US warplanes land in Uzbekistan

Dawn | Sept 22, 2001

[Sawdring]

TASHKENT, Sept 22: US warplanes have landed in the former Soviet republic of Uzbekistan, as Russian President Vladimir Putin, after an extended silence, voiced readiness to cooperate with US plans to strike Afghanistan - but only after they are approved by the UN security council.

Uzbek military sources said on Saturday that the US jets were stationed just outside the Uzbek capital of Tashkent and were equipped with surveillance devices, presumably aimed at the Taliban.

Uzbek officials had previously denied that they were willing to cooperate with the US in its fight against the Taliban.

Heavily armed US attack helicopters are still stationed on a military base some 40 kilometres east of Tashkent, following joint NATO-Uzbek military exercises in the region this month.

The use of former Soviet bases by Washington has been busily debated in Moscow, which has pronounced itself ready to join a world anti-terrorism campaign, but still worries that NATO forces will permanently root themselves in the lucrative Central Asian region should Russia agree to a joint attack.

In a sign that the two sides were starting to bridge their positions, Putin and US President George W. Bush held a 40-minute telephone consultation on the issue late on Saturday Moscow time, although the Kremlin refused to disclose any details of the talks.

The Russian leader - whose generals have previously refused to grant US troops any access to Central Asian countries labelled by Moscow as the "near abroad" - emerged from a near-silence at his Black Sea retreat to voice a mixed message for Washington.

Putin was further holding late-night consultations on the crisis with his most senior security officials at the Sochi base on Saturday, senior Kremlin sources said.

Earlier, speaking ahead of his Tuesday visit to Berlin, Putin hinted in an interview to Germany's ARD television that while Russia was cautious, it was willing to negotiate a joint response to the terror strikes in the United States. "This does not mean that we cannot discuss such questions together with our partners, think about the possible reaction to the terrorist acts," said Putin in remarks aired nation-wide on Moscow television on Saturday.

Putin said Russia's possible level of participation would be decided "based on the level and character of our partnership with the US and NATO".

These comments coincided with those recently made by senior Russian officials, who claim to have Putin's ear. The officials in private said that Moscow would be willing to offer its full cooperation in a new US war should Russia be accepted as a member of NATO.

The same senior Russian officials have said that NATO discussions were far more important than any debates on US plans to build a missile defence shield, an issue that has been the top priority for talks between Moscow and Washington for months.-AFP

[Zviadist]

Do you think we're doing any good?

Nice to see you here. I have been pummeled a bit, but that is part of the game. The only thing that irritates me is when some of these new "fastest fingers" hit the "abuse" button on people who they disagree with -- when none of the rules have been broken. They act like commie informers.

As to the above question, I realize those blinded by the desire for blood will not listen to reason, but a HELL of a lot more than meets the eye is happening right now. The powers that be are packaging it up as a nice patriotic war against terrorism, implication being that anyone who questions it is unpatriotic and therefore highly suspect (how many times does one need to be asked whether one supports the terrorists because one questions massive government expansion and restriction of hard-won freedoms?). The reality is a bit more complicated. It would be nice to settle into a nice war against the "bad guys" like we see in Hollywood movies. Unfortunately life is different than these.

Our military occupation of Central Asia is giving long-suffering CEOs from Chevron and the others more than they could have possibly even dreamed for. It is like a million Christmases rolled into one. Use stupid American G.I.s to secure big bucks for big-wigs and tell them it is all about patriotism. I don't mean to be so cynical, but after what we did to Serbia/Yugo, nothing surprises me.

Again, my disclaimer: real action against anyone and everyone who did this terrible act, and putting a serious hurt on the perps -- count me in! This strange "war that is not a war" all over the world? No thanks. Something smells fishy -- or smelled fishy until the good ambassador spelled it out for us: we are there to secure plans for oil pipelines.

[rockfish59]

no 'violent' responses now. (of course you didn't hear it from me)

[Zviadist]

Everything in that part of the world is at least partially about oil. However, I object to the implication that Bush is sending US troops to Uzbekistan as a trick to occupy that country.

I understand what you are saying, and I appreciate your remaining civil, but remember Kosovo. That's all I can say right now. Remember Kosovo, remember Macedonia, Bosnia, etc.

[Zviadist]

we're also going to drill in 'anwar'.

Great, I'm all for it. But that reserve will only supply the US for a very short period, less than a year if I remember my briefing correctly.

[Inyokern]

That's all I can say right now. Remember Kosovo, remember Macedonia, Bosnia, etc.

This is not Kosovo just like it is not Viet Nam. You seem to have Kosovo on the brain. I thought Clinton's involvement in Kosovo was wrong, but Bush is completely right to go after these bastards in Afghanistan.

[piasa]

"Opponents of ANWR development say that it is not worth forever despoiling ANWR for a few months of oil supply. This is a specious argument that assumes that supply from all other sources ceases during the life of the ANWR reserves. According to government studies, the 2001 area of ANWR, could produce over 1.0 MMBO per day. Like the Prudhoe Bay area, production operations will likely run for more than 25 years, providing vital crude oil and natural gas for the nation’s economy, significant employment in Alaska and in the Lower 48 from production operations and equipment supply, hundreds of millions of dollars of annual state and federal tax and royalty income, as well as a reduction in the outflow of funds for the purchase of imported crude oil. "

[Reeses]

Our military occupation of Central Asia is giving long-suffering CEOs from Chevron and the others more than they could have possibly even dreamed for. It is like a million Christmases rolled into one. Use stupid American G.I.s to secure big bucks for big-wigs and tell them it is all about patriotism.

Do you know how capitalism works? The CEO and "big-wigs" do not own Chevron, the shareholders do. If you are so smart and can see things others can't, go out and get rich. If you can't beat them, join them. You seem to believe that oil businesses are owned and run by evil conspirators. You've bought into the liberal left-wing demonizing of a business.

Instead of just complaining, what is your alternate solution to deal with terrorism?

[getoffmylawn]

The only thing that irritates me is when some of these new "fastest fingers" hit the "abuse" button on people who they disagree with -- when none of the rules have been broken. They act like commie informers.

Someone had one of my posts pulled after they began to play the Neville Chamberlain card against me and I made the mistake of pointing out how the United States Government has been acting much like the empire building and land grabbing Nazi Germany since WW2. I said the terrorist's recruiters could probably be well served to point to Chamberlain when trying to convince peace loving Muslims to join in the Holy War against America.

A post right above it that called for me to be locked up in an internment camp remains unscathed in all its glory.

[Sawdring]

Link To Story

Dawn is a Pakistan newspaper but I think they are based in Britain. If you look at the bottom of the piece you will notice an "AFP" which denotes the article was written by Agence France Presse.

[MeekOneGOP]

Link To Story

---

Thanks! ;-)

[Man of the Right]

The Russian people are friends of Americans, not enemies. That's clear from the popular reaction following 911. The Russian government is trying to re-establish the country as a great power by maintaining good relations with both the U.S. and Chinese. Clearly, an accomodation has been reached with the Bush Administration regarding the Taliban. Otherwise, U.S. planes and special ops people wouldn't be headed for Tajikistan, where the Russians have a motorized division, an airbase, and are patrolling the Afghan border. Militaries of the two countries are cooperating in Kosovo. In 1979 the Russian invasion of Afghanistan looked like a thrust toward the Arabian Sea. In retrospect, it looks more a defensive action to halt the spread of Islamic fundamentalism into central Asia. I get no pleasure seeing footage of Russian helos shot down, Russians killed in truck convoys, and Russian prisoners herded along the road by Afghans. If I walked into a room with Russians on one side, and Afghans on the other, there's not much question who I would feel more affinity with. Russia is a White, Christian, semi-Western country. They don't hijack airliners and fly them into office buildings. They have a tradition of fighting courageously in their own defense. We were allied with them twice in the 20th century. They're part of the solution rather than part of the problem.

[Man of the Right]

I'd rather see a NATO including Russia securing Central Asian pipelines and oil fields than Islamic fundamentalists controlling it. Our top strategic policy in Europe should be to bring a non-communist, democratic Russia into NATO. Russia in NATO eliminates the chance of war among European states. Russia outside NATO puts even Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary at risk. We're seeing a global re-alignment between Islamic fundamentalists in one camp, and Western countries in the other. If the fundamentalists overthrow the Saudi royal family (a real possibility), we're going to need an alternative source of oil.

[1rudeboy]

Agreed. They are part of the solution now. History has provided us with a singular opportunity . . . Russians and Americans will fight together against a common enemy. Don't be discouraged by the posts you see here. We are the hammer, and the Russians are the anvil. Putin is smart enough to come on board. Let the carnage begin.

[Diojneez]

we're also going to drill in 'anwar'.
Great, I'm all for it. But that reserve will only supply the US for a very short period, less than a year if I remember my briefing correctly.

That's "Liberal" math, therefore completely useless. The liberal press will simply not report a realistic estimate.

[bootyist-monk]

A good kick in the nuts to the terrorists, and a mile of pipeline for every American that died. Their cowardly attack is going to cost us over $40 BILLION dollars, not counting the lives of our citizens, which cannot be calculated.

I'd say a few oil fields will do nicely as a start, and we'll take the rest if you piss us off again. The only reason these a-holes still exist is because of oil and the money it gives them to finance their terror. No more.

Let's call it the NEW MANHATTAN PROJECT.

[aristeides]

This represents a chance to reverse Clinton's disastrous policy of p***ing off the Russians. As long as we do it with the agreement and participation of the Russians, I don't see anything wrong with American oil companies operating in Central Asia. I just never understood why that had to be done in a way that antagonized the Russians.

[DB]

Really?

And what land have we "grabbed like Nazi Germany" did?

You compare us much less the nation to Nazis and expect a civil response...

Duh...

[tonycavanagh]

re : I understand what you are saying, and I appreciate your remaining civil, but remember Kosovo. That's all I can say right now. Remember Kosovo, remember Macedonia, Bosnia, etc.

America is reacting to an attack, against it.

As for the Balkans well we did not tear Yugoslavia apart they did that them self’s, the only thing that kept Yugoslavia together was the Communist party under Tito, with communism collapsing all over East Europe, it had a knock on effect throughout all the provinces that made up Yugoslavia.

Granted the break up could have gone a lot more smoother and peaceful, but there was no one man of quality throughout the country just eager ex party men and little small minded nationalists who were determined to get what they could, from 1988 to 1999 when the Germans broke from the ranks, the EU did there best to try and keep the state of Yugoslavia together, but the local politicians were having none of it they continued to make rabble rousing speeches while the country fell into a state of war around there ears.

We live in a small world what one country does can have effect on other countries.

I think the lesson here is keep your own house in order.

Tony

[tonycavanagh]

Putin and Russia will do what we all do look after number one, we may cooperate on this one, but don’t count on this being the new way.

During the 70s and 80s, Russia helped fund and train a whole raft of terrorist groups.

I cheered when ever I saw a Russian helo shot down, a Russian tank go up in flames, it meant there was one less to face me.

Tony

[Mr. Wright]

My Sentiments Exactly!!!