Like everyone on the outside looking in, I am surprised that Afghanistan has so many natural resources. Up until this time I thought we had attacked the country due to its strategic location and a desire to quash one pipeline and build another.
The question is, why are they telling us this? This is really weird.
In American journalism there is a phenomenon seen now and then called “Now it can be told.” After the fact, after the importance of immediacy has passed, when knowledge of government activity no longer makes a difference, we are sometimes told the truth.
Here is a document written in 1965 by Assistant Secretary of Defense John McNaughton – an internal document never meant to be read in public. He’s answering the question asked by many in government: “Why we are in Vietnam?”
70% – To avoid a humiliating U.S. defeat. …20% – To keep SVN (and the adjacent) territory from Chinese hands….10% – to permit the people of SVN to enjoy a better, freer way of life.
ALSO – To emerge from the crisis without unacceptable taint from methods used. NOT – to “help a friend.”
This document is part of the Pentagon Papers, or the real history of Vietnam. It was an internal history of our involvement in Vietnam commissioned by Robert McNamera and meant only for internal use. Daniel Ellsberg, then working for RAND, read the papers and found them so important that he risked his life and freedom to get this truth to us. He almost went to prison over it, and was only saved by an untimely burglary by Nixon. What the Pentagon Papers told us is that never once – never once had the American people ever been told anything true about Vietnam. Beyond just lying was the unavoidable conclusion: Lying was policy. It was natural and accepted. No one questioned it. Except this Ellsberg guy, who they wanted to send to prison.
Ellsberg said recently that he wanted more people like him in the Pentagon to release the truth to the American public. He wondered where they are, why the truth never gets out.
The release of information on the natural resources of Afghanistan might just be an appeal to our imperialist instincts. But it doesn’t fit.
So I am wondering if there is an Ellsberg in the Pentagon. Did someone get hold of some internal documents and release them? Is the press being told now about the true nature of the Afghan conflict because the information is going to come out no matter what?
That’s my guess.
Footnote: The extent and numerous locations for these minerals means that have not recently been “discovered’. Exploration has been ongoing, probably for decades. Was this the reason for the U.S./mujahedeen (aka “Al Qaeda”) expulsion of the Soviets in the 1980’s?
Footnote 2: Get ready for paternalism and a new, deep and abiding concern for the people of Afghanistan. Amity Schlaes of Bloomberg has captured the right tone in this op-ed – She says “now those tribes really have something to fight about.” Are you catching the arrogance? They are irrational, fighting over nothing. “We’re rational, they’re not” is the gilded gold coating on the attitude behind “imperial hubris”, one reason among many (another being the bombing and killing) concerning this conundrum that so many great minds have wrestled with: Why do they hate us?
Footnote 3: The idea that these resources will actually benefit the people of that country is odd. It’s never happened before with a resource colony. It would be a first.
Piece of Mindful 
If it’s real, the timely release of this information helps justify an unanswered question a majority of Americans are asking: why are we there? Of course we don’t want the Chinese and Russians to get “strategic resources” we also need to manufacture all the stuff we haul to the local landfill. You know, kind of like Iraq, where oil reserves ultimately went to China. I think the central bankers are way ahead of the central government planners. We’re doing our part to make it safe for China and the multi-nationals operating there to prosper from our military occupation. That’s what flag day is all about, right?
LikeLike
You may be right. But I find it odd. Even when the truth would help their case, I have never seen an instance in which we were told the truth about any of our military attacks. It is just not done.
LikeLike
With no beginning or end, perpetual war requires periodic infusions of rationale to preempt discontent and disillusion.
LikeLike
The sheiks of Saudi Arabia would disagree with footnote #3.
LikeLike
Actual non-royalty residents of that country would not.
Swede – each resource colony has a privileged class, the “compromised class” that exists due to their cooperation with the colonial power. These are the 10% of the population in Venezuela, for example, that you think so highly of, but Hugo not.
LikeLike
BS, google it. Before the thirties the majority were still herding goats.
“Oil was discovered in Saudi Arabia by U.S. geologists in the 1930s, although large scale production did not begin until after World War II. Oil wealth has made possible rapid economic development, which began in earnest in the 1960s and accelerated spectacularly in the 1970s, transforming the kingdom.
Saudi oil reserves are the largest in the world, and Saudi Arabia is the world’s leading oil producer and exporter. Oil accounts for more than 90% of the country’s exports and nearly 75% of government revenues. Proven reserves are estimated to be 263 billion barrels, about one-quarter of world oil reserves.”
Afghanistan could be so lucky.
LikeLike
Very good, Swede. I mean this sincerely, and not to put you down, as you are a good man. You took the opportunity presented by this post to do a little Googling and get one person’s attitude about Western involvement in oil-rich countries. Now, please, go read a whole bunch more. If you really want an eye-opener, try Yergin’s “The Prize”. He is a conservative, and a credible historian too. The history of oil has a parallel line with the history of modern war.
LikeLike
One’s man opinion ay?
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/3584.htm
I’m sure that goat herder who ended up a butler in a lavish sheik’s mansion would have Yergin’s first printing on his bookshelf.
Mark you’re also a good man but quite frankly your choice in authors, tho numerous, has toasted all practical thought.
Ask any commoner in SA, ask them to live the life before or after oil, and while you’re at it throw in a couple oil enhanced wars. Any doubt in their choice?
Back to Afganny. Would’nt poppy cultivation (natural resource) be better exchanged for mineral resource jobs?
LikeLike
You are hard to deal with. I’ll mention three things, and ask that you respond to each.
1. You are constantly harping “Hugo this” and “Hugo that.” Hugo is a boy scout. The Saudi government is rigid and authoritarian. There is no democratic freedom to speak of. Beheadings are common, women are shit. I have offered up that you are focused on Hugo because that is what you are told to focus on. Focus on Saudi Arabia if you are so goddammed worried about human rights. Venezuela can teach us stuff on the subject.
2. The presence of oil wealth in various countries has affected them all differently, but Saudi Arabia is rather typical – it goes mostly to reinforce the power of the ruling elite. The US does not care about democracy, and so says nothing, but has agreed since the days of Roosevelt that SA is our special friend that we will defend no matter what. It is a brutal theocracy, and we protect the ruling elite.
3. Iraq is a different case. They nationalized their oil in the 1970’s, and built a strong society with wonderful public health and education systems. Women were freed, uncovered their heads, went to school. Obesity was a public health problem. But the key is that they “nationalized” their oil – directed profits towards their own needs, rather than to American oil companies. The US could not do anything about it, since it sat in the shadow of the Soviets. But when the Soviets receded, we attacked, and have since decimated the place, killing millions, destroying everything.
Now, if you say one goddam thing about Saddam Hussein, as if the US gives a shit about brutal dictators, I’m coming to your house. Watch for a black limo.
Enuf.
LikeLike
Never mentioned Hugo here, but I see it’s a sore subject. By the way did food shortages happen before Hugo’s lifetime appointment or after? Before nationalization of of private companies?
There’s your negative benefits/starvation, not oil and mining companies.
Oh, and your black limo would never make up two miles of rough ranch road.
LikeLike
Nice dodge, dude. Mr.Jello, meet Mr.Wall.
Here’s the problem with you Swede, as I see it: You’re shallow.
Read sometime the history of Chile before Pinochet took over. The oligarchy, assisted by the US, were trying to strangle the country, including creation of food shortages.
I can’t tell you that’s going on in Venezuela right now. Only that it is history. But if you don’t know the past, your opinions about the present are not worth much.
LikeLike
Maybe this will bring you up to speed.
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Americas/2010/0616/Hugo-Chavez-sees-support-fade-even-in-Venezuela-strongholds?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+feeds%2Fworld+%28Christian+Science+Monitor+|+World%29
Oh, and you’re a knot-head.
LikeLike
Wow, nailed by another link that happens to support your views. I wish there was something, anything out there to validate me!
ANd you’re wrong, as my Dad would tell you. I’m a”knucklehead”.
LikeLike
The release might have been more directed toward members of Congress, who are pondering the next Afghan funding bill. After the health care bait-and-switcheroo I think average taxpayers have little faith that their opinions and voices matter in Washington, D.C.
LikeLike