Originally posted by: Zeal17
Sorry to use Wikipedia for it but this is what mentioned over there :
Pakistan's President Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq feared that the Soviets were planning to also invade Balochistan, Pakistan, so he sent Akhtar Abdur Rahman to Saudi Arabia to garner support for the Afghan resistance against Soviet occupation forces. A while later, the US CIA and Saudi Arabian General Intelligence Directorate (GID) funnelled funding and equipment through the Pakistani Inter-Service Intelligence Agency (ISI) to the Afghan mujahideen.[112]
About 90,000 Afghans, including Mohammed Omar, were trained by Pakistan's ISI during the 1980s.[112] British professor Carole Hillenbrand concluded that the Taliban have arisen from those US-Saudi-Pakistan-supported mujahideen: "The West helped the Taliban to fight the Soviet takeover of Afghanistan".[113] Nearly all of the Taliban's original leadership previously fought in the Soviet-Afghan War.
Wikipedia would be laughed out of the room.
Even so, Taliban coming from same people is not even close to the same as Taliban funded by the U.S.
The U.S. left Afghanistan after Soviets were done and Kuwait war started. Taliban was formed in the decade after. A lot of the same people joined them. How does that make the U.S. responsible for Taliban?
What you're claiming is akin to saying an employee who embezzled from Bank B was trained by Bank A because he worked for Bank A previously.
It is always convenient and easy to bash the U.S. because the population will still somehow agree to send their kids to fight for other people. Try doing that with Russia or China. Actually, ask a few people (not governments) who they'd rather have with them in a crisis. Russia or China or the terrible, no good U.S.
Edited by HearMeRoar - 4 years ago