You mean Reaganistan would be a modern economy with roads and schools and literacy instead of being a Taliban outpost!
Oh for shame!
Face it, Reagan sided with the people who throw acid in the face of school girls rather than the people who ended feudalism and build schools.
"Romney's 47% comment is a country-club fantasy"
- David Brooks
I take you know nothing about Afghanistan history and why the Soviets came in.
Let me assist you.
The progressive anti-feudal elements took over the government (partially through constitutional means and partially through some fudging) and stated modernizing the nation -- eliminating discrimination against women, secularizing the government, building schools, road, hospitals, etc.
The reactionary islamic extremists and drug war lords reacted with a terrorists campaign. The legitimate goverment invited the Soviets in to quell the reactionaries. The Soviets probably would have one since they were utterly ruthless in killing the sickminded jihadists -- but Reagan sent the terrorists, including Bin Laden, money and stinger missiles.
Man, why is it the conservatives have absolute no knowledge of the history of what their "heroes" did?
"Romney's 47% comment is a country-club fantasy"
- David Brooks
I agree with your assessment about what the Soviets were doing. I am not sure that they would have succeeded over the long term. But I certainly respect your position.
But back to history. The US was not acting in Afghanistan out of any other reason than to counter the spread of international communism.
Yes, as I said, Reagan's strategy was to use the Afghani opposition to wage surrogate war on the Soviets and thereby weaken them. And it worked. However, so did the law of unintended consequences. Reagan and everyone else failed to heed the history of this country in perpetual war with anyone from the outside who stupidly ventured there.
The Soviet sponsered government was not a popular one. Moreover, I'm not sure what Joaquin means by "legitimate" considering the fact that PDPA came to power via a coup. In any case, what I find truly amusing about this is that Joaquin speaks sympathetically about Soviet nation building but condemns neocon nation building. Dude, get your beliefs straight.
Whoever criticizes capitalism, while approving immigration, whose working class is its first victim, had better shut up. Whoever criticizes immigration, while remaining silent about capitalism, should do the same.
~Alain de Benoist
Whoever criticizes capitalism, while approving immigration, whose working class is its first victim, had better shut up. Whoever criticizes immigration, while remaining silent about capitalism, should do the same.
~Alain de Benoist