Only one person in both houses of Congress was brave enough to vote against invading Afghanistan

[NNN0LHI]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_Lee

Barbara Lee

Barbara Jean Lee (born July 16, 1946) is the U.S. Representative for California's 9th congressional district, serving since 1998. She is a member of the Democratic Party. She is the first woman to represent that district. Lee was the Chair of the Congressional Black Caucus and was the Co-Chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Lee is notable as the only member of either house of Congress to vote against the authorization of use of force following the September 11, 2001 attacks. This made her a hero among many in the anti-war movement. Lee has been a vocal critic of the war in Iraq and supports legislation creating a Department of Peace.

The vote against AUMF

Lee gained national attention in 2001 as the only member of congress to vote "No" on the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists (AUMF), stating that she voted no not because she opposed military action but because she believed the AUMF, as written, granted overly-broad powers to wage war to the president at a time when the facts regarding the situation were not yet clear. She "warned her colleagues to be 'careful not to embark on an open-ended war with neither an exit strategy nor a focused target.'" Lee explained "It was a blank check to the president to attack anyone involved in the September 11 events—anywhere, in any country, without regard to our nation's long-term foreign policy, economic and national security interests, and without time limit. In granting these overly broad powers, the Congress failed its responsibility to understand the dimensions of its declaration.... The president has the constitutional authority to protect the nation from further attack and he has mobilized the armed forces to do just that. The Congress should have waited for the facts to be presented and then acted with fuller knowledge of the consequences of our action."

This vote made nationwide news reports and brought about a large and extremely polarized response, with the volume of calls gridlocking the switchboard of her Capitol Hill office. Although it appears to have reflected the beliefs of the majority of her constituents, the majority of responses from elsewhere in the nation were angry and hostile, some referring to her as "communist" and "traitor". Many of the responses included death threats against her or her family to the point that the Capitol Police provided round-the-clock plainclothes bodyguards. She was also criticized by politicians and in editorial pages of conservative-leaning newspapers, e.g. John Fund's column in The Wall Street Journal.



--------------------------------------------------------------

I admire her greatly. Barbara Lee speaks for me. I don't think we should forget this kind of stuff. She showed courage very few have. And it turned out she was right.

[Vattel]

1. good for her!

[Stuart G]

2. k and r..nt

[no_hypocrisy]

3. I remember her vote well. My 80 yo uncle was nearly besides himself with excitement.

He said she reminded him of Rep. Jeanette Rankin who was the only member of the House and the Senate to vote AGAINST declaring war against Japan on December 8, 1941. He even sent JR a telegram of congratulations. (BTW, my uncle put his ass on the line for his principles. He spent some years in Danbury for refusing to participate in WWII. He wouldn't compromise as a pacifist.)

[DCKit]

11. Holy crap.

That's my dad, if he had balls.

[demmiblue]

4. K&R n/t

[quinnox]

5. One person, standing alone against everyone

and on occasion, the one person standing their ground is right, and everyone else is wrong. I applaud Barbara Lee's incredible courage and foresight.

[DCKit]

9. Thank you. She's my hero.

[Scuba]

6. Kicked

[EFerrari]

7. She got death threats for it, too. n/t

[DCKit]

8. She's my neighbor, and too cool for words.

I'm jealous of her wards in SoCal. Wish I had that kind of representation, but I do, Elanor Holmes Norton.. who can't vote, so it doesn't make a whole lot of difference. But she's incredible.

I've got the bravest, strongest, smartest women living upstairs and representing me. And I'm not theirs. I wish I was.

If and when I see her in the elevator, I'll give her your props. She is the best of the best, and I know y'all agree with that. C'mpn guys and gals, the ONLY Congressperson to say "NO" to this bullshit war. She's smart as hell.She represents D progression, and I'm willing to tell her that.

My Mom died last spring, and Barbara Lee was the only person in Congress she respected. I don't want to lay that on her, but I do want to let her know that my mom respected her to that degree.

Guess that's why I*'m being such a dick.

I hope you can forgive me.

I'm not going to apologize. Ask Barbara Lee if she needed an apology.

I'm so vindicated.

[bleever]

22. Not SoCal.

East Bay, SF area.

Tell her bleev says "hey".

[Solly Mack]

10. She knew she was right from the get-go.

So did other people.

[ronnie624]

12. True courage.

I remember it well. I wasn't fooled by the filthy Bush administration either, but I'm not sure I would have had the courage to stand my ground before a steamroller.

[DCKit]

13. zope, she's awsome.

She's my neighbor.

You can drag all you want, she's my biotch, my niighbor, and my friend.

You can't ever take that away from me..

[Dragonbreathp9d]

14. While I'm not downplaying her bravery-

And we can all agree that the handling of the war has been atrocious- if I had been in a position of power I would have pushed for the invasion. I believed then, and still to this day, believe that military action was not only appropriate but necessary. There hasn't been an appropriate use of our military since WWII, and Afghanistan is the only on since.
Once again- the handling of the action has been worthy of dispondence, but the initial response that action was necessary was the right decision.
And another once again- not downplaying her bravery for standing up to the entire country to espouse nonviolence- incredibly commendable- I just happen to respectfully but ardently disagree

[barbtries]

18. not me.

and 10 years on, still over there? i don't know how you reconcile that.
i was against it from the get and she was the only one.

[getdown]

19. based on lies

yet you find it "appropriate"

hope you can do something to help the LEGIONS of young coming back (or not) BROKEN, lives destroyed, for wars based on lies.

[Nostradammit]

20. Respectfully ~

Bullshit. Complete and utter bullshit. The invasion of Afghanistan has been a disaster for their people and for ours.

I will spend the rest of my days countering Orwellian propaganda like "The invasion of Afghanistan was appropriate."

Time has already proven that to be untrue. It was only appropriate if you had a lot of money in defense contracting.

Everyone else has suffered.

[EX500rider]

28. "The invasion of Afghanistan has been a disaster for their people"

....right......'cause the Taliban was working out so well for them...everything was just great there before we showed up...(sarcasm)

[Nostradammit]

29. Had we shown up with humanitarian relief on an unprecedented scale

we would have spent far less and gained far more than we did.

But that would not have put any money into the pockets of the warmongers.

Now their people have been fucked over by the Taliban AND the United States.

Unmitigated disaster all around.

[Dragonbreathp9d]

36. Point taken- but with the scale of attack America would have looked weak

Not saying that your solution is no the better- just global view

[Nostradammit]

37. 19 guys with boxcutters? And most of them from Saudi Arabia?

So we bog down our army in an un-winnable land war for a decade?

Completely stupid.

Unless we had other motives.

[DCKit]

60. What possible "other motives" could you be talking about?

il gusher:

[EX500rider]

39. "Had we shown up with humanitarian relief on an unprecedented scale" that too

We did that too...built roads, schools, clinics, wells etc....but with the Taliban and drug gangs blowing stuff up you have to have a military side to it also or they just burn down everything you build. The Taliban likes its all 14th century...no school for girls, no non-religious schools, no cell phones, no TV, no radio etc...

[Nostradammit]

40. Bullshit

Just complete and utter bullshit. You cannot be said to be providing humanitarian aid while you are blowing a country apart.

From the AFP:

In the Sunday, 3 April 2004, issue of The New Yorker, wrote that retired Army Colonel Hy Rothstein, "who served in the Army Special Forces for more than 20 years, ... commissioned by The Pentagon to examine the war in Afghanistan concluded the conflict created conditions that have given 'warlordism, banditry and opium production a new lease on life' ...."

Even the Pentagon has been forced to admit that the whole operation was fucked up. And it was fucked up because it had nefarious aims that had nothing to do with humanitarian relief and everything to do with the extraction of natural resources.

From Oxfam:

1 Aid effectiveness

Since 2001, Afghanistan has received more than $15 billion in assistance, and the US
House of Representatives has approved $6.4 billion more in economic and
development assistance.4 Aid will be crucial to Afghanistan’s development for many
years and, as this paper argues, many areas are under-resourced.
However, too much aid to Afghanistan is provided in ways that are ineffective or
inefficient. For example, Afghanistan’s biggest donor, the US Agency for International
Development (USAID) allocates close to half of its funds to five large US contractors in
the country. As in Iraq, too much aid is absorbed by profits of companies and subcontractors,
on non-Afghan resources and on high expatriate salaries and living costs.
Each full-time expatriate consultant costs in the region of $200,000 a year, and in some
cases up to half a million dollars a year.6 According to the former NATO Special
Civilian Representative the cumulative impact is that some 40% of aid to Afghanistan
flows out of the country.

So we've spent at least $787 Billion on the war and $21.4 Billion of that has gone to humanitarian aid and you seriously believe they are equal???!!!

[EX500rider]

44. I'd say you proved my point for me..

I didn't say they were equal, I said you couldn't have one with out the other....

$21.4 BILLION dollars IS unprecedented levels of aid for a country as poor as Afghanistan...

"blowing a country apart" hyperbole and exaggerated, we are doing no such thing. Drone strikes on Taliban and drug safe houses are not "blowing a country apart". Fact is they have more paved roads and cell towers and new schools then they have ever had.

"everything to do with the extraction of natural resources." So what resources is the US extracting exactly? Or is it that mythical pipeline that never gets built? Or the fact that the Chinese got a mining concession that they paid for?

[Nostradammit]

50. I'll let someone from Afghanistan respond for me.

“Eight years ago, the U.S. and NATO — under the banner of women’s rights, human rights, and democracy — occupied my country and pushed us from the frying pan into the fire. Eight years is enough to know better about the corrupt, mafia system of President Hamid Karzai. My people are crushed between two powerful enemies. From the sky, occupation forces bomb and kill civilians ... and on the ground, the Taliban and warlords continue their crimes. It is better that they leave my country; my people are that fed up. Occupation will never bring liberation, and it is impossible to bring democracy by war.” -Malalai Joya, former member of the Afghan Parliament, November 2009


From the Project for a New American Century (Cheney's cabal):


"while the unresolved conflict in Iraq provides the immediate justification [for U.S. military presence], the need for a substantial American force presence in the [Persian] Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein" and "Over the long term, Iran may well prove as large a threat to U.S. interests in the [Persian] Gulf as Iraq has. And even should U.S.-Iranian relations improve, retaining forward-based forces in the region would still be an essential element in U.S. security strategy given the longstanding American interests in the region."

One of the core missions outlined in the 2000 report Rebuilding America's Defenses is "fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars."


Carry on with your delusions, reality remains.

[EX500rider]

51. "Occupation will never bring liberation, and it is impossible to bring democracy by war."

Germany and Japan would beg to differ.

Not sure why you even included a blurb about Iraq, but I guess if you run out of facts change the subject?

[Nostradammit]

52. Ummm... not sure if you're being obtuse intentionally or if it just comes naturally, but -

"retaining forward-based forces in the region would still be an essential element in U.S. security strategy given the longstanding American interests in the region."

Helpful Clue for you -

They are referring to Afghanistan AND Iraq in that statement. Look at a map someday and you may notice that Iran lies right between the two, and is the ultimate aim of the cabal.

Re: Imposed Democracy - Germany and Japan are the rare and notable exceptions and the situations are so different as to be incomparable.


And do you not see the irony of an administration that came to power by the subversion of democracy claiming to be bringing "democracy" to a country it is carpet-bombing?



http://www.psci.unt.edu/enterline/against-all-odds-v5.pdf

<snip>

Several explanations might account for the negative impact of imposed democracy on
subsequent democracy. First, simply by virtue of their selection as cases for imposition, states
with a history of an imposed democratic regime may be inherently unstable. After all, a state in
which a foreign power has gone to such lengths as to intervene directly within its borders and
establish an entire political structure may, by definition, be inclined toward instability, making
democracy less likely to emerge in the future. Second, the prior experience with a failed imposed
democratic regime may serve to undermine support for future democratic polities. Citizens in
states in which an imposed democracy has already been attempted and failed may conclude,
based upon this experience, that democracy itself is a flawed endeavor for the state. Citizens may
reason that if democracy cannot succeed with the support of a foreign imposing power, it is
unlikely to do so without such support. Finally, the process of imposing democracy upon another
state may serve to taint democracy as viable political institutions, allowing parties opposed to
democracy to paint subsequent efforts at democracy as an instrument for the return of foreign
control. Regardless, our analysis demonstrates clearly that imposed democracy reduces the
likelihood of subsequent democracy and undermines its persistence when it does occur.

[EX500rider]

53. "to a country it is carpet-bombing?"

US hasn't done any carpet bombing since the Vietnam war.

I never said imposing democracy on Afghanistan would work, just pointing out his statement that it "never works" is wrong.

So if the whole plan is just to surround Iran then why are we pulling out of Iraq (already out actually) and pulling out of Afghanistan by 2014?

[Nostradammit]

54. No offense, but you seem to be woefully ill-informed about your country's involvement in Afghanistan

Taliban Carpet-Bombed as Osama Hunt Narrows

As B-52s carpet-bombed Taliban positions in Afghanistan today, officials again warned the war there would be long and difficult, in spite of intelligence sources who said the hunt for Osama bin Laden has narrowed to a few complexes of caves and tunnels.

Opposition forces also fighting the Taliban said the intense U.S. air assault on the front lines north of Kabul, the Afghan capital, appeared to be coordinated by American troops on the ground. The bombers hit targets, witnesses said, including the old road from Kabul to the strategic Bagram air base and Taliban field headquarters, tanks, artillery and rocket launchers.

Near the key northern city of Mazar-e-Sharif, amid heavy rain, the U.S. bombing was described as relentless.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=80437&page=1#.TwJfsFbeKCU






The United States has confirmed that its B-52 bombers are now being used to pound Taleban troop positions confronting forces of the opposition Northern Alliance.

Rear Admiral John Stufflebeem, deputy director of operations for the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters that the B-52s were carpet bombing targets "all over the country, including Taliban forces in the north."


"We do use it, we have used it and will use it when we need to," he said.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1631533.stm



Relentless. Carpet. Bombing.

And now it looks like they fucked up their ill-advised scheme so badly that they are having a hell of a time ginning up support for an invasion of Iran. Seems the American public has grown a little tired of ever-expanding empire.

I'm not counting them out yet, however.

[EX500rider]

55. Just calling it carpet bombing doesn't make it so..

....mass bomber formations dropping masses of unguided bombs in a general area is carpet bombing.

"The bombers hit targets, witnesses said, including the old road from Kabul to the strategic Bagram air base and Taliban field headquarters, tanks, artillery and rocket launchers."

That's the definition of precision bombing, hitting specific small scale military targets.

[Nostradammit]

56. Oh FFS -

Rear Admiral John Stufflebeem, deputy director of operations for the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters that the B-52s were carpet bombing targets "all over the country, including Taliban forces in the north."

"We do use it, we have used it and will use it when we need to," he said.


Perhaps you need to get more sleep.

[EX500rider]

57. Right..

...the military NEVER exaggerates or makes a statement for propaganda purposes....haha

You believe every word they say? Always? wow..

What, 1 bomber flew over head and dropped a bomb or two?

Air Marshall Harris or General Curtis LeMay would die laughing if they weren't already dead.

[Nostradammit]

58. Right...

I believe the member of my family who was there in that hell-hole and saw our rampage first-hand.

But yeah, having grown up in the military I learned that you can't trust anything they say.

Especially when they tell you we have to invade a country so we can bring them "democracy".

Barbara Lee was smart enough to see that, too.

[DCKit]

61. I'm really sorry, but y'all came to the wrong forum to excuse what the U.S. did.

We were educated, against it from the beginning, and we have a damn good idea of how many civilians were slaughtered.

A majority of THIS forum would like to see most of the Bush* administration in chains at the Hague.

Websites that will buy this load are not unavailable on the InterTubes. A websearch on "welfare queens", "Barak Hussein Obama" or "dirty hippies" would point you in the right direction.

But thanks for playing!

[RZM]

64. And how would that aid have been disbursed, exactly?

It would end up in control of the people with the most guns, i.e. the Taliban and the Warlords. They would have used it to solidify their own positions.

You're forgetting this was in the wake of 9/11, when the country was in shock. If Bush had decided to react to the attacks by giving the Taliban massive amounts of aid, many would have judged him completely out of his mind.

[Dragonbreathp9d]

21. Responding to the upper three as I am lazy

Honestly I believe that the US as a global entity had no choice. And yes I believe it was fucked, and yes I have incredible overwhelming empathy for those who suffered and still continue to suffer through it (why the FUCK are they not home?). And yes there are a million different reasons to be against this action now, but I stand by my reasoning, with absolutely not a shadow of a fucking doubt that she was not only courageous but commendable, I personally though in good faith could not have done the same, as much as I wish I could. We were attacked, to not retaliate would have shown weakness beyond comprehension- we get involved in some of the most rediculous bullshit but on this one occasion we were directly attacked by an organization originating from afghanistan, it was appropriate to go in- it is not appropriate to still be there. I share the sentiment to a degree as the OP, but I know if I were in power I would have voted along with everyone else.
War is the most disgusting human creation ever- and I believe it is mostly avoidable, however, this was an instance where as far as future terroristic actions go, it could not remain unheaded. If you disagree with me, I respect the shit out of you as you are better a (wo)man than I, I just tells em as I sees em

[sad sally]

23. There were plans to attack Afghanistan before September 11, 2001

The Bush/Cheney administration began talking to the Afghan Taliban in February 2001 - a month after they took office. When the Taliban emissary came to Washington in March with an expensive Afghan carpet as a present to Bush, it was reported the US told them "you either accept our offer or we'll bury you under a carpet of bombs." The "offer" was made in order to seize control of oil-rich territory in Central Asia.

And even though the Clinton administration, up until Pakistan Prime Minister Sharif was overthrown in a military coup by General Musharraf who halted the proposed covert operation to take out Bin Laden, the Bush administration saw the Taliban as a source of stability in Central Asia that would enable the construction of an oil pipeline across Central Asia. It was only when the Taliban refused to accept US conditions that “this rationale of energy security changed into a military one.”

The US government had planned the war well in advance, but the horror of September 11 gave the administration the leverage it needed to attack even though the World Trade bombers weren't Afghan Talibans. The Afghan people have been made to suffer for a crime they had no part of - for 10+ long years...

[Nostradammit]

24. What sad sally said.

Succint and perfectly accurate.

Oil. Guns. Drugs.
Oil. Guns. Drugs.
Oil. Guns. Drugs.
Oil. Guns. Drugs.
Oil. Guns. Drugs.
Oil. Guns. Drugs.
Oil. Guns. Drugs.
Oil. Guns. Drugs.
Oil. Guns. Drugs.

Repeat ad nauseum.

Odd how the invasion of Afghanistan so perfectly fit in with PNAC's plans for world domination.

Like the whole thing was planned out for years.

[Dragonbreathp9d]

25. I totally agree with your point

Would not change my mind on it. This is one of those few odd political moments where there is not a clear right and wrong even for a particular side. It is what it is- I would have ordered the strike and served in it equally (at first). Period. Sorry but it is one o those few instances where our military (could have) served its purpose.

Once again, not taking away from her amazing courage.

[stevenleser]

27. Same here. Love Barbara Lee, disagree with her on Afghanistan. nt

[stevenleser]

26. We always have plans to attack everyone. There are military plans for several kinds of attacks

against most countries out there. There are groups of high ranking officers whose job it is to rewrite those plans every so often, accounting for that countries troop movements, bases, new weapons, etc., so that if a contingency arises, we have a fairly up to date plan to use.

So when you say "We already had a plan to attack XYZ country" that doesnt mean anything special.

[Nostradammit]

30. Please don't conflate the contigency plans of the armed forces

with the nefarious schemes of the cabal of war profiteers that pushed us into this mess.

They are two completely different things.

But I suspect you know that.

[stevenleser]

31. The poster offered no evidence of schemes.

But I suspect you know that.

[Nostradammit]

33. "The "offer" was made in order to seize control of oil-rich territory in Central Asia."

Thanks for playing.

[stevenleser]

34. And now, you have offered no evidence of schemes either. Thanks for playing

or rather, making a poor imitation of playing.

[sad sally]

42. Go back and read the evidence - of course "history" is easily changed to meet today's lies.

February 9, 2001: Bush has been in office a matter of days, when secret pipeline negotiations with the Taliban have begun. The new administration has already twice threatened the Taliban that the US would hold the Taliban responsible for any al-Qaeda attack. But, fearful of ending those negotiations, the US does not retaliate against either the Taliban or known bin Laden bases in Afghanistan in the manner Clinton did in 1998. Washington Post, 1/20/02

April 2001 (D): A report commission by former US Secretary of State James Baker entitled "Strategic Energy Policy Challenges For The 21st Century" is submitted to Vice President Cheney this month. The report says the "central dilemma" for the US administration is that "the American people continue to demand plentiful and cheap energy without sacrifice or inconvenience." "the United States remains a prisoner of its energy dilemma," "need for military intervention" to secure its oil supply. It argues that Iraq needs to be overthrown so the US can control its oil. [Sunday Herald, 10/5/02] the US should "Investigate whether any changes to US policy would quickly facilitate higher exports of oil from the Caspian Basin region... the exports from some oil discoveries in the Caspian Basin could be hastened if a secure, economical export route could be identified swiftly." Strategic Energy Policy Challenges For The 21st Century, 4/01

"Anticipated growth in the use of natural gas--in considerable part engendered as a fuel for electric power stations--raises a new series of geopolitical issues, leading to new political alignment" --- "The potential for armed conflict in energy-producing regions will remain high. Early in the twenty-first century, as a result, a weakening of U.S.alliance relationships in Europe, the PersianGulf, or Asia could have major impacts on global energy security. U.S.concerns over the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and the desire to promote democratization and market liberalization around theWorld will also have a significant effect on key energy exporters. The future viability of the energy-producing states in the Caspian and Central Asia will be shaped by the competing objectives or Interests of Russia, the United States, and adjacent regional powers." quotes from Strategic Energy Policy Challenges For The 21st Century

May 15, 2001 Regarding the placement of the Unocal Pipeline, a U.S. Official delivered this ultimatum to the Taliban (via the Pakistani delegation acting as their interlocutors): "Either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs." (Ref: Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasquie in "Forbidden Truth&quot (Book's Preface online-pdf format)

[stevenleser]

43. That is not evidence that is your say so. Where are the links? nt

[sad sally]

45. Here - and note the links within (in my post; WA Post 1/20/02, Strategic Energy Policy Challenges

For The 21st Century, 4/01; (Ref: Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasquie in "Forbidden Truth&quot (Book's Preface online-pdf format). Not my "say so."

http://www.heartson.com/Politics/index.html?du

[stevenleser]

46. You realize that the 1996 map in the links you provide shows that any other number of pipelines

that skirt (i.e., dont go into or through) Afghanistan could be used for the oil, right? That kind of blows any of this conspiracy stuff out of the water.

See http://www.heartson.com/Politics/background.html from your links and the below.

[sad sally]

47. Plans to use the Afgan route continued past 1996.

February 12, 1998: Unocal Vice President John J. Maresca - (later to become a Special Ambassador to Afghanistan) - testifies before the House of representatives that until a single, unified, friendly government is in place in Afghanistan the trans-Afghani pipeline will not be built. He suggests that with a pipeline through Afghanistan, the Caspian basin could produce 20 percent of all the non-OPEC oil in the world by 2010. [House International Relations Committee testimony, 2/12/98] FTW John J. Maresca clearly stating that the Taliban government should be removed and replaced by a government acceptable to his company. He argued that creation of a 42 inch pipeline across Afghanistan would yield a Western profit increase of 500% by 2015. http://www.house.gov/international_relations/105th/ap/wsap212982.htm http://cooperativeresearch.org/completetimeline/1990s/marescatestimony021298.html

Early 1998: Bill Richardson, the US Ambassador to the UN, meets Taliban officials in Kabul (all such meetings are technically illegal, because the US still officially recognizes the government the Taliban ousted as the legitimate rulers of Afghanistan). US officials at the time call the pipeline project a "fabulous opportunity" and are especially motivated by the "prospect of circumventing Iran, which offered another route for the pipeline." [Boston Globe, 9/20/01]

March 1998 Unocal announced a delay in finalizing the pipeline project due to Afghanistan's continuing civil war [www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/afghan.html]

http://www.heartson.com/Politics/background.html?du

####
And according to this 2008 agreement, sounds like it will cross Afghanistan.
####

The new deal on the pipeline was signed on 27 December 2002 by the leaders of Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan.[7] In 2005, the Asian Development Bank submitted the final version of a feasibility study designed by British company Penspen. ‘Since the US-led offensive that ousted the Taliban from power,’ reported Forbes in 2005, "the project has been revived and drawn strong US support" as it would allow the Central Asian republics to export energy to Western markets "without relying on Russian routes". Then-US Ambassador to Turkmenistan Ann Jacobsen noted that: "We are seriously looking at the project, and it is quite possible that American companies will join it."[8] Due to increasing instability, the project has essentially stalled; construction of the Turkmen part was supposed to start in 2006, but the overall feasibility is questionable since the southern part of the Afghan section runs through territory which continues to be under de facto Taliban control.[8]

On 24 April 2008, Pakistan, India and Afghanistan signed a framework agreement to buy natural gas from Turkmenistan.[9] The intergovernmental agreement on the pipeline was signed on 11 December 2010 in Ashgabat.[9] [edit]

Route
The 1,680 kilometres (1,040 mi) pipeline will run from the Dauletabad gas field to Afghanistan. From there TAPI will be constructed alongside the highway running from Herat to Kandahar, and then via Quetta and Multan in Pakistan. The final destination of the pipeline will be the Indian town of Fazilka, near the border between Pakistan and India.[10]

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

[stevenleser]

48. There may have been plans, but there were ample pipelines that didnt use Afghanistan that would also

have served the oil source in question. There is certainly no reason for anyone to have initiated a false flag and several wars over it.

[Dragonbreathp9d]

35. The war profetiers didn't have to lift a finger on this one

It was almost a global outpouring of support.
I will agree they sat back and laughed, but that doesn't negate that we were attacked

[stevenleser]

41. Exactly. nt

[firehorse]

15. Clone her

[Terra Alta]

16. Barbara Lee is awesome.

I was a conservative at the time, but even then I admired her bravery for standing up for what she thought was right. My views have shifted far to the left since then, and I admire her even more now. I hope she continues to fight the good fight.

[barbtries]

17. her words on 9-14-01

you can hear the tears in her voice

[DirkGently]

32. My kind of Democrat. Good on her!

[Surya Gayatri]

38. That's one gutsy lady...

Last edited Mon Jan 2, 2012, 10:02 AM - Edit history (1)

Can you imagine the courage it took for her to resist the wave of pro-war propaganda that engulfed the congress and general public?

If only she had been listened to... Instead of the US-led invasion, a special ops mission could have taken out OBL 10 years ago. The US and Middle East would be much healthier and wealthier places today.

[TBF]

49. Happy to rec this post - thank you Barbara Lee. nt

[malaise]

59. I remember

Barbara Lee rocks

[bigwillq]

62. K and R (nt)

[sabrina 1]

63. Look how right she was. We are now a country that doesn't bat an eye at

the POTUS ordering the killing, without charge, of US citizens. Can it get much worse than that?

If only there were more of her. Back then though, most democrats agreed with her. If she were to say all of that now, she would be under the bus.