this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2025
782 points (88.9% liked)

Memes

47237 readers
1053 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The CIA using the ISI to transport some weapons and train soldiers isn't "this ISI did everything therefore the Mujahedin weren't supported by the US", it's "the ISI were a tool of the CIA", the operation was run out of Washington. It had US media providing glowing coverage of the Mujahedin as they committed war crimes.

[–] RowRowRowYourBot -5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The ISI being the go between for almost everything does mean those groups the ISI paid are not allies of the USA. If anyone in the Mujahideen needed help we would not have provided it because we are not allies. If the ISI needed help we likely would help depending on the circumstances (we wont fight India for example).

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

The Mujaheddin did need help, they needed weapons, bombs, intelligence, diplomatic support, booby traps specifically procured by the CIA. The US provided it.

And then back home, they used their contacts in the media to make sure everyone knew that the Mujaheddin were the good guys worthy of America's support, even if they were not officially receiving it. Americans, Mujaheddin, and Soviets all understood the US supported the Mujaheddin, even if there was a layer of plausible deniability. It's why the Soviets asked the US to stop the attacks on Soviet soldiers during the pullout and not Pakistan.

The american people were told to see the Mujaheddin as their ally, and the Mujaheddin understood it was the US supporting them.