To protect their puppet which came about by a coup de tat led by the Russians... Unlike Iran, Russia overthrew the exist government in Afghanistan while in Iran in 1953 the US stopped a overthrow of the Shah by the PM who was seeking to upend the then Constitution...
On May 21, 12:09 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > KIT, > > Yep, and I'm sure that Russia had a perfectly good reason, according > to THEIR goals & interests at the time, to invade Afghanistan as well. > Would you not fight an armed invader of YOUR country, no matter what > the "good reason", they claimed for doing so? > > On May 21, 10:45 am, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > > > The distinction Holly, is that the United States invaded their land, because > > the Afghanistan (lack of) government allowed for training camps to train > > homicidal murderers to fly jet airliners into our skyscrapers, construct > > dirty bombs, and in general, to destroy yours and my way of life, as > > compared to the Soviets, who invaded Afghanistan as a part of world > > domination and a desire to spread Soviet style communism throughout the > > world. > > > A major distinction. > > > On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Hollywood > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > jgg, > > > > Uh yeah, they changed from killing Russians invading their land to > > > killing Americans & Brits invading their land. Thought I had explained > > > that. > > > > On May 21, 9:54 am, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Or maybe it depends on the circumstance... Like how OBL and AQ > > > > changed over the years... Another example is supporting Stalin in > > > > 1942-45 and fighting him from 1948-1953... Why the change??? Simple > > > > Stalin's actions post WWII... > > > > > On May 21, 10:26 am, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > jgg, > > > > > > WHAT arguement of "because we helped S.H. we are responsible for the > > > > > end result?" Look at my posts, what I ACTUALLY said. Where did I say > > > > > any such thing? > > > > > OF course our political policy is based on what is convient for us at > > > > > the moment. One decade Osama Bin Laden is a "deeply religious freedom > > > > > fighter" another decade the same man is a "murdering Muslim > > > > > terrorist". All depends on wheter he's killing Russians or Brits and > > > > > Americans. Duuuuuuh. > > > > > > On May 20, 10:31 am, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Another of your straw-men Hollywood... Especially as I never have > > > > > > been of the attitude ""your either for us or against us"... > > > > > > Neither > > > > > > was Bush for that matter... Now the LW anti-war fringe WAS and > > > > > > IS... > > > > > > Hence Pelosi's new dance step... > > > > > > > Now my point with Russia IS and was, geopolitical alliance normally > > > > > > are temporary based on convenience... As was our help to Saddam, > > > > > > our interest was not to let either Iraq nor Iran win... And that > > > > > > policy drove our actions... Second, the arms we supplied helped us > > > > > > and the Russians defeat Hitler --- the question here is the refusal > > > > > > of Russia to WITHDRAWAL to its pre war borders WAS a consequence of > > > > > > that win... This included incorporating the Baltic and much of > > > Poland > > > > > > into USSR... > > > > > > > ANd the argument used with with Saddam is BECAUSE we helped him, WE > > > > > > are responsible for the end result... Applying that logic to > > > > > > WWII, > > > > > > we were responsible for 40 years of repression in Eastern Europe... > > > > > > Now I reject that line of reasoning in the cases of Russia during > > > > > > WWI > > > > > > and Saddam post 1987... The issue here do you also reject the > > > > > > reasoning??? If so the issue of our limited help to Saddam in the > > > > > > 80's is a none issue... If you accept that logic, then you > > > > > > logically > > > > > > must hold we are guilty of repressing Eastern Europe for 40 years... > > > > > > > On May 20, 10:16 am, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > jgg, > > > > > > > > NOW you want to resign the black/white world of "your either for > > > > > > > us > > > or > > > > > > > against us" George Bush? > > > > > > > OH, we didn't want Russia it win against Germany, we only wanted > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > help them avoid defeat? When Russian tanks were rumbling thru the > > > > > > > street of Berlin, hundreds of miles west of their borders, we were > > > > > > > merely helping them avoid defeat and destruction? Read a history > > > book, > > > > > > > Russia help US to avoid defeat in Europe. > > > > > > > > On May 20, 8:55 am, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Yes Hollywood, in the grown-up game of geopolitics that is a > > > > > > > > significant difference... In your Ivory Tower of perfection, > > > > > > > > Ideology must remain pure by using only "moral" methods... In > > > WWII, > > > > > > > > we allied with a Totalitarian tyrant not quite as dangerous as > > > Hitler, > > > > > > > > Stalin, to beat Hitler... We supplied him arms so he would not > > > be > > > > > > > > defeated... > > > > > > > > > And Stalin used them to take over Eastern Europe after the > > > > > > > > war... > > > By > > > > > > > > your standards, we are responsible for Stalin post war, even > > > though he > > > > > > > > stopped being an ally in 1945... Problem is, that is not how > > > the > > > > > > > > world works... > > > > > > > > > On May 19, 7:31 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > jgg, > > > > > > > > > > Ohhh, we were not helping him to WIN, we were merely helping > > > him to > > > > > > > > > avoid DEFEAT. > > > > > > > > > Well, that makes all the difference in the world. > > > > > > > > > > On May 19, 3:33 pm, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Our support to SH in the 80's was limited to proventing his > > > defeat by > > > > > > > > > > Iran. 95%+ of SH weapons came from the USSR or its > > > satellites... A > > > > > > > > > > majority of the rest came from France and Germany... > > > > > > > > > > > On May 19, 3:35 pm, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > In a way, it was, for our support of SH during the > > > Iraq-Iran war. We > > > > > > > > > > > tend to eliminate those who illustrate our political > > > conscience. > > > > > > > > > > > Panama. Cuba. El Salvador. USSR. etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > On May 19, 1:35 pm, Hollywood > > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > jgg, > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, S.H's Iraq was NOT an immediate and dangerous threat > > > that needed > > > > > > > > > > > > to be removed? > > > > > > > > > > > > > On May 19, 12:56 pm, jgg1000a <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Again, the Iraqi War was NOT principally about WMD > > > (using your non > > > > > > > > > > > > > UNSC definition)... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On May 18, 5:52 am, VT VirtualTruth < > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You really don;t read or pay attention to the news > > > > > > > > > > > > > > do > > > you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You fools said the same things about WMD's > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that mistake only cost 4000 US lives and maimed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only 30,000. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Republicans make mistakes Americans die. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Good track record you got going there. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On May 17, 10:17 am, Keith In Tampa < > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sean, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, this is really what it boils down to, as I > > > suspicioned. What you are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > really saying is, "I Hate Bush, But I Don't Know > > > Why". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What transpired at Abu Gharib is not at all what > > > transpired with enhanced > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > interrogation techniques by the CIA. The Army has > > > no mechanism other than > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the Army Field Manual to interrogate prisoners. > > > Those individuals were > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > prosecuted because they were outside of Army > > > regulations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 3:26 AM, VT VirtualTruth > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If we tried the little guys for what happened at > > > Abu Gharib > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > then the precedent has already been set for the > > > ENTIRE > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bush Administration. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I believe Nixon was also Impeached for his > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > crimes > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > during the Vietnam war. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nixon resigned rather than face impeachment for > > > his crimes > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > while in office, and Republicans pushed all out > > > to impeach > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Clinton while in office about a lie over a BJ. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So both your reasons for calling me a traitor > > > have both been > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > proven false based on previous precedent. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You have nothing left to say, because you have > > > run > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > out of realistic arguments. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On May 16, 4:47 pm, Keith In Tampa < > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hey Sean!! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Actually, I thought my post was rather witty!! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In all honesty, you seem like a bright, > > > intelligent, (I am assuming > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > younger > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > than me) man. It is one thing to question our > > > governments' policies, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > quite another to jump on a traitorous > > > bandwagon, accusing our President, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (any President!) during a time of war, of war > > > crimes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have nothing else to say on the subject. > > > Based on all of the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > information > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that has been released to date, I don't > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > believe > > > that we ever "tortured" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > anyone. > > ... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
