Taliban claim militants killed 15 US-led troops

[Parashuram1]

The point is that war in Afghanistan is a collective punishment to all Afghans, whether Taliban or not, they're all Afghans and they don't deserve such heinous punishment. At the end of the day ordinary Afghans are suffering and this collective punishment cannot be justifiable even if AQ is complicit in 911 and the Talibs gave them sanctuary, ordinary afghans do not deserve a decade long occupation under foreign boots.

Afghans have all the right to be free and not under invasion from another country and freedom is something I strongly support. However, what I want to point out that they weren't even so much as near the word freedom under Taliban either, long before the NATO-led invasion.

Unfortunately, here and generally Pakistanis have positive emotions with respect to Taliban which is very regrettable. Now don't give me the sage-like sentences that you mean good for Afghans. Most threads on this forum start with criticizing, condemning and undermining Afghan capabilities and if you have an ounce of self-honesty, you can see for yourself.

You talk about oppressing the minorities, heck your coalition buddies are hand in glove with hiring Tajik, uzbek, etc minorities through bribes and whatnot to do your dirty work. What moral standing does the coalition have when they hired criminal drug lords and war lords with history of mass murder on their cuffs to represent Afghanistan on your behalf?

First of all, they are not "our coalition buddies" as Switzerland is not part of any coalition, military or political. Amusing to see that rather than admitting the fact of torture of minorities, you deviate the topic of asking the coalition to have no moral high ground; mind you, the coalition arrived in Afghanistan in 2001... the minorities were being oppressed and harassed much before any foreign troops set foot in Afghanistan post-Soviet invasion.

By the way, neither does Pakistan have any moral standing with a whole lot of equally bad allegations against your country by various countries of sponsoring terrorism. You will want to rubbish these allegations as a Pakistanis but in the eyes of neutral countries and the UN, you are in no different boat than the accusations that you make against the coalition. Hence you are as much "innocent until proven guilty" as much as the coalition is. Like it or not.

You mentioned that you work for the UN, no wonder why UN is so incompetent and impotent when it has fools like you at their disposal.

Your post has been reported for using derogatory speech and using personal attacks. UN might be ineffective in getting to many solutions, but it will never stand in support of extremist terrorism and those who admire and abet in it. Wash your mouth next time when you reply. Wars are not always white and black and there is always some amount of grey in it which I agree with.

The coalition might have some bad and negative aspects under their belt and for those if present, I sincerely condemn those responsible. The UN also condemns mal-practices that take place in such inevitable events. But you hold no moral high grounds either by supporting extremist terrorism that has wiped off almost all minorities in Afghanistan and even kept the local people under their boot of a so-called religious law and order. Even a simpleton will know that no religion promotes violence to the level Taliban does against ordinary citizens and by becoming a trouble for the entire world community, Taliban has brought this upon itself and the innocent citizens of Afghanistan.

Why do your tribal regions offer such safe havens to these terrorists? Isn't your government in control of those territories of yours?

 

[dabong1]

Read the UNAMA data on civilian casualties. Your taliban can't help but kill afghan civilians at a rate of nearly 3:1 over ISAF. That is, at least when they aren't hiding behind the skirts of afghan women and using them for shields.

Can you read? Here-

UNAMA Press Release On Civilian Casualties 2009

Don't strain your eyes even though the truth may hurt an irhabist apologist like yourself.

i know who are TTP terroristes (don't call them talibs plese)"

Fool. For what do you think TTP stands? Let me help you-Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan

What you saw in SWAT and Buner and what the people of FATA have lived under for seven years is what the Afghan people experienced daily between 1996 and 2001 under taliban rule. They are one and the same. You know it. Jana knows it. We all know it.

You would happily foist on the afghans that which you won't accept for yourselves in Pakistan. That is the HEIGHT of hypocrisy and cruelty.

You don't argue well. We'll part here as you're undeserving of any more my time. Opposition is one thing. Stupidity and opposition is intolerable. There's an old adage-don’t argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Whoever said that must have met you.

Thanks.

In considering civilian casualties caused collectively by insurgent forces, it should be noted that the armed insurgency in Afghanistan against the government and foreign military forces is composed of many diverse individuals and groups that are motivated by a range of different goals and ideologies, that do not necessarily identify as "Taliban", and that do not act under a single line of authority.

In the initial airstrikes and invasion, most of the direct civilian deaths were the result of U.S.-led airstrikes and groundfire. In the years since 2005, the mounting insurgency has resulted in more direct civilian deaths being caused each year by insurgent actions than by coalition military action. Overall, however, the number of direct civilian casualties that have been attributed to insurgent forces by the available estimates remains less than the number that have been attributed to U.S.-led airstrikes and groundfire since 2001.
Civilian casualties of the War in Afghanistan (2001?present) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[salahuldin786]

Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
killed 90,000–166,000 people in Hiroshima and 60,000–80,000 in Nagasaki

Bombing of Tokyo
killed 100,000 people

and many many more killed by u.s.a bombing in the world the nation of the brave bomb bomb bomb and bomb some more and when all esle fails bomb again.

 

[Parashuram1]

My bad,not perfectly fine,but definitely MUCH BETTER under the Taliban regime then the USA regime,Go look up on the statistics.You talk about the Taliban having constantly supported the terrorists.What about USA backed Israel,who is considered a terrorist state for the illegal occupation of Palestine.

Much better under Taliban? Are you alright? Once the NATO came in, it was Taliban that continuously attacks their convoy and forces them to retaliate. The reason why NATO came to Afghanistan in first place was as a result of Taliban's support of terrorist activities in US and other Western countries.

Besides, your government wasn't so morally clean when you approached United States and NATO to intervene in Afghanistan when USSR invaded it, isn't it? Then why are you so explicitly worried now? The Soviets wanted to annex Afghanistan into their union while neither NATO nor US are interested in such a thing. What value does Afghanistan offer in your opinion that would make the NATO occupy it for personal gains? Please tell me that.

It has to be always Israel on this forum always, isn't it?.. this is the main problem with most members here. You people are involved in activities that has nothing to do with your country.

1) Israel shares no borders with you, still you are obsessed with considering them an enemy for their own internal dispute.

2)They have never invaded the sovereignty of Pakistan and still Pakistanis see it as an enemy for some reason.

3) The dispute between Israel and Palestine is a dispute that is their internal matter which is not affecting any other country around the world and is a territorial dispute.

Pakistan cannot go on acting as a religious police around the world claiming to be fighting for every other organization's rights just because they share a religion with your citizens. Simple reason, this will only pile up the number of enemies you have, giving no positive results.

Israel might be wrong in some ways and so are terrorist organizations that orchestrate attack on unknowing innocent Israeli citizens rather than directly confronting their enemy; the government. Therefore, they hold no additional moral high ground.

Another man's terrorist can be another man's freedom fighter.If that's the case,and Don't judge me on how I see democracy.I definitely know what is democracy,and how its system takes place.

Which is why there is so much terrorism in your own country today. My dear Pakistani friend, how do feel if someone calls those as freedom fighters that are destroying a promising country like Pakistan? I am sure you hate these terrorists from the core of your heart just as many Pakistanis do. Shouldn't then the logic of their activities be justified because they are freedom fighters to someone? Tell me.

Was he going around spreading rumors on this forums or misbehaving around?He merely supported the Taliban. You expect people to believe your every footstep.Just because another country call its a terrorist organisation,you expect every other country to do so.

But the fact is that almost every other country condemns Taliban as a terrorist organization and that includes your own elected government. In international consensus, that is what counts. Now by every country if you mean the entire planet, well Taliban isn't exactly a threat to Fiji or Mexico so their consultation is needless.

Taliban here is risk to massive Western investment in Middle East, Iran, China, Central Asian States, Russia, India even Pakistan along with rest of the countries where there is a stable society and are under threat. So obviously only those countries concerned will raise the issue. If Afghanistan were an isolated Island in the middle of an ocean with no other countries sharing a border, neither the West nor any of the afore-mentioned states would have been bothered as to how that country functions.

That was years ago.Now times have changed,people are more opposed to the War in Afghanistan now,go look up the survey I showed you,even the Afghan feels that life became MUCH WORST before the USA came.Now show me a source that says Iran almsot wanted to invade Taliban before NATO invaded

.

Wow! Interestingly, we received another statistics that find 71% of Afghans in favor of ousting Taliban and have a stable government. Either you are suggesting that Afghans are two-faced about their own country or someone has wrong statistics. I cannot show you any link since it was a hard copy research. But I am sure it would have been published.

Now if you carefully see, Afghans are against any potential occupation of their land and any war in that respect, which is agreeable by all countries. Freedom is fundamental right of Afghans and they deserve it. But that doesn't mean they support Taliban either. The only reason they are now wanting USA to leave is because of Taliban's attacks and violence in their country. Instead of repelling Talibans with even more vigour, they are doing the opposite.

Little do they realize that it is not easy to negotiate peace with Taliban and without conflict they are not just risking their own existence but also stability of many other neigbouring countries.

They don't realize that Taliban is a nuisance not just for them but for all their neighbours and if the US had not struck back after 9/11, one of the neighbouring countries around your region would have.

There is something called Google. Please search in that about Iran's warning of war against Taliban prior to Afghan invasion. There are various analysis published online by reputed experts for all to read.

 

[Parashuram1]

Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
killed 90,000–166,000 people in Hiroshima and 60,000–80,000 in Nagasaki

Bombing of Tokyo
killed 100,000 people

and many many more killed by u.s.a bombing in the world the nation of the brave bomb bomb bomb and bomb some more and when all esle fails bomb again.

Nuclear attack was the worst of any attacks and it was very wrong. Even today, the entire world cringes at the very thought of those images. I am not supporting USA and NATO but don't you think that there is a lot of bias against NATO here in general? I mean, isn't Turkey also a part of NATO for crying out loud?

What about Turkish historical conquests of other sovereign countries?Is that justified?

 

[Aeri-Eye]

Parashuram1,

Just incase you forgot, let me remind what happened in 80s, 90s. US was having affairs with these very same people they are killing now. US was in bed with them in 80s & 90s, read a bit of history. It was CIA who funded and used these groups for their own interest.

There is a reason why so many people are against US actions. They deserve each & every bit of criticism they get. You shouldn't be expecting flowers in return when you throw stones at others.

 

[S-2]

"Man,really,you are going off topic S-2."

My sole purpose at the beginning of this thread was to defend the heinous assault on American forces by a French Pakistani irhabist. To that end I'm no more off-topic than the rest here at this point.

"You are missing out my real point for showing you this article here."

I disagree.

"...But this doesn't mean other troubles are solved either."

No doubt. Afghanistan was and still largely is a primordial state closer to the bronze age than the 21st century.

"For example Opium trade was at its highest and is responsible for 90% of growing drugs in Afghanistan, increased instability in the region and more."

Opium has been a problem in Afghanistan long before I was born. I'm 54. It won't go away tomorrow. Afghanistan has one of the most corrupt SOCIETIES, much less governments in this world and long has been that way too. It is surrounded by countries that are nearly as corrupt. It has no police force of consequence as yet. Of what it does possess in police, many are themselves drug-addicted and illiterate. It's army is just now learning to walk and while afghans are natural fighters, they are not necessary natural professional soldiers. That will take many years to develop.

That's part of the problem related to drugs. The other is the insurgency. I've done my best to lucidly outline the relationship which exists between the insurgents and narcotics. It goes deep and has roots reaching back to the mujahideen in the Afghan-Soviet war.

The taliban found narcotics an effective means to raise capital in the absence of internat'l recognition upon seizing power in 1996. They do today as well. The epi-center of the narcotics trade is centered in those areas where the taliban exert the greatest influence. This is no accident and I've done my best to point out that three provinces comprising 80% of Afghanistan's opium production also happen to be the three areas where the afghan insurgency has long been the strongest.

"But the fact I do not understand is,what is the real point of USA invading Afghanistan."

Our invasion of Afghanistan was to, minimally, eject Al Qaeda from its safe havens and disrupt their terror operations against our country. In this we've been minimally successful if avoiding another 9/11 is any indication. That operation continues because our larger objective remains the killing or capturing of Al Qaeda's key lieutenants and leaders. In this we've been less successful. Such is war where two sides play to win.

"Is it was the fact the people there were oppressed?"

Al Qaeda's safe haven was provided by an unrecognized and unelected taliban government whom we abhor. That government's leadership was chased into Pakistan.

"...was it for other strategic purposes."

The only other strategic purpose morphed from Operation Enduring Freedom. The world community, of their own accord and via the auspices of the U.N. enacted the Bonn Accords that established both an Afghan government and a mandate to support that government in pursuit of national stabilization. OEF continues but that is America's mission alone. ISAF operates under the aegis of the U.N. mandate and by the invitation and permission of the Afghan government. Two separate missions that parallel one another.

"And if you really cared for the fact,that the women are not facing enough freedom, or there is freedom right abuse,why wouldn't you target countries such as Somalia,why Afghanistan.Think about it"

I have thought about it. The U.N. is in Afghanistan for the purpose of raising forth the afghan people. ALL of its people. We support that but America is not omnipotent and we have no intention of invading every country where oppression is the nature of the beast. We are in Afghanistan and that is, frankly, the best we can offer.

Islam is welcome to extend its generous and benevolent hand to raise forth its own any time it wishes. Those with immense financial means to do so choose not. I don't know why but that's for them to consider and not America. Should we or our friends be again attacked in such a manner that requires we do to Somalia what we've done in Afghanistan, then perhaps Somalia women will benefit by our hand in ways that isn't currently possible.

Your female Afghan M.P. is an interesting woman. I've read of her work. She innocently rails at America for not magically transforming her peoples overnight. I sympathize with her sense of urgency but her naivete is counter-productive. She is politically isolated by choosing the path of the political martyr. I'm right now struggling with a Pakistani pashtun woman who is a woman's rights activist and aligned with a number of pan-Pakistani liberal movements in Pakistan.

She is a great fan of PREDATOR and claims that there's great support for their operations in FATA. I suspect she is quite correct in many respects. She is not, however, perfectly credible in her claims that no innocents have died. Without personally having travelled to that region I know that, in fact, some innocents have unquestionably died by these attacks. Certainly some wives and children of my enemies have died minimally. Why would she claim such when she possesses excellent contacts with IDPs and others within FATA?

She does so because she expects America to fully eradicate Al Qaeda and the taliban from that area to free her sisters. She's suggested to me that must happen otherwise it proves America WISHES Al Qaeda to escape elsewhere and justify our pursuit throughout Islam. That is disingenuous but it serves her purposes. Thus she is simultaneously a friend and a potential enemy of America all in one felt swoop.

I say this to you to amplify on the myriad messages America receives daily from around the world to "save us or else". Your Afghan M.P.'s claims about warlords is heard. Trust me. Rome, however, wasn't built in a day. Thus a process ensues that demands others save themselves FROM themselves. We'll do the best we can to help but without others fighting and dying (if necessary) for their freedom our efforts will be of little avail.

"Education is important and I do agree with you,but to achieve that,there must be stability of the region.And,seeing how it is going,its going to take much longer than expected to achieve that."

One more anecdotal disappointment. An Iraqi court today deneid the electoral eligibility of 145+ sunni candidates on charges of baathism. Maybe. Maybe not. Most realize that being a baathist in Iraq doesn't automatically mean these were Saddamists. Some certainly could have been but others might simply have been doing the best for their tribes under the circumstances. Nonetheless, the stink of Shia-sunni antagonism exceeds the constitutional and political mechanisms in place to evaluate and discern fairly.

Our fault that this has occurred? I don't think so. But it's certainly the reflection of an immature political state where bloc voting is reduced to its greatest common denominator. If Iraq manages to survive such without degenerating into civil war they might yet emerge where one votes based upon more sophisticated concerns-like competency and compassion coupled to economic imperatives related to livlihoods and not "the strongest tribe".

Brace yourself for a rough ride. Then again, fortunately we're all just passing time on planet Earth.

Thanks.

 

[Condor]

oki oki calm down babys, i think i have missed a lot of comments against my comment"good job talibs" !

First of all i really don't need any lecture on talibs from any idiot ,i know who are TTP terroristes (don't call them talibs plese) and who are afgan talibs!

Americans perhaps don't know every afgan is a talibs,(talibs=freedome fighter) NATO have killed and continu to kill thousand of civilian=creation of talibs!

Better is to keep quiet when you don't know the reality! =) Hope my comment will help lot of idiots,who still belive they will defete afgan talibs by force! LONG LIFE PAKISTAN ARMY AND AFGAN TALIBANS!

Just a word of encouragement to my young Pakistani friend here. Do not feel small for your less than desirable grasp of English in which you have to express
yourself here. And nobody can belittle you, if you do it not to yourself.
Languages are but sign posts to what lies deep within. Turn to other languages if you have to - Urdu, Punjabi, French... any. Punjabi has a wealth of invectives
you can unleash.
See how our Staff Member 'Stealth' uses a mix of languages when he's MAD.

I and your other friends here uphold your right to your views.

You'll turn out to be a fine young man - no worries and Good Luck to you.

Regards

 

[ameer219]

Much better under Taliban? Are you alright? Once the NATO came in, it was Taliban that continuously attacks their convoy and forces them to retaliate. The reason why NATO came to Afghanistan in first place was as a result of Taliban's support of terrorist activities in US and other Western .

Firstly,opium trade is on the rise already producing almost 90% of drugs in the world.Criminal activities are also much higher.USA has already been fighting this war for 10 years,and still unable to exert the control over Afghanistan.

And Secondly,I know you are part of the UN and I respect your views and everything but the highlighted point was a total BS.Please read up a little history of yours.

The whole war started when the U.S. government launched military operations in Afghanistan especially Operation Enduring Freedom,which was aim to remove high ranking Al Qaeda members and capturing Osama Bin Laden started by American and British forces by starting an aerial bombing campaign targeting Taliban forces and al-Qaeda.This is totally not a retaliation for attacking NATO convoys.

The Soviets wanted to annex Afghanistan into their union while neither NATO nor US are interested in such a thing.

If it isn't interested at all,then why created the Mujaheedin to have control over Afghanistan,why try to create chaos in Afghanistan?

What value does Afghanistan offer in your opinion that would make the NATO occupy it for personal gains? Please tell me that.

Various Geo-political objectives including oil fields, gas pipelines and opium manufacturing.


America has wanted a new government in Afghanistan since at least 1998, three years before the attacks on 11 September 2001. The official report from a meeting of the U.S. Government's foreign policy committee on 12 February 1998, available on the U.S. Government website, confirms that the need for a West-friendly government was recognised long before the War on Terror that followed September 11th:
"The U.S. Government's position is that we support multiple pipelines...
The Unocal pipeline is among those pipelines that would receive our
support under that policy. I would caution that while we do support the
project, the U.S. Government has not at this point recognized any
governing regime of the transit country, one of the transit countries,
Afghanistan, through which that pipeline would be routed. But we do
support the project."
[ U.S. House of Reps., "U.S. Interests in the Central Asian Republics", 12 Feb 1998 ]
U.S. Interests in the Central Asian Republics


"The only other possible route [for the desired oil pipeline] is across,
Afghanistan which has of course its own unique challenges."
[ "U.S. Interests in the Central Asian Republics", 12 Feb 1998 ]
U.S. Interests in the Central Asian Republics


"CentGas can not begin construction until an internationally recognized
Afghanistan Government is in place."
[ "U.S. Interests in the Central Asian Republics", 12 Feb 1998 ]
U.S. Interests in the Central Asian Republics


The Afghanistan oil pipeline project was finally able to proceed in May 2002. This could not have happened if America had not taken military action to replace the government in Afghanistan.
BBC NEWS | Business | Afghan pipeline given go-ahead

1) Israel shares no borders with you, still you are obsessed with considering them an enemy for their own internal dispute.

2)They have never invaded the sovereignty of Pakistan and still Pakistanis see it as an enemy for some reason.

3) The dispute between Israel and Palestine is a dispute that is their internal matter which is not affecting any other country around the world and is a territorial dispute.

Dude,before you jump to anymore conclusion.Read what I wrote carefully,its not about me opposing Israel or anything.

If you guys talk so much about oppression in Afghanistan,what about Israel.Why did USA kept quiet during the Gaza war in 2009.Palestine already agreed to the State of Israel,why did USA still let them take over the territories of the Palestine but keep quiet over the oppression of Kashmir?,why didn't they interfere.You guys are a bunch of hypocrites from what I can see.

It has to be always Israel on this forum always, isn't it?.. this is the main problem with most members here. You people are involved in activities that has nothing to do with your country.

And if you talk about us involve in other people's buisness.then you are just like a pot calling the kettle black.USA has been involved in Vietnam which has nothing to do with them.Why intefere?

Israel might be wrong in some ways and so are terrorist organizations that orchestrate attack on unknowing innocent Israeli citizens rather than directly confronting their enemy; the government. Therefore, they hold no additional moral high ground.

Dude,compare the civilians death of Israel and Palestine,then talk to me about this.
And honestly,please stop making unsupported statements. We are more interested about our Muslim brothers in Palestine that are being oppressed,and we are definitely not interested about Israel affairs or anything.Anyway,there is even a thread around here that talks about peace with Israel,and even going as far to making military agreements,so please do not judge the whole defence forum community just because i brought up about Israel.

Which is why there is so much terrorism in your own country today. My dear Pakistani friend, how do feel if someone calls those as freedom fighters that are destroying a promising country like Pakistan? I am sure you hate these terrorists from the core of your heart just as many Pakistanis do. Shouldn't then the logic of their activities be justified because they are freedom fighters to someone? Tell me.

Before that,many people in Pakistanis on a recent poll in 2007 showed that people actually believe in the terrorists,but it all turned around when they conducted suicide bombings.Yes now Pakistan has learn this mistake and we are all against the Taliban.And now they are TERRORISTS to us.

Just like how you feel that the Hezbollah and the Hamas are terrorist,for the Palestine,it is their freedom fighter.

Wow! Interestingly, we received another statistics that find 71% of Afghans in favor of ousting Taliban and have a stable government. Either you are suggesting that Afghans are two-faced about their own country or someone has wrong statistics. I cannot show you any link since it was a hard copy research. But I am sure it would have been published.

I do not know where you got your source from but here is my source from an independent analysis

In January 2009, an independent analysis by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington D.C. found that "the majority of Afghans are now deeply opposed to the foreign troops on their soil" and that the presence of a foreign occupier in Afghanistan is the single most important factor behind the Afghan insurgency.

http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/afghan_war-strategy.pdf

Now if you carefully see, Afghans are against any potential occupation of their land and any war in that respect, which is agreeable by all countries. Freedom is fundamental right of Afghans and they deserve it. But that doesn't mean they support Taliban either. The only reason they are now wanting USA to leave is because of Taliban's attacks and violence in their country. Instead of repelling Talibans with even more vigour, they are doing the opposite.

Little do they realize that it is not easy to negotiate peace with Taliban and without conflict they are not just risking their own existence but also stability of many other neighboring countries.

They don't realize that Taliban is a nuisance not just for them but for all their neighbors and if the US had not struck back after 9/11, one of the neighboring countries around your region would have.
In January 2009, an independent analysis by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington D.C. found that "the majority of Afghans are now deeply opposed to the foreign troops on their soil" and that the presence of a foreign occupier in Afghanistan is the single most important factor behind the Afghan insurgency

So the whole point is,that when Americans entered the scene,they made things worst,that's why Afghans want them out of their country,and thus they initially believe that their life was much better before.Thanks for proving my point with whatever you have just mentioned.

There is something called Google. Please search in that about Iran's warning of war against Taliban prior to Afghan invasion. There are various analysis published online by reputed experts for all to read

Ok,thanks,read and confirmed.

 

[Parashuram1]

Firstly,opium trade is on the rise already producing almost 90% of drugs in the world.Criminal activities are also much higher.USA has already been fighting this war for 10 years,and still unable to exert the control over Afghanistan.

And Secondly,I know you are part of the UN and I respect your views and everything but the highlighted point was a total BS.Please read up a little history of yours.

The whole war started when the U.S. government launched military operations in Afghanistan especially Operation Enduring Freedom,which was aim to remove high ranking Al Qaeda members and capturing Osama Bin Laden started by American and British forces by starting an aerial bombing campaign targeting Taliban forces and al-Qaeda.This is totally not a retaliation for attacking NATO convoys.



If it isn't interested at all,then why created the Mujaheedin to have control over Afghanistan,why try to create chaos in Afghanistan?



Various Geo-political objectives including oil fields, gas pipelines and opium manufacturing.


America has wanted a new government in Afghanistan since at least 1998, three years before the attacks on 11 September 2001. The official report from a meeting of the U.S. Government's foreign policy committee on 12 February 1998, available on the U.S. Government website, confirms that the need for a West-friendly government was recognised long before the War on Terror that followed September 11th:
"The U.S. Government's position is that we support multiple pipelines...
The Unocal pipeline is among those pipelines that would receive our
support under that policy. I would caution that while we do support the
project, the U.S. Government has not at this point recognized any
governing regime of the transit country, one of the transit countries,
Afghanistan, through which that pipeline would be routed. But we do
support the project."
[ U.S. House of Reps., "U.S. Interests in the Central Asian Republics", 12 Feb 1998 ]
U.S. Interests in the Central Asian Republics


"The only other possible route [for the desired oil pipeline] is across,
Afghanistan which has of course its own unique challenges."
[ "U.S. Interests in the Central Asian Republics", 12 Feb 1998 ]
U.S. Interests in the Central Asian Republics


"CentGas can not begin construction until an internationally recognized
Afghanistan Government is in place."
[ "U.S. Interests in the Central Asian Republics", 12 Feb 1998 ]
U.S. Interests in the Central Asian Republics


The Afghanistan oil pipeline project was finally able to proceed in May 2002. This could not have happened if America had not taken military action to replace the government in Afghanistan.
BBC NEWS | Business | Afghan pipeline given go-ahead



Dude,before you jump to anymore conclusion.Read what I wrote carefully,its not about me opposing Israel or anything.

If you guys talk so much about oppression in Afghanistan,what about Israel.Why did USA kept quiet during the Gaza war in 2009.Palestine already agreed to the State of Israel,why did USA still let them take over the territories of the Palestine but keep quiet over the oppression of Kashmir?,why didn't they interfere.You guys are a bunch of hypocrites from what I can see.


And if you talk about us involve in other people's buisness.then you are just like a pot calling the kettle black.USA has been involved in Vietnam which has nothing to do with them.Why intefere?



Dude,compare the civilians death of Israel and Palestine,then talk to me about this.
And honestly,please stop making unsupported statements. We are more interested about our Muslim brothers in Palestine that are being oppressed,and we are definitely not interested about Israel affairs or anything.Anyway,there is even a thread around here that talks about peace with Israel,and even going as far to making military agreements,so please do not judge the whole defence forum community just because i brought up about Israel.




Before that,many people in Pakistanis on a recent poll in 2007 showed that people actually believe in the terrorists,but it all turned around when they conducted suicide bombings.Yes now Pakistan has learn this mistake and we are all against the Taliban.And now they are TERRORISTS to us.

Just like how you feel that the Hezbollah and the Hamas are terrorist,for the Palestine,it is their freedom fighter.




I do not know where you got your source from but here is my source from an independent analysis

In January 2009, an independent analysis by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington D.C. found that "the majority of Afghans are now deeply opposed to the foreign troops on their soil" and that the presence of a foreign occupier in Afghanistan is the single most important factor behind the Afghan insurgency.

http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/afghan_war-strategy.pdf



So the whole point is,that when Americans entered the scene,they made things worst,that's why Afghans want them out of their country,and thus they initially believe that their life was much better before.Thanks for proving my point with whatever you have just mentioned.




Ok,thanks,read and confirmed.

Whether CIA and your agencies funded them or not during the Soviet war, the problem is now these militia have gone rogue and are a threat to the peace of every country in the region including Afghanistan and Pakistan. So stopping them is crucial.

You have some good points that have certain relevance and I agree. However, Taliban have been a menace and have been encouraging terrorism and offering terrorists haven from numerous countries including religious fanatics from countries like Uzbekistan. The kidnapping of a flight of Indian Airlines was another evidence of Taliban supporting global terrorism.

Despite your refusal to identify the Taliban that operated in your country and the Taliban of Afghanistan to be the same, the numerous intelligence agencies with better military, political and financial resources around the world confirm otherwise, meaning your claims of them being 2 separate organizations falls short of truth. The world community is better off than believing the words of a terrorist organization about whether or not they are separate entities.


You and many Pakistani members here claim that US is in Afghanistan for natural resources and strategic point, while American members refute this with sources that say they adequately paid for the resources they use. Therefore, resources debate is a matter I leave it to American and Pakistani members to argue it out.

My point is Taliban being a nuisance to the world community as well along with their Al Qaeda affiliates and hence have to be put down. The reason why Mugabe and Myanmar's junta are off with just economic sanctions is because their activities are not disrupting peace all around their neighbourhood unlike the Taliban which are a threat to your country as well as the rest of your neighbourhood. This threat is augmented with their possibility of acquiring nuclear weapons of your establishment.

Before you call this a false claim, let me tell you that it is a possibility and the world has a right to worry if a nuclear armed state whose army has been numerous times attacked by fundamentalist terrorist organizations, is unable to destroy terrorism off its territory and such that these terrorists will go to any extent to even murder your soldiers to acquire these weapons.

Since your stockpile is currently claimed to be safe, it is good and we all wish for it to be true. But you cannot say that the world community has no right to worry or take actions to prevent this anytime in future. NATO might or might not have their own personal interests but they have done a good job by sending a message to Taliban and other terrorist organizations.

 

[S-2]

Energy is central to the development of the region.

The pipeline referenced by ameer219 had agreements signed in 2002 between Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and PAKISTAN to terminate at the port of Gwadar. I don't know the status of that project nor especially care. How it works for America is simple. The more pipelines running in more directions from CAR, the more options CAR has with respect to delivering its energy to global locations at market-based pricing. Therefore CAR cannot be held hostage by one nation or another short of military conquest. That's a good thing for CAR, Afghanistan, and Pakistan as well as end-users globally.

If true and possible to complete, I'd love to see a pipe system run eastward to Pakistan and westward to Iran Afghanistan thus linking the entire region in multiiple end-points that defy disruption by any one nation.

Where America gets its energy to prosecute the war in Iraq is clear-Kuwait. We've not stolen one barrel of oil from the Iraqis nor hold any contracts of consequence to field development at present. WRT to Afghanistan, the fact that fuel tankers have been blown up in Khyber is sufficient to show we bring our gas through Pakistan. I believe almost none comes from CAR.

Thanks.

What's wrong with that?

 

[S-2]

I've looked at your article from Gilles Dorronsoro. It's old and its sourcing-both footnotes and references older. Can you provide the "independant study" supposedly referenced by Mr. Dorronsoro?
I'd like to see it please.

There are other studies that contradict your suggestion that Afghans hate the presence of ISAF troops. Please read-

ABC/BBC/ARD Afghanistan Poll: Where Things Stand 2010

This poll was finished in January 2010. Question #17 is salient.

"Do you strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose or strongly oppose the presence of the following groups in Afghanistan today?"

You may also review the methodology but the poll is an annual affair that reaches back some years and remains the most consistent measure of Afghan perceptions in a very difficult polling environment.

Thanks.

 

[H2O3C4Nitrogen]

I don't know the status of that project nor especially care. How it works for America is simple. The more pipelines running in more directions from CAR, the more options CAR has with respect to delivering its energy to global locations at market-based pricing. Therefore CAR cannot be held hostage by one nation or another short of military conquest. That's a good thing for CAR, Afghanistan, and Pakistan as well as end-users globally.

How can any 1 build a pipeline in a war torn country . Plus i believe , also the CAR should not be made hostage to any OIL and Gas company belonging to a cretin country . The US did had the motive to let its Oil and Gas companies foster in the region so that it could have some sort of role over the CAR
resources , just the way ARAMCO is doing buisness in Saudia Arabia . The UNNACOL was regected by the Taliban regime and the contract went in favour of the Argentanian company BRIDAS . due to this , the UNNACOL board of Govenors gaved CIA a prsentation regarding the Regime Change in Afghanistan .. and the rest of the story then followed .

The US did had some economic objectives tied to the Afghan invasion . No one can deny this . But today there objectives have been severely limited.

 

[S-2]

UNOCAL has no contracts there. Check it out. Conspiracy theories aside, if you look at CAR energy development, you'll see that the vast preponderance is Russian or Chinese based. Who's got the greater motives and incentives.

Blame America all you want but the proof TODAY just isn't there. I've listened to the lies about Iraq and they never held water. If it makes you more comfortable to think we invaded Afghanistan ove some damn pipeline, so be it but you'll be far from the truth. Most whom benefit from CAR energy are countries other than America.

You have a great linked-source I gave you some time ago. You should use it.

Thanks.

 

[ptldM3]

What is wrong to support freedom fighters .
S2, your idealogy is totally in clash with fundamentals of Islam .

Problem is you dont want to do research and read Islam.

Are you afraid to find truth?

The freedom figter are the Norther Allience. Would you want to live under the rule of those "freedom fighters?" Those "freedom fighter" don't let women get an education, don't let women show their faces, they beat women, they don't allow things such as pool games, they murder people for breaking petty rules, i doubt you or your family would like to live under those conditions.