It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

So Many Conservatives On Social Media Worshiping Reagan Without Knowing He Armed Bin Laden?

page: 4
13
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 07:39 PM
link   
a reply to: cavtrooper7




Russians ran them off to Syria and WE gave them to them so the profile was kept low..not that Jr was any mensa graduate...


If by 'we' means China,the US, and Europe then I would agree.

IF not we disagree.



Wikipedia's article on Iraq's WMDs gives a good rundown of the international contributions: All told, 52% of Iraq's international chemical weapon equipment was of German origin. Around 21% of Iraq’s international chemical weapon equipment was French. About 100 tons of mustard gas also came from Brazil. The United Kingdom paid for a chlorine factory that was intended to be used for manufacturing mustard gas An Austrian company gave Iraq calutrons for enriching uranium. The nation also provided heat exchangers, tanks, condensers, and columns for the Iraqi chemical weapons infrastructure, 16% of the international sales. Singapore gave 4,515 tons of precursors for VX, sarin, tabun, and mustard gasses to Iraq. The Dutch gave 4,261 tons of precursors for sarin, tabun, mustard, and tear gasses to Iraq. Egypt gave 2,400 tons of tabun and sarin precursors to Iraq and 28,500 tons of weapons designed for carrying chemical munitions. India gave 2,343 tons of precursors to VX, tabun, Sarin, and mustard gasses. Luxemburg gave Iraq 650 tons of mustard gas precursors. Spain gave Iraq 57,500 munitions designed for carrying chemical weapons. In addition, they provided reactors, condensers, columns and tanks for Iraq’s chemical warfare program, 4.4% of the international sales. China provided 45,000 munitions designed for chemical warfare.


The correct 'we'.




posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 07:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog

ha! Sounds like good times for sure..
Nothing like memories, from the good ol days yeah..



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 08:16 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Yeah what you said...



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 09:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: TechniXcality
It's easy to say now, the threat of communism was a farce (because we effectively outspent it and beat it back at every corner of world) truth is, you could just as soon blame Russia, no one knew that arming these people in the fight against communism would usher in an age of extremism unlike ever seen before.


No, they knew. There's been several interviews with the people involved who stated as much. They were looking at the needs of the present over the needs of the future though. In politics, particularly in democracies everything is about what you've done recently. Long term problems caused by short term decisions are rarely ever considered because it will be someone elses problem. There's zero incentive to plan long term.



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 10:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Arizonaguy

do you really believe all these decisions made during Reagan's administration were his alone, or that he even fully understood the long term ramifications of them

Or his at all. And as far as ramifications I doubt he could see anything beyond the day after tomorrow.



posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 04:30 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

From your own post.



I thought it was 'proven' beyond a shadow of a doubt that Saddam didn't have 'wmds'.


Saddam didn't have an WMD. chemical weapons stockpiles are different manner.



posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 04:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Tiamat384

It's called blowback because as soon as the war was over, the Mujahideen lost all the funding and support and were left out in the cold.

At least the OP didn't drop the cliched al-CIAda line...



posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 04:40 AM
link   
a reply to: TaleDawn

Chemical weapons are WMD's..



posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 04:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Chadwickus




Chemical weapons are WMD's..


Not if you don't want them to be...which seems to be the way the OP views them.



posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 04:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Chadwickus




At least the OP didn't drop the cliched al-CIAda line...


Not yet...there's still time.



posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 06:04 AM
link   
So many liberals on social media worshipping Obama without knowing he armed ISIS...



posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 06:35 AM
link   


Money comes from Congress


there was this freelance event known as Iran-Contra which dealt with money and arms.



posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 12:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Chadwickus




At least the OP didn't drop the cliched al-CIAda line...


And they would be wrong if they did.

Sunni Islamic terrorism,

AKA wahabbism comes from the land of Saudi Arabia, and it's GIP.

Basically it's pmc/Blackwater.



posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 12:55 PM
link   
One more for the road.



Ibn Saud had conquered most of the Arabian peninsula and consolidated it into one kingdom with the help of the fanatically religious Wahhabi Bedouins, who believed, among other things, that dying in battle was a ticket to paradise, that all images, from pictures to statues, had to be destroyed, that drinking and smoking and singing and dancing were sins punishable by whipping, and so forth.


That sounds familiar doesn't it ?

articles.baltimoresun.com...

IF we were being intellectually honest about what's what.



posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 01:42 PM
link   
a reply to: TaleDawn



He armed Bin Laden because Russia invaded Afghanistan. They weren't an enemy at the time. Sorry he didn't have a crystal ball to figure out that they would attack us 30 years later.



posted on Mar, 15 2016 @ 01:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: avgguy
So many liberals on social media worshipping Obama without knowing he armed ISIS...



liberals don't "worship" anyone....why do conservatives like you keep using phrases like that when they have no meaning and are not factual...I have not met 1 single liberal that says they "worship" Obama. it's the "frank Luntz" affect.......
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 03:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Chadwickus

Chemical Stockpiles. Do not count. America was supposedly looking for active WMD, in reality Saddam didn't have any active WMD program.

I cant believe since the Iraqi war you GW Bush defenders still believe the lie.

What a small world.
edit on 21-3-2016 by TaleDawn because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 03:53 PM
link   
a reply to: chuck258

Not quite, He armed Bin Laden not because the Russians were in Afghanistan but because he was worried about America's losing the geopolitical influence.



Sorry he didn't have a crystal ball to figure out that they would attack us 30 years later.

I doubt he even cared and he probably was aware of the blow back but didn't care. As long America had the regional influence.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join