Forums

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages 
Al Qaeda works for the CIA..why shouldn't I believe this?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> Conspiracy - The War on Terror
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Jerry_BOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 15 Apr 2002
Total posts: 8265
PostPosted: 04-06-2007 12:38    Post subject: Reply with quote

coldelephant wrote:
Getting back on topic here - I could not find out why the USSR collapsed anyway - I was watching Apocalypse Now - Redux last night and saw a French family discussing how the Americans created the Viet Cong.


It's an idea that this was done indirectly, because the US repeatedly ignored the young Ho Chi Minh when he petitioned the US to intervene against French infuence in Vietnam.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
crunchy5Offline
Great Old One
Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Total posts: 1951
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 04-06-2007 18:18    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pietro_Mercurios wrote:
Jerry_B wrote:
Yes - the Soviet invasion took place in 1979; the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991.

Is 12 years such a long time in the forward planning of a One Party Totalitarian State, like the USSR?



How long after Al Qaeda pushed the USSR out of Afghanistan, turning it into the medieval hell hole we had to "free", did the USSR collapse into economic turmoil ?

Also didn't the USSR "invade" Afghanistan because "we" already had groups running around the country differently stabilizing the place ?
Back to top
View user's profile 
ted_bloody_maulOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 23 May 2003
Total posts: 4877
Location: Quester's Psykick Dancehall
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 04-06-2007 18:54    Post subject: Reply with quote

crunchy5 wrote:
How long after Al Qaeda pushed the USSR out of Afghanistan, turning it into the medieval hell hole we had to "free", did the USSR collapse into economic turmoil ?

Also didn't the USSR "invade" Afghanistan because "we" already had groups running around the country differently stabilizing the place ?


It took a couple of years but it was partly down to the fact that they'd been fighting for so long that they fell. What caused the Soviet Union to collapse was not the issue of energy resources in relation to Afghanistan but the fact that they had an unsustainable economy brought to ruin more quickly by trying to compete with American defence spending. Also it'd be quite wrong to say that Al-Qaeda forced the Soviets out of Afghanistan in much the same way it would be wrong to say that the French resistance forced the Nazis out of France in 1944 (or to make the same claim of Britain, even). Perhaps even less accurate, in fact.

Quite what reason the Soviets might genuinely have had for the invasion of Afghanistan perhaps only they really know but Afghanistan was in a state of civil war before their invasion and any American involvement (which pre-dates the Soviet invasion although it did not pre-date the Soviet backing of the regime which had provoked the civil war).
Back to top
View user's profile 
Pietro_Mercurios
Heuristically Challenged
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 04-06-2007 21:21    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jerry_B wrote:
Pietro_Mercurios wrote:
Is 12 years such a long time in the forward planning of a One Party Totalitarian State, like the USSR?


You may need to become more familiar with how 'forward-thinking' the USSR was. If anything, the SU had a history of getting things wrong.

That wasn't because they weren't forward thinking, though. That was because, once they'd set things in motion, it took them a long time to change direction. Seems it's not me who doesn't quite grasp how the USSR planned ahead and the sort of scale it operated on. Rolling Eyes

Jerry_B wrote:
Quote:
Perhaps, the Soviets knew something that we didn't? Or, are you suggesting that they had no idea about the state of their economy, or the importance of the energy reserves in the region, not just Afghanistan, but the whole Muslim majority south of the USSR, to the continued existence of the State, both economically and strategically?

The USSR's Afghanistan War has been likened to the USA's Vietnam misadventure, but strategically, the USSR's attempt to bring Afghanistan to heel made more sense. The rise of the new Islamic radicalism obviously worried them greatly.


It seems to me that you're trying to back-engineer current outlooks and place them on the past, to make it fit the 'war for oil' hypothesis. The idea of Islamic radicalism simply wasn't an aspect of the picture of the time. It's not something that would have bothered the SU. ...

You must live in some alternate universe, Jerry_B. One on a different historical timeline.
Quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan

Soviet war in Afghanistan
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Soviet war in Afghanistan was a nine-year conflict involving Soviet forces supporting Afghanistan's Marxist People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA) government against the Mujahideen insurgents that were fighting to overthrow Communist rule. The Soviet Union supported the government while the rebels found support from a variety of sources including the United States, Pakistan and other Muslim nations in the context of the Cold War. This conflict was concurrent to the 1979 Iranian Revolution and the Iran-Iraq War.

...

In February of 1979, the Islamic Revolution had ousted the US backed Shahs from Afghanistan's neighbor Iran. In the Soviet Union, Afghanistan's northern neighbor, more than twenty percent of the population was Muslim. Many Soviet Muslims in Central Asia had tribal kinship relationships in both Iran and Afghanistan. The Soviet Union had also been concerned by the fact that since that February the United States had deployed twenty ships, including two aircraft carriers, and the constant stream of threats of warfare between the US and Iran.[3]

March of 1979 also marked the signing of the US backed peace agreement between Israel and Egypt. The Soviet Union leadership saw the peace agreement between Israel and Egypt as a major step in the progression of US power in the region. In fact, one Soviet newspaper stated that Egypt and Israel were now “gendarmes of the Pentagon”. The Soviets viewed the treaty as not only a cessation in the hostilities between the two nations but also as some form of military agreement. [4] In addition, the Soviets found America selling more than five thousand missiles to Saudi Arabia and also supplying the successful Yemeni resistance against communist factions. Also, the Soviet Union's previously strong relations with Iraq had recently soured. Iraq, in June 1978, began buying French and Italian made weapons as opposed to Soviet weapons.

...

You might not find the Wikipedia a creditable source, but that all seems clear enough.

As to the strategic importance of the region, re oil and gas reserves, do you really think the Soviets were complete idiots?
Back to top
View user's profile 
ted_bloody_maulOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 23 May 2003
Total posts: 4877
Location: Quester's Psykick Dancehall
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 04-06-2007 22:02    Post subject: Reply with quote

Also from the same site:

By the time Gorbachev ushered in the process that would lead to the dismantling of the Soviet administrative command economy through his programs of glasnost (political openness), perestroika (economic restructuring), and uskoreniye (speed−up of economic development) announced in 1986, the Soviet economy suffered from both hidden inflation and pervasive supply shortages aggravated by an increasingly open black market that undermined the official economy. Additionally, the costs of superpower status — the military, KGB, subsidies to client states — were out of proportion to the Soviet economy. The new wave of industrialization based upon information technology had left the Soviet Union desperate for Western technology and credits in order to counter its increasing backwardness.

.............................................

By 1990 the Soviet government had lost control over economic conditions. Government spending increased sharply as an increasing number of unprofitable enterprises required state support and consumer price subsidies to continue. Tax revenues declined as republic and local governments withheld tax revenues from the central government under the growing spirit of regional autonomy. The anti−alcohol campaign reduced tax revenues as well, which in 1982 accounted for about 12 percent of all state revenue. The elimination of central control over production decisions, especially in the consumer goods sector, led to the breakdown in traditional supplier−producer relationships without contributing to the formation of new ones. Thus, instead of streamlining the system, Gorbachev's decentralization caused new production bottlenecks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Soviet_Union_%281985%E2%80%931991%29

Whatever the Soviet Union's motivation for its invasion of Afghanistan, and it may indeed have been related to energy supply, there would seem to have been greater in-built problems with their communist economy. After all, Russia still has enough of an energy surplus to provide both its satellite states and new European clients today.


Last edited by ted_bloody_maul on 04-06-2007 22:11; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile 
Jerry_BOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 15 Apr 2002
Total posts: 8265
PostPosted: 04-06-2007 22:05    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pietro_Mercurios wrote:
That wasn't because they weren't forward thinking, though. That was because, once they'd set things in motion, it took them a long time to change direction. Seems it's not me who doesn't quite grasp how the USSR planned ahead and the sort of scale it operated on. Rolling Eyes


So you're suggesting that the Soviet Union knew that it only had 12 years left to live?

Quote:
You might not find the Wikipedia a creditable source, but that all seems clear enough.

As to the strategic importance of the region, re oil and gas reserves, do you really think the Soviets were complete idiots?


Of course I don't think they were idiots - well, not complete idiots. Their invasion of Afghanistan suffered from the same short-sightedness as various other attempts, past and present, to mould the country into something that suited them. They may have succeeded if the West had not intervened. By their initial actions it seems that they thought that the situation could under their control fairly quickly. The idea that it was pretty about oil and Islam is simply trying to rewrite history to make it fit with the mores of today IMHO. I think sometimes people forget how much impact the Cold War had on the political machinations of the time.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
Pietro_Mercurios
Heuristically Challenged
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 04-06-2007 22:11    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jerry_B wrote:
Pietro_Mercurios wrote:
That wasn't because they weren't forward thinking, though. That was because, once they'd set things in motion, it took them a long time to change direction. Seems it's not me who doesn't quite grasp how the USSR planned ahead and the sort of scale it operated on. Rolling Eyes


So you're suggesting that the Soviet Union knew that it only had 12 years left to live?

...

Now you're just being contemptible.
Back to top
View user's profile 
lupinwickOffline
Joined: 24 Sep 2005
Total posts: 1883
PostPosted: 05-06-2007 07:16    Post subject: Reply with quote

Seems very odd to blame the war in Afghanistan for the fall of the soviet union. There are surely other more pertinent reasons.

My understanding of Afghanistant was it was purely a war of ideologies, a face off between the US and USSR, although initially it started off differently.

Quote:
Alarmed by the deteriorating situation, especially the collapse of the army and the prospect that a disintegrating Afghanistan would threaten its security on its southern border, the Soviet Union airlifted thousands of troops into Kabul on December 24, 1979. The Khalq president, Hafizullah Amin, was assassinated after Soviet intelligence forces took control of the government and installed Babrak Karmal, a Parchami, as president.

The Soviet occupation force of some 115,000 troops and the Karmal government sought to crush the uprisings with mass arrests, torture, and executions of dissidents, and aerial bombardments and executions in the countryside. Some one million Afghans died during this period, most in aerial bombardments. These measures further expanded the resistance to the communist government in Kabul and fueled a flow of refugees out of the country that soon reached five million out of a population of about sixteen million.

Islamist organizations that became the heart of the resistance - and collectively became known as the jihad fighters or mujahidin - based themselves in Pakistan and Iran.. Seeing the conflict as a cold war battleground, the United States and Saudi Arabia, in particular, provided massive support for the resistance, nearly all of it funneled through Pakistan. The arms pipeline gave Pakistan a tremendous ability to bolster parties in Afghanistan that would serve its own interests.

Joining the resistance forces were thousands of Muslim radicals from the Middle East, North Africa and other Muslim countries. Most fought with Pashtun factions that had the strongest support from Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, the Hizb-i Islami of Gulbuddin Hikmatyar and Ittihad-i Islami of Abdul Rasul Sayyaf. Among them was Osama bin Laden, who came to Pakistan in the early 1980s and built training facilities for these foreign recruits inside Afghanistan.


http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/asia/afghan-bck1023.htm
Back to top
View user's profile 
Jerry_BOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 15 Apr 2002
Total posts: 8265
PostPosted: 05-06-2007 08:44    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pietro_Mercurios wrote:
Now you're just being contemptible.


Not at all. After all, you seemed to be suggesting that the SU knew that it was on borrowed time.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
Pietro_Mercurios
Heuristically Challenged
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 05-06-2007 10:13    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jerry_B wrote:
Pietro_Mercurios wrote:
Now you're just being contemptible.


Not at all. After all, you seemed to be suggesting that the SU knew that it was on borrowed time.

Not even that. Although, I refer you to Ted's previous post about Gorbachev's attempts at a major overhaul of the economic system, around 1986.

The Soviet system, based as it was on long term planning and a particularly monolithic and inflexible system of mass production, simply could not compete with the West. It was in trouble. But, you seem to choose to wilfully misconstrue my actual posts, in a miserable attempt to infer that I'm relying on the 'benefit of hindsight' in my extrapolation of the process whereby the Soviet Union dug itself into a state of bankruptcy and collapse.

What you suggest simply isn't there in my Posts. Or, perhaps you merely misunderstood them, overlaying your preconceptions of my argument on top? So that you read, essentially what you wanted to read, rather than what was actually Posted?
Back to top
View user's profile 
Jerry_BOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 15 Apr 2002
Total posts: 8265
PostPosted: 05-06-2007 14:12    Post subject: Reply with quote

I really don't see the need for you to have such an agressive reaction to my question. All I was asking for was some clarification of one of your previous posts.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
Mighty_EmperorOffline
Divine Wind
Joined: 18 Aug 2002
Total posts: 19943
Location: Mongo
Age: 43
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 05-06-2007 14:38    Post subject: Reply with quote

Indeed. Can people address the points as making accusations/assumptions about other people and their motivations is a bona fide method for driving the thread off topic and into the kind of territory where moderators have to get involved beyond a simple friendly nudge.

Worth noting this is aimed at everyone on every thread here not just this specific one or any of the posters on it (although for some reason it is the kind of thing that needs mentioning a lot in the conspiracy forum)..
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
coldelephant
PostPosted: 06-06-2007 07:51    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ok - back on topic then

Did the USA fund, train and/or otherwise encourage groups of fanatics to attack enemies only to find they deviated from their agenda later on and went awol and became terrorists instead?

To answer Emps' question, I would say that it is because people are very much into the debate and really putting feeling into what they say Wink
Back to top
Pietro_Mercurios
Heuristically Challenged
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 06-06-2007 08:07    Post subject: Reply with quote

coldelephant wrote:
Ok - back on topic then

Did the USA fund, train and/or otherwise encourage groups of fanatics to attack enemies only to find they deviated from their agenda later on and went awol and became terrorists instead?

...

Were secret 'Black Op' groups, connected to, but working independently of the CIA, set up to liaise with Mudjahidin, partially through deep cover liaison, partially through the Secret Services of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, to act as the USA's proxy Islamic insurgents in Afghanistan? Perhaps, there are similarities with the sort of group set up to liaise with the Iranians and Contras, in the Iran Contra scandal?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Contra_Affair
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/walsh/

http://911review.org/Alex/Iran-Contra_911.html

Were links maintained with Islamic extremists, specially trained in Afghanistan, after the collapse of the USSR?
Back to top
View user's profile 
crunchy5Offline
Great Old One
Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Total posts: 1951
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 06-06-2007 09:18    Post subject: Reply with quote

Musical interlude.

http://www.voltairenet.org/article144998.html
Back to top
View user's profile 
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> Conspiracy - The War on Terror All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 8 of 9

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group