Titanium Cat

You are consistently an idiot.

Who could tell, if anything it might improve your posts, you're pretty much already at rock bottom.

__________________

Where have you gone, Environment Man?
Our message board turns its lonely eyes to you.
What's that you say, EvilMonkey?
Crazy E-man has left and gone away.

eagleclaw

So how did the progression from Afghanistan to Iraq become validated?
You have no problem with the U.S. government having a plan for Afghanistan BEFORE 9/11?

And even before gw's time. I guess this was all just forgotten, nothing to see here, just move along folks.

Washington's Backing of Afghan Terrorists: Deliberate Policy

Introductory note

In the 'Times of India' article reprinted on Emperor's Clothes under the title "CIA worked with Pakistan to create Taliban", analyst Selig Harrison is quoted as follows:

"'The CIA made a historic mistake in encouraging Islamic groups from all over the world to come to Afghanistan.' The US provided $3 billion for building up these Islamic groups, and it accepted Pakistan's demand that they should decide how this money should be spent, Harrison said."

I disagree. The creation of Islamist terrorist organizations by the CIA has been a key part of U.S. policy, first in attacking the Soviet Union, and since then in an on-going war against Russia and the countries of the former Soviet Union and against Yugoslavia.

As the following article from the 'Washington Post' shows, Washington was no distant financier of the Afghan terrorists, unaware of how its money was being spent. Rather, it controlled the action. Today, Washington publicly condemns Islamist terrorism but this is two-faced for at the same time Washington and its partners continue to create, support and manage Islamist terrorist and related groups (for instance, the 'Kosovo Liberation Army' terrorists). For Washington, organized terror is a weapon of Empire. - Jared Israel.

Anatomy of a Victory: CIA's Covert Afghan War

By: Steve Coll, 'Washington Post', July 19, 1992

Washington's Backing of Afghan Terrorists: Deliberate Policy

Here is the thing TC, the U.S. government has a lot invested in this whole scenario and it looks as if it will use any means available to protect its "INTEREST",U.S. or otherwise.

Murdering citizens of the United States is not out of the realm of their possibilities and then to turn around and blame it on the very group of people that they have in fact encouraged to be "terrorist" is quite convenient. Their very own homegrown terrorist, use before 9-11-2001.

But since a lot of this is "COVERT" or "UNDERCOVER" you more than likely will not find it screaming at you from the pages of a newspaper or on the "News".


They can do whatever they want to get out the message of what they want you to think while at the same time making you believe that you have come to your conclusions acting upon your own free will. But you are only choosing from the couple of options placed before you. The ones that they have carefully chosen for you.

So keep living in your Disney world, if that is what helps you sleep at night.

__________________
All the time, always

Titanium Cat

There was no validation. They went into Afghanistan because they had to and they certainly didn't do what the mission should have required. There was no justification for Iraq. However unlike your fantasy explanations for 9/11, there is a lot of substaniated evidence that indicates their lies and dishonesty when it comes to Iraq.

The U.S. government has plans for many countries. The question is would the US actually invade Afghanistan for the reasons you give. I hardly think so. They didn't need it for an oil pipeline and they have made precious little progress in developing it for much of anything nor was it likely they would. There are various other countries in the region that are just as strategic if not more so.

You are mixing apples and oranges here. The funding of Afghan terrorists before was classic cold war strategy. It is hardly unusual when you look at various similar events over the last half century.

Except those people had already executed numerous terrorists acts against US and other western targets. They didn't need to kill thousands of US citizens to engage them. It's easy to say "realm of possibilities" but you are speculating without any credible evidence and until you have the evidence you are just blowing smoke.

You still live in the make believe world of kindergarten. Have fun with your fantasies, ones that completely fall apart in the real world.

__________________

Where have you gone, Environment Man?
Our message board turns its lonely eyes to you.
What's that you say, EvilMonkey?
Crazy E-man has left and gone away.

Duvidoo

So what was the point? The Taliban are on the rise again. Mullah Omar is still afoot. Osama is still on the loose. Seems like it was just a stepping stone ... a bloody one ... to the prize in Iraq.

__________________

Denie the Delight
retarded Duvi showed up and made a fool of himself followed by you.

Titanium Cat

The point was they had to in order to justify the original aspect of the war on terror. Bush, Cheney were already saying Iraq but Powell and Clarke made it clear that it was Al Qaeda who was responsible and that Afghanistan was their location. I would agree with you they used it as a stepping stone for what they considered the bigger prize which really had very little to do with the war on terra but was manufactured as such. While their exploitation of 9/11 was shameless, vile, and grossly dishonest, it is not evidence of active involvement in 9/11. You can certainly consider it a motive but you need to back it up with verifiable evidence as to their actual participation. So far all we see is massive and wild speculation on multiple fronts.

Still no comment on this? You said:

It was pointed out several times that they already have a route to the Caspian Sea oil that doesn't involve Afghanistan. So why do you think it is clear that is why they invaded Afghanistan?

__________________

Where have you gone, Environment Man?
Our message board turns its lonely eyes to you.
What's that you say, EvilMonkey?
Crazy E-man has left and gone away.

Duvidoo

Based on where 15 of the 19 alleged hijackers were from and where their leader was born I would have zeroed in on Saudi Arabia. Not clear why they went into Afghanistan or Iraq (and after al Qaeda deked off to Pakistan ... that's maybe where they should have gone).

__________________

Denie the Delight
retarded Duvi showed up and made a fool of himself followed by you.

Titanium Cat

Al Qaeda wasn't based in Saudi Arabia, they were based in Afghanistan regardless of where most of the hijackers were from. The Taliban was giving them sanctuary and the freedom to train for operations.

Iraq as I said had little to do with Al Qaeda and the war on terra.

Dealing with Pakistan is another issue. As an ally they needed cooperation from the Pakistan government and didn't want to jeopardize Musharraf's less than solid support in his own country. They probably didn't feel a sense of urgency either since it worked as part of their overall goal which wasn't specifically Al Qaeda.

It's nice to see you once again avoid addressing yet another one of your unsubstantiated claims.

__________________

Where have you gone, Environment Man?
Our message board turns its lonely eyes to you.
What's that you say, EvilMonkey?
Crazy E-man has left and gone away.

Duvidoo

So why couldn't they track them down and bring them in dead or alive?

__________________

Denie the Delight
retarded Duvi showed up and made a fool of himself followed by you.

Duvidoo

What about the $100,000 that Pakistan supposedly paid to M. Atta a short time before 9/11? That's some ally, eh. If al Qaeda did 9/11, why wouldn't part of their goal be to bring them to Justice? So what was this overall goal?

__________________

Denie the Delight
retarded Duvi showed up and made a fool of himself followed by you.

eagleclaw

You are so full of yourself. Are you so sure of your view ? It appears that I am not the only one who has come to this conclusion.

More cut and paste, I hope you choke on it, hypothetically speaking of course.


And there is no denying that this is going on as we speak.



At Last, Some Truth About Iraq and Afghanistan

Eric Margolis
Lew Rockwell.com
Tuesday, June 24, 2008

PARIS – After a sea of lies and a tsunami of propaganda, the ugly truth behind the Iraq and Afghanistan wars finally emerged into full view this week.

Four major western oil companies, Exxon, Mobil, Shell, BP and Total, are about to sign US-brokered no-bid contracts with the US-installed Baghdad regime to begin exploiting Iraq’s oil fields. Saddam Hussein had kicked these firms out three decades ago when he nationalized Iraq’s foreign-owned oil industry for the benefit of Iraq’s national development. The Baghdad regime is turning back the clock.

This agreement comes as talks are continuing between the Washington and its Baghdad client regime over future US basing rights in Iraq. After some face-saving Iraqi objections, it is expected that Baghdad will sign a compact with Washington giving US forces control of Iraq and its air space in a manner very similar to Great Britain’s colonial arrangement with Iraq.





Interestingly, the same oil companies that used to exploit Iraq when it was a British colony are now returning. As former US Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan recently admitted, the Iraq war was all about oil. VP Dick Cheney stated in 2003 that the invasion of Iraq was about oil, and for the sake of Israel.

Meanwhile, according to Pakistani and Indian sources, Afghanistan just signed a major deal to launch a long-planned, 1680 km long pipeline project expected to cost $ 8 billion. If completed, the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India pipeline (TAPI) will export gas and, later, oil from the Caspian Basin to Pakistan’s coast where tankers will transport it to the west.

The Caspian Basin located under the Central Asian states of Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Kazakkstan, holds an estimated 300 trillion cubic feet of gas and 100–200 billion barrels of oil. Securing the world’s last remaining known energy Eldorado is strategic priority for the western powers. China can only look on with envy.

But there are only two practical ways to get gas and oil out of landlocked Central Asia to the sea: through Iran, or through Afghanistan to Pakistan. For Washington, Iran is tabu. That leaves Pakistan, but to get there, the planned pipeline must cross western Afghanistan, including the cities of Herat and Kandahar.

In 1998, the Afghan anti-Communist movement Taliban and a western oil consortium led by the US firm UNOCAL signed a major pipeline deal. UNOCAL lavished money and attention on Taliban, flew a senior delegation to Texas, and also hired an minor Afghan official, one Hamid Karzai.

Enter Osama bin Laden. He advised the unworldly Taliban leaders to reject the US deal and got them to accept a better offer from an Argentine consortium, Bridas. Washington was furious and, according to some accounts, threatened Taliban with war.

In early 2001, six or seven months before 9/11, Washington made the decision to invade Afghanistan, overthrow Taliban, and install a client regime that would build the energy pipelines. But Washington still kept up sending money to Taliban until four months before 9/11 in an effort to keep it "on side" for possible use in a war or strikes against Iran.

The 9/11 attacks, about which Taliban knew nothing, supplied the pretext to invade Afghanistan. The initial US operation had the legitimate objective of wiping out Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaida. But after its 300 members fled to Pakistan, the US stayed on, built bases – which just happened to be adjacent to the planned pipeline route – and installed former UNOCAL"consultant" Hamid Karzai as leader.

Washington disguised its energy geopolitics by claiming the Afghan occupation was to fight "Islamic terrorism," liberate women, build schools, and promote democracy. Ironically, the Soviets made exactly the same claims when they occupied Afghanistan from 1979-1989. The cover story for Iraq was weapons of mass destruction, Saddam’s supposed links to 9/11, and promoting democracy.

Work will begin on the TAPI once Taliban forces are cleared from the pipeline route by US, Canadian and NATO forces. As American analyst Kevin Phillips writes, the US military and its allies have become an "energy protection force."

From Washington’s viewpoint, the TAPI deal has the added benefit of scuttling another proposed pipeline project that would have delivered Iranian gas and oil to Pakistan and India.

India’s energy needs are expected to triple over the next decade to 8 billion barrels of oil and 80 million cubic meters of gas daily. Delhi, which has its own designs on Afghanistan and has been stirring the pot there, is cock-a-hoop over the new pipeline plan. Russia, by contrast, is grumpy, having hoped to monopolize Central Asian energy exports.

Energy is more important than blood in our modern world. The US is a great power with massive energy needs. Domination of oil is a pillar of America’s world power. Afghanistan and Iraq are all about control of oil.

__________________
All the time, always