One could claim that about almost anywhere in the world.
Unless you are going to run them through the caucuses, as is already being worked on now. Who the hell would run a pipeline through Afghanistan where any sheep-humping stink bag can blow it up?
The last I checked, Sudan did not aid an attack upon our country.
I used to think Reese was ok, this is the worst piece of garbage imaginable.
It is common practice for us to stick are noses where they don't belong i.e. Somalia, Haiti, Kosovo. It would be one thing if we normally didn't particpate in peace keeping missions.
HEY DUMB@SS! Anwar has oil as well as a pipeline! Why piss billions of dollars on some 4th world dead goat tick eating backward country sap hell hole like Afganistan, when the oil is here? Careful Alaska! We're about to attack! What an idiot....or is it just a coincidence?
Statisticians base their arguments of facts and evidence, not speculative meanderings.
I suppose it is a coincidence that there is a smoking hole where the World Trade Center once stood.
I suppose it is a coincidence that you continue to survive without constant reminders to breathe in and out.
The man should check out the Jungian concept of 'contemporaneity'.
It is my impression Reese has no grasp of history, whatsoever.
Earth to Charlie Reese, if we decide to kick the crap out a country who borders a nation with nukes, it's probably wise to bring them under our umbrella so they don't decide to kill their arch enemy (India in this case) or lob a nuke onto our troops if they are feeling a bit suicidal.
I just paid $0.999/gallon of gas to fill up my car this morning, is this coincidental with our war on terrorism? You bet it is. These are the types of coincidences I can live with!
Is it a coincidence we are fighting in Afghanistan because that is where is the bastards that attacked us are? No, couldn't be!
The anti-American right is just as unappealing as the anti-American left. Both rely on the reader's weakness for the sentiments of suspicion and distrust. Both depend on the reader's inability to sort out and assess the complexities of the real world.
"ALLEGEDLY"????
I guess those were "alleged" C130s that the "alleged" media were photographing and filming landing and taking off from bases in the north.
It is a coincidence that the logical route for pipelines runs through Afghanistan and Pakistan.
"Logical route"?
Since Charlie is intellectually lazy enough to not bother to give us the specifics on WHAT country and WHAT kind of pipeline he is referring to, it is hard to tell what he's talking about. However, Turkmenistan is currently examining the possibilities of building a pipeline for it's large reserves of natural gas. One of the possibilities is through Afghanistan to Pakistan, however, there are many other options, and to call the Afghan route "logical", isn't nearly true.
Furthermore, I believe that Turkmenistan has just completed an agreement with Turkey to build their pipline in that direction.
Therefore, I suppose it is a further coincidence that the United States suddenly has an interest in not only getting rid of Osama bin Laden, but with replacing the government in Afghanistan.
Probably the most curious statement Reese makes. How could he say our desire to eliminate OBL and the Taliban aren't related? Bush has, since the beginning, made no difference between terrorists and governments that support and harbor terrorists.
And it is another coincidence that after nearly 10 years of dumping on Pakistan, we have suddenly re-embraced that country as one of our best friends.
If I'm not mistaken, Pakistan has always been an ally of the U.S. (at least as far as India goes). What exactly does he mean by "dumping on"? I mean, we dump on Canada all the time.
And it is a final coincidence, and one that prompted this column, that the Central Command has just stated publicly that when the war in Afghanistan ends, it doesn’t mean there won’t be a need for a U.S. military presence in the region.
Once again he lacks specificity. But I would say that the government has indicated the need for peacekeepers in country for a few years, although all indications are that it will be multi-national.
I don’t mean to sound cynical
Huh?
It is a coincidence that on Sept. 21, the British newspaper The Daily Telegraph reported that Israeli intelligence officials said they had not detected any link between Iraq and the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
Well, that's good enough for me!!
I can find numerous other articles that make it clear that Iraq was involved in 9/11. But that is beside the point. Since this is a war on terrorism, and Saddam is a major sponsor of terrorism, we are justified going after him even if he had nothing to do directly with the attacks. The same experts the news report uses (Mossad) says Iraq will have nukes in less than 5 years. That is a good enough reason for overthowing the current government for me.
Saddam, by coincidence, is one of those nationalists who thinks oil profits should be invested in the Arab world to benefit the Arab people rather than in London and New York.
"benefit the Arab people"???
Is he serious???
No, Saddam believes oil profits should be "invested" in builing new palaces to the tune of $1 billion. I'm sorry, but THIS is the most curious statement that Reese makes.
Give me a break.
Silly me, I though that he believed in spending oil dollars to gas segments of his own population and to develop WMD capabilities while his people starve unless we feed them. I had no idea that I had him so wrong.
COINCIDENSE?????????????
Poor Charlie. He must think we're all idiots. This is as accurate as saying the Taliban was an ally in the Soviet/Afghan war. The U.S. objective in the Iran/Iraq war was to ensure access to oil for our corporations and to maintain a role that would give us some influence over stability in the region. We supplied both with arms (though our efforts for Iraq were more in naval support). Until the war began, every piece of artillery and war machinery in the Iraqi arsenal was of Soviet origin. There was a Cold War going on, and inroads with Iraq would necessarily mean outroads for the Soviets in the region. Saddam Hussein has always been regarded by the U.S. government as a ruthless scumbag. The fact that we provided aid to him in a war against the ruthless clerics of Iran should be no more embarrassing than if we were to arm Charles Manson in a fight against Osama Bin Laden.
Is it any coincidence that not one person bothered "po lil ole Afghanistan" until they murdered up to 6000 Americans on our own soil?