Only Bruce Haigh has the gall to squeeze David Hicks, Haneef and Guantanamo Bay into an article about Afghanistan.

However, his overall theme of Australia having no business being in the rat hole of Afghanistan is correct.

Again, the question must be asked: Why does Labor think it is bad to be in Iraq, but good to be in Afghanistan, where we have lost our eighth soldier in a totally hopeless endeavour.

If Australia kept out of these foreign wars – not even in our region – we wouldn't have these so-called refugees and illegal entrants turning up here, thinking that we cared about them when all we are doing is keeping sweet with the US.

We never learned the lesson of Vietnam and that stupid, stupid man, Malcolm Fraser who first sanctioned boat arrivals after another needless, lost war.

If Afghanistan people wanted our assistance they would be supporting our army. There does not seem to be much evidence that this is happening. The opposite is true such as many countries throught the ages have shown us, no outside army can win.

One thing for sure, the people are the ones that pay the price.

So what do we do ?
Let the Taliban set up their training camps with the aid of the
Al Quaeda again ?

Have you all forgotten that the Bali bombers trained in the Afghan camps ?

Well, let me hear what you propose to do if we all left and they
reestablished the training camps. Don't sqwib answering this question
because it is at the crux of the matter.

There does not seem to be any evidence that we are getting rid of Taliban. Any way are they in Afgran now. As I seem to recall they came from many Arab countries including Saudi.

No Flo, Al Queada are definitely Arab but they had close contacts
with the Taliban and were allowed to set up the training camps by
the Taliban. They were involved together in the camps.

Birds of a feather.

Contrary to what Bazz writes, Al Qaeda was set up by the CIA and remains a CIA asset to this day.

That it was set up by the CIA to fight the leftist Government which came to power in Afghanistan in 1978 is not disputed.

That Al Qaeda subsequent turned on the US is a myth and can be shown to be such. What it is is a largely phantom terrorist organisation conjured up by the CIA to justify the fraudulent "war on terror" to achieve the sociopathic world goals of American neo-cons. This is discussed on the forum "War: not in my name" at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=8306#130548

Whilst Al Qaeda may have facilitated the recruitment of patsies to perform the 9/11 hijackings, the masterminds behind the 9/11 'false flag' terrorist attack were in the White House and not Afghanistan.

For further information see discussion of "9/11 Truth" at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2166#51675 http://911oz.com http://911blogger.com http://911truth.org http://ae911truth.org

Just some of the many credible well-credetnialled people who dispute the official US government version of th 9/11 attacks are listed at http://www.911truthgroups.org/911Truth101/Step2ProminentSupporters/tabid/633/Default.aspx

I actually defended the war in Afghanistan because I accepted George Bush's Big Lie of September 11.

I only began to question it about 18 months ago. About 4 months ago, I began to seriously studied the issue and have reached the firm conclusion that the whole justification for the war in Afghanistan was a lie.

Do not risk the lives of westerners in this religious hell hole.
Spend the money now wasted on the occupation to flood the country with radios,televisions,computers(internet),mobile phones and fast food so they can feel how good it can get.
Let them post on a forum like this.
Only the religious nutters will be unhappy and will threaten the gullible with punishment by God for enjoying themselves.
The major religions from that part of the world think that everything enjoyable is a SIN.

Well done Daggett, nice counter to the pre-canned view that our press and government(s) have tried to push...and Bazz and many others have swallowed.
The whole effort against "enemies" that the US actually created in the first place has been massively underreported...and largely ignored by the "their commin' right for us!!" (ala SouthPark) brigade.
Of *course* we have no place being there...but wouldn't the whole post 911 hissy fit the West went into look silly if it were just Iraq?
BTW. The "real" reason the US is still there is an oil pipeline, without which they never would have gone.

Well Ozandy; Where is the pipeline ?
From where to where does it run ?

Perhaps it is in the imagination of the conspiracy theorists ?

Thanks, Ozandy.

---

Bazz asks, "Where is the pipeline? From where to where does it run?"

Check out these links, Bazz:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Afghanistan_Pipeline

http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/news/1/7169-americas-other-glorious-war-.html

The building and protection of oil and gas pipelines in Afghanistan, to continue farther to Pakistan, India, and elsewhere, has been a key objective of US policy since before the 2001 American invasion and occupation of the country, although the subsequent turmoil there has presented serious obstacles to such plans. A planned Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India pipeline has strong support from Washington because, amongst other reasons, the US is eager to block a competing pipeline that would bring gas to Pakistan and India from Iran.[5] But security for such projects remains daunting, and that's where the US and NATO forces come in to play.

http://english.alarabonline.org/display.asp?fname=2009%5C01%5C01-04%5Czbusinessz%5C988.htm&dismode=x&ts=04/01/2009%2004:08:42%20%C3%A3

India, meanwhile, had examined the U.S.-backed $7.6 billion Trans-Afghanistan pipeline to bring natural gas from Turkmenistan some 1,044 miles to South Asian markets.

Commitments made by Turkmenistan to transport natural gas west to the Caspian region leave the future of a planned pipeline through Afghanistan in doubt. Officials in Turkmenistan said in May they had enough gas to meet market demands.

---

It seems real enough to me

Ozandy and Daggett;
I had a look at your reference and as I suspected you are refering to;

The Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline (TAP or TAPI) is a proposed natural
gas pipeline being developed by the Asian Development Bank.

The US would have minimum interest in this pipeline.
There is no likely hood of it being built anytime soon.
Certainly India and Pakistan would have an interest.

The US would not have much interest in a NG pipeline to India.
If it was an oil pipeline they would not have an interest except it
might take oil away from the Baku to Turkey pipeline.

No I think you are drawing a long bow there.
I tried the second link but it did not work.

There are other gas sources that the US could pursue in much more
reliable places. It would require an LNG plant which India would
build perhaps but I doubt if US companies could get the finance.
I could see your argument if it was oil but not natural gas.