Severian
11th February 2006, 03:25
Originally posted by
[email protected] 10 2006, 11:43 AM
I heard that the U.S supported the Taliban with arms and fund's to fight against the U.S.S.R. during the cold war period, is that true?
Not exactly. Other people have pointed out the U.S. armed the mujahedeen to fight against the Soviets. It should also be mentioned that after the Soviet withdrawal, the U.S. continued arming these groups to fight against the government of the People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan, which finally fell in 1992.
The Taliban arose later, beginning about 1994, in part reacting against the chaos caused by rival mujahedeen commanders. They were supported by Pakistani intelligence, and for a few years, the U.S. encouraged this. Of course the Pakistani regime received military aid from Washington, so that was a form of indirect U.S. support for the Taliban.
See the book Taliban by Ahmed Raschid for details. (He's a reporter for the Far Eastern Economic Review, and the book is the best-researched one on the subject.)
Basically Afghanistan's chaos was bad for investment, and Washington hoped the Taliban could create stability, as well as combatting Iranian-supported groups. The Pakistani regime had its own reasons for supporting the Taliban as well.
"Already in 2001 the U.S. has provided $125 million in so-called humanitarian aid to the country's rulling party,"
False. By 2001, the U.S. had given up on the Taliban, though Pakistan had not. The U.S. provided $125 million worth of food to international aid groups for distribution in Afghanistan. Let the liberals denounce the Bush administration for this - but it's seriously unworthy of communists to demand no food be sent to Afghanistan.
The business about the Taliban visiting Texas while Bush was governor is another bit of Democratic hypocrisy. Clinton was president at the time, and in charge of U.S. foreign policy. It was the Clinton administration which in fact supported the Taliban (not that Republicans disagreed.)