Community | June 14, 2010 | 220 comments

U.S. Identifies Vast Riches of Minerals in Afghanistan

source: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/14/world/asia/14minerals.html?pagewanted=1

Image
UrbanGypsy
The United States has discovered nearly $1 trillion in untapped mineral deposits in Afghanistan, far beyond any previously known reserves and enough to fundamentally alter the Afghan economy and perhaps the Afghan war itself, according to senior American government officials.

The previously unknown deposits — including huge veins of iron, copper, cobalt, gold and critical industrial metals like lithium — are so big and include so many minerals that are essential to modern industry that Afghanistan could eventually be transformed into one of the most important mining centers in the world, the United States officials believe.

An internal Pentagon memo, for example, states that Afghanistan could become the “Saudi Arabia of lithium,” a key raw material in the manufacture of batteries for laptops and BlackBerrys.

The vast scale of Afghanistan’s mineral wealth was discovered by a small team of Pentagon officials and American geologists. The Afghan government and President Hamid Karzai were recently briefed, American officials said.

While it could take many years to develop a mining industry, the potential is so great that officials and executives in the industry believe it could attract heavy investment even before mines are profitable, providing the possibility of jobs that could distract from generations of war.

“There is stunning potential here,” Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of the United States Central Command, said in an interview on Saturday. “There are a lot of ifs, of course, but I think potentially it is hugely significant.”

The value of the newly discovered mineral deposits dwarfs the size of Afghanistan’s existing war-bedraggled economy, which is based largely on opium production and narcotics trafficking as well as aid from the United States and other industrialized countries. Afghanistan’s gross domestic product is only about $12 billion.

“This will become the backbone of the Afghan economy,” said Jalil Jumriany, an adviser to the Afghan minister of mines.

American and Afghan officials agreed to discuss the mineral discoveries at a difficult moment in the war in Afghanistan. The American-led offensive in Marja in southern Afghanistan has achieved only limited gains. Meanwhile, charges of corruption and favoritism continue to plague the Karzai government, and Mr. Karzai seems increasingly embittered toward the White House.

So the Obama administration is hungry for some positive news to come out of Afghanistan. Yet the American officials also recognize that the mineral discoveries will almost certainly have a double-edged impact.

Instead of bringing peace, the newfound mineral wealth could lead the Taliban to battle even more fiercely to regain control of the country.

The corruption that is already rampant in the Karzai government could also be amplified by the new wealth, particularly if a handful of well-connected oligarchs, some with personal ties to the president, gain control of the resources. Just last year, Afghanistan’s minister of mines was accused by American officials of accepting a $30 million bribe to award China the rights to develop its copper mine. The minister has since been replaced.

Endless fights could erupt between the central government in Kabul and provincial and tribal leaders in mineral-rich districts. Afghanistan has a national mining law, written with the help of advisers from the World Bank, but it has never faced a serious challenge.

“No one has tested that law; no one knows how it will stand up in a fight between the central government and the provinces,” observed Paul A. Brinkley, deputy undersecretary of defense for business and leader of the Pentagon team that discovered the deposits.

At the same time, American officials fear resource-hungry China will try to dominate the development of Afghanistan’s mineral wealth, which could upset the United States, given its heavy investment in the region. After winning the bid for its Aynak copper mine in Logar Province, China clearly wants more, American officials said.

Another complication is that because Afghanistan has never had much heavy industry before, it has little or no history of environmental protection either. “The big question is, can this be developed in a responsible way, in a way that is environmentally and socially responsible?” Mr. Brinkley said. “No one knows how this will work.”

With virtually no mining industry or infrastructure in place today, it will take decades for Afghanistan to exploit its mineral wealth fully. “This is a country that has no mining culture,” said Jack Medlin, a geologist in the United States Geological Survey’s international affairs program. “They’ve had some small artisanal mines, but now there could be some very, very large mines that will require more than just a gold pan.”

[More to read in the link]
  1. groups:
    Community,   News and Politics,   Afghanistan News
  2. tags:
    News,  World News,  Afghanistan,  Pakistan,  10 more
  3.     
    |

220 comments // U.S. Identifies Vast Riches of Minerals in Afghanistan

  • futuregen
  • QuestionGeek
    • 0
      QuestionGeek  

    • Well finally it is revealed to the general population what this charade was about in the first place---opium poppies and mineral reserves.

      Now if they could just figure out how to get rid of the collateral damage?...Sad... What's sad about it is they won't offer to make the inhabitants of that country rich in the process, they'll just find a way to kill them so they can mine their land. Sad world.

    • 1 year ago
  • Monkey_Films
    • +2
      Monkey_Films  
    • QuestionGeek:

      I think we should ban the use of the word, 'collateral damage'. That word was just invented to give them a psychological way to distance themselves from the killing of human beings. Murder is murder, let's not let them gloss it over with a word. Agreed.

    • 1 year ago
  • iamaman
  • iamaman
    • 0
      iamaman  
    • Image

    • Al Qaeda and the "War on Terrorism" http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7718

      by Michel Chossudovsky

      Historical Background

      What are the historical origins of Al Qaeda? Who is Osama bin Laden?

      The alleged mastermind behind the 9/11 terrorists attacks, Saudi-born Osama bin Laden, was recruited during the Soviet-Afghan war, "ironically under the auspices of the CIA, to fight Soviet invaders".(Hugh Davies, "`Informers’ point the finger at bin Laden; Washington on alert for suicide bombers." The Daily Telegraph, London, 24 August 1998).

      In 1979 the largest covert operation in the history of the CIA was launched in Afghanistan:

      "With the active encouragement of the CIA and Pakistan’s ISI, who wanted to turn the Afghan Jihad into a global war waged by all Muslim states against the Soviet Union, some 35,000 Muslim radicals from 40 Islamic countries joined Afghanistan’s fight between 1982 and 1992. Tens of thousands more came to study in Pakistani madrasahs. Eventually, more than 100,000 foreign Muslim radicals were directly influenced by the Afghan jihad." (Ahmed Rashid, "The Taliban: Exporting Extremism", Foreign Affairs, November-December 1999).

      This project of the US intelligence apparatus was conducted with the active support of Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence (ISI), which was entrusted in channelling covert military aid to the Islamic brigades and financing, in liason with the CIA, the madrassahs and Mujahideen training camps.

      U.S. government support to the Mujahideen was presented to world public opinion as a "necessary response" to the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in support of the pro-Communist government of Babrak Kamal.

      The CIA’s military-intelligence operation in Afghanistan, which consisted in creating the "Islamic brigades", was launched prior rather than in response to the entry of Soviet troops into Afghanistan. In fact, Washington’s intent was to deliberately trigger a civil war, which has lasted for more than 25 years.

      The CIA’s role in laying the foundations of Al Qaeda is confirmed in an 1998 interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, who at the time was National Security Adviser to President Jimmy Carter:

      Brzezinski: According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahideen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, [on] 24 December 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise. Indeed, it was July 3, 1979, that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the President in which I explained to him that in my opinion, this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.

      Question: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?

      Brzezinski: It isn’t quite that. We didn’t push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.

      Question: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn’t believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don’t regret anything today?

      Brzezinski: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam War. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.

      Question: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?

      Brzezinski: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the Cold War? ( "The CIA’s Intervention in Afghanistan, Interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Jimmy Carter’s National Security Adviser", Le Nouvel Observateur, Paris, 15-21 January 1998, published in English, Centre for Research on Globalisation, http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/BRZ110A.html, 5 October 2001, italics added.)

      Consistent with Brzezinski’s account, a "Militant Islamic Network" was created by the CIA.

    • 1 year ago
  • iamaman
    • 0
      iamaman  

    • http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7718

      "The "Islamic Jihad" (or holy war against the Soviets) became an integral part of the CIA’s intelligence ploy. It was supported by the United States and Saudi Arabia, with a significant part of the funding generated from the Golden Crescent drug trade:

      "In March 1985, President Reagan signed National Security Decision Directive 166 … [which] authorize[d] stepped-up covert military aid to the Mujahideen, and it made clear that the secret Afghan war had a new goal: to defeat Soviet troops in Afghanistan through covert action and encourage a Soviet withdrawal. The new covert U.S. assistance began with a dramatic increase in arms supplies — a steady rise to 65,000 tons annually by 1987 … as well as a "ceaseless stream" of CIA and Pentagon specialists who travelled to the secret headquarters of Pakistan’s ISI on the main road near Rawalpindi, Pakistan. There, the CIA specialists met with Pakistani intelligence officers to help plan operations for the Afghan rebels."(Steve Coll, The Washington Post, July 19, 1992.)

      The Central Intelligence Agency using Pakistan’s ISI as a go-between played a key role in training the Mujahideen. In turn, the CIA-sponsored guerrilla training was integrated with the teachings of Islam. The madrasahs were set up by Wahabi fundamentalists financed out of Saudi Arabia: "[I]t was the government of the United States who supported Pakistani dictator General Zia-ul Haq in creating thousands of religious schools, from which the germs of the Taliban emerged."(Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA), "RAWA Statement on the Terrorist Attacks in the U.S.", Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG),
      http://globalresearch.ca/articles/RAW109A.html , 16 September 2001)"

    • 1 year ago
  • bethopea
  • royulery
    • +1
      royulery  

    • not new, it just couldn't be kept secret any more. any mountainous region will have mineralization. i imagine that a large number of secret mines have been producing for generations.

    • 1 year ago
  • Peloquin
    • 0
      Peloquin  
    • royulery:

      http://www.wise-uranium.org/umopasi.html

      Afghanistan

      Illegal uranium mining in Afghanistan unabated

      Smugglers and unscrupulous elements are busy illegally excavating mines to plunder Afghanistan's uranium and gold reserves in Kohistan district of the northern Faryab province.
      Officials and residents charged on Sep. 7, 2005, the uranium brought huge windfalls to the unauthorized excavators.

      Officials at the Ministry of Mines and Industries admitted "irresponsible elements" were digging the site for precious metals. They said they were trying to prevent as soon as possible the brazen plunder of the assets belonging to the Afghan government and people.
      A Kohistan-based mineral expert told Pajhwok Afghan News rapacious men, with no expertise and equipment, dug out large quantities of prized metals including uranium, gold, copper, lead and azure.

      The glowing stones, often mishandled by the callow men, were smuggled to an unknown location, alleged Eng. Khan Mirza, who deplored the massive reserves were being exploited in a non-professional way.

      The brazen practice was rampant during previous governments as well, he said while stressing an early end to what he called a loss of impoverished Afghanistan's abundant mineral resources.

      Tucked away in the jagged Hindukush mountain range, Siku mines are situated 148 kilometres southeast of the provincial capital city of Maimana. (Pajhwok Afghan News/Asia Pulse, Sept 9, 2005)

    • 1 year ago
  • whereischange
  • Monkey_Films
    • +3
      Monkey_Films  
    • whereischange:

      Take it, take all of the electronics. Cell phones are like tracking devices, can't get a moment of peace. Video games create human vegetables. Television is designed to draw you in and make you stupid so you keep watching.

      The meek shall inherit the earth. Now you know what they meant by that. Everyone working so hard for the money and progress also don't know how to live without all of those comforts. Those comforts are just a disaster away from not existing.

      I get all excited when I think about how quiet it would be without all of the modern day 'noise' we call 'life'.

      I know what plants and animals are edible in the wild. Do the rest of you? You might want to start learning. I know how to get water no matter where I'm at. Another little bit of information and knowledge that wouldn't hurt to know right now.

    • 1 year ago
  • MotherForTruth
  • iamaman
  • QuestionGeek
  • Toughth
    • 0
      Toughth  

    • Since the 1800s the great montra of the military is to be in harms way for the national intrest. Does anyone remember why Custer and most of the Seventh cav. were wiped out. It was to help alot of buisnessmen get their hooks into the gold of the black hills. We need to watch the afgans and circle our wagons for the enrichment of those that beleive they have the right to the richs they can strip out of this country. Meanwhile our military pays the price.

    • 1 year ago
  • eden49
  • Peloquin
  • eden49
  • QuestionGeek
  • masterzip
    • +1
      masterzip  

    • so not only will the US occupy Afghanistan militarily, but also economically keeping citizens in perpetual poverty and environmental hazardous working conditions

    • 1 year ago
  • MotherForTruth
  • Peloquin
  • iamaman
  • ampersand
  • Monkey_Films
    • +2
      Monkey_Films  
    • Peloquin:

      Jerk, if their were to be a population reduction, I vote that all of the narcissistic, technologically advanced, 'primitive people suck crowd' be eliminated first. My family has been dealing with your kind since 1492 and it's about time the Earth and the indigenous peoples of the world rise up and tell you where you can put your IPOD.

    • 1 year ago
  • KSirys
  • norml37
  • eden49
  • eden49
  • galwayman
    • -3
      galwayman  

    • Now we know the reason that Obama,puppet of the elite,has gone all out in this war,and no it is not for true and justice,or to free the poor people from the evil Taliban,on no my friends say it isn't so! a trillion dollars,glorious profit for the elite lol in a back water country were they can control everything lol course we have to cut in our partners on the deal lol plenty to go around lol once again my fellow Americans you are being conned! It's time to rub the sand out of your eyes and wake up! Our sons and daughters are dying and being maimed for profit and power!

    • 1 year ago
  • FoosMaster
    • +1
      FoosMaster  

    • And I'm Sure that Halliburton, excuse me, KBR will be asking for an even Greater role in Afghanistan now, like in Iraq with the oil.

    • 1 year ago
  • chaos1
  • iamaman
  • alexandrek
  • Peloquin
  • eden49
  • iamaman
    • 0
      iamaman  
    • alexandrek:

      so lets do what the Soviet Union did at the end of world war two. let em do all the hard work, under the guise of solidarity, then take the richest half over.

      would that be better than the people actually getting help? do you think it makes a difference? to them, it does not matter if its from china or the US, they're tired of being fucked with. if they want to shoot there women in the head for going to school, there is nothing we can really do about it, militarily, for them.

      we just wanna make sure we get a permanent military base to further our global presence for "national security" and "mutual economic progress". if they want Al Quida they've got to find them. is their any mystery why we cant find "them"? all we can do is attack the Taliban because they are the only ones sticking their heads out.

      Al Quida is in Saudi Arabia. where else would the money come from? (even though the Arabs get there money from the western world)

    • 1 year ago
  • iamaman
    • +2
      iamaman  

    • our corporations have done enough. its time we let others take the blame and get the hot seat for once. maybe the afg people will have something to work towards now? i know one thing, the taliban will have another enemy to deal with, unless they sell out their ideology. it just takes a few corrupt officials who choose to be "gangsters".

      http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=15519
      "A diesel-fueled power plant, nearing completion just outside Kabul, demonstrates that the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and its contractors have failed to learn lessons from identical mistakes in Iraq, despite clearly signposted advice from oversight agencies.

      Conclusions gleaned from three independent investigations into U.S.-financed reconstruction of the Afghan electricity sector, as well as IPS interviews with Afghan government officials and contractors, suggest that the power plant - which will cost taxpayers almost three times as much as comparable projects - may never be used."

    • 1 year ago
  • themachine09
    • +1
      themachine09  

    • Im sure the US will find a way to completely rob this country of their land's natural resources as the US has done it to every other nation rich in oil, minerals or in desperate need of industrilzation and a bigger economy.

    • 1 year ago
  • Colin_McCabe
  • zichi
  • Colin_McCabe
  • zichi
  • AsiaSuperLoop
    • 0
      AsiaSuperLoop  
    • Image
    • zichi:

      One of the reasons developing countries, particularly in Africa, have been receptive to natural resource deals with China is because there is no "colonial" baggage.

      China have a poor record of supporting human rights, especially in places like Tibet, but they're apparently managing their external resource relationships well.

      Check this out from the BBC:

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7086777.stm

    • 1 year ago
  • Colin_McCabe
    • 0
      Colin_McCabe  
    • zichi:

      Well just like any other company that mines, they will set up shop and mine it and sell it to who needs it. Bringing it back to America is a non issue because why would you bring it back to sell it, they would just set up the company's in or near Afghanistan, like the Oil company's in Iraq

    • 1 year ago
  • alexandrek
  • Colin_McCabe
  • alexandrek
  • Colin_McCabe
    • +1
      Colin_McCabe  
    • alexandrek:

      No one is digging in this new area yet, the chinese are in a different province, still in Afghanistan, read the article. We did not go to Afghanistan 9 years ago for resources we didn't even know they had

    • 1 year ago
  • zichi
  • ampersand
    • +2
      ampersand  
    • zichi:

      That's for sure. The way the Chinese treat their own miners as disposable fodder is almost beyond comprehension.
      Something about growing up in a crowded swarm of several billion people that only a generation ago were fighting over dogs and human remains to eat that takes the bloom off putting human rights at the top of your "to-do" list, I guess.

    • 1 year ago
  • alexandrek
  • alexandrek
  • Colin_McCabe
  • Colin_McCabe
  • AsiaSuperLoop
    • 0
      AsiaSuperLoop  

    • That's a fair amount of "unobtainium".

      Now we just need to find where the Na'Vi are hiding in Afghanistan.

      The lithium assets are obviously the most attractive, and there's an ostensible "green" motivation for gaining access to that resource. (Lithium, of course, is one of the great rings of power in a new energy complex.)

      But, Russia and China are closer to that part of the world, and particularly China has been quite successful in entering into resource deals with developing countries.

      And as those three supernodes in the multi-polar geo-political universe of the 21st century--the US, Russia and China--compete for the mineral resources necessary for the development of a "green" energy complex, we'll get a peek at the true dynamics of New Energy.

      No mention of uranium reources. But take a look at this link. Apparently, illicit mining of gold and uranium has already begun:

      http://www.wise-uranium.org/umopasi.html

    • 1 year ago
  • nko_cob
  • vicgal
  • device80
  • acontradiction
  • Andrew_Douglas
    • +3
      Andrew_Douglas  
    • acontradiction:

      Please just shut up. And learn to use proper punctuation and capitalization for your airheaded rants. Perhaps people would take them somewhat more seriously, at least enough to find them amusing instead of astoundingly hateful and paranoid.

    • 1 year ago
  • Andrew_Douglas
    • +1
      Andrew_Douglas  

    • HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! That makes me laugh. This article isn't serious. We aren't really over there for corporate reasons, right? We're doing it out of patriotism, right?

      RIGHT?!

    • 1 year ago
  • acontradiction
  • Andrew_Douglas
  • Earl_of_Edmonds
  • oillio
    • +1
      oillio  

    • chances of Afghan people seeing the estimated $1 trillion going into their pockets = ZERO.
      FUCK GLOBALIZATION> FUCK CAPITALISM
      this war we brought has destroyed enough of Afghanistan, and now we're gonna tap into their lifeline

    • 1 year ago
  • Monkey_Films
    • +2
      Monkey_Films  
    • acontradiction:

      When you cannot live without buying their consumerist, gluttonous, war driven stuff, you do not share the blame as long as you are trying to get them to change and are willing to pay the difference in price should we decide not to strive for cheap prices over foreign deaths.

    • 1 year ago
  • irie_ojo
  • MotherForTruth
  • Andrew_Douglas
  • QuestionGeek
    • 0
      QuestionGeek  
    • irie_ojo:

      I am not surprised. I just could never figure out why we were there in the first place until now.

      At first I thought it was because of the opium poppies, but you have their own government destroying those crops when they find them, and there doesn't seem to be enough opium crops over there to furnish a good supply for illicit and legal use around the world.

    • 1 year ago
  • QuestionGeek
    • +1
      QuestionGeek  
    • MotherForTruth:

      The typical USA hypocrite. The USA uses and wastes more than any country on the planet. And long before you were born, war and exploitation was used in order to create wealth and get at these resources. Yet almost no one wants to compromise their comfort or lifestyle in the USA and other developed countries to prevent hypothetical tragedies from happening. They don't seem to make the connection. It's because of the suffering of others that you get to live so well - just like during the slave trade and just like the person that makes millions of dollars a year while you slave and toil away to bring home $40,000 a year.

      It's a sad truth to humanity, but it's oh so true. Obviously we are not the only society that is like this. The ancient Mayan population was the same way. And these types of things still go on today in underdeveloped nations.

      We use these minerals in droves, more than any country in the world Then stop using the stuff. Throw away your frying pans, anything you have made of steel, your jewelry, your computer

      If you really want to make a change, lessen your carbon footprint, and learn to live in a more green manner. But most people aren't willing to do that to a degree that will make a difference. Case in point -- I see tons of SUVs rolling around the streets with only one person in them. I can see if people have those things for families of 5, by why does a person need a giant SUV to cart themselves around? It's the want factor, not the need factor that causes problems like what's about to happen in Afghanistan.

      Also ,some things are out of our control. If I want to fly a plane, where are the planes that run of biodiesel?

    • 1 year ago
  • FoosMaster
    • 0
      FoosMaster  
    • QuestionGeek:

      It is still partly about opium. Karzi's brother just tells them about the fields of his competition so that the government is destroying his competition with the help of the US Military. It's called Monopoly.

    • 1 year ago
  • Monkey_Films
  • MotherForTruth
  • TomTucker
  • Ragan
    • +1
      Ragan  

    • Does anybody remember the Viet Nam war? Does anybody know about the rich mineral deposits in Southeast Asia. So the corporate elite failed to gain control of the rich mineral deposits and the road to Eurasia, Afghanistan is now the new road to riches and the Eurasian treasure chest. I wonder how much Zbigniew Bzrezinski knew about the road to riches through Viet Nam. This underground easy to get treasury extends into China too. China has many minerals that the world could use. The Viet Nam war was not fought to rid the world of communism. It was a corporate war to get at the mineral deposits there. The whole peninsula is filthy with Tin, Nickel, Tungsten and vast riches in valuable stones and minerals.Perhaps the pressures and the high temperatures generated when India collided with China created these minerals, but the west wants control of them.

    • 1 year ago
  • Peloquin
    • -1
      Peloquin  

    • “The big question is, can this be developed in a responsible way, in a way that is environmentally and socially responsible?”

      This is going to be like Dune. Maybe Sting will reprise his role.

      Don't you think if we'd known about this eight years ago when we went in, we would have sent more troops then?

      We're on the side of the Afgan PEOPLE (not just their enormous nuggets) this time, and I hope they become a democracy.

      Fight the terrorists in Afganistan, fight American troops! You are the angels of today!

    • 1 year ago
  • ampersand
    • +2
      ampersand  
    • Peloquin:

      Fine group of "angels" you got there, Peloquin.
      Once you sort out the group murders of innocents at traffic stops, the assassination of gathered families at marriage ceremonies by rocket, or drone attack, and the miscellaneous rapes,"collateral damage" and organized thievery on the individual and corporate level, you have a sterling bunch of oh, so very heroic, "angels".
      If you aren't joking, (and one hopes you are) that is a rather macabre take on it, actually, don't you think?

    • 1 year ago
  • Peloquin
  • ampersand
    • +1
      ampersand  
    • Peloquin:

      You post a picture on one of the atrocities committed by the US in napalming civilians in Vietnam and post from a site on how "misunderstood" the Vietnam war was with quotes by Richard Nixon, General Westmoreland, and General McCafferty.
      It's hard of me to conceive at this moment just how insanely twisted you have to be to post this kind of garbage in public forum.
      "Shame on you," hardly covers the contempt I have you at this moment.
      Anything more I could say (and want to say) to you I expect would violate the community standards here.
      GFY.

    • 1 year ago
  • Peloquin
    • -1
      Peloquin  
    • ampersand:

      Ahh, the first of many. You didn't check the website. It wasn't Americans who did that. It was a stupid rumor for zombies to eat up. Look at the site where I got the pic. LOOK, or lie to all these good people here, lie like a rug.

      I'll admit to being wrong, if I'm wrong!

      Re-writing history, or correcting it?

      Did you find it? For those of you don't want to leave Current, here's the caption;

      "Myth: Kim Phuc, the little nine year old Vietnamese girl running naked from the napalm strike near Trang Bang on 8 June 1972, was burned by Americans bombing Trang Bang.

      No American had involvement in this incident near Trang Bang that burned Phan Thi Kim Phuc. The planes doing the bombing near the village were VNAF (Vietnam Air Force) and were being flown by Vietnamese pilots in support of South Vietnamese troops on the ground. The Vietnamese pilot who dropped the napalm in error is currently living in the United States.

      Even the AP photographer, Nick Ut, who took the picture was Vietnamese. The incident in the photo took place on the second day of a three day battle between the North Vietnamese Army (NVA) who occupied the village of Trang Bang and the ARVN (Army of the Republic of Vietnam) who were trying to force the NVA out of the village. Recent reports in the news media that an American commander ordered the air strike that burned Kim Phuc are incorrect.

      There were no Americans involved in any capacity. "We (Americans) had nothing to do with controlling VNAF," according to Lieutenant General (Ret) James F. Hollingsworth, the Commanding General of TRAC at that time. Also, it has been incorrectly reported that two of Kim Phuc's brothers were killed in this incident. They were Kim's cousins not her brothers."

    • 1 year ago
  • ampersand
    • +3
      ampersand  
    • Peloquin:

      Who made the napalm, asshole?
      Who trained the "Vietnam Air Force" pilot?
      Who paid for the plane?
      What military authority authorized them to drop this run of napalm?
      (No different than any other napalm run dropped by US planes and supplied by DuPont.)

      Trying to square this bizarre selective alternate universe of yours with reality is like trying to debate a drunk that's pissing himself.

      Perhaps you can find some right-wing nut case on some obscure hate blog that thinks your tilted reasoning power and your obscenely distorted "conclusions" are just fine and dandy.
      Go for it.

    • 1 year ago
  • Peloquin
    • -1
      Peloquin  
    • ampersand:

      ""We (Americans) had nothing to do with controlling VNAF," according to Lieutenant General (Ret) James F. Hollingsworth."

      So, he's lying? Or is my alternate universe better than your parallel reality? Oh, by the way, I haven't used any obscenities. I gave them up for my New Years resolution. You see, I want to convince you that people are generally good, and don't try to hurt each other unless they are a bit more primative. It's that simple.

      It's okay to just relax, take it in stride, you'll give yourself a heart attack.

      Now, why would I go somewhere where everyone agrees with me? I need to help people see that not only is America the best place to live in the world (except the island fortressess in my universe), but most people are working towards the betterment of humanity - yes, this was a mistake, but not by an American pilot, and it was quite a while ago.

      We now have real rules of engagement, and honestly they don't always work either - but it's the "why" you don't seem to want to confront. Do you really think our military LIKES to kill? Come-on, be honest.

      That's why I mention it. We've been conditioned to believe certain things, and get mad. That used to benefit the media, but now we're onto the tricks.

      I don't carry the weight of the world on my shoulders. I let my anger go when I experienced a lot of death, and realized that hate causes real problems.

      That's all I'm trying to do, not sing "cumbaya" or however you spell it, just to make that point. You're welcome to go back to your regular scheduled program now, unless you'd like a big white spot in your hair like I have (a lasting symtom of the stress-caused Alopecia Areata).

    • 1 year ago
  • Monkey_Films
    • +1
      Monkey_Films  
    • Peloquin:

      Fallen Angels like the ones that joined Lucifer in Hell. Yea, maybe that's us, but it's extremely misguided to think we are there for the Afghan people. Even more misguided to call American troops Angels.

    • 1 year ago
  • alexandrek
  • Monkey_Films
  • Peloquin
    • 0
      Peloquin  
    • Monkey_Films:

      "Misguided" ? Tell that to a veteran, might as well slap them in the face. Let's see how well that goes. There is still honor in this country. I have always loved to hear, "I may not agree with you, but I'd die for your right to say it." You don't think that matters. You are the problem, not me. There isn't enough evidence in the world to change your mind, but there's more that enough to convince those with some honor.

      I'm not even in the military. I just know from my own "misguided" sense of logic that it makes sense to defend our country. In comparison to what the military in other countries have done, we are in with the good guys. I'm sorry for not being nihilistic, I know it's fun.

      I got sick of bashing, I know enough real bad guys to know who deserves it, and you are just having "harmless" fun. I also believe there needs to be a voice for the "good guys" just because of the real horror they've lived through to make it possible for you to not have to live as a slave with no voice.

      Google itself is standing for free speech, and if you stand for free speech, you stand for the American Military.

      "Courage is the first of human qualities because it is the quality which guarantees the others. "

      Aristotle

    • 1 year ago
  • Omnomynous
    • 0
      Omnomynous  

    • Had to comment just to see 2 BP bashing logos stacked.... Oh yeah but good, bad, ???.... agrees with previous BP logo poster..

    • 1 year ago
  • UrbanGypsy
    • 0
      UrbanGypsy  

    • The amount of cynicism in this thread is kind of disgusting. After 30 years of war Afghanistan has never even had the semblance of stability to even be able to discover that it was mineral-rich. The Afghan people have been in a "state of nature" for so long that they've only had time to worry about war, Mohammed and poppy fields.

      I wonder what a sociologist or an anthropologist would say about the effect on a people's culture, values, and lifestyle that an economic revolution can have. The Afghan people will certainly remain tribal if there is no basis for anything that can resemble a globally directed economy. This might be the first chance they actually have ever had to change that.

      Values along with many others things change with the arrival of business and jobs. And with the arrival of money will also come stability. Business and property owners will try to ensure that their holdings are safe and this might be a source of strength for a future government.

      I see some people here saying that this will bring only bad things. What do you prefer? That the Afghans continue to live in a tribal society surrounded by an environment of violence and with no economy? Expecting the Afghans to be happy in a utopian agrarian society is very selfish of us, especially when we live such comfortable lives.

      I hope they get the chance to see their country grow; even if that means that foreign money will have to fuel the initial growth.

    • 1 year ago
  • zichi
  • 2hellnwait
    • +1
      2hellnwait  
    • UrbanGypsy:

      Hmm. . . which natural resource has a continual world demand, 'and' is a constant renewable resource, not to mention requiring minimal effort? . . you guessed it - - poppies!
      They will remain tribal. . . they do NOT want to change.

    • 1 year ago
  • ezrierin
    • -1
      ezrierin  
    • UrbanGypsy:

      Saudi Arabia has oil wealth up the backside. They also have the Royal Family owning most everything in Saudi Arabia. Mineral wealth will not translate down to the average people, there will not be a sense of enfranchisement demanding social stability. In Saudi Arabia the people are essentially on welfare so the Royal Family can control them. About 50% of Saudi men are unemployed, there are no jobs. So the House of Saud gives the people welfare and toys, cars, televisions etc., to play with. If you don’t like the system, THEY MAKE YOU A HEAD SHORTER!!! Saudi security is amongst the most brutal draconian in the world. Wealth will only bring more misery to Afghanistan, it’s the Muslim way.

    • 1 year ago
  • ampersand
    • 0
      ampersand  
    • 2hellnwait:

      You may have a point there.
      With stock up in human despair, based on the unlimited unstoppable destruction of every corner of the planet and every society in it, the market for opiates and hashish seems like a very solid economic bet.
      I don't know whether to trade that rice field now for one filled with poppies, or just look around for a several year supply of Afghan hash...

    • 1 year ago
  • ampersand
    • -1
      ampersand  
    • UrbanGypsy:

      So, having a "globally directed economy" worked out so well for other countries?
      You might want to dig down in your new found gloss of the wonders of capital flows and winnow out the actual distribution of capital in "gross domestic product" of any "rapidly developing nation."
      Let me know what you find, and get back to us, will you?

    • 1 year ago
  • MotherForTruth
  • 2hellnwait
    • 0
      2hellnwait  
    • MotherForTruth:

      O puhleese MFT, how do you and others here conclude that it is the U.S. that is conspiring to rob Afghanistan of their natural resources? . . certainly you don't mean like we supposedly did to OPEC, which by the way has no trouble fixing oil prices to benefit but a few, leaving their various nations populace destitute and in squalor.

    • 1 year ago
  • ampersand
    • -1
      ampersand  
    • Image
    • 2hellnwait:

      Since you brought it up, here's some fun facts about OPEC from the Concise Encyclopedia of Economics:
      (http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/OPEC.html )
      "Few observers and even few experts remember that the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) was created in response to the 1959 imposition of import quotas on crude oil and refined products by the United States. In 1959, the U.S. government established the Mandatory Oil Import Quota program (MOIP), which restricted the amount of imported crude oil and refined products allowed into the United States and gave preferential treatment to oil imports from Canada, Mexico, and, somewhat later, Venezuela. This partial exclusion of Persian Gulf oil from the U.S. market depressed prices for Middle Eastern oil; as a result, oil prices “posted” (paid to the selling nations) were reduced in February 1959 and August 1960.

      In September 1960, four Persian Gulf nations (Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia) and Venezuela formed OPEC in order to obtain higher prices for crude oil. By 1973, eight other nations (Algeria, Ecuador, Gabon, Indonesia, Libya, Nigeria, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates) had joined OPEC; Ecuador withdrew at the end of 1992, and Gabon withdrew in 1994.

      The collective effort to raise oil prices was unsuccessful during the 1960s; real (i.e., inflation-adjusted) world market prices for crude oil fell from $9.78 (in 2004 dollars) in 1960 to $7.08 in 1970. However, real prices began to rise slowly in 1971 and then increased sharply in late 1973 and 1974, from roughly $10.00 per barrel to more than $36.00 per barrel in the wake of the 1973 Arab-Israeli (“Yom Kippur”) War."

    • 1 year ago
  • ezrierin
  • Monkey_Films
123
1 - 100 of 220
more from Community:
from the community

top videos