Mechagodzilla
Tank
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2003
- Messages
- 6,973
- Reaction score
- 0
Did you mean: "Aside from the fact that, in his search, he misspelt Caspean"?
Because I spelt Caspean exactly correctly when I quoted your post:
I hate to be a grammar matron, but after responding to more than three dozen such posts, I find it helps me better understand your arguments when I needn't take several additional seconds trying to figure out if you've again confused your, you're, bobs and bob's.clarky003 a short while ago said:
But really, who cares about grammar when there are unsourced claims to contend with!
Wrong!
You'll note from your .jpeg that the pipeline(s) you are referring to are projected. That is to say, estimated but uncompleted.
As far as I have been able to uncover (although I honestly didn't really try) the proposed pipeline(s) have no american affiliation.
That renders your statement that "there is large US interest in the area" somewhat suspect. The most prominent country in these oil conspiracy claims, Unocal, had withdrawn their plans nearly a decade ago.
You said american companies are trying to get the oil out through pipeline(s) in Afghanistan, thus the war is a big corporate conspiracy (what this has to do with the iraq war in your head, I have no idea).
Now please show me an american company with a trans-afghanistan pipeline.
Wait, this is stupid on several levels.
1) Russia was and probably still is one of the biggest peaceful opponents of the bush administration.
Why is it a conspiracy when it's an american company, and not suspicious when it's a russian company?
2) Saying that corporations want to safeguard their assets is a huge "well, duh" statement.
Unless you mean the united states government considers the safety of a corporate pipeline paramount (meaning the single most important thing in the mideast region).
In which case I'd have to ask why the trans-afghanistan pipeline has been stalled almost indefinitely due to the Taliban controlling a large section of the southern territory they plan to build through.
3) Which american companies are backing which pipeline?
Last I checked, Unocal pulled out in 1998. Who's left?
Wrong.
They spent a relatively small amount of money, time and effort on deposing Saddam Hussein. Their entire plan was to get rid of him as quickly and cleanly as possible, and that part went without a hitch. Whether they thought he had WMDs or not is unimportant, because the end result is the same. The entire focus of the plan was simply removing him from power, and it worked quite well.
The huge costs came not long afterwards, because the US had not established any clear plan for post-conflict peace.
There was (and is) rather blatantly no plan to stabilize the country after that event.
Read Bob Woodward's Plan of Attack for a fairly detailed account of the successes and failures of the Iraq war's initial attack phase.
Some are more logical indeed. Here's yours, as far as I can tell:
Bush: I WANNA MONEY
Cheney: A company of some sorts will build an afghanistan pipeline fron the CASPEAN sea, once afgahnistan is stable! The stability of afganniestan is our first and only objective.
Bush: Yes, and then we will take that company's money somehow!! YOU ARE A SMART MAN.
Cheney: OF COURSE I AM SMART I INVENTED THE INFINITE ENERGY FLYING CAR. All we need to do is make sure afghanistan has no explosions for at least a long time.
Bush: Great, so let's attack Iraq for absolutely no sensible reason and basically forget afghanistan exists!
Also, let's not use the power from our infinite energy flying cars to make trillions.
Cheney: Then let's let co-builder corporations from Russia, Red China and elsewhere take upwards of 60 percent of the profit the corporation that we'll eventually steal from won't recieve because the taliban still control large chunks of the country!
Taliban: Yay!
Bush: Also, we must make absolutely sure that we have no plan for winning the iraq war ever. That way, no-one will ever become suspicious because we'll never succeed at our goals!
Cheney: Already done! This is the perfect strategy!
I mean, compare that to my ludicrous conspiracy theory version of events:
Rumsfeld: Let's attack Iraq some day. They are evil and we can tell because we are fundamentalist christians.
Bush: 9/11 has made everyone kill-happy so now is our chance to do good in Iraq, even if we have no evidence. What do our spys say?
Spy: Saddam is probably evil but our evidence is weak. Maybe we should get more evidence?
Bush: Too late, I have already called Saddam an axis of evil and colin powell is saying they make al qaeda's anthrax.
Powell: Saddam might have weapon labs that look like optimus prime.
Bush: Yikes, that sounds evil! Are we ready to attack?
Military: Yes, Rumsfeld and the gang have been planning this attack plan for decades.
*attacks, removes Saddam*
American Public: Okay, we are done attacking. What now?
Bush: Since we are good christians, they will love us and the love will build bridges of democracy into their hearts!
*that does not happen*
Bush: Oh well, lol! Can't make an omlette!
Yes, that's the question this thread is based on. Now provide an answer that makes sense.
