The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Afghanistan's poppy problem > Comments

Afghanistan's poppy problem : Comments

By Anna Solar-Bassett, published 7/9/2009

The sobering fact is that 93 per cent of the world's heroin emerges from Afghanistan and corruption is rife.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. All
So now it's the job of the U.S. government to build infrastructure in Afghanistan to stop people using opium. And where in the Constitution is this power granted?
Posted by Peter Hume, Monday, 7 September 2009 3:53:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Zbigneiw Brezinski bragged about sucking the Russians into Afghanistan for their Vietnam.The USA supported the Taliban and the opium had to rage in production to pay for the weapons to fight the noble war.

When the Taliban ousted the Russians they stopped the production of opium.Remember the shortage of heroine a few years ago?When the USA invaded Afghanistan the production opium began in earnest so that the Taliban could afford to buy arms to fight the USA.The USA could stop the production of heroine tomorrow,but there is no money to be made without it.

Just like WW1 & WW2 the banks and arms dealers supply and finance both sides to make a profit.Nothing has changed.
Posted by Arjay, Tuesday, 8 September 2009 12:26:12 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As hinted in the article, there is good reason to believe that President Karsai himself is a major dealer in opium. What other explanation is there for the discovery of very large quantities of opium on premises owned by him?

While mouthing all the right platitudes, Karsai is a corrupt leader unable to hold the position of President except through the most blatant vote rigging. At heart, he is very close to sharing the oppressive Islamist views of the Taliban on the role and rights of women.

Does anyone seriously believe that the regime he leads is motivated by anything other than self-interest and self-preservation, two more things they have in common with the Taliban?

Karsai would have us believe that he remains in office because he is a Pashtun and has the support of the Pashtun, the largest ethnic group in Afghanistan and by far, the largest producers of opium.

It is widely assumed that the only reason for the on-going presence of western forces in Afghanistan and their overt support for the Kasai regime is that the alternative, the Taliban, is more dangerous, a greater threat, and reject democracy, even pluralism, outright.

One thing the Taliban were able to do very effectively when they controlled Afghanistan was stamp out poppy growing and the production of opium. Is there really a legitimate excuse for western governments not demanding that Karsai do the same and do it now?
Posted by JonJay, Tuesday, 8 September 2009 11:14:55 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Texts that flirt with the liberal facist narrative on Afghanistan simply sustain support for the conflict. The issue isn't about moralising on drugs or about harboring terrorists originally birthed by the CIA, and it isn't about womens issues.

The imperative of the NATO mission was to secure hegemony over territory required to host a pipeline corridor for oil and gas between Turkmenistan and an Indian Ocean port. UNOCAL put the Afghan/Pak proposal to the US Foreign Affairs committee in the 90's.

http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2009/05/11/the-gas-must-flow/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Afghanistan_Pipeline

You need not be a 9/11 truth traveller, you can get it from the horse's mouth in the transcipt of Abdullah Abdullahís 2005 CFR session

http://www.cfr.org/publication/8151/conversation_with_he_abdullah_abdull...

Look for the State Dept shark's intervention to put Abdullah on topic for the liberal facist womenís issues narrative.

The CFR manages the narrative for its patrons & clients (the corporate energy members). Abdullah Abdullah was spruiking his presidential credentials and pushed for the alternate northern pipeline route through Uzbek-Indian territory. Recently the Pashtun have felt threatened enough to pop off the Indian negotiator in Kabul, and meanwhile the US has ticked off uranium supply for India and agreed to major arms deals despite their refusal to sign the NPT or allow inspections.

Abdullah Abdullah was the original Northern Alliance go-to man for Dell Dailey in the Afghan campaign. Dailey the one who called off the pursuit of bin Laden despite having been handed credible location intelligence. Dailey has no problem with terrorists, you can see his recent endorsements and attempts to get the Mujahaddin of Iran off the US's terrorist group lists which even CFR captives Hillary and Condi wouldn't sign up to.

And in more recent events the US state dept and CIA is full force behind the uncovering of the Afghan election campaign disarray. This is leverage on Karzai and empowers plan B which is to cut off the Pashtun/PAK, divide the country and work only with the Uzbek-Tajik-Indianís across a Northern route corridor accessing an Indian port.
Posted by ciao, Tuesday, 8 September 2009 2:24:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy