Directly or Indirectly? Which is it? no flip flopping here....you have previously claimed that he was DIRECTLY helped by the USA...but now you say it could be either? Sounds like you need to get your facts straight.
I am saying that the US provided the weapons that Al-Qaeda and Bin Laden are using in Afghanistan now. Al-Qaeda operatives were also trained by the US and financed during the days as Muhijadeen in the USSR invasion. Is that crystal clear for you now?
I understand that...but where do YOU stand on the subject...it seems as though you are trying to say both sides of the argument...the people that the US provided weapons to are now the ones that we are fighting along side, not the ones we are fighting.
That is incorrect. Al-Qaeda got it's weapons from the US. Most of the Mujihadeen the US supplied weapons and money to in the 80's either joined the Taleban or Al-Qaeda. This is not a matter of my opinion: it is pure fact.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,98115,00.html http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/08/15/bergen.answers/index.html http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=5443 http://www.nationalreview.com/interrogatory/miniter200511030759.asp Can we get some fresh denial with no sources?