what are your views on the war on terror, i think its extremley necessary and i dont get why people are soo against it, its like people think people are going to war for oil and to kill innocent people for the fun of it its ridiculous. I may be wrong but feel free to voice your opinion on the war on TERROR! *scary ghost noise*

Although I am anti-war , I think it is justified to retaliate against  any one who attacks another. This war was handled very poorly and the initial attacks on the twin towers could have been prevented. What I mean by the attack could have been prevented is that the terrorists didn't just pick a name of a country out of a hat. They had their reasons for attacking America, and it is largely due to the American foreign policies in Afghanistan during the 80's and 90's. I am not justifying their attacks, just stating that their motives were not to terrorize Americans.  I am also not trying to undermine the radical views of  some Islamic Jihad. They see themselves as fundamentalists of the Quran and not radicals , which if you understand parts of the Quran, isn't far from the truth(particularly the death to infidels part).

When I say this war was handled poorly, let me explain what I mean. First I will state my view of the situation. 11 Saudi Arabians fly planes into the WTC, so America bombs the hell out of Iraq, and then occupies Afghanistan. Lets make an analogy of this. Pretend that a handful of American radicals attacked China, and then China bombs Ottawa because they want the Canadian Prime Minister. Then they  attack the U.S. and occupy it for 10+ years. In this analogy, China is obviously not justified to bomb Canada, and even the occupation of America could be questioned as it was just a handful that attacked China.The U.S. was not justified going into Iraq . Other countries did not support the Iraq front of the war, and it went against United Nations protocol.

I believe that war is only acceptable if you are only there for liberation and not occupation, and I honestly think we are occupying Afghanistan. As I said before, it is perfectly fine to retaliate, but we have all ready succeeded in that regard. We have all ready got rid of the Taliban controlled government and now have killed Osama.  Sure there are still 'terrorists' or radical Jihad there, but that isn't exclusive to Afghanistan. The best way to support the troops, as the slogan goes, is to get them home to their families.

One could argue that America has done more terrorizing than the Taliban or Al-Quada , as they certainly terrorized more Iraqies ( is that what you call them? lol ) than there were Americans terrorized, at least directly.

hmmm an eye for an eye makes the world blind, my dad always goes on about how the sole cause for the war was oil -.- its jus really annoying lol
anyway good info smot you make really good posts on my threads thanks lol

POKeMAD : To say that the war wasn't based on oil at all, is just as wrong as saying it was solely based on oil. It is part of the foreign policies that I was mentioning in the prior post.

Let me explain the situation, in the 90's the American government (and others around the world) recognized China, and Asia in general, as a rapidly growing consumer of oil and natural gases. They thought that if  China's consumption continued to grow at the rate it was growing it would have drastic effects on every other countries (the whole supply and demand thing they teach you in 5th grade). There had been a newly discovered oil source in the Caspian Sea which they figured would help this problem significantly, and both major American oil companies and the American government began to look into viable options for getting this oil to China. A direct pipeline to China would be , in the practicle sense, impossible as it is way too far from the Caspian Sea and would cost way to much money to be created and monitored.

The only viable option would be to create a pipeline that goes from the Caspian Sea down to the Arabian Sea where it could be loaded onto ships and transported to China. Now they couldn't go straight south to the Arabian Sea because Iran covers the majority of that area, and America has economoic sanctions on Iran, and just don't do bussiness with Iran in general. The only other option left was to go from Turkmenistan , which borders the Caspian, around Iran by going through Afgahnistan and then into Pakistan, which is on the coast of the Arabian Sea.  The government had little problem getting Pakistan and Turkmenistan agreeing to this pipe line proposal , for what ever reason (need to research it more sorry) Afghanistan and its Taliban government didn't agree to it.

I will use some quotes from this Congressional Hearing in 1998 which can be found at http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/intlrel/hfa48119.000/hfa48119_0.HTM

This hearing involved members of both the  "SUBCOMMITTEE ON  ASIA AND THE PACIFIC" and "COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS" and for whatever reason has people from oil companys, such as " JOHN J. MARESCA, VICE PRESIDENT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, UNOCAL CORPORATION". Most of these quotes , if not all of  them will come from Mr. Maresca.

"I would like to focus today on three issues. First, the need for multiple pipeline routes for Central Asian oil and gas resources. Second, the need for U.S. support for international and regional efforts to achieve balanced and lasting political settlements to the conflicts in the region, including Afghanistan. Third, the need for structured assistance to encourage economic reforms and the development of appropriate investment climates in the region. In this regard, we specifically support repeal or removal of
section 907 of the Freedom Support Act."

"The second option is to build a pipeline south from Central Asia to the Indian Ocean. One obvious route south would cross Iran, but this is foreclosed for American companies because of U.S. sanctions legislation. The only other possible route is across Afghanistan, which has of course its own unique challenges. The country has been involved in bitter warfare for almost two decades, and is still divided by civil war. From the outset, we have made it clear that construction of the pipeline we have proposed across Afghanistan could not begin until a recognized government is in place that has the confidence of governments, lenders, and our company."

"Mr. Chairman, as you know, we have worked very closely with the University of Nebraska at Omaha in developing a training program for Afghanistan which will be open to both men and women, and which will operate in both parts of the country, the north and south."

"As with the proposed Central Asia oil pipeline, CentGas can not begin construction until an internationally recognized Afghanistan Government is in place."

As all of these were said in 1998 , there is a diffinitve desire to get rid of the Taliban controlled government so companies could make money selling oil to Aisian countries prior to the attacks in 2001. Here is another quote from Unocal, the company behind this pipeline proposal. I am not sure when this was said but it would have to be before Dec. 2002 as that is when the Afghans agreed to the pipeline.

"As a result of sharply deteriorating political conditions in the region, Unocal, which serves as the development manager for the Central Asia Gas (CentGas) pipeline consortium, has suspended all activities involving the proposed pipeline project in Afghanistan."

Also in 1998 Dick Cheney, when he was still chief executive of Halliburton said "I cannot think of a time when we have had a region emerge as suddenly to become as strategically significant as the Caspian."

Former FBI deputy director John O'Neill (who resigned in July of 2001, two months before the inital attack, to protest the American policy in Afgahnistan) told Jean-Charles Brisard (a former french secret service agent) that "the main obstacles to investigate Islamic terrorism were U.S. oil corporate interests and the role played by Saudi Arabia."

He also told Mr.Brisard that "At one moment during the negotiations [ in early 2001 ], the U.S. representatives told the Taliban, "either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs" "


In conclusion, there is far too much evidence that suggests Oil played a huge role in motives for both the terrorist attacks and U.S.'s desire to go into Afghanistan. It would be wrong to say that oil doesn't play a factor in this war, as it obviously does.

I don't like wars the world should just make a huge petition to stop war amongst countries and like each no matter what