[It'salmosttolate]

To: big gray tabby

"worldskew", but it ain't mine.

If you think I'm "reading something into it" I gottta believe you got problems reading

Frome here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/south_asia/newsid_1550000/1550366.stm

Tuesday, 18 September, 2001, 11:27 GMT 12:27 UK

US 'planned attack on Taleban'

The wider objective was to oust the Taleban

By the BBC's George Arney A former Pakistani diplomat has told the BBC that the US was planning military action against Osama Bin Laden and the Taleban even before last week's attacks.

Niaz Naik, a former Pakistani Foreign Secretary, was told by senior American officials in mid-July that military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October.

Mr Naik said US officials told him of the plan at a UN-sponsored international contact group on Afghanistan which took place in Berlin.

Mr Naik told the BBC that at the meeting the US representatives told him that unless Bin Laden was handed over swiftly America would take military action to kill or capture both Bin Laden and the Taleban leader, Mullah Omar.

The wider objective, according to Mr Naik, would be to topple the Taleban regime and install a transitional government of moderate Afghans in its place - possibly under the leadership of the former Afghan King Zahir Shah.

Mr Naik was told that Washington would launch its operation from bases in Tajikistan, where American advisers were already in place.

He was told that Uzbekistan would also participate in the operation and that 17,000 Russian troops were on standby.

Mr Naik was told that if the military action went ahead it would take place before the snows started falling in Afghanistan, by the middle of October at the latest.

He said that he was in no doubt that after the World Trade Center bombings this pre-existing US plan had been built upon and would be implemented within two or three weeks.

And he said it was doubtful that Washington would drop its plan even if Bin Laden were to be surrendered immediately by the Taleban.

[SW6906]

OK, that's someone saying after 9/11 and our action against Afghanistan that there was a plan dating back to July. Anyone can say that. Proof is another matter. I want to see concrete proof PRIOR to 9/11 that there was a plan.

Also, please highlight for me in the Janes article the part about there being a pre-9/11 plan for a US invasion.....

[Shermy]

AH! Veddy interesting. Oman not a part of OPEC. And, remember, when Saudi Arabia was not allowing us to use bases (in the beginning at least) Oman was! And troops trained there too, UK especially.

BTW, there's "plans" for all sorts of contingencies...doesn't mean they would occur. As for Massood, it could be understood that his assassination was a "response" to the 9-11 attacks, as opposed to the other way around. Osama might have thought that with Massood gone, a western response to 9-11 would be near impossible. On the other hand, Mullah Omar apparently appointed Osama as the Taliban Minister of Defense a few months before 9-11 (a fact little discussed). IMO, the threat to Afstan, and Osama's variety of causes, were all in play. Arguably, since Osama didn't mention any threat to Afstan in his post-911 rationalizations, such wasn't his concern. On the other hand, failing to mention Afstan was purposeful--from the start, had he referenced Afstan his culpability for the WTC would be much harder to deny due to his obvious involvement with Afstan. Further, his initial propaganda seemed directed to a mere Arab audience. Later, when he understood the threat to him, he added Kashmir, Chechnya, Timor, etc. in a vain attempt to create a world-wide conflagration. On the other hand, maybe only Dr. L. Van Pelt could give us the comprehensive analysis of the whole situation:

[big gray tabby]

What has that got to do with anything? If you want the truth, why don't you tell us what the status of the Afghanistan pipeline is right now? Why would you even attempt to confuse the opening of the afore-mentioned lines with the Afghan hostilities? And what link do you claim exists between the "planned invasion" and the pipeline. Can you document it? The fact that the Taliban was harboring a known maniacal killer could not have entered into the thinking behind this "planned invasion?"

[Shermy]

More info: the Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum gas pipeline apparently terminates at Erzurum. Not at a port. It's not on the map above. This line for Turkish domestic use, no? Azeris are Turkic, no? Nice fit. BTW, I notice that both gas and oil lines hook around and avoid Armenia, seemingly not taking the most direct routes. Is this due to local geography or politics???

Patria One. Good point about the history of the peoples. However, countries, companies, people, whatever, commit acts in their own interests. The dispute predates OPEC, certainly, but I think it is worth considering why al-Qaeda gave so much emphasis and support to the Chechen crisis, and exacerbated, maybe lengthened it. And Saudis funded al-Qaeda to a substantial degree. Worth considering is whether Saudi Arabia, or the House of Saud, had an official or unofficial policy of destabilization in the Caucasus. Who would benefit from it other than Saudi Arabia? Not a criticism of Saudi Arabia per se, many countries do the same in a variety of ways. Both peace and war can be proftiable.