Operation Cyclone - The Birth of Jihadism

Feb 2015
2,038
UK
You mention ML and jihad. Maybe I was ignorent in the 1970s but I can't ever recollect one act jihadism inj the 1970s. By jihadism would mean when the primary driver is religion NOT as incidental or adjunct. If jihadism was a phenomenon I certainly missed it in 1970s. I did however become aware of it in 1980s and then it escalated to the crescendo of today.
 
Feb 2015
2,038
UK
Are you referring to calls for jihad from other lands?
No. I am talking about jihadism as understood today. That is acts driven by and justified by religion without any or limited secular component.

The issues in places like Palestine and Egypt weren't about lack of available fighting men, nor was there an international outcry outside those countries for Muslims to flock to them to fight back (aside from joint offensive by Muslim nations against the "infidel" Israelis)
The Arab Isreal tussle is about land and 1947. As I have already said Arab or Muslim Christian both are and have been involved against the secular driven action against Isreal. Islam is incidental as was Timothy Mcveigh or even the actions of IRA in UK.

In Afghanistan, you have the perfect storm of international outrage, an atheistic invader, modern media pushing for action, rising extremism in the Middle East with no available outlet (national wars against Israel are done), and the US and Saudi Arabia funding an insurgency.
Atheism has nominal brief in the jihadi diary. It might have been used by Brzezizki to top up the pot but as can bee seen by jihadi activity against even other muslims let alone christians to them it matter nought if you are muslim, christian or athiest although I guess it gives them more satisfaction when beheading a athiest head.

But jihad and Islamic extremism were well founded before the 1980s. Just research organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood, founded in the 1920s.
If they were well founded where or what acts manifest your claim?
Nobody needs any definition of jihadism today as every second day there is a incident but can you give a act in 1970s that would fit within the definition of jihadism? Give me three examples of Jihadist terror before 1980. Today you can trawl 10 in a month.

Also, Brzezinski was a specialist on the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact, he had pretty much zero background in the Middle East, which is largely why the US actions during the Carter administration were so terrible. So I'd take whatever he says with a grain of salt. He is not a subject matter expert on Middle East or Islamic studies, nor was he much involved the Soviet-Afghan War, as he left when Carter left. At best, he signed off on programs planned and carried out by more knowledgeable non-politically appointed experts.[/QUOTE]

I am not a expert on his qualification or otherwise. I think that would have been within remit of Pes. Carter. what i do know he was Carter's NSA and he made MANY visits to Pakistan in regards to Afghan Soviet war. I pasted a picture of him visting the border areas.
 
Last edited:
Mar 2013
3,909
Texas, USA
Most jihad movements of the 1970s dealt with Israel or where directed internally against their own govts. In Egypt, entire concentration camps were opened to house Islamic extremists. In Palestine, militant groups like Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Egyptian Islamic Jihad, and Al-Gamaat Al-Islamiyya all became active in the late 70s when it appeared that the national govts of Egypt and others would make lasting peace with Israel. Previously, most militant extremists could find outlets in organizations either directly under national control in a military or a nationally supported paramilitary group. After peace agreements with Israel were signed, most groups went completely underground, which meant a lack of available outlets for violent action. It left terrorist attacks against local state govt (Sadat assassination), against Israelis, or against western countries supporting Israel (like the US).
 
Feb 2015
2,038
UK
As I said my primary intent of this thread is the Afghan Jihad and it's latent effects today. i realise there are going to be linkages beyond but the wider the scope it becomes more difficult to focus on the subject.

What I do know is that Jihadism as a phenomenon was UNKHOWN in the Af-Pak region prior to 1980. The most we had was Fakir of Afridi tribe going crazy 80 years befotre the Afghan war but that was just at a local level perhaps akin to that nutcase in US David Koresh.
 
Feb 2015
2,038
UK
Most jihad movements of the 1970s dealt with Israel or where directed internally against their own govts. In Egypt, entire concentration camps were opened to house Islamic extremists. In Palestine, militant groups like Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Egyptian Islamic Jihad, and Al-Gamaat Al-Islamiyya all became active in the late 70s when it appeared that the national govts of Egypt and others would make lasting peace with Israel. Previously, most militant extremists could find outlets in organizations either directly under national control in a military or a nationally supported paramilitary group. After peace agreements with Israel were signed, most groups went completely underground, which meant a lack of available outlets for violent action. It left terrorist attacks against local state govt (Sadat assassination), against Israelis, or against western countries supporting Israel (like the US).
You cannot subsume jihadism with the widespread Isreal-Arab conflict which began in 1947. That is about land. Religion may play a role however that is adjunct not the primary motivator this does not fit within the definition of what we call jihadi today.

Jihadi and freedom fighters are differant species. Btw Sadat assasination was in 1981 if I am not mistaken. I againask you give me one example of jihadi act that made it to headlines before 1980?

Today it is a phenomenen that needs no explaining and it's everywhere. You don't go around with a microscope looking for jihadism today. It's a plague of biblical proportions.

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Anwar_Sadat"]Assassination of Anwar Sadat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
 
Last edited:
Feb 2015
2,038
UK
and the seeds of this plague of biblical proportions was laid in the Afghan Jihad as evidenced by bin Laden, Zawari and Mullah Omar all burnished in the crucuble of that Afghan Soviet Jihad.

It was in the 1980s that the average Joe was introduced to the word 'Jihad'. today babies as young as five can spell.

I ask again please show me three incidences of jihadi acts in entire decade from new year 1970 to new year 1980?

Edit: Forget about the average Joe I as a young lad growing up in 1970s in a conservative Pakistan Muslim family NEVER heard about the word 'jihad'.
 
Last edited:
Mar 2013
3,909
Texas, USA
You cannot subsume jihadism with the widespread Isreal-Arab conflict which began in 1947. That is about land. Religion may play a role however that is adjunct not the primary motivator this does not fit within the definition of what we call jihadi today.

Jihadi and freedom fighters are differant species. Btw Sadat assasination was in 1981 if I am not mistaken. I againask you give me one example of jihadi act that made it to headlines before 1980?

Today it is a phenomenen that needs no explaining and it's everywhere. You don't go around with a microscope looking for jihadism today. It's a plague of biblical proportions.

Assassination of Anwar Sadat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Once again, READ THE LINK:
Jihad - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I thought you decided to quit posting? If you're going to be this obstinate when your original hypothesis is ripped apart, maybe that wasn't such a bad idea. Instead of going on and on about this, when its obvious you're wrong, why not just state "I made a mistake about jihad in general, and would only like to focus on Afghan-Pakistan related jihad from this point forward."

Instead you are going on and on, making believe that Jihad didn't exist prior to the 1980s, when acts of Jihad have been happening regularly through the history of Islam.
 

Pacific_Victory

Ad Honorem
Oct 2011
7,654
MARE PACIFICVM
Thank you. Pacific I hope you know I am not doing this to bash USA. I blame Pakjistan, Saudia and US. As Brzizinski said even in hindsight it might have been the right thing to do. I live through the latter stages of cold war. We used to have civil warning on TV in case of Soviet nuclear attack., Those days are gone.
I know you aren't bashing the U.S., Pakeeza :). In any case, the Afghani Muj were largely a product of the U.S., it is not bashing to point that out. The situation is an excellent demonstration of the 'Law of Unintended Consequences'. Nobody could have predicted that Muslim allies who we helped against a Soviet invasion would be our biggest global enemies only a couple of decades later. I really don't blame the U.S. officials at the time, as something like 9/11 was completely unimaginable in 1979, but blameless or otherwise, we (along with the Saudi's and Pakistan, as you rightly pointed out) share a portion of the responsibility for creating these Afghan lunatics. Not all of the responsibility mind you, we shouldn't exonerate Al Qaeda or the Taliban who still deserve the majority of their own guilt. But we certainly didn't help.

In my neighbourhood I run into what were the erstwhile enemies. Polish, Lithuinians, Latvians, Bulgarians, Slovaks. so maybe as Brzezinki says it was worth it. However we must at least acknowledge what happened and it's blowback today. is that NOT what history is all about>
It's amazing how quickly the world changes, isn't it? Two decades ago those people were "enemies", and now they are among the closest allies of NATO in its geopolitical struggle against Russia.

[BTW those books and phamplets are STILL being printed !!!
I read that the Taliban, in fact, demanded that children continue to be taught using the old U.S. printed textbooks. Oh, the terrible, terrible irony!!
 
Feb 2015
2,038
UK
I know you aren't bashing the U.S., Pakeeza :). In any case, the Afghani Muj were largely a product of the U.S., it is not bashing to point that out. The situation is an excellent demonstration of the 'Law of Unintended Consequences'. Nobody could have predicted that Muslim allies who we helped against a Soviet invasion would be our biggest global enemies only a couple of decades later. I really don't blame the U.S. officials at the time, as something like 9/11 was completely unimaginable in 1979, but blameless or otherwise, we (along with the Saudi's and Pakistan, as you rightly pointed out) share a portion of the responsibility for creating these Afghan lunatics. Not all of the responsibility mind you, we shouldn't exonerate Al Qaeda or the Taliban who still deserve the majority of their own guilt. But we certainly didn't help.



It's amazing how quickly the world changes, isn't it? Two decades ago those people were "enemies", and now they are among the closest allies of NATO in its geopolitical struggle against Russia.


I read that the Taliban, in fact, demanded that children continue to be taught using the old U.S. printed textbooks. Oh, the terrible, terrible irony!!
Thanks for understanding. I think you know there is differance between not having a divergent view then hating a country.

Yes, things happened and we are here today. I suspect if William Casey CIa chief was alive he would say all in all it was still successfull and the blowback was just collateral dasmage. I guess he would be right. It's just that I wish today people acknowledged this a bit more. Thats all.

Pacific I am a victim of this. My family belong to a minority sect. As the Afghan Jihad took root Saudia, CIA and Pak government opened Madressahs like as if they were rice saplings. These took in thousands of Afghan kids most orphans and turned them into fanatic fighters for the jihad. They were cannon fodder. Problem is these Madrasahs that were 'jihadi factories' are still there today pumpimg out thousands of brainwashed kids that are wrecking the place. That is sad legacy.