[samvega_]

Why is this almost article entirely about KGB and not the CIA? I'd like to know more about CIA's involvement, which is mentioned as well as being in the title, but rather this is all about a story from a different era. Looks to me like whataboutism at its finest.

[LfLxfxxLxfxx]

If the title says it's the CIA's "turn", then of course the article should be expected to draw a parallel with similar events in the past.

[samvega_]

But it doesn't explain the similarity. Why are they similar? Do they take for granted that the reader already knows CIA's role in the Afghanistan war?