http://www.geocities.com/capitolhill...398/posts.html

For the full story go here....

Some nice links which provide a good deal of proof that Bush was just waiting for a reason to step inot both Afghanistan and Iraq.... take a look you might be surprised...

Bravo to Bush for opening up a different source of oil that cannot be held hostage by OPEC. That's another reason he should be re-elected.

So you do nto deny that he went to war over Oil.... again reiterating the fact that you are not a very good liar nor a very dependable source of information....

Yes he went into Afghanistan primarily for the pipeline..... terrorism was the last thing on his mind except as an excuse......

Yes, I do deny that.

Now that we are there, we should take advantage of the new friendly government, and make America safer.

Do you agree, or do you prefer to pay more for gas?

Sound to me like you agree he went there for oil..... I do nto see any denial at first....

The friendly government in Afghanistan are former employees of unocal..... put there by Oil Magnates to make it smoother to put in thier pipeline...

And no I do not want to pay shit for oil.... not when within a couple years with the rigth funding we could have Hydrogen or Electric powered vehicles and get rid of the shackles put onto our lovely country by the monster that is the internal combustion engine....

Really? Unocal is an Afghan company?

Name one person in the Afghan leadership who used to work for Unocal.


Btw, I like my big SUV. It gets shitty mileage, but I can catch hippies in my grill.

I hate hippies too... they smell....

Anyways here you go.... prepare to be worked my friend....

"""To make things even smoother, the U.S. engineered the rise to power of two
former Unocal employees: Hamid Karzai, the new interim president of
Afghanistan, and Zalmay Khalizad, the Bush administration's Afghanistan envoy.""

that is from my link above which you so flagrantly show to not have even looked at because it is right in it.... too bad,.....

Your link is 20 pages long, so sorry if I don't read the entire pap. I know most of it to have already been debunked long ago.

I concede the Unocal link, but I have no problem with it, If it helps Afghanistan out of the poor house, and helps the US, then good deal.

But it doesn't help Afghanistan out of the poor house. Second part of your statement is more correct, it helps the US. Exploitation of conquered terrain, anyone?

Actually, revenue from an oil pipeline would do exactly the opposite, and help them out of the poor house.

You always seem to get things 180 backward.

I suppose that's the direction of the truth when you're wrong, eh Lawson

No, it will not help the "common people" out of the poor house. Have you ever seen how Saudi-Arabia has evolved? The people put in charge there (which, by your own account, was the US who put them there) are extremely wealthy, as they are the ones to control the oil flow. The average Muhammed Doe there earns less then one on welfare in the US. Probably what has spawned the latest fanatics there (including the ones who took two certain towers down).

The US is only interested in securing the region as "stable" and keeping the oil flowing. They will leave someone in charge to take care of both. That person will have to deal with anti-american sentiments in his country, will have nearly unlimited resources (oil dollars and probably US military backing under the guise of "war on terror")... Put A and B together, what will happen there?

If it posts here is a map of the pipeline that would/will go through the area....

Too large and I am too lazy to edit it.... anyways it would go from the Caspian Sea in Turkmenistan- through Afghanistan- through Pakistan..... into the Arabian Sea..... Turkmenistan has already made arrangements with Unocal as did Pakistan... it was the Taliban in Afghanistan who refused to deal with Unocal....

Isn't OPEC designed to protect and watch over oil transfers and to make certain that the oil usage isn't reaching a point which is dangerous, not to mention handle costs so they can't reach unbelievable heights?

With all due deference to a moderator, these notions are manifestly silly conspiracy theories.

Once we cut past the infantile sloganeering of "It's all about oil," we see the reality:

Saddam Hussein had repeatedly offered the US a sweetheart deal on oil if we lifted the sanctions, and the US refused.

France and others, on the other hand, worked to subvert the UN because they were being bribed by the Oil for Food money. Thus it really was "all about oil" -- France et al kept a sadistic dictator in place so THEIR sweetheart oil deals could be kept in place.

As for Afghanistan, what can I say in the face of such ludicrous arguments. So 9/11 was a "pretext" for a pipeline? And you know the Congress's motivations...how?

So your position is that the invasion of Afghanistan was NOT because of the massacre of 3,000 Americans; rather it was for a pipeline? And YOU know the motivations of the Congress and the POTUS...how?

Why would the US refuse to agree to oil relations with Iraq in exchange for the removal of sanctions, when the US had previously put forth a request to Iraq that dealt with an oil pipeline which would help them both, and is now currently working on that same pipeline since Saddam is gone?