Yeah, we're only in Afghanistan for the oil. Everyone knows that.
*Coughs* Dont forget the massive deposits of valuable minerals.. prospectors have found over the years
10 Years Ago Today...
- Thread starter Alexander Ostmann
- Start date
*Coughs* Dont forget the massive deposits of valuable minerals.. prospectors have found over the years
If you're into alternative theories, the wildest and most amusing one to me is how several coalition member politicians made awkward speeches about how "We should not go after farmers for growing opium, that is their business and we shouldn't get involved". The allegation is that Vietnam used to house the world's opium production headed by the CIA, lost in the 70's only to be replaced by Afghanistan, which eventually saw their opium fields destroyed by the Taliban only to come back in full force after the US-led invasion of Afghanistan. The idea of course being that opium production is what funds most CIA operations in the world, and something like 90% of the opium in the world is grown by Afghan farmers.
A little less wild theory is that whoever controls Afghan territory can circumvent Iran if they want to make a natural gas pipeline. First you need a competent and strong Afghan government and army which is still several years away. Such a government will have to compete with the Taliban, which is a superior ideology for controlling Afghanistan, a region that has always been dominated by the faction with the biggest guns and the will to use them.
My theory? Afghanistan is a country lacking in internal security, which makes it a great place outlaws to practice for and plan Islamic revolutions in "the Muslim world", which if successful (So far it has been a bloody failure) would probably result in western banks and oil companies being kicked out of the middle east.
I think it will remain a permanent quagmire because Afghanistan is not really a country in the usual sense, it is just a geographical area consisting of a few urban towns and lots of tiny villages that are not interested in world events or even national events. They want to to continue their way of life and little else, who cares what these politicians in Kabul are saying? The Afghan government will probably never be able to exert it's power outside of the major cities where globally minded Afghans live, the vast rural areas will remain as they are for another few hundred years, maybe even a thousand. Only coalition military presence can police the country and that is a really lousy deal for all parties involved. Status quo depends on how long western powers can stay in Afghanistan.
A little less wild theory is that whoever controls Afghan territory can circumvent Iran if they want to make a natural gas pipeline. First you need a competent and strong Afghan government and army which is still several years away. Such a government will have to compete with the Taliban, which is a superior ideology for controlling Afghanistan, a region that has always been dominated by the faction with the biggest guns and the will to use them.
My theory? Afghanistan is a country lacking in internal security, which makes it a great place outlaws to practice for and plan Islamic revolutions in "the Muslim world", which if successful (So far it has been a bloody failure) would probably result in western banks and oil companies being kicked out of the middle east.
I think it will remain a permanent quagmire because Afghanistan is not really a country in the usual sense, it is just a geographical area consisting of a few urban towns and lots of tiny villages that are not interested in world events or even national events. They want to to continue their way of life and little else, who cares what these politicians in Kabul are saying? The Afghan government will probably never be able to exert it's power outside of the major cities where globally minded Afghans live, the vast rural areas will remain as they are for another few hundred years, maybe even a thousand. Only coalition military presence can police the country and that is a really lousy deal for all parties involved. Status quo depends on how long western powers can stay in Afghanistan.
Good post Sufyan, and I absolutely agree on the Afghan people. I tend to be more optimistic though, maybe naive, in thinking that once (if ever) the Taliban are not a factor, the people even in the villages can be helped at least a bit out of absolute poverty.
As to the theories, the CIA-opium thing is the domain of the fringe conspiracy theorists, so that one can safely be discarded. The Caspian Sea oil pipeline is much more valid, but you'd be a hopeless dreamer if you think you could put a pipeline through the Taliban heartland of the southern mountains and into Pakistan, itself not exactly a beacon of social justice and democracy. At least not anytime in the next 10-20 years.
As to the theories, the CIA-opium thing is the domain of the fringe conspiracy theorists, so that one can safely be discarded. The Caspian Sea oil pipeline is much more valid, but you'd be a hopeless dreamer if you think you could put a pipeline through the Taliban heartland of the southern mountains and into Pakistan, itself not exactly a beacon of social justice and democracy. At least not anytime in the next 10-20 years.
It's worth noting that, prior to the Soviet Union's invasion, the Afghans were (relatively) well-off, women especially. Even under the Soviet puppet state, they were better off than today.
God.
I so wish I could show my work on this one, but I can't.
Although the claims made by the Bush administration were based on faulty information, actual WMDs were found in Iraq. I cannot go into any detail, but, due to my previous occupation I had access to a significant amount of information that never saw the light of day.
Exactly. It'll be worse than it was before. This is exactly what happened with the Soviet invasion as well. Every successive invasion makes it worse and worse.
You and Shadrach have a remarkable amount of sanity and common sense, for anonymous Internet commentators. I like this.
The sad part is how hypocrite this ****ed up world is. The country with the biggest amount of WMD attacks another one because they had WMD.
The US government interrupted the negotiations of the entrance of Iraq in OPCW (Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons) in 2002 by forcing the removal of Jos
Afghanistan is where empires go to die.
It didn't do too bad during Taraki's reign, such a shame that Amin had to be all Stalin'y and get Taraki trotsky'd.
It didn't do too bad during Taraki's reign, such a shame that Amin had to be all Stalin'y and get Taraki trotsky'd.
Yeah, I just remember back in 2003 when I saw Cheney waving that vial of what looked like, well, basically horse sperm, around claiming it was "proof" of Iraq's WMDs... the level of absurd theatre for the masses was taken to ridiculous heights.
- Why on earth would you bring an actual vial of WMDs to a *press conference*
- How is you waving a vial around in any way *proof* of anything
Anyway this discussion is on Afghanistan not Iraq, so carry on gents.
[...] You and Shadrach have a remarkable amount of sanity and common sense, for anonymous Internet commentators. I like this.
As I suggested in an earlier post, I am both Muslim and a westerner, I think I have a slight advantage over most people who is only one or the other in understanding all sides in these type of conflicts. The Muslim perspective is very distorted in western media, and the western perspective is often completely lacking in Muslim media. I know what Islamism is about and why some have taken to terrorism, and I know what Muslims and Islamic scholars think about it. Turns out people are not so different from each other. It is kind of like having two good friends that don't like each other for petty and unfair reasons.
So far, Afghanistan has cost us one death in the family (Swedish ISAF soldier, one of two that were shot the death by an Afghan national in police uniform). I only now realise the OP was for him as well.