Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why are we in Afghanistan?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 10:23 AM
Original message
Poll question: Why are we in Afghanistan?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
1. corporate profits and military job security nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deep13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 10:25 AM
Response to Original message
2. Unwillingness to admit that we've lost. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 10:38 AM
Response to Original message
3. Pipelines and Poppies n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 11:17 AM
Response to Reply #3
22. Bingo. Getting oil from the Caspian sea to India was a goal of both
American and British oil interests. A friend of mine who has been on two tours in Afghanistan says that the poppy crop is now the primary reason since the Caspian sea oil basin has fail to produce as much as expected. American big pharma doesn't want to continue to depend on Iran for it's poppy crop, so they've set up shop in Afghanistan instead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 10:40 AM
Response to Original message
4. Why ARE we, or why we SHOULD be -
I don't know why the fuck we are there, because the only reason we should be there is to hunt down Bin Laden and those who orchestrated 9/11 - and that seems to be the one option that nobody is talking about, from any side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
excess_3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 10:41 AM
Response to Original message
5. Obama (the peaceful) wants it that way .nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 10:46 AM
Response to Original message
6. Here the thing: No US Official can admit to geostrategic reasons of any sort....
Edited on Mon Nov-02-09 10:48 AM by Junkdrawer
because then our occupations are in violation of international law.

So, the main, obvious reasons for most of our foreign policy decisions are off the table in terms of official debate.

Great democracy we have, huh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #6
12. Did we initially go in to Afghanistan for geostrategic reasons?
Do you think that was the main objective when we initially went there to "rout out terrorists that attacked up on 9/11"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #12
15. yes.
afghanistan is between turkmenistan and the ocean ports in pakistan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #15
18. Most of DU disagreed back in 2004.
So, revisionist history is fine, but I take it with a grain of salt.

BTW, what a joke - Afghanistan as a strategic location!!

:rofl:

You can say that with a straight face?

holy fucking crap!

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #18
23. the "need" to go into afghanistan came before the "reason".
but poppy's boys were able to connect the two with 9/11.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #23
25. OooK
Ummm.... :yoiks:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #25
34. "oook?"
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #34
38. It makes sense if you say it out loud with a tone of incredulity in your voice
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #38
39. it does...?
oook? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #12
24. Forbidden Truth: U.S.-Taliban Secret Oil Diplomacy and the Failed Search for Bin Laden
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51ZYX2911DL._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-click,TopRight,35,-76_AA240_SH20_OU01_.jpg

http://www.amazon.com/Forbidden-Truth-U-S-Taliban-Secret-Diplomacy/dp/1560254149
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #24
27. Somebody wrote it
...so it must be true, right?

:crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 11:34 AM
Response to Reply #27
29. You weren't here when the book was published....
It was considered by the vast majority of DU as the definitive backgrounder re: Afghanistan.

Over the years since then, this book was cited by many a poster as the kind of good journalism that gets discredited by "wacky 9/11 theories."

So, now this is being thrust aside as too controversial. Interesting....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #29
30. No, I haven't read it, but you posted the headline as an argument
Edited on Mon Nov-02-09 11:37 AM by HughMoran
I don't agree based on the title of the book - never will.

Most of what you post is controversial to the point of being absurd IMO, so I have little trust in what you say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 10:50 AM
Response to Original message
7. Other: to retaliate for 9/11. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #7
17. You honestly believe that? A "fight against terrorism" is an intelligence
issue; we didn't bomb Timothy McVeigh's hometown now, did we?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 10:53 AM
Response to Original message
8. Other. The president is a captive of his campaign rhetoric.
He knows it is a stupid war, but he'd rather see troops stay there than admit he was saying all that about Afghanistan so he couldn't be painted weak on defense.

The interests that want the war want it for power and greed first, and that includes selling war materiel, profiting from war, and controlling the region for oil interests.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 10:54 AM
Response to Original message
9. Better question - why did an overwhelming majority of DUers support the Afghan conflict
...even though it was initiated by W? Oh, because most of us believed that it was to seek and destroy terrorists. It's hilarious to see people rewriting the history that they wrote differently with their own hand just a few years ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joeybee12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 10:56 AM
Response to Original message
10. The Taliban...that was the reason after 9-11...but it was all for show for
Bush and his cronies, then the taliban went to Pakistan and only grew in strength in the region.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jonnyblitz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #10
14. i thought it was because of Al queda. the taliban didn't have
Edited on Mon Nov-02-09 11:03 AM by jonnyblitz
anything to do with 9-11.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joeybee12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #14
20. The Taliban supported al-qeda in the region...
beacuse that's where Bin Laden was based.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #20
31. I've read that.

Not sure I believe it, but I've read that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joeybee12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #31
33. read about how he escaped from Afghanistan, and how Bush
ordered the troops not to go after him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #10
19. Look up "Caspian sea oil basin"
an oil pipeline was a larger concern for BushCo-but that didn't pan out as hoped.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 10:57 AM
Response to Original message
11. Political CYA to avoid admitting to another lost war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jaxx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 11:00 AM
Response to Original message
13. It was a gift to the Obama adm.
That's right, a present by bush who left it to fester. Now the rightwing is wanting more time to kill people and the general is doing what generals do....want more troops to kill people with.

Bring em home.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
16. And it's 1, 2, 3, what're we fighting for? Who knows? I don't give a damn.
Next stop: Afghanistan!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 11:15 AM
Response to Original message
21. Pipelines and Poppies and
one particular Poppy (Bush). Good old Poopy, still jumping out of airplanes and letting the other guy take the fall....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 11:23 AM
Response to Original message
26. Politics.
Timid Democrats unwilling to say what a fucking mess it is, that we have nothing to gain by staying there. They are too scared to leave, falsely assuming they would look weak.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #26
28. Yep
That is the main reason we're not pulling out sooner - you've got it exactly correct IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demigoddess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 11:53 AM
Response to Original message
32. you should have added stupidity
eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JustABozoOnThisBus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 01:15 PM
Response to Original message
35. Because we were there yesterday
and we don't see a politically acceptable way out.

Nobody (including Obama) wants to be the one who lost the war. We don't want to lose, and can't figure out what "win" means.

It's a good strategy, it kept us in Vietnam for a long time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Xenotime Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 01:29 PM
Response to Original message
36. We are there trying to occupy another country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-02-09 01:30 PM
Response to Original message
37. Pipelinistan
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 12:07 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC