Reagan and His Meeting With The Taliban and Mujahideen

[DiveCon]

and the braindead moron ed chimes in'


im outta here you fucktards can have your "bash the dead guy" thread
'
fuck off

 

[edthecynic]

Even the Ronnie god praised Taliban.

Ronald Reagan meeting with Taliban\al-Qaeda\Mujahideen The Political Inquirer.

The Great ronnie god praised the taliban and al-qaeda.

September 6 - 12, 2002
Rogue Statesman
Congressman Dana Rohrabacher’s absolutely crazy, quite possibly illegal back-channel chats with the villains of Sept. 11

by R. Scott Moxley

"[Rohrabacher] says the Taliban are devout traditionalists—not terrorists or revolutionaries. He believes a Taliban takeover [of Afghanistan] would be a positive development."

... "Listen! Hold on!" said Rohrabacher. "I am a bigger expert on Afghanistan than any member of Congress." ...

A November/December 1996 article in Washington Report on Middle East Affairs reported, "The potential rise of power of the Taliban does not alarm Rohrabacher" because the congressman believes the "Taliban could provide stability in an area where chaos was creating a real threat to the U.S." Later in the article, Rohrabacher claimed that:

Taliban leaders are "not terrorists or revolutionaries."

Media reports documenting the Taliban’s harsh, radical beliefs were "nonsense."

The Taliban would develop a "disciplined, moral society" that did not harbor terrorists.

The Taliban posed no threat to the U.S.

 

[Modbert]

we did not over throw Irans PM, look up and read Op Ajax
educate yourself
and i dont mean read bullshit blogs that talk about it, i mean read the ACTUAL documents

1953 Iranian coup d'état - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The 1953 Iranian coup d'état, on August 19, 1953 (and called the 28 Mordad coup d'état in Iran), was the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh by the United States' Central Intelligence Agency.[1] The crushing of Iran's first democratically elected government launched 25 years of dictatorship under Mohammad-Rezā Shāh Pahlavi, who relied heavily on U.S. weapons to hold on to power until he was overthrown in February 1979.[2] "For many Iranians, the coup demonstrated duplicity by the United States, which presented itself as a defender of freedom but did not hesitate to use underhanded methods to overthrow a democratically elected government to suit its own economic and strategic interests", the Agence France-Presse reported.[3]

The CIA sent Major general Norman Schwarzkopf, Sr. to persuade the exiled Shah to return to rule Iran. Schwarzkopf trained the security forces that would become known as SAVAK to secure the shah's hold on power.[59][60]

SAVAK - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sources disagree over how many victims SAVAK had and how inhumane its techniques were. Writing at the time of the Shah's overthrow, TIME magazine described SAVAK as having "long been Iran's most hated and feared institution" which had "tortured and murdered thousands of the Shah's opponents."[24] Federation of American Scientists (FAS) also found it guilty of "the torture and execution of thousands of political prisoners" and symbolizing "the Shah's rule from 1963-79." The FAS list of SAVAK torture methods included "electric shock, whipping, beating, inserting broken glass and pouring boiling water into the rectum, tying weights to the testicles, and the extraction of teeth and nails." [25] According to a former CIA analyst on Iran,[26][27] Jesse J. Leaf, SAVAK was trained in torture techniques by the CIA. An example of the public image of the SAVAK in Iran as all-pervasive and fear-inducing, is "a much enjoyed joke" during the Pahlavi regime, where an Iranian Muslim is questioned by angels on the first night after his (the Iranian's) death:

According to the history based on documents released to the National Security Archive and reflected in the book Mohammad Mosaddeq and the 1953 Coup in Iran, edited by Mark J. Gasiorowski and Malcolm Byrne, the coup caused long-lasting damage to the U.S. reputation.

In a review of Tim Weiner's Legacy of Ashes, historian Michael Beschloss wrote, "Mr. Weiner argues that a bad C.I.A. track record has encouraged many of our gravest contemporary problems... A generation of Iranians grew up knowing that the C.I.A. had installed the shah," Mr. Weiner notes. "In time, the chaos that the agency had created in the streets of Tehran would return to haunt the United States."[97]

In 2000, the U.S. Secretary of State called the coup a "setback for democratic government" in Iran, saying "It is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America in their internal affairs."[105]

Okay, did more research. Looks like I was pretty spot on. Your turn.

 

[edthecynic]

there is so much wrong in that i'm not gonna even bother

Except there isn't. Maybe it contradicts a lot of what you hold true, but what I posted are facts. Or are you gonna deny we overthrew Iran's PM, or maybe deny Iran-Contra? Or maybe deny that we ever gave Saddam weapons? Go ahead, amuse me Dive.

we did not over throw Irans PM, look up and read Op Ajax
educate yourself
and i dont mean read bullshit blogs that talk about it, i mean read the ACTUAL documents

Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi: Biography from Answers.com

Coup plans which had stalled under Truman were immediately revived by an eager intelligence corps, with powerful aid from the brothers John Foster Dulles (Secretary of State) and Allen Welsh Dulles (CIA director), after Eisenhower's inauguration in 1953.

Under Kermit Roosevelt Jr.'s direction (a senior CIA agent, and grandson of the former U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt), the CIA and British intelligence funded and led a coup d'etat to overthrow the democratically elected prime minister with the help of military forces loyal to the Shah through Operation Ajax.

 

[edthecynic]

and the braindead moron ed chimes in'


im outta here you fucktards can have your "bash the dead guy" thread
'
fuck off

Looks like I scared the BRAINWASHED DittoTard away.

 

[Political Junky]

Pahlavi dynasty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In 1951, the Majlis (Parliament of Iran) named Mohammad Mossadegh as new prime minister by a vote of 79–12, who shortly after nationalized the British-owned oil industry (see Abadan Crisis). Mossadegh was opposed by the Shah who feared a resulting oil embargo imposed by the west would leave Iran in economic ruin. The Shah fled Iran but returned when the United Kingdom and United States staged a coup against Mossadegh in August 1953 (see Operation Ajax). Mossadegh was then arrested by pro-Shah army forces.

 

[Londoner]

The scary part is that many right wing voters know nothing of the stuff Reagan/Bush supported in the middle east, africa, and latin america. [FYI: neoliberalism -- the protection and expansion of global markets -- has sometimes required that America get in bed with corruptible puppets willing to sell their country's resources and political autonomy down river, e.g., Mossedegh would not play ball with America, whereas the Shaw and the early Hussein did. Point is: "softening" the globe to the flow of capital is a dirty business at best. Funny how weekend Conservatives don't see the quasi-socialism involved in a unitary global economy managed centrally and militarily by one superpower. Problem is: the right's base can't even see this question because capital controls the media. Welcome to a profit centered universe. Controlling information is job one]

Regardless, the need to rewrite Reagan was necessary to creating the movement we see today. Reagan was to become THE symbol, indeed the Founding Father of the New Right. Therefore, starting in the early 90s, the Right started to cherry pick Reagan's history. Please recall Grover Norquist and the Reagan Legacy Project. Money flowed into publishing houses, think tanks, radio stations, political action committees, TV stations, etc. When Reagan died, they applied massive pressure to put his name on everything. Nobody mentioned his deficits -- or the fact that he went to congress twice, hat in hand, to expand the federal debt level. Reagan was a fiscal nightmare -- he was the first postwar president to truly abandon "pay-as-you go". He expanded the federal workforce more than Carter or Clinton. He used a dying Soviet Union to rebuild the Pentagon budget to a level that would amount to generational theft. He propagandized the Soviets to pull 3rd world supply chains under America's protective wing, e.g., they planted stories about Mossadegh's ties to Moscow which were later revealed as false. The Soviets, though definitely a real threat, were literally used as a prop for a geopolitical chess game. Needless to say, Reagan's backers would get all the cheap labor and resources they could ever want.

No wonder the Right tells its followers not to trust the media. If your goal is to morph Bin Laden into Hussein, you better turn your audience against all information sources save your own, or at least put them in a Biblical sleeper hold, or distract them with gay marriage and illegal aliens. Or maybe get them to focus on sin instead of derivative traders. (wow, just wow) [How did the Right find an audience who would buy into such transparent garbage]

Needless to say: funding for the rewriting of history poured in from the wealthy (private and corporate), who wanted low taxes and wink-wink regulations. This was an obvious triangulation of interests. The New Right, behind Ronald Reagan's newly constructed image, would literally defund the middle class and create a second gilded age. And they would do it electorally by getting people to vote against their wallets and their democracy; they would do it by feeding race, religion, patriotism, and fear to people who didn't have the time or the patience to study history or policy. Sadly, the revolution was a staggering success. Now, most Conservatives get over 50% of their news from inside the bubble. The Real Reagan is gone for good.

 

[California Girl]

It's always a joy to watch idiots debate really, really complicated GLOBAL political issues.... Y'all make me laugh. Thanks.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Evidence?

Taliban still have Reagan's Stingers - Telegraph



The CIA gave weapons, training, and intelligence to Afghani "Freedom fighters" who became what is today known as the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.

Go look up the name Gulbuddin Hekmatyar while you're at it.

By 1988, Osama Bin Laden had created Al Qaeda with the U.S's knowledge. They were too short sighted and didn't look to the future.

Norm Dixon: How Reagan Armed Saddam with Chemical Weapons

While the August 18 NYT article added new details about the extent of US military collaboration with Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein during Iraq's 1980-88 war with Iran, it omitted the most outrageous aspect of the scandal: not only did Ronald Reagan's Washington turn a blind-eye to the Hussein regime's repeated use of chemical weapons against Iranian soldiers and Iraq's Kurdish minority, but the US helped Iraq develop its chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs.

1982, we gave billions to Saddam in weapons and cash to go and kill Iranians. By 1983, we had given Iran weapons to kill Iraqis. Y'know, Iran-Contra.

Heck, when Saddam invaded Kuwait in the early 90's, he was using the weapons we gave him.

Also, in 1953, the CIA overthrew the Prime Minister of Iran and installed the Shah who was one of the most brutal dictators in the future. Heck, that's the whole reason why they took hostages in 1979 and why they hate us today. Along with the fact that we gave the Iraqis weapons to kill them in the 80's.

CIA has a term for this, it's called blowback.

there is so much wrong in that i'm not gonna even bother

The US Government dealt with the Northern group, not Taliban at all. Not Osama Bin Ladin at all. This is a continuing lie foisted by dumb asses.
How about some REAL evidence.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

we did not over throw Irans PM, look up and read Op Ajax
educate yourself
and i dont mean read bullshit blogs that talk about it, i mean read the ACTUAL documents

1953 Iranian coup d'état - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The 1953 Iranian coup d'état, on August 19, 1953 (and called the 28 Mordad coup d'état in Iran), was the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh by the United States' Central Intelligence Agency.[1] The crushing of Iran's first democratically elected government launched 25 years of dictatorship under Mohammad-Rezā Shāh Pahlavi, who relied heavily on U.S. weapons to hold on to power until he was overthrown in February 1979.[2] "For many Iranians, the coup demonstrated duplicity by the United States, which presented itself as a defender of freedom but did not hesitate to use underhanded methods to overthrow a democratically elected government to suit its own economic and strategic interests", the Agence France-Presse reported.[3]

SAVAK - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In a review of Tim Weiner's Legacy of Ashes, historian Michael Beschloss wrote, "Mr. Weiner argues that a bad C.I.A. track record has encouraged many of our gravest contemporary problems... A generation of Iranians grew up knowing that the C.I.A. had installed the shah," Mr. Weiner notes. "In time, the chaos that the agency had created in the streets of Tehran would return to haunt the United States."[97]

In 2000, the U.S. Secretary of State called the coup a "setback for democratic government" in Iran, saying "It is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America in their internal affairs."[105]

Okay, did more research. Looks like I was pretty spot on. Your turn.

Ya wiki is sure know for its honesty and truth, no one can just post what they want there.

 

[edthecynic]

Taliban still have Reagan's Stingers - Telegraph



The CIA gave weapons, training, and intelligence to Afghani "Freedom fighters" who became what is today known as the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.

Go look up the name Gulbuddin Hekmatyar while you're at it.

By 1988, Osama Bin Laden had created Al Qaeda with the U.S's knowledge. They were too short sighted and didn't look to the future.

Norm Dixon: How Reagan Armed Saddam with Chemical Weapons



1982, we gave billions to Saddam in weapons and cash to go and kill Iranians. By 1983, we had given Iran weapons to kill Iraqis. Y'know, Iran-Contra.

Heck, when Saddam invaded Kuwait in the early 90's, he was using the weapons we gave him.

Also, in 1953, the CIA overthrew the Prime Minister of Iran and installed the Shah who was one of the most brutal dictators in the future. Heck, that's the whole reason why they took hostages in 1979 and why they hate us today. Along with the fact that we gave the Iraqis weapons to kill them in the 80's.

CIA has a term for this, it's called blowback.

there is so much wrong in that i'm not gonna even bother

The US Government dealt with the Northern group, not Taliban at all. Not Osama Bin Ladin at all. This is a continuing lie foisted by dumb asses.
How about some REAL evidence.

As already posted, Dana Rohrabacher R Cal. met 9/11 Reagan's "freedom fighter" Bin Laden and supplied him with stingers. But CON$ can never face reality!!!!

 

[Si modo]

Even the Ronnie god praised Taliban.

Ronald Reagan meeting with Taliban\al-Qaeda\Mujahideen The Political Inquirer.

The Great ronnie god praised the taliban and al-qaeda.

Ignorance often makes the ignorant look the fool.

Check your history; the mujahadeen and the taliban are not the same thing.

Idiot.

 

[uscitizen]

and the braindead moron ed chimes in'


im outta here you fucktards can have your "bash the dead guy" thread
'
fuck off

Umm I think it is educate the ones who think the dead guy was the greates president ever.
And which party contributed the most to the ME mess.
the dead guy is not the target here.

 

[Si modo]

and the braindead moron ed chimes in'


im outta here you fucktards can have your "bash the dead guy" thread
'
fuck off

Umm I think it is educate the ones who think the dead guy was the greates president ever.
And which party contributed the most to the ME mess.

My money's on the peanut-head...er...farmer.

 

[uscitizen]

I knew somehow it was all Carters fault

 

[Si modo]

I knew somehow it was all Carters fault

LOL. Not all, but he was a freakin' joke. Damn, what an embarassment. He still makes me cringe.

 

[traveler52]

picking on a dead guy?


really?


You guys are really imploding, and it is soooooooo fun to watch

How is reporting the truth, "Picking on a dead guy"? The article have a fair and accurate protrayal of the events of the meeting. HOw is that "Picking on a dead guy"?

You do not even attempt to dispute the facts in the article.

I give an F+ for the attempt at nonsense. An F+ for failing to find a means to rebut the article.

No, we are no imploding. You just can't handle the truth.

 

[Si modo]

picking on a dead guy?


really?


You guys are really imploding, and it is soooooooo fun to watch

How is reporting the truth, "Picking on a dead guy"? The article have a fair and accurate protrayal of the events of the meeting. HOw is that "Picking on a dead guy"?

You do not even attempt to dispute the facts in the article.

I give an F+ for the attempt at nonsense. An F+ for failing to find a means to rebut the article.

No, we are no imploding. You just can't handle the truth.

The fail of the article and this thread is inherent when even their history is wrong.

Fail.

 

[RDD_1210]

It's always a joy to watch idiots debate really, really complicated GLOBAL political issues.... Y'all make me laugh. Thanks.

And every time you post, I known it will contain at least one insult. Thanks for being so reliably hateful. I always get a good laugh every time I see you post.

Hey I give you credit though..this is one of the rare posts where you didn't feel the need to drop an F-bomb.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Everyone knows that Progressives have to lie. This thread is just another lie.