In case you have been wondering why we are fighting in Afghanistan the Americans have finally come clean. We are not there to bring democracy, liberate Afghan women, or to help that country escape its long suffering feudalism. Development is not really on the agenda unless you consider building US military bases as some sort of betterment for the Afghan people.
According to Islamonline.net the US has offered the Taliban six provinces in exchange for allowing them to build eight military bases:
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1256909637728&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout
This is one news item North American newspapers won’t be in a rush to print.
Of course, the American embassy in Kabul(as mentioned in the report)denies any such negotiations are taking place, but you can be sure they are. Trying to con the Taliban into such a deal is a lot cheaper than sending over another 34,000 US troops which the US has just announced are going to be deployed.
The Taliban have wisely rejected the offer as it would turn them into the new Palestinians or the New Iraqis as you wish. They would be ghettoized in their homeland and see their rights and freedoms hijacked. “Power-sharing” is not something Americans do well as numerous other countries have learned the hard way.
Iraq was supposed to be about democracy but at last count fourteen US military bases have been established there and that long suffering country remains broken.
If we Canadians think our troops are serving there to democratize Afghanistan we delude ourselves. Canadian and NATO forces alike have been conscripted as mercenaries in America’s imperialist treachery.
The truth only apppears radical when it has been buried for too long under false assumptions and propaganda.
Robert Billyard 2009 (c)
.
Stumble It!
The country has large untapped mineral and metal resources and the main purpose of this present exercise is to prevent them to get under Chinese, or Russian control.
The present war and occupation is a hopeless mess that doesn't accomplish anything, because motorized troops are useless in a country without roads and the occupiers are getting blown up even on the few existing roads.
As I wrote on this blog 4-5, or whatever years ago, It would take half million soldiers on their feet, stationed in every village for 50 years, to suppress the Taliban and when they leave the Taliban would come back and massacre all who cooperated with them.
Sooner or later the occupiers will be forced out and Canada can look forward to the loss of another 2-3 dozen soldiers, dying for nothing.
Ed Deak, Big Lake, BC.
When i see
Since every story has to pass me before it gets posted, sometimes I have ulterior motives. I usually like Roberts' work, but lately, it's been a little "off" shall we say. Which is no reason for me to not publish it - my opinions are irrelevant. Some may wish to debate his stories, and it's not for me to decide.
But seeing "The Americans come clean" and "Islam Online" in the same story I just knew it was a case of 'Confirmation Bias'. The story is believed, despite the readers own intuition, because the reader wants to believe the information and the story reinforces that bias. Which is why kids believe in Santa, until they learn logical thought. And why people still hold to that 'pipeline' argument, despite there being a severe lack of said 'pipeline'.
AlJazeera.com (not .net!), IslamOnline.com, Glenn Beck. These are sources that rely on sensationalism and a severe lack of actual factual reporting to their target audiences. I'm glad some people still have a finely tuned sense of 'bullshit'.
As Flatlux stated, the Taliban were America's Own Thugs until they got the idea that they could go their own way - much like Saddam Hussein.
It was America which promoted the Taliban's emergence, encouraged Hikmatyar to attack the shaky (and slightly less dodgy than the Taliban became) government of Burhanuddin Rabbani's in Kabul, and then funded the Taliban to attack in their turn "to separate the brothers". The Taliban became the de facto government, and the USA, Canada, the UK, et al were quite happy to do business with them.
The reasons given for the attack and invasion of Afghanistan by the Americans and their friends in 2001 never made sense. At least this report has a certain credibility, and its veracity should be investigated as shining some light on what on earth Canadian and British soldiers and marines are doing there... and in whose interest.
For example:
By Pepe Escobar
What happens on the immense battlefield for the control of Eurasia will provide the ultimate plot line in the tumultuous rush towards a new, polycentric world order, also known as the New Great Game.
Our good ol' friend the nonsensical "global war on terror", which the Pentagon has slyly rebranded "the Long War", sports a far more important, if half-hidden, twin - a global energy war. I like to think of it as the Liquid War, because its bloodstream is the pipelines that crisscross the potential imperial battlefields of the planet. Put another way, if its crucial embattled frontier these days is the Caspian Basin, the whole of Eurasia is its chessboard. Think of it, geographically, as Pipelineistan.
.....
Read More >>>
Why do you do damage to your anti-Afghanistan arguments by promoting such tripe? There are plenty of real issues to debate, but this isn't one of them. Islamonline has less credibility than Fox.
It may have less credibility, but that doesn't mean they are wrong. Quit diverting.
My original point stands, if you are going to cite a source to make an arguement, Islamonline shouldn't be it. They are not just the boy that cried wolf, they are the wolf themselves.
Now, I'm not diverting, but I'd like to debate the pipeline issue. BeaverFeaver makes some decent points and cites a post that at least used decent sources in it's writing. However, I do have issues with some of the arguments generated by Pepe . So, according to this theory, we all went to war because the Taliban refused to give W a pipeline through Afghanistan. OK, lets go with that. So we've been there what, 8 years? Can anyone show me a picture of said pipeline that is now being built (I would assume by Haliburton)? If this was true, wouldn't there be some evidence that it has now gone through? Or at least started? Anyone? No? So what are they waiting for then? Jeb Bush to get elected? Jeez, by the time they start putting this together, we'll be so far past peak oil there won't be any point will there? Or is this just about controlling the ground to ensure someone else (the Chinese or Russians) DON'T get it? Maybe. But this strategy sounds more expensive then letting them have it to begin with. Seing as how they (Russian and China) control most of the source in the area anyway.
Now, I'm not diverting, but I'd like to debate the pipeline issue. BeaverFeaver makes some decent points and cites a post that at least used decent sources in it's writing. However, I do have issues with some of the arguments generated by Pepe . So, according to this theory, we all went to war because the Taliban refused to give W a pipeline through Afghanistan. OK, lets go with that. So we've been there what, 8 years? Can anyone show me a picture of said pipeline that is now being built (I would assume by Haliburton)? If this was true, wouldn't there be some evidence that it has now gone through? Or at least started? Anyone? No? So what are they waiting for then?
And to further your point Michael; we have this theory based on a single source that a pipeline was going to be built.
But, public companies are only as good as their stock price. If there is anything good on their horizon, they will flog it with press releases to generate interest in their stock. So a pipeline should bring out all sorts of announcements from construction companies to steel producers.
Yet we have blissful silence. For 11 years since the original hint of a pipeline. So I too ask; What pipeline. . .?
Yet we have blissful silence. For 11 years since the original hint of a pipeline. So I too ask; What pipeline. . .?
Here are just a handful of news articles on central asian pipeline projects and the EAST-WEST race to control the delivery of central asian fossil fuels:
By Ian McWilliam
BBC correspondent in Kabul
An agreement has been signed in the Turkmen capital, Ashgabat, paving the way for construction of a gas pipeline from the Central Asian republic through Afghanistan to Pakistan.
The project has been around for some years
The building of the trans-Afghanistan pipeline has been under discussion for some years but plans have been held up by Afghanistan's unstable political situation.
This follows a summit meeting bringing together the presidents of the three countries last May when the project received formal go-ahead.
The pipeline would represent the first major foreign investment in Afghanistan in many years.
Alternate route
With improved regional security after the fall of the Taleban about a year ago, Afghanistan, Turkmenistan and Pakistan have decided to push ahead with plans for the ambitious 1,500-kilometre-long gas pipeline.
Pakistan will be the terminus for the pipeline
The leaders of the three countries have now signed a framework agreement defining the legal aspects of setting up a consortium to build and operate the pipeline.
The trans-Afghanistan pipeline would export Turkmen gas via Afghanistan to Pakistani ports, from where it could reach world markets.
India is the largest potential buyer and the Afghan President, Hamid Karzai, said Delhi was welcome to join the project.
Turkmenistan has some of the world's greatest reserves of natural gas, but still relies on tightly controlled Russian pipelines to export it.
Ashgabat has long been desperate to find an alternative export route.
Wary investors
Afghanistan would profit by receiving millions of dollars in transit fees and construction of the pipeline would provide thousands of desperately needed jobs.
It is also hoped such a project would boost regional economic ties and pave the way for further foreign investment.
The chief difficulty will be actually finding the money to build the pipeline.
The Asian Development Bank is carrying out a study for the project.
But investors will be very cautious about putting serious money into Afghanistan when the central government in Kabul still has only limited influence in the regions the pipeline would cross.
A 1,768-km (1,100-mile) pipeline carrying oil from the Caspian Sea to the Turkish Mediterranean port of Ceyhan has been formally opened.
The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline links Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey. Oil is then shipped to Western markets.
The US-backed project was conceived 10 years ago to diversify the West's oil sources and bypass Russia.
Oil began flowing in June. At full capacity the pipeline will carry a million barrels of crude oil a day.
A second pipeline carrying Caspian gas along the same route is expected to start working by the end of the year.
Strategic project
The presidents of Turkey, Azerbaijan and Georgia and ministers from a number of countries attended the official opening ceremony in Ceyhan.
The pipeline has been heavily backed by Washington from the very start.
The US is keen to challenge Russia's dominance of energy supply routes and to promote the Caspian as a secure additional source of fuel channelled via America's regional allies, says the BBC's Sarah Rainsford in Ceyhan.
For Ankara too this is a strategic project as much as an economic one, she adds.
Ankara is currently negotiating to host several other international gas and oil pipelines, hoping to become a major transit and terminal country for fuel.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/e ... 175676.stm
Published: 2006/07/13 14:04:52 GMT
ASHGABAT, Turkmenistan, Nov. 12 (UPI) -- A natural gas pipeline from the Dauletabad gas field in Turkmenistan is set for a December launch to bring 700 billion cubic feet of gas to Iran each year.
The second pipeline adds to the existing Korpeje-Kurtkui pipeline that brings 282 billion cubic feet of gas to Iran each year from Turkmenistan.
Turkmen President Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov paid a visit to the construction site of the pipeline, saying the national gas company Turkmengaz was ready to meet all of the necessary supplies, the Trend news agency reports.
Iran said it could use the gas from Turkmenistan for transfers to Iraq and the rest of the region from various export connections.
Both countries in February signed agreements to develop fields in Turkmenistan in an effort to diversify transit options.
Moscow has a strong grip on the energy sector in Turkmenistan, and Ashgabat is eager to expand.
Berdimuhamedov noted his country would begin operating a gas pipeline to China by the end of 2009 with the capacity to pump some 1.6 trillion cubic feet of gas per year. Meanwhile, he emphasized the importance of the proposed Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India pipeline while a rival project from Iran moves forward in the region.
Saturday, 07 Nov 2009
Reuters reported that Russia gas monopoly Gazprom supplies one quarter of Europe gas needs.
Below are new pipeline projects aimed at bringing more Russian gas to Europe
1. Nord Stream - The pipeline would carry up to 55 billion cubic meters of gas a year over 1,200 kilometers from Vyborg in Russia to Greifswald in Germany under the Baltic Sea. Nord Stream is majority owned by Gazprom which is building it with Germany's BASF, E.ON EONG.DE and Dutch Gasunie and has plans to build two parallel gas pipeline legs.
2. Yamal-Europe Pipeline - The pipeline which runs from the Yamal peninsula in Russia Arctic north to Frankfurt on Order on the Polish-German border carries Russian gas for over 4,000 kilometers. The expansion of the pipeline, which is expected to be completed by 2010, should boost capacity to 67 billion cubic meters of gas a year through two stretches.
3. Caspian gas pipeline - Russia, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan have agreed plans for a new natural gas pipeline around the Caspian Sea with an intended annual capacity of 20 billion cubic meters which might be doubled to 40 billion cubic meters.
4. South stream pipeline - Gazprom and Italian oil firm Eni plan to build a new pipeline under the Black Sea to take Russian gas to Europe. French utility EDF is poised to join the project to build the pipeline able to carry up to 63 billion cubic meters of gas a year.
(Sourced from Reuters)
The race between Russia and the European Union over energy pipeline corridors has become a little more intense after a series of recent events in Turkey.
Months of delays in negotiations between Turkey and Azerbaijan over Turkey’s price for transmitting gas to Europe through the Nabucco gas pipeline and the Interconnector Turkey-Greece-Italy gas pipeline have culminated in a row between Baku and Ankara. This seemed to coincide with the recent rapprochement between Azerbaijan’s ally Turkey, and its enemy Armenia. As Turkish-Armenian rapprochement began to appear inevitable, President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan arranged a deal with Moscow during a Commonwealth of Independent States meeting in which he would direct the sale of 500 million cubic metres of gas from the newly tapped Shah Deniz Phase 2 gas field reservoir (a large deposit located below the Shah Deniz Phase 1 reservoir off Azerbaijan in the southern Caspian Sea) in 2010, and threatened to extend this deal into a permanent supply agreement. This would divert gas from the South Caucasus gas pipeline (which supplies gas to Georgia) and bypass Turkey.
A week later, after the signing of the Ankara-Yerevan rapprochement, President Aliyev announced on Azerbaijani national television that he would no longer subsidise gas sold to Turkey, issuing further threats against Western efforts to use the Turkish pipeline to deliver gas to Europe. Negotiations have been quietly proceeding since then to restore Azerbaijan’s confidence in Turkey as a transportation corridor partner.
Then last week Russia, in a race to push through the Gazprom-Eni backed South Stream gas pipeline before the EU’s Southern Corridor can be constructed jumped a major hurdle when Turkish Economy Minister Taner Yildiz announced on Tuesday that his Government will permit the Russian-Italian project to lay pipes within Turkish territorial waters. This will allow South Stream to bypass territorial waters controlled by Ukraine.
These events have brought the race between the Southern Corridor and South Stream to the forefront of international attention, and moved Russia into a neck-and-neck chase with the Europeans, in which it may be even a bit ahead, in the race to build the first pipeline.
Europe’s Entry: The Southern Corridor
The Southern Corridor is Europe’s latest effort to diversify its energy sources and move beyond dependence on Russia. To be implemented by the Caspian Development Corporation (CDC), a body devised last November to serve as a “one-stop shop” for the transport of gas from the Caspian Sea and Central Asia to Europe, the Southern Corridor concept will involve using the existing South Caucasus gas pipeline, the Nabucco gas pipeline connecting Turkey and Austria, the Interconnector Turkey-Greece-Italy gas pipeline, the proposed White Stream project connecting Georgia, Ukraine and Romania and the Trans-Adriatic gas pipeline connecting Romania and northern Italy to deliver gas to Europe along three corridors (Turkey-Austria, Turkey-Italy and Georgia-Romania-Italy).
Southern Corridor diversifies Europe’s energy providers from the east. Since the West-Siberian gas pipeline was extended to Western Europe in the 1980s, Russia has dominated the European energy market. Today, the European Union receives 50 percent of its gas and 30 percent of its oil supplies through the Russian pipelines.
Tapping Caspian Sea oil and gas resources was seen as the best remedy to reduce Russian control of Europe’s energy market. In 1994 the BP Company (formerly British Petroleum) led a consortium of 10 oil firms in forming the Azerbaijan International Operating Company (AIOC – likely a play on BP’s original name: the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company). The new AIOC began developing the Azeri-Chirag-Gunashli (ACG) oil fields in the central Caspian Sea. Similarly, BP worked with a smaller group of companies in a joint venture to develop the Shah Deniz offshore gas field farther south.
Today, Caspian oil runs through Georgia and Turkey in the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) pipeline (the second largest oil pipeline in the world after the Druzhba), and its gas goes through the South Caucasus pipeline (which follows the same route as far west as Erzurum). In the future, it is planned to send Caspian gas from eastern Turkey through the Southern Corridor pipelines. The most well-known component of the Corridor is the proposed pipeline from Turkey to Austria to be built by Nabucco Gas Pipeline International GmbH (named after a Giuseppe Verdi opera), a consortium led by Austria’s OMV energy firm. This pipeline would supply southeastern Europe and connect Caspian gas with Western European energy markets.
Russia’s Entry: South Stream
Russia is racing in with a pipeline of its own to supply gas to southeastern Europe and ensure an equally reliable connection with Western Europe. With its South Stream, and corresponding Nord Stream, gas pipelines Moscow plans to eliminate its own reliance on its Western neighbours.
Russia began facing difficulties transmitting gas to the West when newly independent Ukraine diverted it from pipelines passing through its territories. Russia attempted to halt gas supplies to Kiev several times for its alleged failure to pay for what it had overtly imported, but each time the Ukrainians simply diverted gas from the pipelines going to Europe to make up the shortfall.
Following the 2004 Orange Revolution in Ukraine and after a 2007 dispute over Transneft’s attempt to normalise the price of oil sold to Belarus, Russia’s quest for another option became even more urgent. Gazprom selected two projects: Nord Stream, a Baltic subsea pipeline that would carry gas from St. Petersburg to Germany, and South Stream, a Black Sea subsea pipeline that would carry gas from the Krasnodar Region to Bulgaria.
The South Stream project is useful to Russia not only as a more reliable means of delivering gas to the market, but, as Russian Prime Minister Putin demonstrated this week, an effective diplomatic weapon. The Russian newspaper Kommersant stirred fears internationally on Tuesday by suggesting that the timing of the Russian-Turkish agreement meant that Bulgaria, which has elected the relatively anti-Moscow Citizens for European Development (GERB) Party under Prime Minister Boyko Borissov, would be excluded from the South Stream project for refusing to cooperate on other energy projects. In a more notable example of non-cooperation, fellow GERB Party politician and Mayor of Burgas Dimitar Novikov echoed on Greek television the unpopularity of the pipeline. “Our priorities are projects related to the development of tourism and light industry, not those which threaten the environment such as the Burgas-Alexandropoulis oil pipeline,” he said.
Putin has arranged with Turkish Economy Minister Yildiz the use of the proposed Turkish Samsun-Ceyhan pipeline, replacing the Bulgarian-Greek bypass route, but the threat to take the gas pipeline around Bulgaria has proved to be either inaccurate reporting or a bluff, at least for the time being. Still, Turkish cooperation removes a bargaining chip from Ukraine, which had earlier sought to trade its approval for the South Stream passing through Ukrainian territorial waters in return for Russian approval for Ukraine’s White Stream subsea gas pipeline to pass from the Georgian coastline through Russian territorial waters to Ukraine.
Turkish cooperation has also reportedly helped speed up the South Stream project’s timetable, so that it would be completed before the rival Nabucco pipeline. Media observers such as The Moscow Times have suggested that the threat of the speedy construction of such a bypass of the Ukraine-based West-Siberian gas pipeline might be designed to damage Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko’s chances of reelection at the beginning of 2010.
Published: Nov. 12, 2009 at 11:09 AM
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, Nov. 12 (UPI) -- Hungarian energy giant Mol said the security risks in the volatile tribal belts of Pakistan are worth the potential gains from natural gas resources.
Pakistan in October launched a major military offensive in the volatile region along the border with Afghanistan to take on Taliban militants.
Mol holds a minority stake in the Maramzai-1 well at the Tal block in Pakistan's North-West Frontier province. In October, the company said production from the well was 38.3 million cubic feet per day.
"If you want to find hydrocarbons you have to take risks," said Gyorgy Mosonyi, chief executive of Mol.
Mol said it began exploration activity at the first discovery at the well in December 2002. Its third discovery in the block, located about 20 miles from the Afghan border, was announced in March 2008.
Executives at the Hungarian giant said discoveries and in-place infrastructure put the developments there on a fast track for production by 2010.
Analysts tell The Financial Times oil and gas explorers have reaped the benefits from arrangements between the International Monetary Fund and Pakistan for $11.3 billion in loans to make up for a removal of subsidies.
Alright Rick, show me one credible source that says the US is bargaining bases for provinces. If this had even a shred of truth to it,
Certainly explains how the Taliban is extending its reasch into northern Afghanistan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Arm ... fghanistan
http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/asiapa ... 659867.htm
The evidence is necessarily indirect. But then, you tell me how some incident such as the Tonkin Gulf put-on could be discerned AT THE TIME IT HAPPENED. Somebody would have known about it. But it didn't receive exposure until years later.
In 2002.
The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline links Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey. Oil is then shipped to Western markets.
Bypassing Afghanistan by a long shot.
ASHGABAT, Turkmenistan, Nov. 12 (UPI) -- A natural gas pipeline from the Dauletabad gas field in Turkmenistan is set for a December launch to bring 700 billion cubic feet of gas to Iran each year.
. . .
Berdimuhamedov noted his country would begin operating a gas pipeline to China by the end of 2009 with the capacity to pump some 1.6 trillion cubic feet of gas per year. Meanwhile, he emphasized the importance of the proposed Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India pipeline while a rival project from Iran moves forward in the region.
Nearly the end of 2009 isn't it? Any progress?
Saturday, 07 Nov 2009
Reuters reported that Russia gas monopoly Gazprom supplies one quarter of Europe gas needs.
Below are new pipeline projects aimed at bringing more Russian gas to Europe
1. Nord Stream - The pipeline would carry up to 55 billion cubic meters of gas a year over 1,200 kilometers from Vyborg in Russia to Greifswald in Germany under the Baltic Sea. Nord Stream is majority owned by Gazprom which is building it with Germany's BASF, E.ON EONG.DE and Dutch Gasunie and has plans to build two parallel gas pipeline legs.
2. Yamal-Europe Pipeline - The pipeline which runs from the Yamal peninsula in Russia Arctic north to Frankfurt on Order on the Polish-German border carries Russian gas for over 4,000 kilometers. The expansion of the pipeline, which is expected to be completed by 2010, should boost capacity to 67 billion cubic meters of gas a year through two stretches.
3. Caspian gas pipeline - Russia, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan have agreed plans for a new natural gas pipeline around the Caspian Sea with an intended annual capacity of 20 billion cubic meters which might be doubled to 40 billion cubic meters.
4. South stream pipeline - Gazprom and Italian oil firm Eni plan to build a new pipeline under the Black Sea to take Russian gas to Europe. French utility EDF is poised to join the project to build the pipeline able to carry up to 63 billion cubic meters of gas a year.
(Sourced from Reuters)
None of which approach Afghanistan.
The race between Russia and the European Union over energy pipeline corridors has become a little more intense after a series of recent events in Turkey.
Months of delays in negotiations between Turkey and Azerbaijan over Turkey’s price for transmitting gas to Europe through the Nabucco gas pipeline and the Interconnector Turkey-Greece-Italy gas pipeline have culminated in a row between Baku and Ankara. This seemed to coincide with the recent rapprochement between Azerbaijan’s ally Turkey, and its enemy Armenia. As Turkish-Armenian rapprochement began to appear inevitable, President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan arranged a deal with Moscow during a Commonwealth of Independent States meeting in which he would direct the sale of 500 million cubic metres of gas from the newly tapped Shah Deniz Phase 2 gas field reservoir (a large deposit located below the Shah Deniz Phase 1 reservoir off Azerbaijan in the southern Caspian Sea) in 2010, and threatened to extend this deal into a permanent supply agreement. This would divert gas from the South Caucasus gas pipeline (which supplies gas to Georgia) and bypass Turkey.
.
.
.
You know, we're talking about Afghanistan, right? It's much farther south east.
Published: Nov. 12, 2009 at 11:09 AM
Analysts tell The Financial Times oil and gas explorers have reaped the benefits from arrangements between the International Monetary Fund and Pakistan for $11.3 billion in loans to make up for a removal of subsidies.
Now that's much closer. But, I still don't see this pipeline that we went to Afghanistan to protect.