the difference is that the "gov't" harbored and cultivated Bin Laden.
Obama supporters: 60 Children Among Afghan Dead, U.N. Finds
- Thread starter blackascoal
- Start date
the difference is that the "gov't" harbored and cultivated Bin Laden.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
We could have more effectively defended America by putting a trillion dollars into protecting our borders than sending some failed mission into Afghanistan, which if it succeeded would've done nothing but create another martyr and grew Al Quaeda. And it didn't succeed. The human rights situation in Afghanistan was terrible, and is terrible. Afghanistan isn't conquerable. We can't go in and try to change their culture. We aren't the Gods we think of ourselves as.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
OUR government harbored, trained, cultivated, and funded Bin Laden.
Should we be attacked for that?
Should Latin America attack the US because of our terrorist training camp here in Georgia?
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Again, I will call bullshit on this part of your argument. Acting like we went in to Afghanistan due to the potential for a pipeline is ridiculous.
The pipeline primarily benefits Turkmenistan and Pakistan. With some residuals going to Afghanistan for use of the land. The most the US gets out of it is potential from the contracts to build the line. There is no way we are sitting there for such a small contract.
We are there because the Taliban refused to take action on Al Queda. As such the United NATIONS, not just the US, sent a force in to remove the Taliban and go after Al Queda (both of which Bush subsequently ignored to a great degree after his quest into Iraq)
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
How is it even possible at this late state of all that is known for you to type that mindfuck nonsense?
Do you believe there is WMD in Iraq as well?
UNOCAL address to Congress, 1998: U.S. INTERESTS IN THE CENTRAL ASIAN REPUBLICS
http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/intlrel/hfa48119.000/hfa48119_0.HTM
Unocal and the Afghanistan Pipeline / Players on a Rigged Grand Chessboard: Bridas, Unocal and the Afghanistan Pipeline
http://www.fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/government/fraud/911_attack/news.php?q=1216405258
The Oil Connection: Afghanistan and Caspian Sea oil pipeline routes
http://www.newhumanist.com/oil.html
By the way .. guess who was a major player in this .. Zbigniew Brezezinski .. who is now Obama's brain on foreign policy.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
LMAO... the fact that we were Unocal was trying to get a pipeline built there does NOT mean THAT is why we went to war in Afghanistan. That is idiotic at best.
WHAT possible benefit other than building the dam pipeline do you think we would get from that?
Do you even KNOW what the pipeline is for?
Judging by the crackpot link that suggests it is about OIL, I am guessing you do not. This has NOTHING to do with the Caspian Sea oil. NOTHING.
The friggin pipeline is for NAT GAS from the opposite side of Turkmenistan.
So do try to educate yourself beyond the crackpot conspiracy sites before you come on here and act like my statement is somehow equivalent to believing their are WMDs in Iraq. Because out of the two of us... YOURS is the statement that is most similar to those views in that it desperately wants to see something that is not there.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
Let me guess .. you supported the Iraq war.
Hell yes you did, and you talked about the same "crackpot" ideas that it was all about oil.
I'm betting you also voted for Bush .. am I right?
Get better informed my brother.
No matter how many times you try, a natural gas pipeline is not a reason to invade over oil. The US has plenty of natural gas, we don't import it from Afghanistan.
And before you try the same BS. No. I did not support the war in Iraq.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
I'm not trying anything.
I accept American ignorance about what their government does as a fact of life. I couldn't care less if you believe it or not.
Just stating my opinion .. based on evidence.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
"In January 1998, the Taliban signed an agreement that would allow a proposed 890-mile, $2-billion, 1.9-billion-cubic-feet-per-day natural gas pipeline project led by Unocal to proceed. The proposed pipeline would have transported natural gas from Turkmenistan's 45-Tcf Dauletabad natural gas field to Pakistan, and most likely would have run from Dauletabad south to the Afghan border and through Herat and Qandahar in Afghanistan, to Quetta, Pakistan. The line would then have linked with Pakistan's natural gas grid at Sui. Natural gas shipments had been projected to start at 700 Mmcf/d in 1999 and to rise to 1.4 Bcf/d or higher by 2002."
FROM YOUR OWN SITE BAC.
Nice of you to post your above bullshit... usually a sign that you know you are wrong.
The fact that Unocal considered potentially bringing oil through Afghanistan at one point in time doesn't mean they decided to do so. They determined it would be easier to simply ship it through Georgia and Azerbaijan to Turkey.
The friggin pipeline in Afghanistan is for NAT GAS.... and AGAIN... it primarily benefits Afghanistan, Pakistan and Turkmenistan. So enough of your bullshit. The most the US would get is the contract to build the pipeline for one of our companies.
I notice you continue to fail to point to WHAT other benefit you think we would get.
This has nothing to do with my "ignorance" of what the government does. It has everything to do with the fact that a natural gas pipeline is NOT OIL. No matter how much you want to just wish it so. I base that on evidence and not ignorance.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Your "evidence" is the same type of "evidence" that was used to justify going into Iraq. You have no evidence.
Pretending the pipeline is why we went into Afghanistan while showing NO benefit other than the contract to build the dam thing is idiotic at best. Especially given that it is a UNITED NATIONS force that is in Afghanistan and NOT just a US force.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
In other words, I was right about you and Iraq.
OH .. you mean like the "coalition force" in Iraq?
If no one has told you what other nations are saying about adding more of their troops to Afghanistan, let me help you out ...
U.S. Wants NATO to Step Up in Afghanistan
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=17307563
Afghanistan: a war that won't be won by Nato's occupation
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=15297
"Now more soldiers are dying in Afghanistan than in Iraq. Here in Britain, the images of flag-draped coffins being unloaded from transport planes is feeding a growing popular dissatisfaction with the war.
A recent poll found that 54 percent of the British people want the troops home from Afghanistan now. Only 34 percent think that British troops should battle on."
As things get worse .. the US will assume an even larger role.
Get better informed.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
As I said, no matter how many times you try to spin this into something to do with Iraq, you are friggin clueless when it comes to what the pipeline is for in Afghanistan.
You also have failed once again to provide ANY potential benefit to the US other than building the NAT GAS pipeline.
But I know, you are embarrassed that you have been shown to be wrong and so now you want to spin the topic away from your ignorance.
As for the forces in Afghanistan, no it is not like the coalition in Iraq. Again with your idiotic attempts to try to equate the two. It is a UN sanctioned force that is in Afghanistan. What part of that do you not comprehend.
As for "get more informed" .... you might want to stop spouting that bullshit when it is you that is clearly uninformed with regards to the pipeline and you moronic conspiracy proclaiming that is the reason the UN is in Afghanistan rather than the reason being a direct response to 9/11 and the Talibans refusal to take action against Bin Laden and Al Queda.
Holy Mary, mother of God! I did not know this important tidbit.....re zbrezezinski
Socrtease
Verified User
I didn't know all the if and whats about the pipeline, but after reading your posts I am absolutely sure that we did not invade so that a US company could send a pipe line crew to build the pipeline. I know this for all the reasons that SF and Damo have put forth here. The Taliban supported Bin Laden in his current incarnation. Our support of the taliban and people like bin Laden was to bring a swifter conclusion to the Cold War. It was one of the crippling death blows of the USSR. Yes, an unintended consequence of supporting the Mujahadeen was the creation of a brutal moslem government. Just as an unintended consequence of cubans supporting castro over batista was the creation of a brutal communist dictator instead of brutal facist dictator.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
I didn't call you ignorant, but your comments do reflect a certain ignorance of facts about your conclusions. That is not a personal attack.
The Project for a New American Century .. which is not a conspiracy theory .. which wrote the blueprint for Bush's foreign policy agenda .. thought the pipeline in Afghanistan was worth seeking a New Pearl Harbor for.
Your conclusion seems to suggest that it's only a natural gas pipeline and thus there would be no benefit to corporations. PNAC thought it was worth changing the government in Afghanistan for. All they needed was the event to set it off.
Additionally, I don't follow the logic of believing the Bush Administration lied and concocted "evidence" to invade Iraq .. but there is just no way that Afghanistan is anything other than what they told you it is. Certainly Bush wouldn't lie about that.
He didn't lie about anything else did he?
That's deep .. and illogical as hell.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
Holy Mary, mother of God! I did not know this important tidbit.....re zbrezezinski
There are a lot more tidbits
The PNAC guys didn't care about Afghanistan. Never did. Still don't. It wasn't a target rich environment. That's why we had Iraq. Afghanistan wasn't the war that they wanted.
Socrtease
Verified User
Not only that but it promised to be a much tougher place to fight the "war on terra" with very difficult terrain and like you said, not a lot of big show targets. Iraq was supposed to be easy, three week war with flowers and champagne at the end. Not much like reality.