At A Glance
* * * *
Bush's 15-minute "Press Availability" seemed to have been called for the express purpose of underscoring that his administration has no intention of winding up its campaign in Afghanistan or its international "war on terrorism." Government officials want to counter any sentiments--in the American population or among its nominal allies internationally--that the stated aim of the US mission has been accomplished and that further military attacks are unnecessary.
In fact, Bush made it clear that US military commanders have been given a green light to pursue the Afghan campaign indefinitely: "We won't be making political decisions about what to do with our military and when Tommy [General Franks] says 'Mission complete, Mr. President,' that's when we start moving troops out." With this statement, Bush makes an astonishing abdication of civilian power over the armed forces, and indicates that democratic controls over the military are being subordinated to the aims of the generals, who in essence are calling the shots in the Afghan campaign.
An excerpt of an article entitled “As US Bombs More Civilian Targets, Bush Insists Afghan War Must Go On" by Kate Randall, 29 December 2001. Web Address: www.wsws.org/articles/2001/dec2001/afgh-d29.shtml
* * * *
The U.S. Strategic Command, the highest military authority, describes nuclear weapons as the core of the arsenal, because "unlike chemical or biological weapons, the extreme destruction from a nuclear explosion is immediate, with few if any palliatives to reduce its effect." Furthermore, "nuclear weapons always cast a shadow over any crisis or conflict." This study advises further that planners should not "portray ourselves as too fully rational and cool-headed." "That the United States may become irrational and vindictive if its vital interests are attacked should be part of the national persona that we project." It's "beneficial" for our strategic posture if "some elements” appear to be potentially "out of control." -- Dr Noam Chomsky quoting a study by the U.S. Department of Defense.
* * * *
After turning Afghanistan into a Cold War killing field for the past 20 years, the US's soon to be revealed "development" plan includes oil and gas pipelines which will benefit multi-national corporate interests and US strategic interests primarily. The Afghan people will be lucky if they receive a few drops from the pipeline. Unocal refused to allow the Taliban to have even a modest amount of "local consumption" rights from their pipeline plan, which is one of the main reasons the Taliban refused to agree to the deal, ultimately resulting in their being targeted for replacement.
worldinformation.com/fullstory.asp?articleid=33
Information by Andy on the Independent Newswire on 4 January 2002. Ref: www.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=114301
See also Patrick Martin’s article on the planning of war in Afghanistan before 9-11 in item 5 of the "Declaring Independence and a State of Global Rebellion" Menu
Other Reasons for the Removal of the Taliban -
Is it Because They Were Successfully Removing Drugs?
“Against this tremendous stake interests of this giant outlaw network, the morally conservative Taliban had been eradicating Afghan opium production, suppressing supply to druglords and the drug revenue flow to money laundering establishment bankers and global investors alike.”
-- Quoted from "The 9-11 Wolfowitz Conspiracy - A Frame-Up Cover-Up for the Oil, Investment-Bank-Laundered Opium Revenues, and for War on Islamic Populism - The Certain Motive" by Dick Eastman. See the “Insights-Reflections-Analysis” Menu.
To next article for Declaring Independence and A State of Global Rebellion
Phase 1 “Know” Menu
Looking for Justice in All the Wrong Places Menu
Insights-Reflections-Analysis Menu
Covering Up the Cover Up Menu
The Reality of Israeli Zionist Infiltration Menu
Are We On the Path of Expanding Liberty or Tyranny?
Declaring Independence and A State of Global Rebellion Menu
A Picture of the Stars and A Voice from the Ethers Menu
Interim Addendums During Phase 1
