Afghanistan

I know these are hardly new topics, but I hope for a fresh discussion on them to establish what we actually know, what theories we have and thoughts of members.

How important do we feel oil was in the war on afghanistan, considering the strategic importance of that nation in piping oil out from the Caspian area. I believe alternative routes exist only via Russia (America would not bebeholden to Russia) and Iran (not likely, at least not until next phase in War on Terror).

I can't believe even for two seconds that anyone could suggest the overthrow of the Taliban had anything to do with oil. The 3,000 deaths on 9/11 and refusing to hand Bin Laden over were the only causes, not some big oil conspiracy. There are those that believe the war in Iraq was over oil, and while I don't agree, at least there can be some intelligent argument over that. As far as the war in Afghanistan goes, the suggestion that it was even remotely connected to oil is absurd. All the Taliban regime had to do was hand Bin Laden over and close the Al Qeada camps and they would still be in power, regardless of any oil pipeline. Suggesting an oil related conspiracy in the Afghan fight only takes away from the tragedy of 9/11 and the seriousness of what and who perpetrated it, that kind of accusation does nothing to further the discussion of peak oil.

No wonder the world thinks America is concieted, muslim extremists flew planes into buildings killing themselves and innocent civilians to bring attention to their cause and to hurt America, the U.S. responds with a military action and what do some of us say? Nah that had nothing to do with it, it was oil. It's kind of silly frankly.

We had navy seals in Afghanistan 2 days after 9/11. We didn't even give them time to hand over OBL. The decision to go to war was premature and could have easily been driven by greed.

Originally posted by looking4truth
I can't believe even for two seconds that anyone could suggest the overthrow of the Taliban had anything to do with oil. The 3,000 deaths on 9/11 and refusing to hand Bin Laden over were the only causes, not some big oil conspiracy. (...) As far as the war in Afghanistan goes, the suggestion that it was even remotely connected to oil is absurd.

Well, that planned pipeline probably did have something to do with leaving the Taliban alone, which did have implications. If the Taliban had been pressured to hand over Bin Laden and close down Al Qaeda camps, things might have looked different, so I would say it is not that absurd that the war in Afghanistan has anything to do with oil. As for the motivation for the war, I would certainly agree that the other reasons alone were far more important.

Originally posted by RedDragon
We had navy seals in Afghanistan 2 days after 9/11. We didn't even give them time to hand over OBL. The decision to go to war was premature and could have easily been driven by greed.

Premature? There are 3,000 lost souls from 9/11 that might disagree with you. I doubt anyone who jumped from a flaming building on that day would have had a problem if we took Afghanistan by force a few years earlier, before their deaths were plotted by evil men with something far more sinister than oil profits in mind. Do you think those people on the planes and in the buildings wanted to die on that day and in that way? I'm sure if you could ask them now they would want to know why something wasn't done sooner. But you can't, and thats the point.

You know I could understand the whole Al Qeada thing if they had something tangible like an oil pipeline or similar as a goal for their mass killing, but it wasn't. It was just to show their might and to punch America in the nose, well they succeeded but the benefit was nonexistant. They achieved nothing. All they have done is caused more death, caused more heartache for those they claim to be fighting for. Oil tycoons might be bastards but those Al Qeada people have lost everything that would even qualify them as human.

As for having Navy Seals in there so soon, why wouldn't they be there? Even if war was avoided by the Taliban handing Bin Laden over we would have had people in place to gather intel and select targets just to be safe. Isn't that what they are for, recon and battlefield prep? If the Taliban played ball with us and closed the camps we would have wanted reliable intel on the ground to verify it. The idea that because seals were there the choice was made is not as clear cut as you make it sound.

Sorry, this is not a personal attack on anyone but I really have to depart from the majority of conspiracy theorists on this subject. Too many bad things have been said about decent people just to push a political ideaology or prove you are smart enough not to follow the crowds. Well it really stinks in my opinion. Give some of us who supported taking out Afghanistan a little credit as well, we are not all stupid, and we are not all Sean Hannity Republicans. There are people who were directly affected by 9/11 in real and horrible ways, and there are those of us that were affected in less personal ways. I cannot disperage those people by saying the war was for oil. Sorry, I just can't do it. Every bomb dropped in Afghanistan had the name of a Fire Fighter, Cop, or civilian that died put on it with Sharpe markers by US service men, try telling them it was for oil.

I am frankly suprised that looking for truth is so shocked at the idea of oil being behind afghanistan. don;t view things as being so distinct. Thins don;t neatly fall into little boxes. afghan/iraq were all part of one plan, and it is a plan older than you or I. Why did the west turn its back on Afghanistan under the Taliban if they were so supportive of bin laden? why not overthrow much earlier? Why the placement of a Big Oil representative as President (Karzai) after successful US/UK invasion? Why the rush top build the pipelines? Further than this even...why the massive increase in opium production since the overthrow of the Taliban?

The fact that the Taliban went back on their agreement to allow the pipeline, and were invaded shortly thereafter, rings alarm bells for me.

The whole thing fell together quite nicely for those in charge..you know, the people who don't have to do the dying and the suffering?

Yeah..those folks.

I'm sure the dead of 9/11 would want real justice. I know the friend I lost would want nothing less than a full investigation, which never happened. You know they spend..what, 15 million on the investigation of 9/11. They spent like three times that investigating the oval office felatio incident under Clinton.

Priorities?

America had a fine relationship with the Taliban before they decided to go back on the pipeline deal. I don't think that's just a coincidence.

here here!

Trouble is that real justice is nigh impossible to imagine actually happening.

The United States Government had NO direct contact with the Taliban Regime before 9/11, the pipeline so often mentioned as a "link" is frankly rubbish. The deal was between a private company and the Taliban.

The 9/11 commission was seriously a joke, and not because it wasn't able to connect the government to a conspiracy around the attacks, more for the fact that it was there for Left Wing partisans to try and point fingers and for Right Wing weenies to cover their butts.

The real "Stunning Truth" that the 9/11 commision failed to reveal had nothing to do with any conspiracy, the truth was that political and public support for any real action against terrorists was non-existant pre 9/11.

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
The whole thing fell together quite nicely for those in charge..you know, the people who don't have to do the dying and the suffering?

Yeah..those folks.

I'm not sure how many people are aware of this.............but we have a document called the "constitution" that states the commander in cheif is a civilian elected leader. This is to prevent the military from deciding to take or not take action on their own. Even if a General is elected, they must retire prior to taking the oath of office.

The president and congress approved the military action in Afghanistan, and yes they are spared from fighting, however we are talking about elected officials not King Aurthor and the Knights out on a crusade. We are a Democratic Republic, the leardership and the military are seperate.

I'm not really trying to defend the government or Pres. Bush, I am more trying to say that I don't believe the links exist to make a real case for an oil conspiracy and Afghanistan.

If any one wanted to make the case that the Taliban regime was in power there because of US meddling in the Afghan fight against the Soviets well then I can accept that. Had the US tried to help the Afghani's build a stable government after the Russian withdraw instead of just backing off then Al Qeada might not have been able to use it as a base.

If someone can provide some REAL proof that the US government or any leaders had directly profited from or pushed pre-9/11 the Afghan war, well then, you could probably convince me. However, Haliburton is not going to be your proof of a profit by leadership as almost any American with an index fund in their 401k profited in that case.

The motto of ATS is Deny Ignorance, so I am. I feel that no one has givin any evidence other than conjecture. Somebody should be able to provide a good detailed list of evidence right? I am open minded, and I certainly would look at the evidence with impartiallity, just show me the proof. I am starting to believe that there isn't any and that the idea springs from anti-war rhetoric and a dislike of the current elected leaders.

There was not one nation on earth that sided with the Taliban, troops from many nations helped and continue to do so, by stating that the fight there is an oil conspiracy means you link all the nations that supported it. To think that is the case, that SO MANY nations were involved or complicit, casts a shadow on the believability of such claims.