Charlie Wilson's War

medicineman said:

The truth is med your just a simple ASS and you would be the loudist in the crowd hollering for some ones head or to burn the witches. This is not to say that I don't have a soft spot for you because I do.

Why thank you May. Coming from you that is about the most complementary thing I could expect. I am proud to be a simple man, salt of the earth. it may be my Indian blood or my Peyote affiliation, but I'd rather be barefoot than in a 500.00 pair of shoes. It's funny how educated fools from un-educated schools always feel superior. Must be something in the water at those schools.

Click to expand...

Med few work as hard at being an ass as you do, and I think that you do what you do for what you see as a good cause, rightly or wrongly.
Me I have only lied 1 time on the internet and that was on overgrow for what I saw as a good cause and even then it couldn't lead someone down the wrong path and truely didn't amount much. This is not to say that there haven't been lies of omission. Never would I lie about myself, in any of the names that I have used. I must admit though I do have fun walking the edge and always have, I am always more alive when i'm the edge, but for me the edges not only define the boundaries of areas but help to see the truth and truth is what I am about.

VTXDave said:

I hear it didn't even once mention the Carter Administration's funding (and supply of weapons) via the CIA of the Mujahadin even before the invasion of the Soviets. Is that so?

Click to expand...

This is proven to be wrong in the PDF page 2- 2nd par. post 27 of the why thread.

Carter signed the order in 80 the invasion was in 79.

I never understood why you could not see the spin, he only alouded to it and he wanted you to believe it and there wasn't any reason that he couldn't say it outright but he was ambigous without a reason. See your book was just spining his spin.

Did you read that part of the PDF?

may said:

Did you read that part of the PDF?

Click to expand...

I did. I suppose you're right may; former CIA Director Robert Gates and former Nat'l Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, were just blowing smoke when they both declared that our involvement began in July of 1979. Not to mention evidence complied and presented in Johnson's book. True, "officially" our involvement began in December of 1979, which is contradictory to their "claims" of involvement prior to 12/79. I suppose I'll just have to take your word for it. On second thought, I'll trust the multiple sources that I've gleaned this information from.

VTXDave said:

I did. I suppose you're right may; former CIA Director Robert Gates and former Nat'l Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, were just blowing smoke when they both declared that our involvement began in July of 1979. Not to mention evidence complied and presented in Johnson's book. True, "officially" our involvement began in December of 1979, which is contradictory to their "claims" of involvement prior to 12/79. I suppose I'll just have to take your word for it. On second thought, I'll trust the multiple sources that I've gleaned this information from.

Click to expand...

Gee you don't believe your own link? A link that you used as proof against what I had posted? A link that was good enough for me to change something that no one had provided proof of nor had I seen anything in almost 20 years.


Please tell me again WHY I should trust your links when YOU don't even trust the best of them?

I think you should stop gleaning in the garbage. Try nonfiction.

may said:

Gee you don't believe your own link? A link that you used as proof against what I had posted? A link that was good enough for me to change something that no one had provided proof of nor had I seen anything in almost 20 years.


Please tell me again WHY I should trust your links when YOU don't even trust the best of them?

I think you should stop gleaning in the garbage. Try nonfiction.

Click to expand...

The link I provided from the DTIC is just one source I use may, that's all. In fact, the link does not contradict what Gates and Brzezinski claim; it simply begins the analysis with the "official" US involvement in Afghanistan beginning in 12/79. I'm glad you found the article thought provoking, but I do check multiple sources when I research given issues. Based upon what I research and find I draw my conclusions. I will concede that some sources, on some issues, tend to "imply" that certain events transpired and I find myself using Occam's Razor as the litmus test. But I will always check out a given event against multiple sources before I draw a conclusion. Seamaiden and I do this quite regularly and debate each other over this stuff as well....It can get quite entertaining at times....if you know what I mean. Heh heh.

VTXDave said:

The link I provided from the DTIC is just one source I use may, that's all. In fact, the link does not contradict what Gates and Brzezinski claim; it simply begins the analysis with the "official" US involvement in Afghanistan beginning in 12/79. I'm glad you found the article thought provoking, but I do check multiple sources when I research given issues. Based upon what I research and find I draw my conclusions. I will concede that some sources, on some issues, tend to "imply" that certain events transpired and I find myself using Occam's Razor as the litmus test. But I will always check out a given event against multiple sources before I draw a conclusion. Seamaiden and I do this quite regularly and debate each other over this stuff as well....It can get quite entertaining at times....if you know what I mean. Heh heh.

Click to expand...

Well the PDF comes from the real records so we know the timing of the war and of carters orders, so I ask you why??
Would carter countermand his own orders?? There wasn't a reason for that I can think of. What did you and seamaiden think of this in your debate and what was your reasoning?
I can't understand why he would give an order with a stroke of his pen and then change the order with a verbal command?

No mater what I have said of carter he was always honest at least.

Yes the link does not only contradict gates but shows him to be the liar that he known to be, as for brzezinski he was just spinning the truth.
The dates of the orders give proof of this.

Some of the biggest bullshit floating around the web would have hundreds sources saying the same thing. It doesn't make it the truth.

Please git back to me on why and how you both came to this concolusion?