Real reason for the war in Afghanistan

US planned war in Afghanistan long before September 11

www.wsws.org...

When the majority of your population consists of intellectually deficient uneducated dimwits, you can basically tell them anything and they will believe it. If you are a sucker who easily believes one blatant lie after another, you deserve to be lied to.

I had heard about the pipeline before but this thread makes it all pretty obvious thanks. But here's the 10 million dollar question. Would the pipeline in itself be a valid reason to fight for control? I'll bet some people might think it is!

I don't believe any of the British British empires were given Independance I believe its stil under the Queens rule hense you use her money!

Personally I think the # between India and Pakistan is all for show even if they did go to war they are both controlled by the same people.

If you watch Indian cinema, eg Bollywood films your be suprised that Illuminati has control over India, Pakistan and Indian cinema wich is in hindi national language wich Pakistanis, Indins most asian watch.

They are more controlled than Hollywood, the tv channels, programmes, news, Media.

Trickle-down economics at work here...

It is obvious that whatever country holding these Afghan reserves will be more rich...and will in the long run "benefit its people" - how much I can not say.

U.S citizens, our country has always been built upon extremely cheap labor. Same goes for this pipe line. The amount of money all of these "natural resources" are worth compared to the amount they pay the troops...just another example of cheap labor (in comparison to what the so called CEO's are earning).

I have always knew oil and the likes were a huge reason for the war, but your thread is of great research, despite a few possible flaws that IMO do not deter your argument much at all.

This is a good post, but I'm fairly certain most posters on this site understand the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are all about oil. Bush family are oil tycoons. But the war in Afghanistan also involves high dollar drug trades. I think it's kind of weird that Afghanistan was pretty much drug free until USA invaded. Now they are number 1 heroine producing country in the world. Afghanistan is pretty much another colombia, used to fuel US's black wars. But oil is another reason.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Killing and Dying in "the New Great Game"

The "New Great Game"

In February 1998, at a Congressional hearing of the Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific of the House International Relations Committee, then Congressman Doug Bereuter (R-Nebraska), chair of the subcommittee, laid out a vision, some might say a grandiose vision, for the US in Central Asia.

Opening the hearing, Congressman Bereuter said:

"One hundred years ago, Central Asia was the arena for a great game played by Czarist Russia, Colonial Britain, Napoleon's France, and the Persian and Ottoman Empires. Allegiances meant little during this struggle for empire building, where no single empire could gain the upper hand.

"One hundred years later, the collapse of the Soviet Union has unleashed a new great game, where the interests of the East Indian Trading Company have been replaced by those of Unocal (purchased by Chevron in 2005) and Total (a French oil company), and many other organizations and firms.

"Today the Subcommittee examines the interests of a new contestant in this new great game, the United States. The five countries which make up Central Asia - Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan - attained their independence in 1991, and have once again captured worldwide attention due to the phenomenal reserves of oil and natural gas located in the region ...

"Stated US policy goals regarding energy resources in this region include fostering the independence of these states and their ties to the West; breaking Russia's monopoly over oil and gas transport routes; promoting Western energy security through diversified suppliers; encouraging the construction of east-west pipelines that do not transit Iran; and denying Iran dangerous leverage over Central Asian economies.

"In addition ... the United States seeks to discourage any one country from gaining control over the region, but rather urges all responsible states to cooperate in the exploitation of region oil and other resources ...

"It is essential that US policymakers understand the stakes in Central Asia as we seek to craft a policy that serves the interests of the United States and US business."

The New Great Game


[edit on 7-11-2009 by SLAYER69]

Don't forget OPIUM!!! The IMF and CIA want to control that resource too, just like the other narcotics they control and distribute worldwide.

A recent report found and exposed that the USA is controlling the Opium export out of Afganistan.

Originally posted by unicorn1
I had heard about the pipeline before but this thread makes it all pretty obvious thanks. But here's the 10 million dollar question. Would the pipeline in itself be a valid reason to fight for control? I'll bet some people might think it is!

It most certainly would be. If you don't know about Peak Oil, do a Web search on it, and read "The Party's Over" by Richard Heinberg. It is serious stuff.

Think about it: our economic model is driven by investment and credit, which require economic growth. You can't have long-term economic growth without exponentially increasing energy use (for manufacture, transport, travel, etc.). Once the energy supply levels off - pfoof! The economy collapses, because confidence in future growth - the requirement for investment - has disappeared. Don't believe that it was "just" the credit crunch or "just" the bankers that put us in our current dire predicament: the eventual collapse of the global economy was an inherent feature of capitalist economics from the start. (And before anyone attacks me, I'm not saying Communism is the solution; I don't think there really is a solution except massive depopulation.)

That's the immediate effect of Peak Oil, which we've already seen.

The follow-on effect is even worse: as we start on the downward slope of oil supply, then at some point, even in a severe recession, demand for oil exceeds supply. At this point, oil turns abruptly from being a buyer's market to a seller's. Result: those countries (and people) who can't afford oil suddenly have to make do with much less of it, or even none. That puts the Western nations in a particularly precarious position. Imagine what would happen if the oil producing nations stopped pricing oil in dollars: the inherent weakness of the American economy would be laid bare, and the cost of oil imports would skyrocket almost overnight. Ditto the UK.

SO, it is perfectly understandable that Western nations should be so desperate to gain control of all the oil they can, while they can. There is credible evidence (can't remember it off hand) that the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq were planned way before 9/11.

(Incidentally, I had read that the oil finds in the Caspian Sea area had proved far lower than anticipated - at least, that's what Michael Ruppert claims in his book "Crossing the Rubicon" - compulsory reading for 9/11 conspiracy theorists!)





[edit on 7-11-2009 by Franz]

[edit on 7-11-2009 by Franz]

reply to post by Franz

Your post is right on!

It also explains the entire foreign and domestic policy of the western
world for the last half century!

Also explains many other things such as the suicidal denial
of climate change!
(You must not be an americant!)


God help us. We surely won't.

The Taliban doesn't exist as they are portrayed here? Really? That's not the impression I got from serving over there and talking to MANY people who had moved out of the country to flee from them. I'm not commenting on the oil and natural gas pipeline, because I don't have any firsthand knowledge about it. However, I can tell you that the road construction is going on because the infrastructure there is HORRIBLE. It's a simple matter of commerce. Is it any wonder that they haven't been able to maintain a stable democracy when it takes several days just to drive across a country the size of Texas. Coincidentally, the concentration of fatalities happens to line up with the concentration of PEOPLE in the country.

S&F for you...Great post. Now where are all the Bush bashers that hated Bush for big oil crap?

Bush was nearly out of Afgan because he knew it was a looser and berry and bunch stated it was the "right" war. He made his campaign promises and now that he's in and see's all the details he doesn't know what to do.

He screwed either way he goes. The method of converting the civilians that worked in Iraq will not work in Afgan. It would be like trying to convert American rednecks and hillbilies to Islam. I just cracked up think about that!

Can anyone say Vietganistan!!!

Phil

reply to post by PrisonerOfSociety


THIS HAS ALWAYS BEEN ABOUT OIL ,SO I WAS WONDERING HOW MUCH OF THIS OIL COMPANY IS OWNED BY GOOD OL g.w. bushes oil company that was bought for him by the Saudi royal family [bin ladans clan.] its amassing that all of the worlds nations have ganged up on Afghanistan ,i guess they tried to relearn the lesson that mother Russia learned along time age when the Afghanistan people handed their great millitay a sounding defeat .
don't tell me that the great us cant win against 1 little tiny nation that has no real military -oh whoa is them.
rocket launchers vs. migs loser
auto weapons and the best trained against rifles and shot guns losers

and the real game is MONEY
and nothing else matters

is this pipeline in place of the Caspian sea pipeline? also dont forget about the billion dollar opium trade that karzai's brother runs. gotta love it.

reply to post by Full_Vision


I know what you mean Full_Vision LOL! I have read into this and watched the "Bohemian Grove" footage for example. There does seem to be a lot of evidence to back this up however talking to people about this just draws blank looks.
My mother thought I was crazy when I said the elite's worship owls. It all does sound ridiculous though doesn't it.

All this information is so sad but true.

You see why we have so many resistors against the United States. We are the 2010 Roman Empire.

I think we need to be weary of what will happen the next few years to come.

More wars, more lies, and more death.

Iran is next.

Our soldiers are dying for nothing. I know how military life is and I would not wish it on anybody. YOU ARE JUST A PAWN.

Great post, keep up the great info.

Peace.

Originally posted by middleclasssoldier
is this pipeline in place of the Caspian sea pipeline?

I would ask myself what was the real reason for the Russian/Georgian conflict. The Caspian line will go right through the region.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/75161fa41121.jpg[/atsimg]Georgia's oil pipeline is key to U.S. support

The breakaway province of South Ossetia is claimed by Georgia, a former Soviet republic that cast its lot with the United States and the West to the eternal irritation of Moscow. But South Ossetia has resisted Georgia's rule and has been under Russia's sway for years.

Georgia sits in a tough neighborhood, shoulder to shoulder with huge Russia, not far from Iran, and astride one of the most important crossroads for the emerging wealth of the rich Caspian Sea region. A U.S.-backed oil pipeline runs through Georgia, allowing the West to reduce its reliance on Middle Eastern oil while bypassing Russia and Iran.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/8af1f34ebbdd.jpg[/atsimg]
EU nervous as Russia eyes new energy markets

"But we are going to enlarge and diversify our export possibilities for these products which are so essential to the global economy," said Putin, who on the same day reportedly called for the speedier completion of a new pipeline that will carry gas from Siberia to Asian markets.

The comments are fuelling speculation that Moscow will increasingly leverage Europe's dependence on Russia's vast oil and gas reserves for geopolitical purposes, particularly if EU leaders today decide to impose sanctions on Russia for its actions in Georgia.

Russia is trying to downplay these fears. "We have worked for many years to gain not just the image, but the status of a reliable energy supplier to Europe and we would never let it suffer, even in this political situation," Russian Energy Minister Sergei Shmatko said on 29 August.

Despite these assurances, recent cutbacks in supplies to the Czech Republic (EurActiv 31/07/08) as well as cuts in deliveries to Ukraine and Belarus, which left several European countries without supply (EurActiv 11/01/07), remain fresh in EU leaders minds, making them nervous about the bloc's dependence on Russian oil and gas.

UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown told the Guardian newspaper on Sunday that "no nation can be allowed to exert an energy stranglehold over Europe". Brown wants to see a greater diversification of fuel suppliers to the EU, which currently depends on Russia for 30% of its oil and 50% of its gas imports, according to the Commission.

Great thread,

I am keeping in touch with this one S&F for you sir.

Originally posted by PrisonerOfSociety
I can't dispute those figures Slayer, other than going round myself with a dipstick and collating numbers. Just sounds like BS and if those numbers are true, then that negates the purpose of this thread - the war in Afghanistan.

It's never been the case of lack of reserves. Think more outside the box...

Cheap oil is always good for the global economy. It's more of having an influence on who gets oil and from where. Russia would like to have a major stake in where the EU gets most of it's fuel. Why? Because Russia is desperate for those fuel Euros.

Some have speculated that the only real reason for Russia's support for Iran is simply becuase they don't want the situation to change. If there was a regime change or an Iranian policy change the sanctions on Iran go away and Iran would be able to sell it's fuel to the EU. With present sanctions in place this is not the case.

Russia likes the idea of Iran having sanctions in place. This is actually a good thing for Russia. It mean less competition for fuel sales to the EU. The Caspian pipeline is one outlet for Central Asian oil, but if you look at the above map. Russia is way too close for comfort if there were ever a future conflict between East and West. That's why the Caspian line would go part way through Georgia then dips south into Turkey [NATO] member instead of straight on through to a port.

Even though it's a safe route now there is no telling how potentially a weak link in the EU's fuel source it could become in the future. A second secure line away from Russian influence makes for a more reliable route.




[edit on 8-11-2009 by SLAYER69]

While I was working over the summer, I was working with someone who was a page for the canadian government. Basically pages are like helpers for the members of parliament, getting them drinks, photocopying documents, whatever it may be.

At one point, he says he was accidentally put in a room where their was a national defence briefing going on with all the top generals and some of the members of the ruling government. He knew right away that there was a mistake, and that there was no way he was supposed to be their.

Before he was taken out, he heard that the military was purposefully burning and destroying opium, and non-opium crops of the afghani farmers, just to fuel discontent and rage amoung the average farmer so he would sign up his sons in the local taliban resistance. So basically, the forces in afghanistan are helping the enemy as much as they are fighting them, probably for oil, like you said.

I cant believe that we are having to cut health funding along with everything else while we spend billions to both help and fight in Iraq.