~ U.S. Doesn't Consider Taliban Terrorists ~

[Muezzin]

All this stuff about oil pipelines is straying from the topic, is it not?

 

[lilah]

If you think we did it for a pipeline, I have a bridge I will sell you.

The SPICE must Flowww - Dune
-------------------------------------------
[mouse] The OIL must Floww [/mouse] - Earth

 

[Cognescenti]

I read that Afghanistan was to be a transit point for a pipeline to be layed down by UniCal, originating from the Caspean Sea going through Afghanistan, and Pakistan.

I think they wanted to avoid at all costs an alternative route via Iran (something along those lines).

Most modern Western Wars are about interventions to dominate natural resources. They are waged on behalf of the corporations.

Interventions for "humanitarian" reasons, combating "terrorism," "liberating" and oppressed people, are only a disguise, in order to legitimize these illegal wars, to lul the soon-to-be occupied into a false sense of security and blindening the "natives" to the real aimes, and conning our local populations into approving these invasions and filling the ranks with pawns who are to be sacrificed for Exxon and Haliburton.

The invasions have nothing to do with defending our nation from a fabricated threat.

It's all about economics and economic prosperity (primarily, for the elite)...

What do you think is powering the computer and monitor you are using to enlighten us...as squirrel in a cage? Until you come up with a better idea, it is going to be carbon-based fuels for a while.

There is this too. Your Afghanistan hypothesis is a laugh riot. One of the biggest single exporters of oil to the US is less than 1500 miles from Miami. Don't you think it would be easier to invade Venezuela? Mexico produces more oil than Iraq. We could drive there...or just rent luxury cruise ships

 

[Zman]

All this stuff about oil pipelines is straying from the topic, is it not?

No disrespect intended, this is Just my opinion.

But, since the Taliban are Afghans, and since they weren't classified as terrorists, that casts doubt on the real reason for our invasion of Afhganistan.

That it wasn't to combat terrorism, but to secure the oil flow (and to have a military presence near Russia, China and Iran, Pakistan).

We're not there to combat terrorism and Al Qaeda and their Taliban "hosts/protectors", since we disbanded the Bin Laden Unit in the CIA.

We're not there to combat terrorism and Al Qaeda, since before our invasion, we requested that the ruling Taliban hand over OBL for trial, and they offered to cooperate by asking for proof of his guilt, and my government did not comply with the request.

Since Emperor Bush said that if you harbor terrorists then you're complicit in their actions, so why aren't the Taliban listed as terrorists? And since it was a "political" reason for not classifying them as terrorists, then what is the "political" reason that we're in Afghanistan.

If we retaliated against Afghanistan and its representative government, the Taliban for allegedly allowing OBL to plan the 9/11 attack from a cave in Afghanistan, then why isn't OBL officially cited for his complicity on 9/11 on the FBI's Most Wanted List?

That brings us back to, why are we in Afghanistan?

That must mean that the Taliban and OBL aren't the real reasons for our presence there. correct?

I think the original article provides some room to maneuver in the debate.

What do you think?

 

[Islamicboy]

What oli? I am paying $1.30 per litre where is all this glorious oli everyone talks about? I was paying less before the Afganistan invasion and the Iraqi invasion.

 

[Keltoi]

No disrespect intended, this is Just my opinion.

But, since the Taliban are Afghans, and since they weren't classified as terrorists, that casts doubt on the real reason for our invasion of Afhganistan.

That it wasn't to combat terrorism, but to secure the oil flow (and to have a military presence near Russia, China and Iran, Pakistan).

We're not there to combat terrorism and Al Qaeda and their Taliban "hosts/protectors", since we disbanded the Bin Laden Unit in the CIA.

We're not there to combat terrorism and Al Qaeda, since before our invasion, we requested that the ruling Taliban hand over OBL for trial, and they offered to cooperate by asking for proof of his guilt, and my government did not comply with the request.

Since Emperor Bush said that if you harbor terrorists then you're complicit in their actions, so why aren't the Taliban listed as terrorists? And since it was a "political" reason for not classifying them as terrorists, then what is the "political" reason that we're in Afghanistan.

If we retaliated against Afghanistan and its representative government, the Taliban for allegedly allowing OBL to plan the 9/11 attack from a cave in Afghanistan, then why isn't OBL officially cited for his complicity on 9/11 on the FBI's Most Wanted List?

That brings us back to, why are we in Afghanistan?

That must mean that the Taliban and OBL aren't the real reasons for our presence there. correct?

I think the original article provides some room to maneuver in the debate.

What do you think?

How does the U.S. not designating the Taliban as a terrorist organization cast any kind of doubt on the reasons for war? They were an isolated government which was harboring a terrorist organization. Agree with it or not, the so-called "Bush Doctrine" of pre-emptive war fit the bill in Afghanistan to a T. Afghanistan was the home of Al-Qaeda and Bin Laden. The 9-11 attacks had just occurred. It was about revenge and punishment, not treasure.

 

[Islamicboy]

The 9-11 attacks had just occurred. It was about revenge and punishment, not treasure.

.

Howcome American government did not turn the other cheek. I think this means they are bad christians just imagine how Jesus Peace be upon him is feeling.

 

[wilberhum]

How does the U.S. not designating the Taliban as a terrorist organization cast any kind of doubt on the reasons for war? They were an isolated government which was harboring a terrorist organization. Agree with it or not, the so-called "Bush Doctrine" of pre-emptive war fit the bill in Afghanistan to a T. Afghanistan was the home of Al-Qaeda and Bin Laden. The 9-11 attacks had just occurred. It was about revenge and punishment, not treasure.

It seams we need to put forth a document outlining major points in the history of the conflict.

Some don’t seam to be able to remember. :skeleton:

 

[Cognescenti]

What...no oil in Afghanistan? Dang!

Then it was all done for Big Rug! Yeah, that's it! Cheney was a former Chairman of the largest Afghan rug importer in the US, Rugs-R-Us, a division of Halliburton.

Why do you think they call it "carpet bombing"?

 

[lilah]

to insist that oil had/has nothing to do w/ mid east policy, the over throw of opposing governments, the labeling of whos a terrorist country and whos an ally is plane foolishness....granted, there were other reasons for the invasion of the taliban, the same organisation that were american allies decades prior, but oil is a major motivator....if the prime export of these nations were potatoes instead of petrolleum, US's involvement in afganistan would not be a non issue.....

jmo

 

[Keltoi]

to insist that oil had/has nothing to do w/ mid east policy, the over throw of opposing governments, the labeling of whos a terrorist country and whos an ally is plane foolishness....granted, there were other reasons for the invasion of the taliban, the same organisation that were american allies decades prior, but oil is a major motivator....if the prime export of these nations were potatoes instead of petrolleum, US's involvement in afganistan would not be a non issue.....

jmo

The U.S. was never allies with the Taliban as a government, but they did give a little back door help to those fighting the Soviets. I suppose that distinction is too subtle for some.