Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Why join MGSF?
  • MGSF is officially the internet's largest MGS discussion board. So, you can enjoy your time with an active community of dedicated MGS fans.
  • Want more than just MGS talk? MGSF has a huge off-topic section for Opinions, Sport, Music, Movies, and other video games!
  • Organizations! Create your own or join an existing one. Organizations are sub-communities of the forum designed so you can gather with your closest friends on the board.
  • Blog! As a member, you have the ability to create your own blog on the forum for other users and/or guests to read.
  • Our forum also has an Arts sections for you to express your creative side, as well as a Digital Art forum in the computer corner.
  • We also have a Kojima Productions forum for members who wish to discuss KP-related issues outside of MGS.
Join our community today!

If you are already a member, please log in to your account to access all of your features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
the CIA funding bin laden?
Topic Started: Aug 4 2013, 07:58:35 AM (1,180 Views)
kilo_bravo
Member Avatar
Heavily-Armed Trooper
this is in response to a off topic debate here http://mgsforums.com/topic/7638590/4/#new


Quote:
 
It's widely known that the US Government/CIA funded Mujahideen groups, supplying them with weapons through the Pakistani government to help them win the war against The Soviets and their national army.


yes we known this both the CIA and MI-6 helped the mujahideen in someway

Quote:
 
One of these groups was an early version of Al-Qaeda. Bin Laden himself was from a wealthy family and provided additional funding to these groups and sources say that he worked alongside the CIA during the war to consolidate and distribute these funds,


the AL-Qaeda came around 1988 however theres was a group called MAK. MAK maintained a close liaison with Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency through which the CIA and the intelligence agency of Saudi Arabia Al Mukhabarat Al A'amah funneled money to Afghan Mujaheddin.

Quote:
 
Bin Laden was nowhere near as anti-american during the war as he was in the following years and like the other Mujahideen he was grateful for their assistance during that time, in fact two time Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto (who admittedly may be a bit biased) also stated in an interview that he was initially pro-American and many other reputable individuals have stated on camera and in other forms of media that he was grateful of this help.


thats crap as stated above the AL-Qaeda come around 1988 he may have been thankful but not pro-western

Quote:
 
At some point after the war (when he and his fellow fundementalist were no longer profitting from the US) his idealogy appeared to change to one of anti Americanism and he and other affiliates of Al-Qaeda (including Ali Mohamed, who did work for the CIA) began to plot terrorist attacks against the US.
ok this is wear MAK comes in basically it was run by two guys one wanted to help Afghanistan the other wanted global jihad laden wanted jihad aswell the help afghan guy was killed and MAK meged in AL-Qaeda

Quote:
 
Many people claim that Bin Laden was actually trained by the CIA but I dont think there's enough evidence to support this however they may have indirectly given him some training through the American techniques taught by Ali Mohamed.
yes most likely
Spoiler: click to toggle

Spoiler: click to toggle
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hasa92
Member Avatar
Heavily-Armed Trooper
This could actually be the taboo Kojima was talking about, killing child soldiers and torturing doesn't sound that bad but if the main character in the game is allied with the most know terrorist ever, many might reconsider buying the game.
Edited by Hasa92, Aug 4 2013, 08:10:16 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Baneposter
Member Avatar
Only me

Sorry if i'm mistaken, but OJ did not mean they were Al-Qaeda, but an awful lot of modern Mujaheddin/Al Qaeda members were originally part of the militia supplied by the US, and that came back and bit them pretty much. Direct, indirect, does not really matter, 'Laden was supplied/trained/indirectly trained in some form or fashion by the US. It's not far fetched to imagine he had pro-American ideologies at the time because of the help he was given and the immense supplies, and when the funds were cut short and their interested no longer aligned, alas, the terrorist that we know was born.
Posted Image
Spoiler: click to toggle
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Baneposter
Member Avatar
Only me

Hasa92
Aug 4 2013, 08:09:04 AM
This could actually be the taboo Kojima was talking about, killing child soldiers and torturing doesn't sound that bad but if the main character in the game is allied with the most know terrorist ever, many might reconsider buying the game.
Lol sorry, Kojima is not dumb. It's a ground not even movies touch upon that often, to assume this game will is pretty radical. The wound is still too fresh in many people's mind for that to even happen.
Also, if killing children turned soldiers isn't bad, then what is bad? eating them alive as you maniacally laugh over their blood pool? :huh:
Edited by The Baneposter, Aug 4 2013, 08:18:55 AM.
Posted Image
Spoiler: click to toggle
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kilo_bravo
Member Avatar
Heavily-Armed Trooper
ex mujahideen guys becoming AL-Qaeda is pretty much yes,no,could be

Quote:
 
It's not far fetched to imagine he had pro-American ideologies at the time because of the help he was given and the immense supplies, and when the funds were cut short and their interested no longer aligned, alas, the terrorist that we know was born.


so "hey merica stopped given the mujah money lets hate them now"?
Spoiler: click to toggle

Spoiler: click to toggle
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Baneposter
Member Avatar
Only me

It has a pretty big chance of being a yes. It falls under the same ideology and time period with the climate surrounding the founding of Al Qaeda.
America stopped lending support, funds, training, whatever you want to call it. Thus, the Mujaheddin turned on them, or Bin Laden, once America stopped the support to further Bin Laden's agendas. Seems pretty straight forward to me.
Posted Image
Spoiler: click to toggle
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kilo_bravo
Member Avatar
Heavily-Armed Trooper
why would the mujahideen turn on them after they won thanks to the funding?
Spoiler: click to toggle

Spoiler: click to toggle
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Intandem
Member Avatar


Dang, seems like we're still funding rebel terrorist groups indirectly through funding "freedom fighters" in the Middle East (did we ever stop?).

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/congress/item/15515-rand-paul-senate-is-arming-al-qaeda-and-rushing-to-war-in-syria

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
See Greene


I for one dont mind the government supporting rebels. Hell, if I could aid people in gaining their freedom I would. Everyone deserves freedom. No matter the cost.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Hasa92
Member Avatar
Heavily-Armed Trooper
Aragorn
Aug 4 2013, 08:15:29 AM
Lol sorry, Kojima is not dumb. It's a ground not even movies touch upon that often, to assume this game will is pretty radical. The wound is still too fresh in many people's mind for that to even happen.
Also, if killing children turned soldiers isn't bad, then what is bad? eating them alive as you maniacally laugh over their blood pool? :huh:
Video games are "allowed" to be much more gore, evil, taboo than movies by society.

I don't know any top selling movie where the main character kills multiple civilians, eats other human beings, launches nuclear bombs etc.

I know record selling video games that have done some of those exact things, from the top of my head:

Fallout, Cod, GTA, Skyrim and so on.

Now the worst i can think when i think of a Movie that was Taboo yet very popular i gotta go with SAW...
And no i don't think SAW movies are even that bad, some of the scenes were just a bit disgusting, video games are way worse.

The only thing "mainstream" video games haven't done to my knowledge is killing innocent children. When Kojima says he is a bit afraid of releasing the game because of the taboos in the game, i think it is something really, really bad worse than "just" shooting child soldiers.
Edited by Hasa92, Aug 4 2013, 09:06:43 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jc55
Member Avatar
Covert Taskforce Member
2007 - 2015

The Black man is God
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kilo_bravo
Member Avatar
Heavily-Armed Trooper
did you just try and make a point with a rap song?
Spoiler: click to toggle

Spoiler: click to toggle
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mamba
Member Avatar
The future ain't what it used to be...
What's left to debate?
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jc55
Member Avatar
Covert Taskforce Member
Yes. Yes I did.

I don't recall there being any mention of Cadillacs nor the smacking of one's hos.
2007 - 2015

The Black man is God
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kilo_bravo
Member Avatar
Heavily-Armed Trooper
Mamba
Aug 4 2013, 12:04:19 PM
i already address that

two news story only a coupe of days after 9/11 :hmm:
Edited by kilo_bravo, Aug 4 2013, 01:44:55 PM.
Spoiler: click to toggle

Spoiler: click to toggle
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Intandem
Member Avatar


See Greene
Aug 4 2013, 08:51:52 AM
I for one dont mind the government supporting rebels. Hell, if I could aid people in gaining their freedom I would. Everyone deserves freedom. No matter the cost.
I hope you're not serious. The U.S supporting rebel groups leads to blowback against us. For example, the Benghazi consulate attack on 9/11 of last year occurred because we were supporting forces that were opposed to western influence in the Middle East. Weapons supplied by the U.S ended up in their hands and they blew back against our Ambassador and Embassy, killing 4 Americans and numerous security personnel. Same thing happened with 9/11. We support these groups without regard to their affiliation as long as they serve the interest of U.S foreign policy.

Do you really think the U.S cares about freedom? Tell me about how much better off Iraq and Afghanistan is for us meddling in their affairs. There has been more death and carnage brought on by our influence than what any dictator laid before us. Over 1 million Iraqi deaths, mostly civilians including countless numbers of women and children. Most drone strikes end up striking civilians rather than their intended target. Or if a drone strike does reach its target, it causes untold amounts of collateral damage that raises moral objections to its effectiveness.

The U.S does not care about people or freedom, the U.S cares about maintaing its hegemony and securing resources, mostly oil and economic influence throughout the Middle East. The U.S is hanging on a thread by the petro dollar, our economy is in shambles yet we continue to exert our power over sees.

If you think the war in Syria is about the people liberating themselves, you are wrong. Most of the fighters against Assad are from outside of the country, with an Islamic Jihad occurring in the region whereupon various 3rd party factions form the rebel groups - including factions aligned with Al Qaeda. So why is it okay to support Al Qaeda when they serve our interest, but when they turn against us, they're our enemy? Shouldn't they always be the enemy since they supposedly perpetrated 9/11?

The war against Syria is an indirect proxy war against Russia. The real goal is Iran. The U.S/Western Powers cannot move against Iran until Syria is out of the picture as Syria and Iran are close allies and have signed a mutual defence pact. Beyond that, Russia and China have pledged to defend Iran and Syria, and it seems that Russia has drawn a line in the sand over Syria and will not allow any direct meddling by the U.S or Nato as they did in Libya.

The U.S has one goal: Domination of the Middle East, not the freedom of its people. If the U.S cared about liberating people under dictatorships, the U.S would have supported the uprisings in Saudi Arabia which is a dictatorial monarchy. Saudi Arabia openly slaughtered its civilians when an uprising occurred, yet the U.S and western nations didn't stand up then. The U.S picks and chooses which countries to "aid" because the U.S isn't really supporting freedom, the U.S is supporting which ever group/power that will cow-tail to it's policy.

The invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan was a calculated move, along with the coup d'tat in Libya against Ghaddafi and the ongoing civil war in Syria. We really have no right what so ever to be meddling in other countries affairs. If another country is having a civil war, let them sort it out. By the U.S meddling in foreign nations affairs, it shows no regard or respect for another nation's sovereignty. Imagine if the same thing was happening here in the U.S where the people finally stood up against a corrupt, tyrannical, corporate government and Russia and China decided to step in by sending aid to influence and support factions within the U.S that would benefit their interest, and furthermore, declared a no fly zone over parts of America and turned that into a "legal" bombing campaign against the standing army of the U.S - the U.S would declare war.

The U.S planned this incursion in the Middle East before the events of 9/11. 9/11 served as the casus beli (initiation for war) that certain elements within the U.S needed in order to effectively carry out the Project for a New American Century (look it up), wherein its policies called for another attack on the mainland of the U.S akin to Pearl Harbor.

Here's the Allied Supreme Commander General Wesley Clark admitting his surprise to the fact that the higher ups in the Federal Administration of the U.S directly planned and order an overarching attack against 7 countries in the Middle East in order to preserve our dominance over the resources held in the region:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RC1Mepk_Sw

Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Somalia, Sudan, and finally Iran. Is it a coincidence that we're involved militarily in most of these countries? Africom is involved in Africa and we have drones in the continent and various contingents carrying out operations, where as Iraq and Afghanistan were overt strikes, the war against Syria and Libya is one of subversion rather than open force.

Do you really think that the U.S is involved because of freedom? How is it that we're going to war for other countries' freedom when our civil liberties and rights are slowly being eroded from beneath our feet? The Patriot Act, the Authorization for Use of Military Force, the National Defence Authorization Act, the National Defence Preparedness Act, PRISM and various spying programs all aimed at the domestic population of the United States. All of this in the name of protecting our security and supposedly our freedom. Well history shows that when the populace of a country willingly gives power and freedom away to its government, that government generally never returns that power. The U.S has declared this war on terror indefinite and the whole world as being a battle ground. The U.S has suspended the constitution and has deemed Americans as being worthy of being killed and detained indefinitely without due process and a trial. We have lost our autonomy as citizens of this once great nation.

Do you still wake up in the morning and smell the freedom? Because if so, it's bullshit.
Edited by Intandem, Aug 4 2013, 04:36:07 PM.

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Baneposter
Member Avatar
Only me

Hasa92
Aug 4 2013, 09:06:06 AM
Aragorn
Aug 4 2013, 08:15:29 AM
Lol sorry, Kojima is not dumb. It's a ground not even movies touch upon that often, to assume this game will is pretty radical. The wound is still too fresh in many people's mind for that to even happen.
Also, if killing children turned soldiers isn't bad, then what is bad? eating them alive as you maniacally laugh over their blood pool? :huh:
Video games are "allowed" to be much more gore, evil, taboo than movies by society.

I don't know any top selling movie where the main character kills multiple civilians, eats other human beings, launches nuclear bombs etc.

I know record selling video games that have done some of those exact things, from the top of my head:

Fallout, Cod, GTA, Skyrim and so on.

Now the worst i can think when i think of a Movie that was Taboo yet very popular i gotta go with SAW...
And no i don't think SAW movies are even that bad, some of the scenes were just a bit disgusting, video games are way worse.

The only thing "mainstream" video games haven't done to my knowledge is killing innocent children. When Kojima says he is a bit afraid of releasing the game because of the taboos in the game, i think it is something really, really bad worse than "just" shooting child soldiers.
Lol, that's because movies do that regularly. CoD? there are a bajillion violent movies out there about war, some even have children being killed in them, like Blood Diamonds *Great movie by the way, go see it* cannibalism is also pretty standard in games, you don't even really get to see the cannibalism in Skyrim. Gore and violence stopped being taboo in movies long time ago, while games get a whole lot of shit for it. See where i'm going with this?

Kilo@ because they stopped, essentially. Bin Laden/Mujah's agendas and goals stopped receiving support from America, and Bin Laden became anti-American.
Posted Image
Spoiler: click to toggle
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
See Greene


Intandem
Aug 4 2013, 03:58:06 PM
See Greene
Aug 4 2013, 08:51:52 AM
I for one dont mind the government supporting rebels. Hell, if I could aid people in gaining their freedom I would. Everyone deserves freedom. No matter the cost.
I hope you're not serious. The U.S supporting rebel groups leads to blowback against us. For example, the Benghazi consulate attack on 9/11 of last year occurred because we were supporting forces that were opposed to western influence in the Middle East. Weapons supplied by the U.S ended up in their hands and they blew back against our Ambassador and Embassy, killing 4 Americans and numerous security personnel. Same thing happened with 9/11. We support these groups without regard to their affiliation as long as they serve the interest of U.S foreign policy.

Do you really think the U.S cares about freedom? Tell me about how much better off Iraq and Afghanistan is for us meddling in their affairs. There has been more death and carnage brought on by our influence than what any dictator laid before us. Over 1 million Iraqi deaths, mostly civilians including countless numbers of women and children. Most drone strikes end up striking civilians rather than their intended target. Or if a drone strike does reach its target, it causes untold amounts of collateral damage that raises moral objections to its effectiveness.

The U.S does not care about people or freedom, the U.S cares about maintaing its hegemony and securing resources, mostly oil and economic influence throughout the Middle East. The U.S is hanging on a thread by the petro dollar, our economy is in shambles yet we continue to exert our power over sees.

If you think the war in Syria is about the people liberating themselves, you are wrong. Most of the fighters against Assad are from outside of the country, with an Islamic Jihad occurring in the region whereupon various 3rd party factions form the rebel groups - including factions aligned with Al Qaeda. So why is it okay to support Al Qaeda when they serve our interest, but when they turn against us, they're our enemy? Shouldn't they always be the enemy since they supposedly perpetrated 9/11?

The war against Syria is an indirect proxy war against Russia. The real goal is Iran. The U.S/Western Powers cannot move against Iran until Syria is out of the picture as Syria and Iran are close allies and have signed a mutual defence pact. Beyond that, Russia and China have pledged to defend Iran and Syria, and it seems that Russia has drawn a line in the sand over Syria and will not allow any direct meddling by the U.S or Nato as they did in Libya.

The U.S has one goal: Domination of the Middle East, not the freedom of its people. If the U.S cared about liberating people under dictatorships, the U.S would have supported the uprisings in Saudi Arabia which is a dictatorial monarchy. Saudi Arabia openly slaughtered its civilians when an uprising occurred, yet the U.S and western nations didn't stand up then. The U.S picks and chooses which countries to "aid" because the U.S isn't really supporting freedom, the U.S is supporting which ever group/power that will cow-tail to it's policy.

The invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan was a calculated move, along with the coup d'tat in Libya against Ghaddafi and the ongoing civil war in Syria. We really have no right what so ever to be meddling in other countries affairs. If another country is having a civil war, let them sort it out. By the U.S meddling in foreign nations affairs, it shows no regard or respect for another nation's sovereignty. Imagine if the same thing was happening here in the U.S where the people finally stood up against a corrupt, tyrannical, corporate government and Russia and China decided to step in by sending aid to influence and support factions within the U.S that would benefit their interest, and furthermore, declared a no fly zone over parts of America and turned that into a "legal" bombing campaign against the standing army of the U.S - the U.S would declare war.

The U.S planned this incursion in the Middle East before the events of 9/11. 9/11 served as the casus beli (initiation for war) that certain elements within the U.S needed in order to effectively carry out the Project for a New American Century (look it up), wherein its policies called for another attack on the mainland of the U.S akin to Pearl Harbor.

Here's the Allied Supreme Commander General Wesley Clark admitting his surprise to the fact that the higher ups in the Federal Administration of the U.S directly planned and order an overarching attack against 7 countries in the Middle East in order to preserve our dominance over the resources held in the region:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RC1Mepk_Sw

Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Somalia, Sudan, and finally Iran. Is it a coincidence that we're involved militarily in most of these countries? Africom is involved in Africa and we have drones in the continent and various contingents carrying out operations, where as Iraq and Afghanistan were overt strikes, the war against Syria and Libya is one of subversion rather than open force.

Do you really think that the U.S is involved because of freedom? How is it that we're going to war for other countries' freedom when our civil liberties and rights are slowly being eroded from beneath our feet? The Patriot Act, the Authorization for Use of Military Force, the National Defence Authorization Act, the National Defence Preparedness Act, PRISM and various spying programs all aimed at the domestic population of the United States. All of this in the name of protecting our security and supposedly our freedom. Well history shows that when the populace of a country willingly gives power and freedom away to its government, that government generally never returns that power. The U.S has declared this war on terror indefinite and the whole world as being a battle ground. The U.S has suspended the constitution and has deemed Americans as being worthy of being killed and detained indefinitely without due process and a trial. We have lost our autonomy as citizens of this once great nation.

Do you still wake up in the morning and smell the freedom? Because if so, it's bullshit.
I am not going to read any of that. You know why?

I guarantee you its full of "what about America, what about me, what about 9/11, (insert conspiracy theory here)"

Maybe instead of thinking about your self and your own country you should think about the others that are suffereing.

now i did read this part: "Do you really think the U.S cares about freedom? Tell me about how much better off Iraq and Afghanistan is"

Financially backing someones cause is completely different from invading their country and staying there for 10+ years.





"I guarantee you its full of "what about America, what about me, what about 9/11, (insert conspiracy theory here)""

Was I right?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Baneposter
Member Avatar
Only me

SeeGreene, you kind of can't say much about his post unless you actually read it. personally haven't, but just saying, in the Opinions/Off Topic section with threads like this, gotta read every word.
Posted Image
Spoiler: click to toggle
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
See Greene


Aragorn
Aug 4 2013, 06:26:52 PM
SeeGreene, you kind of can't say much about his post unless you actually read it. personally haven't, but just saying, in the Opinions/Off Topic section with threads like this, gotta read every word.
kk. ill read all of it. and if i was right im going to explode.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
0 users reading this topic
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Opinions/Confessions · Next Topic »
Add Reply

User Color Code
Admin · Global Moderator · Forum Moderator · Member · Validating · Banned