# The Top Five Lies About this War **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 16, 2001, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-top-five-lies-about-this-war/87790 "2001-10-16T19:35:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![stolichnaya](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bcef8e/32.png) [@stolichnaya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stolichnaya)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2001, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-top-five-lies-about-this-war/87790/21 "2001-10-16T21:26:09Z")
> [@](#): > > No mention is made of ANY alternatives to the course of action. What would the author do to insure, or even significantly reduce the odds, that thousands more Americans are not killed by future terrorist attacks? Alternatives aren’t the point here **beags**. The point is to alleviate a vague guilt felt by members of a priveledged group at the expense of people like their parents. Or it is to learn a bit about questioning authority. Or to get babes. Anyways, it’s harmless at worst, and susceptible to criticism as you’ve so eloquently pointed out. On the other hand, the great thing about America is that we tolerate opposing viewpoints without regard to their intent or substance. What a cool thing to learn in college, even at Pitt ;). **george** > [@](#): > > Who do you think produces great debates, moderates in the middle of the road? Excellent point. There is nothing I like better than an emotionally driven person using logic admirably from a fringe position. Two out of three ain’t bad. ---
**Author:** ![Neurotik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/91b2a8/32.png) [@Neurotik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neurotik)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2001, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-top-five-lies-about-this-war/87790/22 "2001-10-16T21:28:10Z")
**curious george** , it was very nice of you to ignore all the substantive rebuttals to your position(s) from **Vinnie** and **beagledave** in your last little response. The only problem I have is **Vinnie’s** little rant towards the end. Specifically: > [@](#): > > There’s only one thing animals like Osama bin-laden understand: terror and force. Scare the shit out of these bastards with some nukers and some napalm, and they will knock it off real quick. Two problems with this. First is that nukes and napalm can’t get everyone. Not all the terrorists are in Afghanistan. And the chances of us killing a large amount of terrorists with those tactics is very little. They are extremely mobile and hard to find. You would likely just kill a lot of innocent people, making us no better than the terrorists. Infiltration of cells is a much better idea. Second problem is that **george** is right (sort of). Terrorism is a tactic. There are lots of people throughout the world using it. What makes it so attractive is its ability to inflict massive damage on an enemy for relatively little cost. Perfect way for individuals to wage a private little war against a super power. So long as we are pretty much invulnerable to military attack by conventional means, expect lots more unconventional attacks (cyberwarfare, terrorism, economic warfare, etc.). It is like organized crime. Very difficult to pin down because of its penchant for mobility and its attractiveness in terms of asymmetrical attacks. And remember that nukes won’t really scare them because they don’t seem too afraid to die. So I think the best solution is the stick and carrot. Use the stick on the terrorists through careful infiltration, assasination, etc. Use the carrot with the poor of the world by helping them build infrastructure for schools, highways, etc. Economic wealth helps bring stability. Of course, that won’t get rid of the radical types, but by improving the lot of some of the poorer in the world and giving them a better life to live for it’ll make it harder for the radical types to recruit. IMHO, anyways. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2001, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-top-five-lies-about-this-war/87790/23 "2001-10-16T21:35:50Z")
Look, this is classic tactics by Mr. George. Cut and paste an anti-American leftist rant, then sit back and watch as it gets cut to pieces, then complain about how we’re all war criminals and fascists. If you want to debate, how about you put forward YOUR opinions, instead of violating the copyright of some other leftists? You don’t debate, you cut and paste and run. ---
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2001, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-top-five-lies-about-this-war/87790/24 "2001-10-16T22:47:47Z")
Real leftist don’t believe in copyright =). ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2001, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-top-five-lies-about-this-war/87790/25 "2001-10-16T22:49:44Z")
Without dissent, we are no longer Americans. As one who has long been aligned with the conservative wing of the extreme left, I have many times lamented with (some famous person)“I can deal with my enemies, Heaven protect me from my allies!” However, there are kernels of truth in this that cannot, or at least should not, be answered with slurs on another’s partriotism. The right does not own patriotism, Lord knows they think they do. If unity is to be bought at the price of unquestioning obedience, it isn’t worth it. It is clearly not our intent to make war on the Afghan people. That subtlety may be lost on them. I am gratified and relieved that the air war has, thus far, been conducted with such professionalism and care that civilian casualties have been so low. But as any Viet Nam vet can tell you, when you get “in country”, the distinctions get blurry. Heaven help the Afghans if an actual ground-war invasion is deemed necessary. I don’t believe “oil” is our primary motivation. I fear that our primary motivation is vengeance. I can’t see how this is any improvement, but it probably springs from the Marxist fallacy to view everything as economic determinism. The lines about "war on terrorism"s futility are at least partially right. Our allies no doubt take this with a grain of salt, they know that we mean **our** terrorism, not thiers. Spain may back our play, but not under any illusion we will send 1st Cav. to rout the Basque terrorists of the ETA. The only people who believe this, most likely, is us. But enough. I tire. The road is long, bleak, and lined by imploring beggars. And we have hardly even started. ---
**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2001, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-top-five-lies-about-this-war/87790/26 "2001-10-16T23:01:29Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by curious george \* > \*\*They use several facts to support their positions, especially in #3, #4, & #5… Anyway, this is politics. If you don’t think their facts are accurate, then debate that. > Otherwise, debate their positions and conclusions. > \*\* What facts are they putting forward to support #4? Let’s examine #4: > [@](#): > > Lie #4: “Oil? Who said anything about oil?” You did, by re-posting their work here. > [@](#): > > Reality: The Caspian Sea region has potentially the world’s largest oil reserves, likely making Central Asia the next Middle East. This is a fact. It does not support in any way the supposition that this is a war over oil. A fortunate choice of geography on the part of the Afghani’s. > [@](#): > > The problem is piping it out. Afghanistan occupies a strategic position between the Caspian and the markets of the Indian subcontinent and east Asia. Yes, they had another fortunate choice of geography. > [@](#): > > It’s prime territory for building pipelines, which is why the oil company Unocal – as well as the US government – welcomed the Taliban’s rise to power in 1996 as a promising source of “stability.” There is no cite for Unocal “welcoming” the Taliban’s rise to power. And why shouldn’t any business welcome stability in a country? Which business, outside of the arms trade, welcomes instability and chaos? 😕 > [@](#): > > That turned out to be a pipe dream (so to speak), but people like our Commander-in-Chief and the oil men around him have never given up on the tremendous profit possibilities that Central Asia offers. Speculation - no facts here. They do not know the minds or motives of these mysterious, unnamed “oil men”. > [@](#): > > And if you don’t think such considerations are crossing their minds at this time of crisis, may we suggest a refresher course in The Facts of Life? More speculation - supposes to know what the “hidden motives” of others are, while **offering no facts to support that**. You posted it here, **you** be prepared to defend it. Or withdraw it. ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2001, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-top-five-lies-about-this-war/87790/27 "2001-10-16T23:27:37Z")
My utmost sympathy goes to the parents of Curious George, who are paying the University of Pittsburgh $25,000 a year to teach CG that his OP makes sense. ☹ ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2001, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-top-five-lies-about-this-war/87790/28 "2001-10-16T23:54:13Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Wildest Bill \* > \*\*If those people are starving so bad in Afganistan, why don’t they overthrow the crappy existing govt instead of letting them harbor an idiot like Bin Laden? \*\* How are they supposed to do that while they’re starving? Have you ever gone a day without food? You get all weak and dizzy-imagine that magnified by a few days? Hunger pains? ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2001, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-top-five-lies-about-this-war/87790/29 "2001-10-17T00:20:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by curious george \* > **Lie #2: “America is coming together.” > Reality: Tens of thousands of people have been laid off in the airline industry alone. The government quickly responded to the airline industry crisis with a multi- billion-dollar bailout package for the companies in order to keep afloat the profits of shareholders and the salaries of CEOs, but when it came to aiding the thousands of workers laid off, Congressman Dick Armey said that that would be contrary to “the American spirit.” Maybe it is. Maybe it’s the “American spirit” to make common working people pay for a crisis.** Yep, all those ex-airline employees have been thrown out into the street with no income or government aid at all. And the federal airline bailout has nothing at all to do with preserving a vital industry affecting many thousands of additional workers. Nah. Let’s talk about the CEOs, the “common working people” (about whom we have read diligently in our Economics and Poly Sci classes and deeply sympathize with, short of actually helping them, and who would knock us on our butts if we called them “common working people” to their faces) and otherwise strut our anti-capitalistic rhetoric in the face of the obvious.\*\* > [@](#): > > And the biggest lie of them all . . . > > Lie #1: “It’s possible to win a ‘war against terrorism.’” > …the idea that you can wage a “war” against it is as dishonest as the idea behind the “War on Drugs.” The use of food as a political weapon, indiscriminate aerial bombardment, and the arming of gangsterish groups of religious fanatics all count as “terrorism” by any reasonable definition of the word, and the United States has long employed all of them…\*\* Not sure how the War on Drugs got dragged in here, except as a protest against the high price of building a decent stash at the University of Pittsburgh. Our getting serious about blunting the impact of terrorism will save thousands and perhaps millions of lives. That’s a laudable and realistic goal, except to people who feel guilty or outraged about the fact that the lives saved will include those of many Americans. Perhaps the Pittsters and their fans, who “know” so much about evil U.S. interventions around the world, can explain the sinister corporate motivations behind our recent costly involvements in Africa and Eastern Europe, which as we all know came about only so we could lure the locals into drinking Coke and eating McBurgers. Ignorance and guilt make a lousy framework for explaining current events. ---
**Author:** ![Shirley\_Ujest](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/45deac/32.png) [@Shirley\_Ujest](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shirley_Ujest)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2001, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-top-five-lies-about-this-war/87790/30 "2001-10-17T00:38:09Z")
Hey, now. where is the ramblings of blaming the jews, I was fully expecting to see that in this chest beating diatribe. Maybe the Irish are secretly behind all of this. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2001, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-top-five-lies-about-this-war/87790/31 "2001-10-17T00:42:12Z")
I get so tired of people arguing against this by using hypotheticals and suppositions. And I’m getting REALLY tired of people arguing against this war without proposing any other solution, other than to trot out the same old tired cliches about how we just need to give our wealth to everyone and we’ll all be happy and peaceful-like. Instead of trying to refute the endless stream of straw men and nonsense, the best rebuttal is to just remind them of the reasons for what we are doing: #1 - The U.S. was attacked in an incredibly violent way, causing greater loss of life than any other single battle in U.S. history. #2 - The people who attacked the U.S. claim that they will not settle for anything less than the destruction of the United States. #3 - The states that sponsor these people either have, or have access to, weapons of mass destruction including nuclear, chemical, and biological. #4 - They are clearly willing to use those weapons, as evidenced by the current outbreaks of Anthrax. Now, Curious George, WHAT DO SUGGEST WE DO TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM? And beware: If you start carping about poverty and evil businesses and oil, I will tear that argument into so many shreds you’ll have to use a whisk broom to collect the remnants of your ego. ---
**Author:** ![Vinnie\_Virginslayer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/53a042/32.png) [@Vinnie\_Virginslayer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Vinnie_Virginslayer)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2001, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-top-five-lies-about-this-war/87790/32 "2001-10-17T02:33:29Z")
The last war where America truly was dealing with an unquestionably evil enemy was World War 2. That was 50 years ago, of whose anniversary start date will ironically be in about 7-8 weeks. Today’s generation does not understand the totality of what it truly takes to win a war against Evil. Flamethrowers into caves. Atomic bombs. Fire bombing of Dresden Germany. These were ugly, inhumane things America was forced to do to gain the unconditional surrender of the evil German genocidal Third Reich and the suicidal expansionist Japanese Empire. These weren’t a bunch of barefoot peasants in the Vietnam jungle; these were governments and societies that were truly misguided and needed to be destroyed, similar to Al Qeada and extreme Muslim fundamentalism. Today’s peace pundits make the mistake of trying to combine politcal correctness with warfare. Problem is, once you set your mind to go to war, you must be prepared to everything possible to meet the ends. In war, you kill other human beings. In war, sometimes the innocent must die. Until Americans are willing to face the fact that we will be forced to do some very, very ugly things in order to preserve our freedom and security for ourselves and hopefully the next 50 years of America, yes, a war on terror will be very very hard to win. In order to destroy Evil one must be in touch with one’s own evil side. ---
**Author:** ![Neurotik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/91b2a8/32.png) [@Neurotik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neurotik)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2001, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-top-five-lies-about-this-war/87790/33 "2001-10-17T02:54:34Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sam Stone \* > **The U.S. was attacked in an incredibly violent way, causing greater loss of life than any other single battle in U.S. history.** Absolutely not true. Well, at least the greater loss of life than any other single battle in US history part. Gettysburg had 20,000 killed on the Union, and another 20,000 killed on the Confederate side. I could bring up many others. I doubt the WTC would even come in on the top 10. I’ve really got no argument with your other premises though, except the anthrax thing. I doubt that is being done by Al-Queda, simply because they’re not doing a very good job of it. Mailing large envelopes full of anthrax isn’t very good, because everyone in their right mind knows right now to check to see if its anthrax then get the treatments ASAP. If they were really trying to do damage they’d just walk into the lobby in the Capitol building, put some on a spoon and just puff it into the air. Then proceed to do it in other major public areas. Plus, we don’t really know who’s doing it. > [@](#): > > \*\*Today’s generation does not understand the totality of what it truly takes to win a war against Evil. Flamethrowers into caves. Atomic bombs. Fire bombing of Dresden Germany. These were ugly, inhumane things America was forced to do to gain the unconditional surrender of the evil German genocidal Third Reich and the suicidal expansionist Japanese Empire. These weren’t a bunch of barefoot peasants in the Vietnam jungle; these were governments and societies that were truly misguided and needed to be destroyed, similar to Al Qeada and extreme Muslim fundamentalism. \*\* Here’s the problem, **Vinny**. In those wars we knew who the enemy was by sight. They were the ones in the German and Japanese military uniforms and the ones sitting in Japanese and German cities. My point here is that not only will the same tactics not work because we can’t identify the people in the terrorists organizations on sight like we could with the German and Japanese military. Also, there’s no city objectives. We can go through and take control of Afghanistan, and the terrorists will just slip across the border into Tajikistan or Uzbekistan or Turkmenistan or Iran. There is no real home base for the terrorists like there was for the Germans or the Japanese. And they don’t rely on huge factories for munitions, so we can’t really target those to help cut back on stuff. To put it bluntly, terrorists are not the same as another state. They cannot be fought effectively in the same way. Nukes and conventional weapons will not work. You need special ops, infiltration and changes in our foreign policy that help other states establish stable governments and a good educational/economic infrastructure to reduce the ability of terrorists to recruit. ---
**Author:** ![Neurotik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/91b2a8/32.png) [@Neurotik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neurotik)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2001, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-top-five-lies-about-this-war/87790/34 "2001-10-17T02:57:06Z")
Oh yeah, **Vinny** I also forgot to mention that if you thought that the destruction of Dresden was necessary to win WWII then you need to check your history. That city had no manufacturing plants, military targets, or anything of the kind. All it did was kill people going about their daily lives. That’s the sort of atrocity that we are trying to avoid this time around. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Ryan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7feea3/32.png) [@The\_Ryan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Ryan)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2001, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-top-five-lies-about-this-war/87790/35 "2001-10-17T02:58:06Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by curious george \* > They use several facts to support their positions, especially in #3, #4, & #5. Name one. > [@](#): > > If you don’t think their facts are accurate, then debate that. > Otherwise, debate their positions and conclusions. What’s there to debate? It’s just a list of statments. Each statemnet is followed by a paragraph which, except for the last (which almost supports the claim), is irrelevant to the preceding statement. But if you like debating those sort of things, try refuting these points: [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?postid=1721713#post1721713](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?postid=1721713#post1721713) Guinastasia: > [@](#): > > Have you ever gone a day without food? You get all weak and dizzy-imagine that magnified by a few days? How do you know what happens to Wildest Bill? ---
**Author:** ![Houlihan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Houlihan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Houlihan)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2001, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-top-five-lies-about-this-war/87790/36 "2001-10-17T03:47:27Z")
I think that the five points that started this thread, and the supporting arguments underneath, can be adequately rebutted with a hearty “so what?” 1. So what if we are at war with the afghan people? There is a good deal of evidence that afghan residents with the implicit, if not tacit approval and support of the afghan government, planned and executed this attack, as well as other attacks on U.S. interests. If the afghanis can’t clean up their backyard, we need to do so for our own security interest. If we can’t tell the civilians from the enemy, its unfortunate that innocent people will die, but that’s what happens in a war. 2. So what if we reap the benefit of getting more oil out of the ground? Unless you are prepared to argue that we attacked ourselves to justify this war, this is a non-sequitor. 3. So what if we backed the wrong horse before? So what if we back the wrong horse this time? We know the Taliban supports an organization that is harmful to our security. Our options as to who assumes power after the Taliban is removed are limited. Maybe the government that takes control will not support extremists. That’s better than allowing a government that we know supports terrorists to remain in power. 4. So what if you have detected some inequities in the domestic response to what happened on September 11? This was an unprecedented event, and we are making up the rules as we go along. It is difficult to tell what precisely this point is - is the war too expensive? I certainly expect to pay more in taxes to pay for this war, and I hope I pay enough in taxes to pay for a bomb myself. 5. So what if we can’t win a war against terrorists? We can at least fight it. I prefer action over inaction every time. There are only two other options: (1) surrender, or (2) do nothing in response and hope they don’t hurt us again. Are either of these realistic responses? No. ---
**Author:** ![waterj2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/858c86/32.png) [@waterj2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/waterj2)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2001, 4:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-top-five-lies-about-this-war/87790/37 "2001-10-17T04:18:47Z")
> [@](#): > > Lie #3: “The US is trying to liberate the people of Afghanistan from Taliban tyranny.” > Reality: The US, Russia, and Iran have been aiding a rough coalition of armed groups called the Northern Alliance. The Northern Alliance’s fighters are drawn mainly from ethnic minority groups in Afghanistan who have been persecuted by the Taliban. But their record is also a bloody one. Groups like the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA), which have been fighting against fundamentalism and for democracy in Afghanistan for years, have publicly stated that the fundamentalist gangsters of the Northern Alliance are not an acceptable alternative to the fundamentalist gangsters of the Taliban. How do the faults of the Northern Alliance somehow mean that the US is not trying to free the citizens of Afghanistan from the Taliban tyranny? That’s like saying that we weren’t trying to free the Jews from the concentration camps because we helped Stalinist USSR. Also, while the Northern Alliance may not be great, the areas of Afghanistan they hold are ruled far better than those held by the Taliban. It’s interesting that these people can’t even put together a coherent argument even when they seem willing to pass off suppostion and rumor as truth. It’s also interesting that **curious george** posts crap that he gets from email lists, and then never tries to back up the opinions expressed therein. Oh, and I’d like to welcome back **Mary Hart’s Legs** , everyone’s favorite knee-jerk anti-American, from a long vacation. ---
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2001, 4:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-top-five-lies-about-this-war/87790/38 "2001-10-17T04:23:03Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Neurotik \* > \*\*Oh yeah, **Vinny** I also forgot to mention that if you thought that the destruction of Dresden was necessary to win WWII then you need to check your history. That city had no manufacturing plants, military targets, or anything of the kind. All it did was kill people going about their daily lives. > > That’s the sort of atrocity that we are trying to avoid this time around. \*\* They did have a rail yard which was a legitimate target. Marc ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2001, 4:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-top-five-lies-about-this-war/87790/39 "2001-10-17T04:58:26Z")
Marc, the railyard was a legitimate target, but IIRC correctly, that wasn’t the reason Dresden was bombed in the manner in which it was. The Allies had some faulty intelligence that there was a major Nazi operation of somekind there and in order to wipe it out, they firebombed the city, and damned near killed everyone in it. When they later found out that there was nothing of value there (the railyard was considered important, but could have been taken out with a plane or two) the Allies were mortified. ---
**Author:** ![JDM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/90db22/32.png) [@JDM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JDM)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2001, 8:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-top-five-lies-about-this-war/87790/40 "2001-10-17T08:04:20Z")
[QUOTE] \*Originally posted by Anthracite \* \*\* > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by curious george \* > > > [@](#): > > > > It’s prime territory for building pipelines, which is why the oil company Unocal – as well as the US government – welcomed the Taliban’s rise to power in 1996 as a promising source of “stability.” > > There is no cite for Unocal “welcoming” the Taliban’s rise to power. And why shouldn’t any business welcome stability in a country? Which business, outside of the arms trade, welcomes instability and chaos? 😕\*\* Speaking of which: > [@](#): > > \*\*Then again, maybe releasing the spigot on arms sales to all and sundry is not so strange after all, when considering the question of who benefits. For as The Wall Street Journal reports, some of the biggest financial profits of the new overt-covert conflict will flow to two famous families much in the news these days: the bin Ladens and the Bushes. > > The Saudi-based bin Laden family conglomerate, from which the estranged Osama received a $50-million inheritance before falling out over his predilection for blowing up representatives of the family’s Western business partners, is intricately tied to the Carlyle Group, a little-known but immensely powerful investment firm stocked with old Reagan-Bush hands, including the old hands of George Bush Senior. > > Carlyle deals in “private equity”: buying and shuffling companies in hush-hush trading - “a high-end business,” says The New York Times, “open only to the very rich.” Like Old George, who sits on the Carlyle board and rakes it in from the sweetheart deals his comrades cut with their old pals in governments around the world. For Carlyle prefers companies that are state-regulated; two-thirds of its $12 billion in investments are in - wait for it - defense and telecommunications companies. Regulated firms, you see, are more amenable to profitable intervention by well-lobbied government officials. None of that “free market” malarkey for these boys! \*\* That’s from here: [http://www.sptimesrussia.com/archive/times/711/opinion/o\_4831.htm](http://www.sptimesrussia.com/archive/times/711/opinion/o_4831.htm) which I referred to in an earlier thread that I started, which died a slow, pathetic death ignored by all… So I’ll try again- JDM [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-top-five-lies-about-this-war/87790.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-top-five-lies-about-this-war/87790.md?page=3)