Chmn of Joint Chiefs: We Can Leave Iraq

[RetiredGySgt]

Thanks for clarifying your position. I am not sure what pipelines have to do with military operations along the Pakistan/Afghan border so cannot comment.

As to your hypothetical, without any context it would seem the impulsive answer is "no".

Have you forgotten the claim by the left we only went to Afghanistan to build and defend a pipeline through the country?

Never mind no one is building one, one is not in the planning stage and no one has as a mission defense of any contractors building a pipe line.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Thanks for clarifying your position. I am not sure what pipelines have to do with military operations along the Pakistan/Afghan border so cannot comment.

As to your hypothetical, without any context it would seem the impulsive answer is "no".

It's not only the impulsive answer my brother, it's also the sane and rational answer .. ask the Rand Corporation

The war on terror is a hoax

Pipelines have everything to do with it because the plan is to kill anyone who'd dare disrupt them.

The US government and it's military have been reduced to pawns of American corporate interests.

 

[CSM]

It's not only the impulsive answer my brother, it's also the sane and rational answer .. ask the Rand Corporation

The war on terror is a hoax

Pipelines have everything to do with it because the plan is to kill anyone who'd dare disrupt them.

The US government and it's military have been reduced to pawns of American corporate interests.

I am unaware of any pipeline in Afghanistan.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Nope. You breed more Osama Bin Ladens.

Exactly .. as also determined by the Rand Corporation.

Hasn't anyone briefed Obama with the Rand's studies and conclusions?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I am unaware of any pipeline in Afghanistan.

There is NOT one. That does not stop people like BAC from claiming they are the reason we went there though. Do not forget this guy thinks the US Government was in on 9/11.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Have you forgotten the claim by the left we only went to Afghanistan to build and defend a pipeline through the country?

Never mind no one is building one, one is not in the planning stage and no one has as a mission defense of any contractors building a pipe line.

Oh really ...

Afghanistan's New Pipeline Deal May Be Just Another Pipe Dream

KABUL, Afghanistan, April 17, 2006 (ENS) - The deal has been signed, the partners agreed. Within the next two years, Afghan government officials say, construction will begin on a major gas pipeline that will extend from energy rich Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to Pakistan, and perhaps on to India.

But even before the ink had dried on the mid-February agreement in Ashgabat, analysts were second guessing the deal. Despite the brave face shown by the major players, this latest plan could follow several early versions into oblivion – and for the same reason, that instability in Afghanistan casts doubt over any infrastructure project, especially such a big one.
Afghanistan's New Pipeline Deal May Be Just Another Pipe Dream

Ooopss

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Oh really ...

Afghanistan's New Pipeline Deal May Be Just Another Pipe Dream

KABUL, Afghanistan, April 17, 2006 (ENS) - The deal has been signed, the partners agreed. Within the next two years, Afghan government officials say, construction will begin on a major gas pipeline that will extend from energy rich Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to Pakistan, and perhaps on to India.

But even before the ink had dried on the mid-February agreement in Ashgabat, analysts were second guessing the deal. Despite the brave face shown by the major players, this latest plan could follow several early versions into oblivion – and for the same reason, that instability in Afghanistan casts doubt over any infrastructure project, especially such a big one.
Afghanistan's New Pipeline Deal May Be Just Another Pipe Dream

Ooopss

Again remind us how any International troops are involved AT ALL? US or foreign. Show us how troops are guarding the proposed paths of thsi pipe line. Remind us how Osama Bin Laden was not IN Afghanistan and the Government refused to turn him over and vowed to protect him after 9/11. How we had no reason at all to invade.

Tighten that tinfoil it may not be getting all the secret telepathy attempts to subvert your brain.

 

[CSM]

Oh really ...

Afghanistan's New Pipeline Deal May Be Just Another Pipe Dream

KABUL, Afghanistan, April 17, 2006 (ENS) - The deal has been signed, the partners agreed. Within the next two years, Afghan government officials say, construction will begin on a major gas pipeline that will extend from energy rich Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to Pakistan, and perhaps on to India.

But even before the ink had dried on the mid-February agreement in Ashgabat, analysts were second guessing the deal. Despite the brave face shown by the major players, this latest plan could follow several early versions into oblivion – and for the same reason, that instability in Afghanistan casts doubt over any infrastructure project, especially such a big one.
Afghanistan's New Pipeline Deal May Be Just Another Pipe Dream

Ooopss

Ooops is correct. The article you cite is from 2006 and I have yet to hear of any pipeline constucted, in the process of being constructed or even planned. In fact, your article even states that such a pipeline plan at that time would probably fall into oblivion and apparently it did.

So I ask again, what the heck do pipelines have to do with cross border operations into Pakistan?

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Have you forgotten the claim by the left we only went to Afghanistan to build and defend a pipeline through the country?

Never mind no one is building one, one is not in the planning stage and no one has as a mission defense of any contractors building a pipe line.

Are you sure?

Not in Afghanistan to guard pipelines: MacKay

HALIFAX — Defence Minister Peter MacKay insisted Wednesday that Canadian troops are not in Afghanistan to guard a new natural gas pipeline being built through the southern part of the country.

Mr. MacKay told a Halifax radio talk show that Canada has to let Afghanistan map its own future.

He said fears that Canadian troops may end up paying a hefty price to protect the U.S.-backed project from insurgents are unfounded.

“We have to decide what role, if any, we'll play,” Mr. MacKay said. “We are not there specifically to protect a pipeline across Afghanistan.”
globeandmail.com: Not in Afghanistan to guard pipelines: MacKay

Nope, you aren't too sure now are you?

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Again remind us how any International troops are involved AT ALL? US or foreign. Show us how troops are guarding the proposed paths of thsi pipe line. Remind us how Osama Bin Laden was not IN Afghanistan and the Government refused to turn him over and vowed to protect him after 9/11. How we had no reason at all to invade.

Tighten that tinfoil it may not be getting all the secret telepathy attempts to subvert your brain.

"Never mind no one is building one, one is not in the planning stage and no one has as a mission defense of any contractors building a pipe line."

Defence Minister Peter MacKay insisted Wednesday that Canadian troops are not in Afghanistan to guard a new natural gas pipeline being built through the southern part of the country.

No secret why you now would rather talk about "tin foil hats"

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Are you sure?

Not in Afghanistan to guard pipelines: MacKay

HALIFAX — Defence Minister Peter MacKay insisted Wednesday that Canadian troops are not in Afghanistan to guard a new natural gas pipeline being built through the southern part of the country.

Mr. MacKay told a Halifax radio talk show that Canada has to let Afghanistan map its own future.

He said fears that Canadian troops may end up paying a hefty price to protect the U.S.-backed project from insurgents are unfounded.

“We have to decide what role, if any, we'll play,” Mr. MacKay said. “We are not there specifically to protect a pipeline across Afghanistan.”
globeandmail.com: Not in Afghanistan to guard pipelines: MacKay

Nope, you aren't too sure now are you?

I am quite positive. Show me where he said they were guarding it. Ohh wait, he specifically said they ARE NOT. Nice try though, next you will claim because we have troops there they are task with guarding the religious schools as well.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Ooops is correct. The article you cite is from 2006 and I have yet to hear of any pipeline constucted, in the process of being constructed or even planned. In fact, your article even states that such a pipeline plan at that time would probably fall into oblivion and apparently it did.

So I ask again, what the heck do pipelines have to do with cross border operations into Pakistan?

Defence Minister Peter MacKay insisted Wednesday that Canadian troops are not in Afghanistan to guard a new natural gas pipeline being built through the southern part of the country.

Come again

 

[CSM]

"Never mind no one is building one, one is not in the planning stage and no one has as a mission defense of any contractors building a pipe line."

Defence Minister Peter MacKay insisted Wednesday that Canadian troops are not in Afghanistan to guard a new natural gas pipeline being built through the southern part of the country.

No secret why you now would rather talk about "tin foil hats"

Again, even the article you post statest the pipeline does not exist....construction is "planned" to begin in 2010 .... after the NATO commitment for Canadian troops has ended.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

I am quite positive. Show me where he said they were guarding it. Ohh wait, he specifically said they ARE NOT. Nice try though, next you will claim because we have troops there they are task with guarding the religious schools as well.

Only a dummy would believe they would tell you they're guarding "it" .. what is "it" .. you claimed there was no "it" .. Now that I've proven there is indeed an "it" .. now you reach for the stupid.

 

[CSM]

Defence Minister Peter MacKay insisted Wednesday that Canadian troops are not in Afghanistan to guard a new natural gas pipeline being built through the southern part of the country.

Come again

To be fair, I will retract my statement on the "planned" part. As an adjunct I will point out that I stated I was unaware of such plans. You have made me aware that there is indeed planning for such. Kudos to you. However, planning for said pipeling has been done in the past without result.

Suggesting that the operations in Afghanistan are centered around construction of a pipeline that most likely will not happen is a bit of a stretch. I suppose however, it does make for some interesting propaganda if not speculative discussion.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Again, even the article you post statest the pipeline does not exist....construction is "planned" to begin in 2010 .... after the NATO commitment for Canadian troops has ended.

If you can't figure it out from here .. I can't help you.

This pipeline has been in the works since before Bush took office .. SEE: UNOCOL

 

[CSM]

If you can't figure it out from here .. I can't help you.

This pipeline has been in the works since before Bush took office .. SEE: UNOCOL

And if you insist that something that does not exist yet and probably wont exist anytime soon is the basis for military operations then ....

Ah well, at least you managed to keep it civil.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

To be fair, I will retract my statement on the "planned" part. As an adjunct I will point out that I stated I was unaware of such plans. You have made me aware that there is indeed planning for such. Kudos to you. However, planning for said pipeling has been done in the past without result.

Suggesting that the operations in Afghanistan are centered around construction of a pipeline that most likely will not happen is a bit of a stretch. I suppose however, it does make for some interesting propaganda if not speculative discussion.

If I had the time I could lay out the entire plans .. they're not that clever .. but I don't. Hard enough trying to post and work at the same time as it is.

I imagine you think it's just coincidence we're chasing ghosts/terrorists only where there is oil and/or pipelines involved.

I imagine you think the conflict in Georgia is about "freedom."

 

[BlackAsCoal]

And if you insist that something that does not exist yet and probably wont exist anytime soon is the basis for military operations then ....

Ah well, at least you managed to keep it civil.

I'm always civil when civily spoken to brother and I apopreciate your civility and fairness.

That being said .. SEE: PNAC: Rebuilding America's Defenses .. the plans are all there .. all that was required was a "New Pearl Harbor" .. and lo and behold, 9/11 just drops out of the sky.

What luck

 

[CSM]

If I had the time I could lay out the entire plans .. they're not that clever .. but I don't. Hard enough trying to post and work at the same time as it is.

I imagine you think it's just coincidence we're chasing ghosts/terrorists only where there is oil and/or pipelines involved.

I imagine you think the conflict in Georgia is about "freedom."

C'mon BAC, I don't be condescending...I try very hard to treat you as partner in reasonable discussion.

I suppose your statement aboout chasing terrorists could be viewed that way but consider this...perhaps the terrorist view pipelines as a more lucrative target than caribou herds in the Arctic Circle and thus are found in those regions containing pipelines.....

As for what you imagine....well I shudder to think what else you imagine!