Afghan man faces the death penalty after being charged with converting from Islam to Christianity

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Alright, I must have missed the news flash. Someone please remind me again what exactly our huge accomplishment in Afghanistan was?

The Taliban was starting to make it harder for Heroin to get to Europe and prices threatened to rise beyond the average British Drug user's reasonable budget. This could not stand.

Thanks, I feel much better now.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Alright, I must have missed the news flash. Someone please remind me again what exactly our huge accomplishment in Afghanistan was?

The Taliban was starting to make it harder for Heroin to get to Europe and prices threatened to rise beyond the average British Drug user's reasonable budget. This could not stand.

Thanks, I feel much better now.

ET .. to answer your question:

"He may be a sonofabitch, but he's our sonofabitch"

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

The Taliban was initially opposed to the opium trade, but quickly reversed its decision, realizing there were few other opportunities for generating cash in Afghanistan's ruined economy, which had been wrecked by 20 years of war (now going on 30.)

Actually, what had a lot more to do with the decision to attack the recalcitrant regime in Afghanistan was the U.S. and Britain's desire to build a pipeline to bring oil from Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan through Afghanistan and Pakistan and out to tankers at sea, without having to travel through Russia, China or Iran. The Taliban wouldn't play ball with the grand plan. That made them Public Enemy Number #1.

Look at a map. Consider the locations of the oil reserves that U.S. and British oil companies want, and at cheap prices. Then consider the neighborhood, and which countires would be willing to cooperate, and which ones wouldn't. The strategic reasons for the wars in Afghanistan -- and Iraq -- become quite clear in terms of geography.

[keltic 1]

NOONE should have to hide what they believe

it IS his decision... his decision to believe what he wishes to believe... and if he wishes to be a christian, why should he have to hide it? he shouldnt hide it... if he believes in Christ, he shouldnt be afraid to show it... and he doesnt seem to be... he seems to be steadfast in his belief... maybe he is at peace with what will happen... maybe he wishes to be a martyr to bring the worlds attention to how things stand in afghanistan...

what we have to remember is, would we want someone to KILL us for believing what we believe? change around the words... would you be more upset if it were a jew being killed for not being christian? or buddhist being killed because hes not a shintoist?

religious battles have been fought for eons... its still happening in places... most places have become more civil about their differences... some places not...

and i think that ppl get terribly upset over 'stereotyping' of cultures and religions... and it does happen... EVERYWHERE... americans are stereotyped as lazy, egocentric and wasteful... southerners are stereotyped as dumb, incestuous and bigoted... christians are.... muslims are... jews are... etc etc etc... but, i would like to think that the majority of ppl can see past that... that SOME ppl fit the stereotypes... but not ALL... i know that from what I see, that ALL muslims are NOT fundamentalists... not anymore than ALL christians are fundamentalists... so, if ppl read an article about someone being killed for having a different religious belief, then they can express their upset/outrage/apathy/joy without being branded as stereotyping a group of ppl... its just what it is... opinions about the situation on the table

[anya-D 8]

Might as well say the majority of bad drivers are predominantly asian women, amounts to much the same thing at the end of the day.

However, with most stereotypes there is a grain of truth and muslims haven't been doing a lot of positive things to help their cause lately. When all hell breaks loose over a cartoon what else are people to think.

You probably won't see any Asian women Indy 500 or NASCAR drivers either. LOL

NOO i'm a good driver

Edited March 21, 2006 by anya-D

[Saddle Bronc 124]

...

Actually, what had a lot more to do with the decision to attack the recalcitrant regime in Afghanistan was the U.S. and Britain's desire to build a pipeline to bring oil from Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan through Afghanistan and Pakistan and out to tankers at sea, without having to travel through Russia, China or Iran. The Taliban wouldn't play ball with the grand plan. That made them Public Enemy Number #1.

...

Such a pipeline would be expensive to build due to Afghanistan's terrain.

Shortest route (through Hindukush, follow Indus valley to Karachi) hits an obvious physical blockage of high mountains with few usable (for pipelines or motorable highways) passes. Building the pipeline to Gwadar extends the distance, plus high risk (have you seen the recent BBC news articles on Balochistan?).

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

...

Actually, what had a lot more to do with the decision to attack the recalcitrant regime in Afghanistan was the U.S. and Britain's desire to build a pipeline to bring oil from Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan through Afghanistan and Pakistan and out to tankers at sea, without having to travel through Russia, China or Iran. The Taliban wouldn't play ball with the grand plan. That made them Public Enemy Number #1.

...

Such a pipeline would be expensive to build due to Afghanistan's terrain.

Shortest route (through Hindukush, follow Indus valley to Karachi) hits an obvious physical blockage of high mountains with few usable (for pipelines or motorable highways) passes. Building the pipeline to Gwadar extends the distance, plus high risk (have you seen the recent BBC news articles on Balochistan?).

I think recent estimates of the cost of building such a pipeline are around $3.5 billion. That’s chump change to the oil crowd.

Actually, California-based Unocal had already cut a deal with the Taliban to build exactly such a pipeline for natural gas, back in January 1998.

The agreement was for an 890-mile pipeline project to transport natural gas from Turkmenistan's Dauletabad natural gas field to Pakistan. At the time, the most likely route would have run from Dauletabad south to the Afghan border, then through Herat and Qandahar in Afghanistan onward to Quetta, Pakistan. The line would then have linked with Pakistan's natural gas grid at Sui.

Unocal backed out in December 1998, citing the increasing civil unrest in Afghanistan as the Taliban fought with rival groups to consolidate its power.

Then came 9/11. And as the Pentagon was laying out targets in Afghanistan, the State Department was mapping pipelines.

On October 10, 2001 (only the third day of the bombing campaign) the U.S. ambassador to Pakistan, Wendy Chamberlain, met with Pakistan’s oil minister to discuss reviving the old Unocal deal.

Then on December 31, 2001, Bush appointed Afghan-American Zalmay Khalilzad as his special envoy to Hamid Karzai’s “interim” government (which was then just 9 days old.) Did you know that Khalilzad is a former Unocal consultant ? What a coincidence. As a member of the National Security Council on Persian Gulf- and Southeast Asian-related affairs, he had reported to former ChevronTexaco general counsel Condoleezza Rice.

And who would have guessed it, but gool ole Karzai himself is a former Unocal consultant.

On May 30, 2002, according to the BBC, Pakistani President Musharraf, “interim” Afghan leader Hamid Karzai and Turkmen President Niyazov agreed on the construction of a $2 billion pipeline to bring gas from Turkmenistan across Afghanistan to Pakistan. Officials in Islamabad said the 950-mile pipeline would take natural gas from the huge Daulatabad-Donmez fields in Turkmenistan to the southwestern Pakistani port of Gawadar. What a surprise.

Barring World War 3 (which George Bush and his advisors seem intent on provoking) the pipeline WILL likely be built eventually. And it's not just about diversifying America's sources of supply by "weaning itself off Middle Eastern oil." The U.S. badly wants to break Russia’s monopoly on the transport of oil and gas from the region, and keep China's hands out of the cookie jar, for long-term strategic reasons.

Part of the international “Great Game” is to not only secure resources for oneself, but also to deny them to others.

[Saddle Bronc 124]

...

Actually, what had a lot more to do with the decision to attack the recalcitrant regime in Afghanistan was the U.S. and Britain's desire to build a pipeline to bring oil from Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan through Afghanistan and Pakistan and out to tankers at sea, without having to travel through Russia, China or Iran. The Taliban wouldn't play ball with the grand plan. That made them Public Enemy Number #1.

...

Such a pipeline would be expensive to build due to Afghanistan's terrain.

Shortest route (through Hindukush, follow Indus valley to Karachi) hits an obvious physical blockage of high mountains with few usable (for pipelines or motorable highways) passes. Building the pipeline to Gwadar extends the distance, plus high risk (have you seen the recent BBC news articles on Balochistan?).

I think recent estimates of the cost of building such a pipeline are around $3.5 billion. That’s chump change to the oil crowd.

Actually, California-based Unocal had already cut a deal with the Taliban to build exactly such a pipeline for natural gas, back in January 1998.

The agreement was for an 890-mile pipeline project to transport natural gas from Turkmenistan's Dauletabad natural gas field to Pakistan. At the time, the most likely route would have run from Dauletabad south to the Afghan border, then through Herat and Qandahar in Afghanistan onward to Quetta, Pakistan. The line would then have linked with Pakistan's natural gas grid at Sui.

Unocal backed out in December 1998, citing the increasing civil unrest in Afghanistan as the Taliban fought with rival groups to consolidate its power.

Then came 9/11. And as the Pentagon was laying out targets in Afghanistan, the State Department was mapping pipelines.

On October 10, 2001 (only the third day of the bombing campaign) the U.S. ambassador to Pakistan, Wendy Chamberlain, met with Pakistan’s oil minister to discuss reviving the old Unocal deal.

Then on December 31, 2001, Bush appointed Afghan-American Zalmay Khalilzad as his special envoy to Hamid Karzai’s “interim” government (which was then just 9 days old.) Did you know that Khalilzad is a former Unocal consultant ? What a coincidence. As a member of the National Security Council on Persian Gulf- and Southeast Asian-related affairs, he had reported to former ChevronTexaco general counsel Condoleezza Rice.

And who would have guessed it, but gool ole Karzai himself is a former Unocal consultant.

On May 30, 2002, according to the BBC, Pakistani President Musharraf, “interim” Afghan leader Hamid Karzai and Turkmen President Niyazov agreed on the construction of a $2 billion pipeline to bring gas from Turkmenistan across Afghanistan to Pakistan. Officials in Islamabad said the 950-mile pipeline would take natural gas from the huge Daulatabad-Donmez fields in Turkmenistan to the southwestern Pakistani port of Gawadar. What a surprise.

Barring World War 3 (which George Bush and his advisors seem intent on provoking) the pipeline WILL likely be built eventually. And it's not just about diversifying America's sources of supply by "weaning itself off Middle Eastern oil." The U.S. badly wants to break Russia’s monopoly on the transport of oil and gas from the region, and keep China's hands out of the cookie jar, for long-term strategic reasons.

Part of the international “Great Game” is to not only secure resources for oneself, but also to deny them to others.

So that's why Bush and co. hit the sky upon hearing of an Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline deal? Of course, the recent finds of oil/gas in Afghanistan (1.6 billion barrels and 15.7 TCF) now give (Bush & Co., not Iran) them some fillip.

Edited March 21, 2006 by sriniv

[Nizzy 1]

Karzai sucks...yeah I said it...

[almaty 19]

Karzai sucks...yeah I said it...

well stated..