THE INVASION OF AFGHANISTAN
Though the events of 9/11 were catastrophic, simply directing our unstable emotional mentality at the first target available, is both a sign of weakness and a dangerous thought for the proclivity of revenge. The enemy had been identified as Osama Bin Laden, a known CIA asset during the Russian occupation of Afghanistan, as the mastermind behind the attacks; although, he denied involvement on multiple occasions.
According the United States government, Osama Bin Laden was located in Afghanistan, and protected by the Taliban who refused to hand him over. The American people, due to the immense barrage of patriotism and negative labeling, if one did not support the invasion, did not question this. They wanted revenge. This State argument is somewhat factual, but the endgame was not. The Taliban was in Afghanistan, but they had actually agreed to hand Bin Laden over the U.S. Only if they could provide substantial evidence that he was behind the 9/11 attacks. The U.S didn’t and essentially ignored the claim by invading the country anyways.
The American people believed, and still believe in part, that the invasion of Afghanistan, and war on terror, will protect our freedom from terrorists. People’s individual opinions had been molded to come to this belief by the various agencies within the state, war propaganda and the mainstream media. Most American’s have a great love of country, and as individuals, have a hard time seeing how the American way could ever do anything that is considered “wrong”. And this worldview by the west is seen as a systemic Global Normality, that America is only “trying to spread peace and democracy”. Though, by blowing up innocents and raping the world of life and resources is the furthest from the actuality of the United States policies; and does more harm to our freedoms than any other action. The rest of the world in nearly every case wants the U.S to just leave them alone.
Plans to go to war in Afghanistan were far underway before 9/11 occurred. Individuals inside of the CIA had placed a document on president Bush’s desk one day prior to 9/11 as a plan to begin an invasion of Afghanistan. Though, like many other powerful people, they use a nationalistic state argument in the way of claiming that “everything is in America’s best interests”. This also should establish an idea of who really runs this country – a small handful of individuals – regardless of the fake illusion that we have a government by the people and for the people.
An example of both systemic global alliances of selling arms to both sides, from the Iran-Contra Scandal, to the arming of the Mujahidin by the United States, shows a larger network within the government system; a piece of that network known as the military industrial complex is one of the largest contributors. Companies like Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Halliburton would benefit from their stocks rise to indescribable numbers since 9/11 and the invasion of Afghanistan. However, Individuals like Vice President Dick Cheney, the former CEO of the oil company and defense contractor Halliburton, have significant influence. He was placed in charge of America’s energy policy after running an oil company and helped Halliburton to get the spending-plus contract to rebuild Iraq.
Others benefit from the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan such as the ones gaining from drug production. Opium production in Afghanistan has skyrocketed nearly 60-90% since the United States began operations. We can see the use of states Military Power to maintain control over a region, and gain profits not only from its oil resources, but also the abundant drug operations. The main argument against this is that if the U.S doesn’t grow the opium then the Taliban will. But, this only creates and indirect systemic alliance with the so-called enemy. This is the same situation that took place in Vietnam when dead soldier’s bodies were stuffed with drugs and brought back to the states.
The main profits come from the oil fields. The states Internal Domestic Factors, such as the future energy of the United States, can have a large influence on policy. By saying that the United States was securing its future energy prospects by invading Afghanistan, is strong, but in bits and pieces can be manipulated into public opinion in order to distract from the latter, which is the massive production of Opium. Individuals in the oil companies have pocketed undefinable amounts of money and their companies have formed systemic alliances with other companies to gain the same profits. Other than oil companies is the still larger defense contractors and private security forces like Blackwater. Both individuals and corporations benefit from these contracts. Defense contractors defiantly add to the argumentative state definition of military power; as they create it.
Prior to the events of 9/11, an Afghanistan pipeline was pushed by the US-based Unocal oil company, which engaged in intensive negotiations with the Taliban regime, but these fell through. The contract for the pipeline was signed almost immediately after the invasion. Some argument could be made that this is directed towards individuals, such as members of the Taliban. When the final meeting ended members of Unocal were quoted saying to the Taliban, who controlled the region where the pipeline was to be built, that “either we’ll cover you with a carpet of gold or we’ll bury you under a carpet of bombs.” I believe this to be another alliance of Oil companies, again setting the systemic norms that they can control the direction of the world. By this, many oil companies own the patents on varieties of alternative energies that would be disastrous to their profits. The “big dogs” are essentially in alliance, or at the least moving towards the same directive allied or not. The location to the building of this pipeline is also very important and adds to a state argument for invasion. Getting oil from the Caspian Sea to the Indian Ocean was the plan, but the pipeline couldn’t be built straight through Iran, due to certain sanctions. The only other location was through the Taliban controlled regions of Afghanistan. Almost immediately after the invasion of Afghanistan, to disarm the Taliban, “responsible for 9/11”, the contract to build the pipeline was signed and construction began very soon after. America’s main military bases were also built directly along the pipeline from the North to the South. And some soldiers were even assigned to guard certain areas of oil production with tanks. The final individual argument towards Unocal should examine why the new U.S placed leader of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai, was also a former consultant to Unocal. This is history repeating itself again from the U.S and Britain overthrowing the democratically elected leader or Iran in 1953, Mohammed Mossadegh. He had nationalized Iran’s oil, something that British Petroleum -BP- didn’t like, and began to unite the country. The U.S then installed the Shah; a pro-U.S dictator who in many ways opposed Islam in a country dominated by the religion.
No matter the evidence for each instance, viewing a collection of evidence to support them all is more sufficient in understanding what is truly behind the invasion of Afghanistan and subsequently the invasion of Iraq, a country that had nothing at all to do with 9/11.
Afghanistan was to be the stepping-stone to the 2003 Iraq invasion and subsequent military occupations in the region, including Libya. By viewing the larger plan laid out by the U.S government, you have to see that it was a small group of individuals that we’re behind these actions, which continue today. The Downing Street memo showed that the Bush administration was fixing its policy to overthrow Saddam, in Iraq, in the Summer of 2002. This was put into place by a small handful of individual policy makers. Other simply benefited from this decision. It could be said that those who benefited also influenced the individuals to create the policy in the first place.
This can all be summed up in the State and individual argument, that no matter what the cause behind 9/11 or the invasion of Afghanistan, the support came from the American people. The U.S needed to have an enemy image to take revenge on from 9/11 and this was found in Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban in Afghanistan. The opinions of the people were molded to fit this belief. It is an easy outlet to simply blame someone else. By agreeing with, and calling for, invading Afghanistan many people justified 9/11 with the old “eye for an eye”. As long as we came to gather as one country and fought off the enemy, that we were told threatens our freedom, then that enemy cannot win, and therefore 9/11 was not a victory by the terrorists.
However, revenge and war seem to be America’s forte. It is quite sad that a countries opinion can be molded to the individual apex of each person. That the death of innocence around the world can somehow justify the death of innocent American’s on 9/11. Doesn’t that make us just as “bad” as the “bad” guy? No matter how we choose to view this event, be it Individual, State, or Systemic, the real issue lies in that many of the facts presented are mainly overlooked for ignorantly simplified explanations of opinion, such as “Osama Bin Laden is an evil man and is responsible for everyone’s suffering. If we can kill him we will have peace and prosperity for all.”
We must never forget to ask ourselves when examining an event, that one pivotal question, so easily overlooked with emotions; who gains? It certainly wasn’t the American people. It was a small handful of Individuals; those in turn control the state military power of the United States, who crushes the opposition that was yesterday part of their systemic alliance.
Osama Bin Laden put it best in a BBC interview…
”…there are intelligence agencies in the U.S., which require billions of dollars worth of funds from the Congress and the government every year…They needed an enemy. So, they first started propaganda against Usama and Taliban…What is this? Is it not that there exists a government within the government in the United Sates? That secret government must be asked as to who carried out the attacks. (9/11)”
9 REASONS FOR WAR
1) According to the U.S government, Osama Bin Laden was located in Afghanistan and the Taliban refused to hand him over to the U.S. STATE
2) Many believe that a war on terror, and invasion of Afghanistan, will protect our freedom from terrorism. STATE & SYSTEMIC
3) Plans to go to war in Afghanistan were underway far before 9/11 occurred. STATE & INDIVIDUAL
4) Companies like Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, & Halliburton would benefit from their stocks and profits rise to indescribable numbers since not only the invasion of Afghanistan, but the events of 9/11. SYSTEMIC
5) Opium production in Afghanistan has skyrocketed nearly 60-90% since the United States began operations. STATE & SYSTEMIC
6) The United States was securing its future energy prospects by invading Afghanistan. STATE
7) An Afghanistan pipeline route was pushed by the US-based Unocal oil company, which engaged in intensive negotiations with the Taliban regime, but this fell through. The contract for the pipeline was signed almost immediately after the invasion. SYSTEMIC & INDIVIDUAL
8) Afghanistan was to be the stepping-stone to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and subsequent military occupations in the region, including Libya SYSTEMIC
9) The U.S needed to have an enemy image to take revenge on from 9/11 and this was found in Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban.STATE & INDIVIDUAL