That is not the point if both KGB and CIA had terrorists as their agents sometimes for some tactical reasons. That is how intelligence works. The truth is Soviets were less likely to ally with islamist terrorists comparing to the West which supported and still supports “freedom fighters” of the worst kind. Ideology was everything for Soviet alliances and militant islam is as far from commie values as possible.
And there are tonns of terrorists who are agents of Washington. The entire Saudi Arabia which is the main sponsor of terrorism is a US client, here goes Pakistan and what?
Once again, it is wrong to equal Soviet-backed Baathists and traditionally Western-backed Jihadists. Baathism proved to be a single way of barely civilized nation-state existance for muslims and it worth supporting for that single reason despite many cons. Jihadism on the other hand is opposite. And it won’t be a friend no matter how much support they got.
“That is not the point if both KGB and CIA had terrorists as their agents sometimes for some tactical reasons.”
The CIA, so far as I know, does not use mass killing of civilians as an instrument of global communist revolution. The KGB/FSB has and does. Arafat, for example, was a KGB puppet, as was the entirety of the PLO. They did not belong to the CIA.
cunning_fish is correct
cunning_fish is correct
Right now the best game we could have played was to have the secular murderous dictators in the Arab world fight and kill and be occupied with the jihadis and Moslem brotherhood (ok, the jihadis and Moslem brotherhood are one and the same)