OT: “Obama administration warns public to expect rise in US casualties”

[Arraya]

From 1997… The taleban ended up turning the west down.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/west_asia/37021.stm,

A spokesman for the company, Unocal, said the Taleban were expected to spend several days at the company’s headquarters in Sugarland, Texas.

Unocal says it has agreements both with Turkmenistan to sell its gas and with Pakistan to buy it. <--Karzai ex unocal employee A senior delegation from the Taleban movement in Afghanistan is in the United States for talks with an international energy company that wants to construct a gas pipeline from Turkmenistan across Afghanistan to Pakistan.

U.S. INTERESTS IN THE CENTRAL ASIAN
REPUBLICS HEARING BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ASIA AND THE PACIFIC
OF THE COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL
RELATIONS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION
FEBRUARY 12, 1998

For those who are not familiar with the terminology, the netback is the price which the producer receives for his oil or gas at the well head after all the transportation costs have been deducted. So it’s the price he receives for the oil he produces at the well head.

The second option is to build a pipeline south from Central Asia to the Indian Ocean. One obvious route south would cross Iran, but this is foreclosed for American companies because of U.S. sanctions legislation. The only other possible route is across Afghanistan, which has of course its own unique challenges. The country has been involved in bitter warfare for almost two decades, and is still divided by civil war. From the outset, we have made it clear that construction of the pipeline we have proposed across Afghanistan could not begin until a recognized government is in place
that has the confidence of governments, lenders, and our company.

Of course it’s about the terrorists. HAHA Follow the oil pipelines. Of course it was a stroke of luck to have the attacks, I guess, considering there was huge projects in the works.

Cheney as CEO of Halliburton-1999

For the world as a whole, oil companies are expected to keep finding and developing enough oil to offset our seventy one million plus barrel a day of oil depletion, but also to meet new demand. By some estimates there will be an average of two per cent annual growth in global oil demand over the years ahead along with conservatively a three per cent natural decline in production from existing reserves. That means by 2010 we will need on the order of an additional fifty million barrels a day. So where is the oil going to come from? Governments and the national oil companies are obviously in control of about ninety per cent of the assets. Oil remains fundamentally a government business. While many regions of the world offer great oil opportunities, the Middle East with two thirds of the world’s oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies, even though companies are anxious for greeter access there, progress continues to be slow

[partypup]

[quote=TheBreeze]

It’s no surprise to me that Obama is redeploying troops to Afghanistan. He’s only been talking about doing that for about two years now.

Why are you surprised at this? Did you not listen to anything Obama said in the two-year campaign?

[/quote]

None of this surprises me. What does surprise me is that Obama has become such a shameless tool of the war-waging Establishment and you, a member of the so-called anti-war party, are so brainwashed that you can’t even see it.

What did I listen to during the campaign, you ask? I listened to a bunch of brainwashed Democrats tell me that Obama was “talking tough” to get elected, but that they certainly didn’t expect him to act on his hawkish words.

And what did I expect? I was expecting that a candidate who campaigned against a “bone headed” war would not turn around and continue to provide endless funds to the man who started that war.

I was expecting a candidate who staked his platform on getting troops out of one endless, pointless war not to bog us down further in another endless, pointless war.

I was expecting Democrats not to be hoodwinked into jumping onto the “War on Terror” bandwagon that the Right had fallen prey to the last 8 years.

[quote=TheBreeze][quote=partypup]

Well gee whiz, that’s the same thing Bush told us when we complained about a bottomless-pit-of-a-war in Iraq, and everyone got up in arms.
[/quote]

You do realize that Iraq and Afghanistan are two different countries, right?

Obama has always said that the Iraq War was a mistake (he was one of the few politicians who came out against it before it even started) and that Afghanistan is where the terrorists are and where America should focus it’s military efforts:

Here’s a quote from Obama two months before the election:

“What President Bush and Senator McCain don’t understand is that the central front in the war on terror is not in Iraq, and it never was — the central front is in Afghanistan and Pakistan, where the terrorists who hit us on 9/11 are still plotting attacks seven years later,” Obama said.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/09/obama-savages-bush-redepl_n_125130.html?page=9&show_comment_id=15511960#comment_15511960

[/quote]

Yes, I do realize that Afghanistan and Iraq are two different countries.

Now, my turn: do you realize that Pakistan is yet another country, and that Obama is continuing Bush’s policy of waging attacks there that kill civilians?

Does it not concern you that Pakistan has nuclear capability and a confrontation there could ignite World War III?

Does it not concern you when Obama kills other people, or does it not matter to you because he is…Obama? Would you kill for Obama, Breeze?

I think we all know the answer to that question.

[partypup]

[quote=TheBreeze]

It’s no surprise to me that Obama is redeploying troops to Afghanistan. He’s only been talking about doing that for about two years now.

Why are you surprised at this? Did you not listen to anything Obama said in the two-year campaign?

[/quote]

None of this surprises me. What does surprise me is that Obama has become such a shameless tool of the war-waging Establishment and you, a member of the so-called anti-war party, are so brainwashed that you can’t even see it.

What did I listen to during the campaign, you ask? I listened to a bunch of brainwashed Democrats tell me that Obama was “talking tough” to get elected, but that they certainly didn’t expect him to act on his hawkish words.

And what did I expect? I was expecting that a candidate who campaigned against a “bone headed” war would not turn around and continue to provide endless funds to the man who started that war.

I was expecting a candidate who staked his platform on getting troops out of one endless, pointless war not to bog us down further in another endless, pointless war.

I was expecting Democrats not to be hoodwinked into jumping onto the “War on Terror” bandwagon that the Right had fallen prey to the last 8 years.

[quote=TheBreeze][quote=partypup]

Well gee whiz, that’s the same thing Bush told us when we complained about a bottomless-pit-of-a-war in Iraq, and everyone got up in arms.
[/quote]

You do realize that Iraq and Afghanistan are two different countries, right?

Obama has always said that the Iraq War was a mistake (he was one of the few politicians who came out against it before it even started) and that Afghanistan is where the terrorists are and where America should focus it’s military efforts:

Here’s a quote from Obama two months before the election:

“What President Bush and Senator McCain don’t understand is that the central front in the war on terror is not in Iraq, and it never was — the central front is in Afghanistan and Pakistan, where the terrorists who hit us on 9/11 are still plotting attacks seven years later,” Obama said.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/09/obama-savages-bush-redepl_n_125130.html?page=9&show_comment_id=15511960#comment_15511960

[/quote]

Yes, I do realize that Afghanistan and Iraq are two different countries.

Now, my turn: do you realize that Pakistan is yet another country, and that Obama is continuing Bush’s policy of waging attacks there that kill civilians?

Does it not concern you that Pakistan has nuclear capability and a confrontation there could ignite World War III?

Does it not concern you when Obama kills other people, or does it not matter to you because he is…Obama? Would you kill for Obama, Breeze?

I think we all know the answer to that question.

[partypup]

[quote=TheBreeze]

It’s no surprise to me that Obama is redeploying troops to Afghanistan. He’s only been talking about doing that for about two years now.

Why are you surprised at this? Did you not listen to anything Obama said in the two-year campaign?

[/quote]

None of this surprises me. What does surprise me is that Obama has become such a shameless tool of the war-waging Establishment and you, a member of the so-called anti-war party, are so brainwashed that you can’t even see it.

What did I listen to during the campaign, you ask? I listened to a bunch of brainwashed Democrats tell me that Obama was “talking tough” to get elected, but that they certainly didn’t expect him to act on his hawkish words.

And what did I expect? I was expecting that a candidate who campaigned against a “bone headed” war would not turn around and continue to provide endless funds to the man who started that war.

I was expecting a candidate who staked his platform on getting troops out of one endless, pointless war not to bog us down further in another endless, pointless war.

I was expecting Democrats not to be hoodwinked into jumping onto the “War on Terror” bandwagon that the Right had fallen prey to the last 8 years.

[quote=TheBreeze][quote=partypup]

Well gee whiz, that’s the same thing Bush told us when we complained about a bottomless-pit-of-a-war in Iraq, and everyone got up in arms.
[/quote]

You do realize that Iraq and Afghanistan are two different countries, right?

Obama has always said that the Iraq War was a mistake (he was one of the few politicians who came out against it before it even started) and that Afghanistan is where the terrorists are and where America should focus it’s military efforts:

Here’s a quote from Obama two months before the election:

“What President Bush and Senator McCain don’t understand is that the central front in the war on terror is not in Iraq, and it never was — the central front is in Afghanistan and Pakistan, where the terrorists who hit us on 9/11 are still plotting attacks seven years later,” Obama said.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/09/obama-savages-bush-redepl_n_125130.html?page=9&show_comment_id=15511960#comment_15511960

[/quote]

Yes, I do realize that Afghanistan and Iraq are two different countries.

Now, my turn: do you realize that Pakistan is yet another country, and that Obama is continuing Bush’s policy of waging attacks there that kill civilians?

Does it not concern you that Pakistan has nuclear capability and a confrontation there could ignite World War III?

Does it not concern you when Obama kills other people, or does it not matter to you because he is…Obama? Would you kill for Obama, Breeze?

I think we all know the answer to that question.

[partypup]

[quote=TheBreeze]

It’s no surprise to me that Obama is redeploying troops to Afghanistan. He’s only been talking about doing that for about two years now.

Why are you surprised at this? Did you not listen to anything Obama said in the two-year campaign?

[/quote]

None of this surprises me. What does surprise me is that Obama has become such a shameless tool of the war-waging Establishment and you, a member of the so-called anti-war party, are so brainwashed that you can’t even see it.

What did I listen to during the campaign, you ask? I listened to a bunch of brainwashed Democrats tell me that Obama was “talking tough” to get elected, but that they certainly didn’t expect him to act on his hawkish words.

And what did I expect? I was expecting that a candidate who campaigned against a “bone headed” war would not turn around and continue to provide endless funds to the man who started that war.

I was expecting a candidate who staked his platform on getting troops out of one endless, pointless war not to bog us down further in another endless, pointless war.

I was expecting Democrats not to be hoodwinked into jumping onto the “War on Terror” bandwagon that the Right had fallen prey to the last 8 years.

[quote=TheBreeze][quote=partypup]

Well gee whiz, that’s the same thing Bush told us when we complained about a bottomless-pit-of-a-war in Iraq, and everyone got up in arms.
[/quote]

You do realize that Iraq and Afghanistan are two different countries, right?

Obama has always said that the Iraq War was a mistake (he was one of the few politicians who came out against it before it even started) and that Afghanistan is where the terrorists are and where America should focus it’s military efforts:

Here’s a quote from Obama two months before the election:

“What President Bush and Senator McCain don’t understand is that the central front in the war on terror is not in Iraq, and it never was — the central front is in Afghanistan and Pakistan, where the terrorists who hit us on 9/11 are still plotting attacks seven years later,” Obama said.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/09/obama-savages-bush-redepl_n_125130.html?page=9&show_comment_id=15511960#comment_15511960

[/quote]

Yes, I do realize that Afghanistan and Iraq are two different countries.

Now, my turn: do you realize that Pakistan is yet another country, and that Obama is continuing Bush’s policy of waging attacks there that kill civilians?

Does it not concern you that Pakistan has nuclear capability and a confrontation there could ignite World War III?

Does it not concern you when Obama kills other people, or does it not matter to you because he is…Obama? Would you kill for Obama, Breeze?

I think we all know the answer to that question.

[partypup]

[quote=TheBreeze]

It’s no surprise to me that Obama is redeploying troops to Afghanistan. He’s only been talking about doing that for about two years now.

Why are you surprised at this? Did you not listen to anything Obama said in the two-year campaign?

[/quote]

None of this surprises me. What does surprise me is that Obama has become such a shameless tool of the war-waging Establishment and you, a member of the so-called anti-war party, are so brainwashed that you can’t even see it.

What did I listen to during the campaign, you ask? I listened to a bunch of brainwashed Democrats tell me that Obama was “talking tough” to get elected, but that they certainly didn’t expect him to act on his hawkish words.

And what did I expect? I was expecting that a candidate who campaigned against a “bone headed” war would not turn around and continue to provide endless funds to the man who started that war.

I was expecting a candidate who staked his platform on getting troops out of one endless, pointless war not to bog us down further in another endless, pointless war.

I was expecting Democrats not to be hoodwinked into jumping onto the “War on Terror” bandwagon that the Right had fallen prey to the last 8 years.

[quote=TheBreeze][quote=partypup]

Well gee whiz, that’s the same thing Bush told us when we complained about a bottomless-pit-of-a-war in Iraq, and everyone got up in arms.
[/quote]

You do realize that Iraq and Afghanistan are two different countries, right?

Obama has always said that the Iraq War was a mistake (he was one of the few politicians who came out against it before it even started) and that Afghanistan is where the terrorists are and where America should focus it’s military efforts:

Here’s a quote from Obama two months before the election:

“What President Bush and Senator McCain don’t understand is that the central front in the war on terror is not in Iraq, and it never was — the central front is in Afghanistan and Pakistan, where the terrorists who hit us on 9/11 are still plotting attacks seven years later,” Obama said.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/09/obama-savages-bush-redepl_n_125130.html?page=9&show_comment_id=15511960#comment_15511960

[/quote]

Yes, I do realize that Afghanistan and Iraq are two different countries.

Now, my turn: do you realize that Pakistan is yet another country, and that Obama is continuing Bush’s policy of waging attacks there that kill civilians?

Does it not concern you that Pakistan has nuclear capability and a confrontation there could ignite World War III?

Does it not concern you when Obama kills other people, or does it not matter to you because he is…Obama? Would you kill for Obama, Breeze?

I think we all know the answer to that question.

[partypup]

[quote=TheBreeze] George W. McSame was talking about sending a paltry 4500 troops to Afghanistan. Obama just ordered the redeployment of 18,000 Marines with many more to come.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/09/obama-savages-bush-redepl_n_125130.html?page=9&show_comment_id=15511960#comment_15511960

[/quote]

And what’s so very, very chilling is that you seem almost proud of this fact. Obama would send MORE troops to their deaths than McSame would.

And this is change you can believe in??

Breeze, are you a closet fascist?

[partypup]

[quote=TheBreeze] George W. McSame was talking about sending a paltry 4500 troops to Afghanistan. Obama just ordered the redeployment of 18,000 Marines with many more to come.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/09/obama-savages-bush-redepl_n_125130.html?page=9&show_comment_id=15511960#comment_15511960

[/quote]

And what’s so very, very chilling is that you seem almost proud of this fact. Obama would send MORE troops to their deaths than McSame would.

And this is change you can believe in??

Breeze, are you a closet fascist?

[partypup]

[quote=TheBreeze] George W. McSame was talking about sending a paltry 4500 troops to Afghanistan. Obama just ordered the redeployment of 18,000 Marines with many more to come.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/09/obama-savages-bush-redepl_n_125130.html?page=9&show_comment_id=15511960#comment_15511960

[/quote]

And what’s so very, very chilling is that you seem almost proud of this fact. Obama would send MORE troops to their deaths than McSame would.

And this is change you can believe in??

Breeze, are you a closet fascist?

[partypup]

[quote=TheBreeze] George W. McSame was talking about sending a paltry 4500 troops to Afghanistan. Obama just ordered the redeployment of 18,000 Marines with many more to come.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/09/obama-savages-bush-redepl_n_125130.html?page=9&show_comment_id=15511960#comment_15511960

[/quote]

And what’s so very, very chilling is that you seem almost proud of this fact. Obama would send MORE troops to their deaths than McSame would.

And this is change you can believe in??

Breeze, are you a closet fascist?

[partypup]

[quote=TheBreeze] George W. McSame was talking about sending a paltry 4500 troops to Afghanistan. Obama just ordered the redeployment of 18,000 Marines with many more to come.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/09/obama-savages-bush-redepl_n_125130.html?page=9&show_comment_id=15511960#comment_15511960

[/quote]

And what’s so very, very chilling is that you seem almost proud of this fact. Obama would send MORE troops to their deaths than McSame would.

And this is change you can believe in??

Breeze, are you a closet fascist?

[temeculaguy]

This is why I hate politics. No matter if it’s your guy or not, if you don’t like war you wont like war, no matter who is at the helm. I wasn’t a fan of the last guy and the new guy wasn’t my first pick but I beleive neither man is an evil man and neither wants their soldiers to die. Obama has the reigns now, he gets info that none of us do, so as much as we’d like to second guess him, our opinions are uneducated. If a conservative and a liberal both feel we need to be somewhere in the middle east I almost feel that’s enough check and balance for me, I’m done doubting and I firmly believe they both have my safety in mind. If the most liberal president in decades feels we need to kill some terrorists, we probably do, I’ll do what I can, in fact I’m probably more supportive than I have ever been because it feels unanimous. Instead of worrying about strategy, how about this:

http://www.cigarsforsoldiers.org/index.htm

The funny thing about soldiers, I haven’t heard them whining about putting their lives at risk, they probably don’t want you doing it for them. When will it be enough to convince you that despite the history of the world, sometimes it boils down to the good guys and the bad guys. Why is every war vietnam, where are the wwII comparisons? Anybody feel that was a waste of time? We don’t all get to be the president, but we get to vote and that day is over. Regardless if you voted for him or not, he is our guy right now and he’s a pretty bright guy, so back the home team or get off my island (sorry, shameless Braveheart quote).

[temeculaguy]

This is why I hate politics. No matter if it’s your guy or not, if you don’t like war you wont like war, no matter who is at the helm. I wasn’t a fan of the last guy and the new guy wasn’t my first pick but I beleive neither man is an evil man and neither wants their soldiers to die. Obama has the reigns now, he gets info that none of us do, so as much as we’d like to second guess him, our opinions are uneducated. If a conservative and a liberal both feel we need to be somewhere in the middle east I almost feel that’s enough check and balance for me, I’m done doubting and I firmly believe they both have my safety in mind. If the most liberal president in decades feels we need to kill some terrorists, we probably do, I’ll do what I can, in fact I’m probably more supportive than I have ever been because it feels unanimous. Instead of worrying about strategy, how about this:

http://www.cigarsforsoldiers.org/index.htm

The funny thing about soldiers, I haven’t heard them whining about putting their lives at risk, they probably don’t want you doing it for them. When will it be enough to convince you that despite the history of the world, sometimes it boils down to the good guys and the bad guys. Why is every war vietnam, where are the wwII comparisons? Anybody feel that was a waste of time? We don’t all get to be the president, but we get to vote and that day is over. Regardless if you voted for him or not, he is our guy right now and he’s a pretty bright guy, so back the home team or get off my island (sorry, shameless Braveheart quote).

[temeculaguy]

This is why I hate politics. No matter if it’s your guy or not, if you don’t like war you wont like war, no matter who is at the helm. I wasn’t a fan of the last guy and the new guy wasn’t my first pick but I beleive neither man is an evil man and neither wants their soldiers to die. Obama has the reigns now, he gets info that none of us do, so as much as we’d like to second guess him, our opinions are uneducated. If a conservative and a liberal both feel we need to be somewhere in the middle east I almost feel that’s enough check and balance for me, I’m done doubting and I firmly believe they both have my safety in mind. If the most liberal president in decades feels we need to kill some terrorists, we probably do, I’ll do what I can, in fact I’m probably more supportive than I have ever been because it feels unanimous. Instead of worrying about strategy, how about this:

http://www.cigarsforsoldiers.org/index.htm

The funny thing about soldiers, I haven’t heard them whining about putting their lives at risk, they probably don’t want you doing it for them. When will it be enough to convince you that despite the history of the world, sometimes it boils down to the good guys and the bad guys. Why is every war vietnam, where are the wwII comparisons? Anybody feel that was a waste of time? We don’t all get to be the president, but we get to vote and that day is over. Regardless if you voted for him or not, he is our guy right now and he’s a pretty bright guy, so back the home team or get off my island (sorry, shameless Braveheart quote).

[temeculaguy]

This is why I hate politics. No matter if it’s your guy or not, if you don’t like war you wont like war, no matter who is at the helm. I wasn’t a fan of the last guy and the new guy wasn’t my first pick but I beleive neither man is an evil man and neither wants their soldiers to die. Obama has the reigns now, he gets info that none of us do, so as much as we’d like to second guess him, our opinions are uneducated. If a conservative and a liberal both feel we need to be somewhere in the middle east I almost feel that’s enough check and balance for me, I’m done doubting and I firmly believe they both have my safety in mind. If the most liberal president in decades feels we need to kill some terrorists, we probably do, I’ll do what I can, in fact I’m probably more supportive than I have ever been because it feels unanimous. Instead of worrying about strategy, how about this:

http://www.cigarsforsoldiers.org/index.htm

The funny thing about soldiers, I haven’t heard them whining about putting their lives at risk, they probably don’t want you doing it for them. When will it be enough to convince you that despite the history of the world, sometimes it boils down to the good guys and the bad guys. Why is every war vietnam, where are the wwII comparisons? Anybody feel that was a waste of time? We don’t all get to be the president, but we get to vote and that day is over. Regardless if you voted for him or not, he is our guy right now and he’s a pretty bright guy, so back the home team or get off my island (sorry, shameless Braveheart quote).

[Author]

Posts