Support Blog 2, 'cause the first one didn't work

The United States has often worked to “support” nations that serve its interests. The word “support” is a somewhat vague term that can refer to military involvement, shipment of money, shipment of weapons, the sending of advisors, or just rhetoric. Now, given the context of the “War on Terror”, the U.S. is working to “support” various countries against radical militant fighters. However, every above-mentioned mean of support has drawbacks. Military involvement failed in Vietnam and Somalia, where the U.S. did not achieve its objectives. Results are pending for our military operations in Afghanistan (where violence is on the rise) and Iraq (where violence is declining). In Pakistan, where the U.S. sends large quantities of money, the Pakistani army has been found to over-report or blatantly lie about combat incidents in order to create the illusion that the army is actually fighting Taliban militants and, therefore, receive more American money. In the 1980s, the U.S. sent weapons to the Mujahideen in order to support their fight against the Soviets. The Taliban were a faction of the Mujahideen and are currently using stinger missiles and AK type weapons against the same people who provided them. The U.S. began its involvement in Vietnam by sending advisors. As for rhetoric, in August the U.S. issued a staunch declaration of support for its Caucus region ally, the Republic of Georgia. Russia invaded anyway.