It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why is the US in Afghanistan?

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 02:08 PM
link   
As I sit here listening to US Generals asking for more troops for Afghanistan, I need to ask this question:

Why are we in Afghanistan anymore?

Is it to continue the fight against al Qaeda?

Is there some energy angle that is not apparent?

What?

We cannot possibly be trying to bring democracy to that region. Have you ever looked at it? It is a 6th century society. Very few roads; most are goat paths. Very limited infrastructure. To try to bring that country into the 21st century would take 3 generations and untold trillions of dollars.

So why are we there?




posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 02:23 PM
link   
Who else has boots on the ground in that country?

Oddly, it's borders six (I think) countries.

What a piece to have a presence in.

Can't go killing off the Taliban too quickly - we need a reason to be there.



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 02:26 PM
link   
To get to Iran from more than one side ???
Strategy , it is how you win wars, you attack from multiple sides.





posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 02:39 PM
link   
Why in Afghanistan?

To secure the Opium so that they can sell it to you, get you hooked and jail you.



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:09 PM
link   
I answered this one before in a fair amount of detail, I will cover the salient aspects in brief - then post a link to my previous response (maybe I will copy and paste it).

Afghanistan is a strategic piece of real estate for many reasons.

1) It is a wedge between nuclear armed Pakistan and Iran, even though they currently share a border - destabilizing Pakistan by pursuing 'terrorists' could lead to a re-write of the Pakistan/Iranian border by extending Afghanistans border to the Arabian Sea. Pakistans nuclear program was boosted significantly by conflict in Afghanistan - because the US needed to use Pakistan to deploy and base troops during the Russian incursion into Afghanistan. The US had previously been applying sanctions, but needed cooperation and lifted sanctions - so Pakistan managed to become nuclear armed as a result.

Cooperation between Pakistan and Iran with regard to nuclear weapons would be a massive blow to the scum controlling the western governments - dividing the two countries geographically makes a lot of sense from that perspective.

2) Central Asia is rich in natural gas and oil - Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan all boasting reserves. If the US wishes to beat Russia into these rich deposits, they must establish a region of control to allow the extraction. The best method would be a pipeline either directly through Pakistan to the Arabian Sea, or through Pakistan to India.

The Central Asian Bank already has drawn up plans for a pipeline through to India - but Afghanistan is too dangerous to begin a multi billion dollar project, they need to subdue it - and put in a puppet government. Another pipeline for natural gas was also proposed by UNLOCAL - a US oil company - much preferred to allowing the Asian area to profit from its own resources ..


3) I believe opium is also a factor. The Rothschilds have been involved in the opium trade since the early 1800's, and in 2007 Afghanistan produced 97% of the worlds opium. The Taliban had criminalized the production of opium in 2000, and burned all the opium crops - I think this was one of the main events that triggered an armed invasion of Afghanistan.

Opium is grown copiously in Afghanistan - and the War on Drugs and similar criminalization in various countries is purely to drive up the price of the drugs. This is a multi billion dollar industry, and the CIA is responsible for distribution - in the same way as they do for coc aine from south America.

These are the real reasons why western troops are killing and dying in Afghanistan - to line the pockets of the scum - nothing patriotic about killing for profit.


I will post a link to my research on the opium connection asap.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 19-7-2009 by Amagnon]



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:11 PM
link   
I hope we are there to stomp terrorist dick into the dirt. I think it is a very good cause. Did we bite off more then we can chew? Possible. Am I willing to fight and die for that cause? Absolutely



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Amagnon
 


I hope that is not the case but you are probably right or close to the truth.

I will choose to stay ignorant and believe we fight for freedom from terrorism for ourselves and anybody else on this globe that has suffered from their cowardly tactics and violent messege.

[edit on 19-7-2009 by Tank2/8]



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:14 PM
link   
It's called imperialism and it has been going on since man has been roaming the planet with his various toys. A better question would be, why is Canada in Afghanistan?



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:16 PM
link   
Because they did 911 and now have to pay!



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:37 PM
link   
OGG (oil, gas, gold). Stop asking stupid questions, or "I will taunt you a second time".



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:38 PM
link   
Afghanistan is where the US offensive against terrorism began. It was at the time the seat of the Taliban and the location of al Qaida terrorist training camps.

This is a fairly accurate assessment.


The War in Afghanistan, which began on October 7, 2001 as the U.S. military operation Operation Enduring Freedom, was launched by the United States with the United Kingdom in response to the September 11 attacks. The stated aim of the invasion was to find the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden and other high-ranking al-Qaeda members and put them on trial, to destroy the whole organization of al-Qaeda, and to remove the Taliban regime which supported and gave safe harbor to al-Qaeda. The United States' Bush Doctrine stated that, as policy, it would not distinguish between terrorist organisations and nations or governments that harbor them.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by GradyPhilpott
 


Exactly, Afghanistan did 911 and now must pay.



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amagnon
3) I believe opium is also a factor. The Rothschilds have been involved in the opium trade since the early 1800's, and in 2007 Afghanistan produced 97% of the worlds opium. The Taliban had criminalized the production of opium in 2000, and burned all the opium crops - I think this was one of the main events that triggered an armed invasion of Afghanistan.



I am struggling to see how the Rothschild's are involved in Opium, could you post some links to support that. They may have provided financial backing in the form of loans but they were not in charge of those operations, that you will find was the British government (the East India Co was under Royal Charter). I am happy to be proven wrong.

The latter point though, regarding the Taliban burning the crops is an excellent one.

Street heroin, in the UK (90% of which originates in Afghanistan) has fallen in price by as much as 80% since the Anglo-US invasion, which is a major contradiction in my book. It was and possibly still is, run by British SIS, not the CIA (that is not to say that they don't have a piece of the action, they learnt most of what they know from our lot after all)...but what is notable, is that since the invasion the route into Britain (and the rest of Northern Europe) has changed from the traditional Balkan route, and is now mostly coming through Turkey. If the Taliban won't play ball anymore it makes one wonder if the whole kit and caboodle is now being grown, processed, transported and distributed by 'friendlies'. Which would mean that the only reason our men and women are getting blown up is because we are forcing them (the Afghanis) to be drug pushers and they don't want to. Understandably so. Somewhat redolent of the Boxer Uprising if you ask me.

Interesting. Thank you.

[edit on 19-7-2009 by KilgoreTrout]



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:48 PM
link   
reply to post by American_Soviets
 


You're so funny!

Where did you develop such an incisive and astute sense of humor?



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Tank2/8
 



what is a cowardly tactic? fighting on the ground men to men or guys that call in air support at the first sign of engagement?

face it, the US has the worst trained ground troop in the world but they are well equipped. a war with us is a war with out technology, not our soldiers the way they see it. they can disregard our armed ground forces, they do not fear it. they are afraid of what they can't fight, our bombs and aircraft.

everyone claim that we are training the ROK but in truth they are training OUR forces. you can't throw someone who live in luxury onto the battlefield and expect them to fight. they are naturally cowards. Vietnam for example.



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by DOADOA
Vietnam for example.


Think again, DOADOA!

The NVA and the VC lost every major engagement against US forces in Vietnam. The record is clear on that.

Saigon did not fall until April of 1975 a full two years after the last US combat troops were removed from South Vietnam in April of 1973 and the war was turned over to the South Vietnamese.

I know you're not interested in facts, but if you're going to screw with the facts, you ought to do it with facts that are not so easily verifiable.

It is true that well-trained, disciplined forces have problems fighting wars against cowards who do not acknowledge rules of engagement and who use innocent civilians as shields, etc., but on the whole we do have a certain standard to which we try to live and those among us who violate our standards are held accountable for their actions.

Honor, however, is a concept you are unlikely to understand.



[edit on 2009/7/19 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Afghanistan is where the US offensive against terrorism began. It was at the time the seat of the Taliban and the location of al Qaida terrorist training camps.

This is a fairly accurate assessment.


The War in Afghanistan, which began on October 7, 2001 as the U.S. military operation Operation Enduring Freedom, was launched by the United States with the United Kingdom in response to the September 11 attacks. The stated aim of the invasion was to find the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden and other high-ranking al-Qaeda members and put them on trial, to destroy the whole organization of al-Qaeda, and to remove the Taliban regime which supported and gave safe harbor to al-Qaeda. The United States' Bush Doctrine stated that, as policy, it would not distinguish between terrorist organisations and nations or governments that harbor them.

en.wikipedia.org...




That is a fairly accurate assessment of the official story - I think everyone knows that is a load of BS.



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 04:12 PM
link   
reply to post by GradyPhilpott
 


Thank you



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 04:14 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

reply to post by DOADOA
 



they are naturally cowards. Vietnam for example.


Really? On what vast amount of experiance do you base this extraordinary claim? "naturally cowards"? You really haven't a clue, do you?

American military forces are very well equipped, you got that right. They are also very well trained, as well. Exhibit One: As Grady told you, no major military engagement in Vietnam was lost by US forces. Exhibit Two: The 100 hr. war with Iraq in Gulf War One. Exhibit Three: Afghistan, though it is admittedly not over yet...however, I don't see the Taliban advancing on all fronts... Exhibit Four: While the aftermath was poorly handled, the actual invasion was textbook during the drive to Bahgdad. Poorly trained cowards can't do that.



As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.


Edited for seplling errors...



[edit on 7/19/2009 by seagull]



posted on Jul, 19 2009 @ 04:15 PM
link   
reply to post by KilgoreTrout
 


Here's a link to my original post on the subject - the Rothschilds became married into the Sassoon family late in the piece. They were however sponsoring the East India Co long before that - I had a quick look but I didn't turn up any references when I posted this before - as always my posts rely mostly on my memory - once I know things I hate to go reading and reading for hours to turn up references - apologies for that.

The Rothschilds were not on the original list of founding members of East India Co . but I understand they were sponsoring them. I think that their aversion to the spotlight occurred long ago - stuff on the Rothschilds can be hard to find - unless of course it paints them as saints.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join