Rep. Charlie Wilson, a democrat has passed.

[Rupert]

Well, no one can say he wasn't a colorful guy! Many give him major credit for bringing down the Soviets via his staunch support of Afghan fighters. And he never denied that he had fun in life......after all he was "Good Time Charlie"!
Some more background.....I'd like this guy if he was a Republican....If he hiked the Appalachian Trail, he would bring his own girls and a camera crew to catch it all. Charles Wilson (Texas politician) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Regards!

[Wheatfield]

Well, no one can say he wasn't a colorful guy! Many give him major credit for bringing down the Soviets via his staunch support of Afghan fighters.

Yup,he supported those same Afghan fighters that are now leaving IEDs where they can blow up yours and our troops.
How clever and long sighted of him.
Maybe he just didn't like young adults very much.

[Rupert]

Yup,he supported those same Afghan fighters that are now leaving IEDs where they can blow up yours and our troops.
How clever and long sighted of him.
Maybe he just didn't like young adults very much.

Maybe the broken promises we made to those Afghan fighters had a little something to do with it....you think? You read?
Regards!

[Wheatfield]

Maybe the broken promises we made to those Afghan fighters had a little something to do with it....you think? You read?
Regards!

Well maybe.
It doesn't much change the fact that we are now fighting the people you armed 20 years ago.

[gokenin]

Well maybe.
It doesn't much change the fact that we are now fighting the people you armed 20 years ago.

course the munitions we gave them 20 years ago probably have already been used up. so that would mean that they are being supplied by other peoples money that allows them to buy munitions. but thats besides the point. ahhh well thank god for all those poppy fields and the opium they produce that will continue to allow the taliban and everyone else over there to continue to buy weapons to kill us, the soviets in the day, their own people when they dont have anyone else to kill. ok getting off my rant

[Rupert]

Well maybe.
It doesn't much change the fact that we are now fighting the people you armed 20 years ago.

Again...maybe we wouldn't be fighting them if we had kept our promises and helped their economy and their educational system...as we are now promising to do....again. We have a history of leaving before the job is done, and then wondering later "what went wrong"? Old man Bush did the same thing with the Kurds in northern Iraq,.........how did that all work out? They were ready and willing to do our work for us, but we failed and then ended up in yet another blunder of gigantic proportions.
Still, Charlie deserves a lot of credit for bringing down the Soviets....most likely a lot more than Ronald Reagan ever deserved...he basically reaped the benefits of Charlie's work......but he played it well, he was a better actor than President. After all, he started the huge deficit spending that is still going on today, convinced the poor and middle class that making the rich richer would "trickle down" to them....in time, and established "Voodoo Economics" that Jesus George used to nearly bankrupt our entire economy. You can't blame all that on Charlie.....
Regards

[Wheatfield]

Again...maybe we wouldn't be fighting them if we had kept our promises and helped their economy and their educational system...as we are now promising to do....again. We have a history of leaving before the job is done, and then wondering later "what went wrong"? Old man Bush did the same thing with the Kurds in northern Iraq,.........how did that all work out? They were ready and willing to do our work for us, but we failed and then ended up in yet another blunder of gigantic proportions.
Still, Charlie deserves a lot of credit for bringing down the Soviets....most likely a lot more than Ronald Reagan ever deserved...he basically reaped the benefits of Charlie's work......but he played it well, he was a better actor than President. After all, he started the huge deficit spending that is still going on today, convinced the poor and middle class that making the rich richer would "trickle down" to them....in time, and established "Voodoo Economics" that Jesus George used to nearly bankrupt our entire economy. You can't blame all that on Charlie.....
Regards

You are, it seems, still stuck in the McCarthy ere where the "Soviets had to be brought down".
I've always wondered why this particular bit of infantilism controlled America's every waking thought for so long.
I didn't figure it out until after the "Soviets had been brought down" and suddenly your government was casting around for new and improved boogieman to scare the citizenry into line with and somehow they lucked into Al Queda, who even did some of the dirty work for the cause.
Anyway, your foreign policy is full of this sort of stuff.
It's SOP for America to break promises with the world.
And you still probably wonder why no one outside of America really trusts America.

[Wheatfield]

course the munitions we gave them 20 years ago probably have already been used up. so that would mean that they are being supplied by other peoples money that allows them to buy munitions. but thats besides the point. ahhh well thank god for all those poppy fields and the opium they produce that will continue to allow the taliban and everyone else over there to continue to buy weapons to kill us, the soviets in the day, their own people when they dont have anyone else to kill. ok getting off my rant

Interestingly, the Taliban government went out of their way to do away with opium cultivation in Afghanistan.

Who benefits from the Afghan Opium Trade?
The Lies About Taliban Heroin

Maybe come up with some facts next time you get on your soap box.

[Parallax]

I am not a history major so I have a question. This isn't sarcasm I really don't know the answer:

Has there ever been a case where we armed another country in hopes they would defeat an enemy for us that has actually worked out the way we hoped in the long run?

[Rupert]

I am not a history major so I have a question. This isn't sarcasm I really don't know the answer:

Has there ever been a case where we armed another country in hopes they would defeat an enemy for us that has actually worked out the way we hoped in the long run?

I can't think of any? Maybe Grenada?

[Wheatfield]

I am not a history major so I have a question. This isn't sarcasm I really don't know the answer:

Has there ever been a case where we armed another country in hopes they would defeat an enemy for us that has actually worked out the way we hoped in the long run?

I think it worked in WWII when you helped arm GB against the Axis.
As Rupert indicated, it isn't the arming that is the problem, it's the bailing before the job is done.
In WWII, you stuck around until the end.
I don't think you've done that any time since, and now those seeds have borne some pretty bad apples.

[Rupert]

You are, it seems, still stuck in the McCarthy ere where the "Soviets had to be brought down".
I've always wondered why this particular bit of infantilism controlled America's every waking thought for so long.
I didn't figure it out until after the "Soviets had been brought down" and suddenly your government was casting around for new and improved boogieman to scare the citizenry into line with and somehow they lucked into Al Queda, who even did some of the dirty work for the cause.
Anyway, your foreign policy is full of this sort of stuff.
It's SOP for America to break promises with the world.
And you still probably wonder why no one outside of America really trusts America.

Maybe it is because all those nukes didn't bother you since they were pointed at us. You can talk in comfort knowing that your Royal Canadian Piper Cub Air Force will not need to defend your "all loving hinies" ...since we are doing it for you. A two year old doesn't need to worry about his enemies...if his Daddy is Mike Tyson. You don't seem to get that Wheatfield, do you?
Regards!

[Parallax]

I think it worked in WWII when you helped arm GB against the Axis.

No, that isn't within the context of my question as we actually had to enter the fight ourselves. You are both right though about the sticking around part being the key when we do step in.
I was just curious as to whether there has ever been a successful remote control campaign.
Arming Iraq so they would take care of Iran didn't work out so well.
Arming South VietNam wasn't such a blistering success either.
There have been numerous others since WWII that I can't recall off hand.
I starting to think that training Bin Laden may not have been such a red hot idea after all.

[wlank]

Well maybe.
It doesn't much change the fact that we are now fighting the people you armed 20 years ago.

How many Canadian troops are in combat in Afghanistan?