NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1189411428847&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

"Proof of cooperation between Iran and Syria in the proliferation and development of weapons of mass destruction was brought to light Monday in a Jane's Defence Weekly report that dozens of Iranian engineers and 15 Syrian officers were killed in a July 23 accident in Syria.

According to the report, cited by Channel 10, the joint Syrian-Iranian team was attempting to mount a chemical warhead on a Scud missile when the explosion occurred, spreading lethal chemical agents, including sarin nerve gas."

Read that again.

Iran and Syria are developing chemical warheads mounted on missiles.

Where did that sarin come from? Unless Syria and/or Iran have chemical weapons programs, that leaves at least one likely suspect, doesn't it?

And before you criticize the source of the story, note that it's originally from Jane's Defence Weekly, one of the most respected sources in military matters.

Thank God the Israelis have the moxie to do what needs to be done. Hopefully the US will also take appropriate action. Iran needs to be put down, and soon. Syria likewise.

japan?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarin_gas_attack_on_the_Tokyo_subway

japan?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarin_gas_attack_on_the_Tokyo_subway

Theres a difference between the amount needed for a subway terrorist attack, and the amount needed to put on a missile.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1189411428847&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

"Proof of cooperation between Iran and Syria in the proliferation and development of weapons of mass destruction was brought to light Monday in a Jane's Defence Weekly report that dozens of Iranian engineers and 15 Syrian officers were killed in a July 23 accident in Syria.

According to the report, cited by Channel 10, the joint Syrian-Iranian team was attempting to mount a chemical warhead on a Scud missile when the explosion occurred, spreading lethal chemical agents, including sarin nerve gas."

Read that again.

Iran and Syria are developing chemical warheads mounted on missiles.

Where did that sarin come from? Unless Syria and/or Iran have chemical weapons programs, that leaves at least one likely suspect, doesn't it?

The US?

Iran and Syria are developing chemical warheads mounted on missiles.

I thought it was generally assumed that the Shahab series of SRBM's could deliver chemical munitions.

Where did that sarin come from? Unless Syria and/or Iran have chemical weapons programs, that leaves at least one likely suspect, doesn't it?

Again, I thought it was assumed that Iran had a chemical weapon program at least at one time, possibly continuing to the present. The thinking is that after the pretty serious gassing they received from the Iraqis they want to be capable of responding in kind.

Iran needs to be put down, and soon. Syria likewise.

:rolleyes:

North Korea? but really after sadams use of WMDs againt Iran, don't ya think Iran Might see there vaule?

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1189411428847&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

"Proof of cooperation between Iran and Syria in the proliferation and development of weapons of mass destruction was brought to light Monday in a Jane's Defence Weekly report that dozens of Iranian engineers and 15 Syrian officers were killed in a July 23 accident in Syria.

According to the report, cited by Channel 10, the joint Syrian-Iranian team was attempting to mount a chemical warhead on a Scud missile when the explosion occurred, spreading lethal chemical agents, including sarin nerve gas."

Read that again.

Iran and Syria are developing chemical warheads mounted on missiles.

Where did that sarin come from? Unless Syria and/or Iran have chemical weapons programs, that leaves at least one likely suspect, doesn't it?

And before you criticize the source of the story, note that it's originally from Jane's Defence Weekly, one of the most respected sources in military matters.

Thank God the Israelis have the moxie to do what needs to be done. Hopefully the US will also take appropriate action. Iran needs to be put down, and soon. Syria likewise.
From your own article:

Syria began developing chemical weapons in 1973, just before the Yom Kipper War. Globalsecurity.org cites the country as having one of the most advanced chemical weapons programs in the Middle East.


They made the sarin themselves, mystery solved.

The US?

The US?! Why would the US give Iran and Syria sarin nerve gas?

The US?! Why would the US give Iran and Syria sarin nerve gas?

Of Course...the US would never sell weapons to Iran...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Contra_Affair

anybody concerns with China?

I'm confused. Whats a MWD?
:confused:

I'm confused. Whats a MWD?
:confused:

Massive White Dicks.


And we don't mean this one:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/01/Dick_Cheney.jpg/474px-Dick_Cheney.jpg

Syria and Iran are producing Massive White Dicks? We must destroy them! Think of the children!

I always thought they stood for Micro Warp Drives. Just proves that these neo-fascists can't bear the thought of another nation besting them in the space race. :p

The US?! Why would the US give Iran and Syria sarin nerve gas?

Well, Iran was our puppet until 1979...at which point they turned to the Soviet Union.

The US?! Why would the US give Iran and Syria sarin nerve gas?

For money. Duh.

North Korea? but really after sadams use of WMDs againt Iran, don't ya think Iran Might see there vaule?

Umm, to remind you of the history: neither side had any quams about tossing chemical weapons at each other during the Iran/Iraq war. Indeed, the initial Defence Department assessment of the Halabja incident was that it was more likely to have been Iranian gas that decimated the civillians given they were both tossing shells over the town at each other during that battle.

Of course, it was only Iraq told to disarm afterwards.

The notion that WMD are new to almost any country in the middle east is hilarious and represents a clear lack of education on the region by the OP.

The notion that WMD are new to almost any country in the middle east is hilarious and represents a clear lack of education on the region by the OP.

Given how he worded it, it's clear that the OP is still trying to justify adventures in the Middle East under the tired old WMD claim.

Given how he worded it, it's clear that the OP is still trying to justify adventures in the Middle East under the tired old WMD claim.

even the administration has given up that notion. why are there people on NSG who still believe it?

The US?! Why would the US give Iran and Syria sarin nerve gas?

Where do you think Saddam got it?

even the administration has given up that notion. why are there people on NSG who still believe it?

Leftovers of years of lies. Accepting that they were lied to means accepting they were duped. Nobody likes to admit that.

shows to you that you should fight your battles yourself.
Fighting by proxy tends to backdraft (not merely backfires) on your face.

Given how he worded it, it's clear that the OP is still trying to justify adventures in the Middle East under the tired old WMD claim.

Well, he is trying to come up with an excuse that's more politically acceptable than "/\/\05l3/\/\z r 3b1l n \/\/3 /\/\us7 n00k d3/\/\."

shows to you that you should fight your battles yourself.
Fighting by proxy tends to backdraft (not merely backfires) on your face.

Me thinks the term you're looking for is "blowback", not "backdraft". ;)

The US?! Why would the US give Iran and Syria sarin nerve gas?

Maybe to self-destruct, it seems they are on the right tract.

Me thinks the term you're looking for is "blowback", not "backdraft". ;)

Although in a way 9-11 could be considered a backdraft resulting from U.S. Cold War meddlings in the Middle East.

Me thinks the term you're looking for is "blowback", not "backdraft". ;)

were all going to get incredibly high:confused:

either way I don't really care this will be out the news in a week and Syria will still have chemical weapons (minus one which has been randomly bombed)

Where did that sarin come from? Unless Syria and/or Iran have chemical weapons programs, that leaves at least one likely suspect, doesn't it?

Yep: The United States. *nod*

The US?! Why would the US give Iran and Syria sarin nerve gas?

The US has given quite a few countries chenical weapons. Including our good buddy Saddam Hussein. *nod*

Where did that sarin come from? Unless Syria and/or Iran have chemical weapons programs, that leaves at least one likely suspect, doesn't it?

.

But they do and did have advanced chemical weapons programs, so thats that then, isn't it?

NEWS FLASH: The US and other Western countries are cooperating in WMD, the horror!

Next they'll say that soylent green is NOT made of [The rest of this post has been censored by the NS mods.]

Well, Iran was our puppet until 1979...at which point they turned to the Soviet Union.

Excuse me, but did you just say that post-shah Iran that was changed into a Islam "paradise" turned to the communists? The same communists that claims that religion is opium for the masses?

Mind you, buying a few tanks doesn't make you a puppet, only a hypocrite.

Where did that sarin come from? Unless Syria and/or Iran have chemical weapons programs, that leaves at least one likely suspect, doesn't it?

Quite a few suspects actually. But:

1. Is it really so unlikely that Iran or Syria have their own chemical weapons programs? The stuff has been around since the 40s at least, and you can find out how to make it on the bloody internet for crying out loud.
2. Doesn't sarin have a rather short shelflife?

Although in a way 9-11 could be considered a backdraft resulting from U.S. Cold War meddlings in the Middle East.

were all going to get incredibly high:confused:

either way I don't really care this will be out the news in a week and Syria will still have chemical weapons (minus one which has been randomly bombed)

Backdraft is a firfighting term for a situation where combustion in a fire ceases due to lack of O2 but the gas/smoke remains at a high temperature. When O2 re-introduced (a la opening a door or window) combustion restarts often with an explosive effect.

Blowback is the unintended consequences of covert operations that often appear random and without cause.

Blowback was originally a reference to firing automatic weapons and the stuff that flies back. It became an intel term for a situation where what the govenment does in "secret" turns around to bit the country.

"Blowback" is a CIA term first used in March 1954 in a recently declassified report on the 1953 operation to overthrow the government of Mohammed Mossadegh in Iran. It is a metaphor for the unintended consequences of the US government's international activities that have been kept secret from the American people.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20011015/johnson

Hence, Nusangkasa's statement that "Fighting by proxy tends to backdraft (not merely backfires) on your face." ought to be blowback, not bacdraft.

Excuse me, but did you just say that post-shah Iran that was changed into a Islam "paradise" turned to the communists? The same communists that claims that religion is opium for the masses?

Mind you, buying a few tanks doesn't make you a puppet, only a hypocrite.

Yes, I did. I didn't say they became the puppet of the Soviet Union, only that they turned to it, which they did.

The Soviet Union didn't give a damn about the religions or lack thereof in the countries they used as puppet states to war against the United State's puppet states...they only cared that they were warring and were well supplied with arms, munitions, and the like.

Iran needs to be put down, and soon. Syria likewise.Why? Unlike the US and Israel, these two states do not invade other countries just because they want to.
And they don't have such a low regard for human live as the US, which has used nuclear weapons against people.

Backdraft is a firfighting term for a situation where combustion in a fire ceases due to lack of O2 but the gas/smoke remains at a high temperature. When O2 re-introduced (a la opening a door or window) combustion restarts often with an explosive effect.

Blowback is the unintended consequences of covert operations that often appear random and without cause.

Blowback was originally a reference to firing automatic weapons and the stuff that flies back. It became an intel term for a situation where what the govenment does in "secret" turns around to bit the country.


http://www.thenation.com/doc/20011015/johnson

Hence, Nusangkasa's statement that "Fighting by proxy tends to backdraft (not merely backfires) on your face." ought to be blowback, not bacdraft.

i dont often appreciate a correction on these forums but that was nicely done and nicely explained. sometimes you see a word like that and it doesnt seem quite right but you cant figure out why.

Of Course...the US would never sell weapons to Iran...

see also: eastasia, always been at war with

Typical unconscious reflex to any problem in the world is to blame it on the U.S. Iran and Syria die preparing chemical weapons for potential delivery and some of you blame the U.S.? I don't get the hatred.

Why? Unlike the US and Israel, these two states do not invade other countries just because they want to.
And they don't have such a low regard for human live as the US, which has used nuclear weapons against people.

If you're talking about low regard of human life as abortion I agree with you.

You're not though. Did Syria not invade Lebanon? Isreal? and Iraq? Check your history. The reason they haven't done more is because they can't.

I am unapologetic about our use of the two nuclear weapons on Japanese civilian populations. Japanese defenders would have erased themselves from history if the invasion occurred.

Typical unconscious reflex to any problem in the world is to blame it on the U.S. Iran and Syria die preparing chemical weapons for potential delivery and some of you blame the U.S.? I don't get the hatred.The US really shouldn't tell others how to behave, because the US have committed every evil already.

What WMDs?

Oh, wait, you mean the ones even BUSH ADMITTED WEREN'T THERE?

Admit you want to see some people dead and that's the end of it!

Iran and Syria are developing chemical warheads mounted on missiles.

Where did that sarin come from? Unless Syria and/or Iran have chemical weapons programs, that leaves at least one likely suspect, doesn't it?
:D

I love it when you don't read your own articles, and subsequently end up getting, well, let's say completely owned, by your own source. :D

"According to globalsecurity.org, Syria is not a signatory of either the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), - an international agreement banning the production, stockpiling or use of chemical weapons - or the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT).

Syria began developing chemical weapons in 1973, just before the Yom Kipper War. Globalsecurity.org cites the country as having one of the most advanced chemical weapons programs in the Middle East."



Yeah. It's a real fucking mystery as to where the sarin might have come from. We should call in Sherlock Holmes on this epic conundrum. :p

Oh they're Moslems and they have weapons?

HOLY SHIT LETS INVADE.

New Mitanni manages to convince everyone that his reasoning is just as sharp as it's always been.

Truth doesn't matter to some of the world.

I always thought they stood for Micro Warp Drives. Just proves that these neo-fascists can't bear the thought of another nation besting them in the space race. :p

EVE Online reference!

Anyway, Syria has its own chemical weapons program. If Israel and Syria have an all-out war, the results will not be pleasant.

Yes, I did. I didn't say they became the puppet of the Soviet Union, only that they turned to it, which they did.

The Soviet Union didn't give a damn about the religions or lack thereof in the countries they used as puppet states to war against the United State's puppet states...they only cared that they were warring and were well supplied with arms, munitions, and the like.


Shuush you'll shatter the illusions of the anti US crowd who believe only the US/west supplied all those Mig aircraft, T55/T72 tanks, Silkworm/ scud missiles and Ak47's to various regimes around the mid-east.

Boris

oops missed the French mirage aircraft and the german chemical agents supplied to Iraq :rolleyes:

I always thought they stood for Micro Warp Drives. Just proves that these neo-fascists can't bear the thought of another nation besting them in the space race. :p

My first thought when I saw the title as well...

The US really shouldn't tell others how to behave, because the US have committed every evil already.

I know, we must stand up against the Great Satan alongside our righteous allies Iran and Syria.

I know, we must stand up against the Great Satan alongside our righteous allies Iran and Syria.

:rolleyes:

Typical unconscious reflex to any problem in the world is to blame it on the U.S. Iran and Syria die preparing chemical weapons for potential delivery and some of you blame the U.S.? I don't get the hatred.

We're not blaming it on the U.S. We're pointing out that, in the ridiculously unlikely event of them not having made the chemical weapons themselves, the most likely country to have given said weapons to them is the U.S., around 20 or so years ago.

Yes, I did. I didn't say they became the puppet of the Soviet Union, only that they turned to it, which they did.

The Soviet Union didn't give a damn about the religions or lack thereof in the countries they used as puppet states to war against the United State's puppet states...they only cared that they were warring and were well supplied with arms, munitions, and the like.

It's not so much that I find it odd that the Sovjets would play out a game of divide and conquer, but its more the fact that I doubt that the ayatollah's had turned towards the sovjets. Again, just buying a few guns doesn't make you into a pinko buddy.

Although in a way 9-11 could be considered a backdraft resulting from U.S. Cold War meddlings in the Middle East.

Personally, 911 occurred because of our failure to rebuild Afghanistan after the CIA and the Mujahdeen pushed Russia out of the country. If we had provided the necessary aid then to unite the country and build a government we never would have had the problems we have today.

And since this is about Iraq, I would like to say, if we pull out of Iraq prematurely, like we did in Afghanistan, we will see the same thing happen again in 30 years, only we will have a new Iraqi-born "Osama Bin Laden" to deal with.

That said, regardless of how you feel about the reasons for why we attacked Iraq, we must make every effort to avoid future problems like this by helping the Iraqi people in every possible way to form a viable government.

I know, we must stand up against the Great Satan alongside our righteous allies Iran and Syria.

Exactly right.

Iran needs to be put down, and soon. Syria likewise.

So many invasions, so little time.

Truth doesn't matter to some of the world.

Some wise man once said: Truth is what you want to believe .

The US?! Why would the US give Iran and Syria sarin nerve gas?

The Iran-Iraq war really needs to be required knowledge for people in this day and age.

Way back when (1980) Iraq declared war on Iran. Reagan was like, "OH NO! SADDAM = BUDDY! HELP BUDDY! I know, we can give Iraq stuff to kill Iran, and at the same time support Iranian insurgencies to get rid of that pesky Ayatollah."

End result: we laundered Iraq lots of goodies through Israel that includes but is not limited to: Chemical and biological weapons.

So if the idea is that Saddam shipped these off to Syria and Iran before the we invaded, then chances are they came from the good ol' US and A.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1189411428847&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

"Proof of cooperation between Iran and Syria in the proliferation and development of weapons of mass destruction was brought to light Monday in a Jane's Defence Weekly report that dozens of Iranian engineers and 15 Syrian officers were killed in a July 23 accident in Syria.

According to the report, cited by Channel 10, the joint Syrian-Iranian team was attempting to mount a chemical warhead on a Scud missile when the explosion occurred, spreading lethal chemical agents, including sarin nerve gas."

Read that again.

Iran and Syria are developing chemical warheads mounted on missiles.

Where did that sarin come from? Unless Syria and/or Iran have chemical weapons programs, that leaves at least one likely suspect, doesn't it?

And before you criticize the source of the story, note that it's originally from Jane's Defence Weekly, one of the most respected sources in military matters.

Thank God the Israelis have the moxie to do what needs to be done. Hopefully the US will also take appropriate action. Iran needs to be put down, and soon. Syria likewise.

As much as I would love for it to be Iraqi in origin to give me some hope that we didn't go there for some ulterior evil motive I would say that chances are both Iran and Syria have had a chemical weapons program for some time and it is cooperatively linked with the DPRK. They share a lot of technology, those three countries so it is more likely that it came from them. In addition, remember Libya, they had a pretty vast WMD program underway until they "gave it up."

Why? Unlike the US and Israel, these two states do not invade other countries just because they want to.
Lebanon, Iraq, Israel, etc.

And they don't have such a low regard for human live as the US, which has used nuclear weapons against people.
That was back when the only thing we knew about nuclear weapons was that they make really big explosions. We didn't know about the effects of radiation, the fallout, the cell damage, and the cancer caused by it until later.

Personally, 911 occurred because of our failure to rebuild Afghanistan after the CIA and the Mujahdeen pushed Russia out of the country. If we had provided the necessary aid then to unite the country and build a government we never would have had the problems we have today.

And since this is about Iraq, I would like to say, if we pull out of Iraq prematurely, like we did in Afghanistan, we will see the same thing happen again in 30 years, only we will have a new Iraqi-born "Osama Bin Laden" to deal with.

That said, regardless of how you feel about the reasons for why we attacked Iraq, we must make every effort to avoid future problems like this by helping the Iraqi people in every possible way to form a viable government.

umm...Bin Laden is Saudi, not Afghani, and I'm pretty sure 9/11 was a response to US meddling in the entire mid-east and especially Saudi Arabia not just Afghanistan

That was back when the only thing we knew about nuclear weapons was that they make really big explosions. We didn't know about the effects of radiation, the fallout, the cell damage, and the cancer caused by it until later.

Not to mention that conventional explosives of the time were so far below nuclear explosions that none of the bombers and other people who messed with the atomic bombs actually realized the full scope of the explosion. They simply couldn't conceive of it, which is only natural for humans, as we see every day with people scoffing about this new technology or that new medicine. Even the footage shown to them was grainy black and white footage that was so far under the quality we could achieve nowadays that it could not convey the scope.

So the bombers on the Enola Gay probably went into battle figuring it would just be a larger overall explosion, with no understanding of the true ramifications.

Fact is, we NEEDED Hiroshima and Nagasaki to be destroyed by nuclear weapons. We needed some demonstration of the actual power and resulting harm that would come in order to keep rational individuals from ever considering the nuclear bomb as an out and out weapon again.

Without that lesson, we still wouldn't understand just what the nuclear bomb is capable of. Without that lesson, not only would so many more Japanese and Americans have died during the invasion of Japan, we'd have some other city in some other conflict destroyed later by a much more powerful nuclear explosive.

In other words, the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki who died then died to keep all of us and so many emerging lives in the future from being lost in the same way. Their deaths form the ultimate lesson.

Not to mention that conventional explosives of the time were so far below nuclear explosions that none of the bombers and other people who messed with the atomic bombs actually realized the full scope of the explosion. They simply couldn't conceive of it, which is only natural for humans, as we see every day with people scoffing about this new technology or that new medicine. Even the footage shown to them was grainy black and white footage that was so far under the quality we could achieve nowadays that it could not convey the scope.

So the bombers on the Enola Gay probably went into battle figuring it would just be a larger overall explosion, with no understanding of the true ramifications.

Fact is, we NEEDED Hiroshima and Nagasaki to be destroyed by nuclear weapons. We needed some demonstration of the actual power and resulting harm that would come in order to keep rational individuals from ever considering the nuclear bomb as an out and out weapon again.

Without that lesson, we still wouldn't understand just what the nuclear bomb is capable of. Without that lesson, not only would so many more Japanese and Americans have died during the invasion of Japan, we'd have some other city in some other conflict destroyed later by a much more powerful nuclear explosive.

In other words, the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki who died then died to keep all of us and so many emerging lives in the future from being lost in the same way. Their deaths form the ultimate lesson.

QFT.

It is often hard for people to conceptualize something they haven't seen. I remember when September 11th happened, and I was relating to my friends my nitpicker's annoyance that a couple media personalities had called it "the bloodiest day in American history," because more people died in the World Trade Center than at Pearl Harbor or some crap, and I pointed out that the battle of Antietam was worse, with a total of around 30,000 deaths in a day. My friend refused to believe that such was possible in a civil war battle. Why? Because 30,000 is a huge number, and it was hard for him to imagine that many people standing together, let alone all getting killed in one day.

Also, with the atomic bomb, there a couple things people often forget.

1. At the time, we were firebombing the crap out of Japanese cities. If the war hadn't ended, we would have kept on doing so for as long as the invasion took. These bombings killed way more people than the atom bombs did.

2. If the casualty estimates had proven correct, which, at the time, naturally, we assumed they would (500,000 to a million dead just on our side, IIRC, let alone how many Japanese would have died), as they were going by the horrible casualty rates incurred during the conquest of Okinawa and Iwo Jima, and then, later it came out, the American people learned that the government had possessed a weapon that could have ended the war instantly, what do you think would have happened?


And anyway, as the post I'm quoting says, the fact that it was used lets us know exactly what it does and gives everyone a good reason to be so wary of ever using such weaponry. Perhaps it is possible that the dead of Hiroshima and Nagasaki saved us all.

And as usual, New Mitanni is nowhere to be seen :)

QFT.


1. At the time, we were firebombing the crap out of Japanese cities. If the war hadn't ended, we would have kept on doing so for as long as the invasion took. These bombings killed way more people than the atom bombs did.

2. If the casualty estimates had proven correct, which, at the time, naturally, we assumed they would (500,000 to a million dead just on our side, IIRC, let alone how many Japanese would have died), as they were going by the horrible casualty rates incurred during the conquest of Okinawa and Iwo Jima, and then, later it came out, the American people learned that the government had possessed a weapon that could have ended the war instantly, what do you think would have happened?


.

Although I entirely agree that the dead of Hiroshima and Nagasaki quite possibly saved us from a nuclear holocaust during the cold war, there is still a prevailing view amongst historians that the Japanese were actually considering surrendering. Although it isn't certain that it's true, it does put the neccesity of dropping the bomb into perspective. In any case, the bomb almost certainly prevented North Japan falling under Sovjet rule. Thats worth something.

And as usual, New Mitanni is nowhere to be seen :)
That is due to the fact that he got his hat handed to him by the 7th post (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13065049&postcount=7)?

Thats worth something.

Sore wo Nagasaki to Hiroshima no hito ni itte.

To translate:

Tell that to the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Brazilian here, for that matter.

And as usual, New Mitanni is nowhere to be seen :)

Are you really that surprised?

Are you really that surprised?

Well would you stick around if you were that wrong?

From your own article:

They made the sarin themselves, mystery solved.

Oh god how humiliating it must be to be the OP'r.
Really.
Shameful.

umm...Bin Laden is Saudi, not Afghani,...

You are correct, Bin Laden is Saudi; however, we (the CIA) trained him as a Mujahdeen in Afghanistan to help fight the Soviets. When the Soviets pulled out, we left and Afghanistan collapsed into civil war.

...and I'm pretty sure 9/11 was a response to US meddling in the entire mid-east and especially Saudi Arabia not just Afghanistan

Again you could be correct, but if you consider, that if we had helped the Mujahdeen build a government in Afghanistan, instead leaving it for the war lords to fight it out, we would have created a friend in the country, and probably even Bin Laden, which mean he wouldn't be behind the attack, and in all likelihood, 9/11 never would have happened.

Oh god how humiliating it must be to be the OP'r.
Really.
Shameful.

Don't worry, I'm sure he's used to it by now ;)