Two Blackwater guards arrested by FBI on murder charges

I have actually done research on this and seeing as how most Americas view of history is as shallow as a kiddie pool filled with glorious revisionist history... WOW

Ok, so you have researched it (you claim), good for you. Why don't you enlighten us with your vast knowledge on the subject? What in my version of this cold war battle front is revisionist and shallower than the kiddy pool? Did America secretly have control over the Politburo and Soviet Army and order them to invade? That would have been a neat trick. I know it is easier to bash Americans' intelligence than to come up with any concrete argument, but give the latter a try.

If anything this proves you like to make emotional arguments that sound right but are fundamentally devoid of any logic or respect for historical accuracy. First off the claim that Cater may or may not have capitalized on an opportunity automatically entails that any or all previous actions were made with the same intention (ie to bait the Soviet union into war) is completely unsound. For instance,

A man in a truck is stopped at a green light. For days his transmission has been acting weird. In an attempt to forcefully shift into first gear he revs the engine high, drops the clutch and as a result rockets forward and runs over his soon to be ex-wife.

By your biased reasoning that man is obviously guilty. That in essence is your emotional argument.

As for the rest of your argument I call bullshit. If your really privy to what the CIA did in ‘79 then why have you consistently failed to provide documentation for what happened? That’s because your take on the events are wrong for two reasons.

First US officials met with Afghan rebels in April and July of ‘79 and in both cases turned down requests for military aid. At best they received aid for anti-DRA demonstrations.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB57/essay.html

From the source.

“CIA and State Department documents seized by Iranian students during the takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran in November 1979, reveal that, starting in April 1979, eight months before the Soviet intervention and immediately following Brzezinski’s SCC decision, the United States had, in fact, begun quietly meeting rebel representatives. Although most of the cables and memoranda released to date show that U.S. officials politely turned down rebel requests for U.S. assistance, others reveal CIA support for anti-DRA demonstrations and close monitoring of Pakistani military aid for rebel parties based in Pakistan’s NWFP.

Brzezinski’s decision to help the rebels was curious in light of Soviet activities in Afghanistan at the time. According to declassified documents and this author’s interviews, Soviet officials thought the Khalqi leadership was moving too fast with its reforms and urged Taraki and Amin to moderate the pace of change and broaden their political base by including non-communists in the government. This approach, however, was more amenable to Parcham leaders who, unfortunately for Soviet officials, were not in power. When Khalq leaders sidestepped Soviet advice, Moscow sought other means to induce political change, meeting with former members of the monarchy and other non-communists to seek their participation in the DRA government. Soviet and other East bloc diplomats in Kabul kept the U.S. Embassy informed of their efforts.”

The soviets and the Americans conducted peace keeping meetings with the same groups at the same time. In fact both were aware of each others actions because the US and Soviet Union up until that point were committed to preventing a war.

Secondly none of those actions actually influenced the Soviet Union to invade. The Soviet’s invaded first and foremost because they wanted to remove Amin from power and second because they believed the US was trying to create a true Pashtun state.

Here are the declassified Soviet documents that will attest to that decision.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB57/r8.doc

The US was never interested in creating a Pashtun state as evidenced by the fact that they worked closely with Pakistani intelligence to recruit and fund Afghan freedom fighters. Pakistan was involved in the entire conflict to prevent the creation of a Pashtun state so the idea that the US was attempting to create such a state through an organization specifically charged with preventing one constitutes a massive attempt to rewrite history.

A there’s a short bus for your argument to ride on. Really V you need to start mixing it up. It’s scary how consistently you stick to that dismissive, holier-than-thou M.O.

Seriously, once again you’ve done nothing but base your wild belief’s on an unsubstantiated conspiracy website that for obvious reasons lacks any credentials or respect by anyone other than conspiracy theorists. In keeping with your M.O once challenged by an argument that not only pokes holes in the logic behind your post and the “facts” you provide you high tail it back to adolescent response land and bust out with a gif or jpeg.

What’s really interesting, at least with this go around, is that your distortion of history when boiled down to basics essentially claims that the clusterfuck which was/is our foreign policy with Afghanistan wasn’t actually a clusterfuck but instead an actual third part POV of the old line, “Oh I meant to do that.” In fact your argument, or lack there of, is so pathetically inadequate that even though I’m compelled by some sense of superiority to believe that it’s an intentional flame war I’m ultimately still convinced that you actually believe what you say.

no....*sigh*

“You systematically make it personal, make it about me, and each and every time, you paint me with your own flaws”

Holy hell I completely forgot about that. Yes this is the final stage of the your M.O the “projection” line. Great I love this part. This is where I summerize all my points and shrug off all your ridiculous counter arguments (if you can all them that).

First off I never made it personal. If I had I would’ve been censored by the staff and I wasn’t.

“called projection, dearie.”

No V it’s not you don’t know what you’re talking about. My charge against you was simple. Your arguments were emotional, simplistic, unrealistic, and based upon info from a conspiracy theory website. Worst still the claims you made were not even substantiated by the source material.

On the other hand my argument is based upon declassified documents straight from the Soviet Union and the US. In fact my argument isn’t really my argument It just happens to be the best recollection or understanding of the entire issue from the perspective of many, many individuals that were actually involved in the conflict.

That’s why the arguments put forth from conspiracy theorists such as yourself are so nutters. There is a near endless supply of information, straight from the source, that will attest to the ridiculousness of your claim. Hell there’s probably even a fair share of info that will help to validate your argument however I don’t see you posting it. Instead you abandon all hope of defending your position whenever confronted by anyone and take the holier than thou approach.

Denica_Cassandra
Dear god that's amazing.

Ricky, your responses to me are always about me, it seems that you are obsessed by me. If they are not removed it is because I don't flag them - I much more enjoy knowing how so many people read them and laugh at you.

No one has personally attacked you at all. All I’ve done is offer a rebuttal to your claims and the obviously well established manner in which you dismiss the huge inaccuracies of your conspiracy theories. On the other hand most of what said besides the single attempt you made at defending your bullshit is intentionally inflammatory and much closer than I have ever come to an actual personal attack.

Get over it or call the whambulance. As far as things go I’m done. You couldn’t come up with an honest rebuttal for any of points so it’s obvious how much you honestly know about the matter.

Where did I say that anyone personally attacked me? I merely pointed out that every single post of yours in response to anything I post is about me, and it shows your obsession about me. Now, go back to sleep.

It’s hilarious how you can go from happy to prove someone wrong to beating the death out of the charge of obsessed in a mater of a few posts. I guess that’s the way people act when a bullshit argument meets the light of day.

There you go again - posting about me!

By definition, professional soldiers are mercenaries.

Indeed you are correct we employ a professional fighting force of mostly lifers who get paid for their service. Essentially a permanent mercenary army.

Paranoid Monkey, you can count on religion not being an influence on me. I think for myself, I don't let some child molesting, bomb building, money grubbing slime ball from any religion influence anything I do. Religious people are just like anyone else. There are good ones. There are bad ones. But the religious ones always seem to be using their religion as an excuse to molest kids, keep women from getting educated, killing people because they are from a different religion and therefor are wrong and must die (the Muslims), I could go on and on. Don't you have a paranoid rant about the CIA to monitor or something?

And the world hates us because we back the Isrealis. And for the most part, we aren't Muslims.

Trying to invalidate an entire culture is ignorant. Just because you don't understand why they don't want an iPod doesn't mean that their way of life is inferior to ours.

Lucretia. LOL

Just because they dont want an ipod... How about not shitting in a hole in front of their dirt houses. The place is an absolute shit hole. The people that live there are literally from the stone age, oh and i forgot. They are lazy as f*ck.

40 years ago it wasn't that way. 30 years of constant warfare and drug-lording tends to change a place.

It's one thing to be an ignorant twat, but you're talking about people who have gone through unbelievable suffering. In a story about civilian murder by occupying forces no less. Please don't procreate.

Opressed, have you ever been to Afghanistan? I have, and I can tell you that you are dead wrong.

Exactly when did you visit the beautiful land of afghanistan. In the 80's when they were being bombed, 90 when they were being ripped apart from civil war or the last 10 years where we have bombed every inch of there.? Afghanistan is allot like arizona, just allot shittier.

In the seventies, eighties and nineties. It was a beautiful country until the US enticed the URSS to invade, then financed and trained the Taliban, and finally bombed the shit out of it with DU. Still, parts of it remain largely untouched and unharmed. My daughter's father comes from Paktia.

“It was a beautiful country until the US enticed the URSS to invade”

There you go again V rewriting history and trying to pass it off as fact. The USSR did not invade Afghanistan because the US enticed it. The US government had no faith in the ability of Afghan people to repeal the might of the Soviet Union. The whole point of US involvement, domestically and militarily, was to buy off their trust or friendship so that the Afghan’s would serve as a buffer to Soviet expansion.

Happy to prove you wrong as always, Ricky:

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/27c/467.html

INTERVIEW OF ZBIGNIEW BREZINSKI
National Security Adviser in the Carter Administration

Q: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs ["From the Shadows"], that American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct?

Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise: Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.

Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?

B: It isn't quite that. We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.

Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn't believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don't regret anything today?

B: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter: We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.

Private armies ring too close to fascist Italy or Nazi Germany...

None of my money to abortions then...

Rick when you grow falopian tubes and a uterus, I will care about your opinion on a woman's right to choose. Otherwise that response had nothing to do with the subject at hand.

Or shoot him in the face...

I never get tired of that joke. :D

Me neither, Lucretia. :D

i agree, and can see this happening, it's all for show.
Same thing in UK with our "Iraq enquiry" which im sure is being resided over by a load of over paid toffs who have probably already came to their decision, and Tony Blair will never pay for what he and his friends did to this country, they will never pay unless WE make them.