideen. Pakistan and Israel cooperated very closely during the entirety of the conflict and the Pakistani military which was engaging Soviet aircraft and providing the mujahideen with funds and weapons—received a generous amount of Israeli armaments and aid as a result.[44]___

              So how didn’t it work like that? It really seems the ISI, who would best know the parties involved, did the heavy lifting.

              • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                10
                ·
                24 hours ago

                The CIA using the ISI to transport some weapons and train soldiers isn’t “this ISI did everything therefore the Mujahedin weren’t supported by the US”, it’s “the ISI were a tool of the CIA”, the operation was run out of Washington. It had US media providing glowing coverage of the Mujahedin as they committed war crimes.

                • RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  24 hours ago

                  The ISI being the go between for almost everything does mean those groups the ISI paid are not allies of the USA. If anyone in the Mujahideen needed help we would not have provided it because we are not allies. If the ISI needed help we likely would help depending on the circumstances (we wont fight India for example).

                  • Sodium_nitride@lemmygrad.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    6
                    ·
                    10 hours ago

                    I don’t know why you are being so obtuse. Aparantly, you can only be called an ally of america if you are being paraded around Washington or something.

                    Americans providing weapons and training doesn’t count, because the structure for providing this isn’t to your standards.

                  • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    23 hours ago

                    The Mujaheddin did need help, they needed weapons, bombs, intelligence, diplomatic support, booby traps specifically procured by the CIA. The US provided it.

                    And then back home, they used their contacts in the media to make sure everyone knew that the Mujaheddin were the good guys worthy of America’s support, even if they were not officially receiving it. Americans, Mujaheddin, and Soviets all understood the US supported the Mujaheddin, even if there was a layer of plausible deniability. It’s why the Soviets asked the US to stop the attacks on Soviet soldiers during the pullout and not Pakistan.

                    The american people were told to see the Mujaheddin as their ally, and the Mujaheddin understood it was the US supporting them.

            • RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              1 day ago

              Yes and the ISI were the intermediary for almost everything. The wiki link they provided even explains this.

              What did you think I was missing or am I supposed to think a handful of CIA guys made all the decisions vs taking input from the ISI would would know all of the players involved.

              I know you are a communist and not a huge fan of the USA, but are you one of the people that actually believes America’s intelligence agencies were good at spy-craft? We weren’t.