What's new

Lawrence Wilkerson, former chief of staff to US SoS, explains the reasons US was in Afghanistan

Abid123

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
2,829
Reaction score
-8
Country
Pakistan
Location
Norway

Lawrence Wilkerson, former chief of staff to US SoS, explains the reasons US was in Afghanistan:


1. Blocking China's BRI militarily.
2. Neutralizing Pakistani nukes.
3. CIA destabilizing China through Uyghur population in Xinjiang

+ By occupying both Afghanistan and Iraq, they are/were positioning military assets close to Iran.

@Dalit @SecularNationalist @SalarHaqq @aryobarzan @Daylamite Warrior @etylo @PradoTLC @beijingwalker @Beidou2020 @Ich @IceCold @hussain0216 @Big Tank @SaadH @Mugen @Beast @PakFactor @Mohsin A @aziqbal
 
.
1. Blocking China's BRI militarily- Failed
2. Neutralizing Pakistani nukes- Failed
3. CIA destabilizing China through Uyghur population in Xinjiang- Failed

Managed to accomplish none of their tasks :lol:
 
.
I agree except #2. Pakistani nukes. These nukes are no issue for USA. They can strangulate the economy to make them handover all nukes.
This fairy tale has been cooked up by chaprasi generals to give themselves 'the defender against the USA' look.

By not mentioning the money laundering operation that moved money from treasury to private corporations in afghan war, he seems to be protecting them.
 
Last edited:
.
Two points. There may not be 20K Uyghurs in Syria. Second, Imran Khan was and is destabilizing Pakistan, which can result in US taking our nukes.
 
. . .
All tin foil theories

Americans were in Afghanistan for noble reasons


They only went in to get terrorist like OBL only

Closed this thread down other wise mods will shut it down if you try to argue against mainstream media
 
.
There are Americans who believe Earth is flat.



There are Americans who believe Moon Landings are fake.



There are Americans who believe 9/11 is inside job.


There are Americans who are fans of Russia.



American political scene is polarized.


American institutions are holding it all together in United States (US). If matters are left to individuals, they will kill each other.

WE cannot be sure about who is right and who is wrong from among the individuals.

American institutional perspective is much more likely to be reliable than individual perspective.

-----

China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is a pan-Asian project:

file-20170516-11945-1xpsm31.png


obor-feature-Main-Image-768x450.png



You cannot shut it down from Afghanistan.

-----

US helped Pakistan improve its nuclear security regime:





-----

Xinjiang separatist movement is very old:



Ever heard of Turkestan Islamic Party (TIP) ???


Chinese crackdown on Xinjiang have its reasons:


But Chinese crackdown also has uncomfortable side to it:


Nevertheless, China is concerned about militancy problem in Afghanistan will fuel Xinjiang separatist problem:



Funny thing is that TTA itself is a militant organization close to Al-Qaeda Network and has links with Uyghur groups.
 
. .
There are Americans who believe Earth is flat.

Nice attempt as discrediting the messenger

The problem is mr Wilkerson is not just random guy off the street

Every thing the US has done has reinforced the so called tin foil hat theories


It is high time you realize since the days of Kennedy and Ike US administration is nothing more a organised criminal organization masquerading as champions of democracy …
 
.
Anyone who believes in this has the brain size of a tiny peanut.. The assertions being made here is laughably dumb.

1. First of all 911 was an inside job and fuk no Pakistan was never the target or anyone else the Americans believed in something the muslims themselves never believed in which is a propheciesed army rising from Khorasan taking over the world hence they were dragged thru this pipe-hole because of this and no American official from that era will ever admit to it because it would sound fuking stupid to the intellect making a false flag to take on a ragtag militias who weren't even formed into a sovereign state and assuming of them to replace them (Americans) hence they wanted to prevent a prophecy that they themselves whole heartedly believed in back then but not anymore they realized it was all fake 20 years later and left while understanding that they were tricked into this place. they were not after China BRI nor Pakistani nukes but they were afraid of them taking over Pakistan back then but the Americans were not after Pakistan. It was a period where the black banner hadiths were trending on social media with the revival series and everywhere online. To put it short they were hoax'ed into Afghanistan besides they never came for OBL who died before the invasion even began hence to put it short they were tricked into Afghanistan.

2. Iraq was never done due to getting closer to Iran because they could have taken Iran itself or even now if that is what they want but it was done due to insistance from Tel Aviv lobbies who wanted Saddam gone at all costs because they precieved him as rogue element and a growing threat due to his chemical stock pile and note not nukes but chemical weapon stock pile..

The first one is absolutely true and very embarrasing what are you gonna say I was sold on a segment of a fake tale hence nobody will share that with you but in all honesty it was for that reason.

3. Notice how they are now putting pressure on China and Russia and this time it is not based on hoax. The US follows a certain pattern and it is easy to read their pattern and time them right because now the only reason they started the trade war was because now China's meteric rise is viewed as threat towards their world hegemony and threatens to replace them and note how the Hoax and their current political agenda is the same and about strictly world dominance focussed. If you are an irrelevant player they don't care like Vietnam or Philippines but if you seek world dominance they will be at your throat they can't allow this. They went after these in Afghanistan and the salafists assuming they wanted world dominance due to some prophecies that the Americans themselves believed in strangely enough or atleast their elite bought the hoax but once they 100% confirmed that this is hoax and that the salafists weren't more then 10million worldwide made them realize that they were chasing a ghost all this time for 20 years hence they readjusted and went after the new chellengers who they assume is coming for their hegemony this means alot to the US then people realize they have to stay at all times the single dominating factor and if they assume someone else harbours these same ambitions or grows to powerful they will view them as significiant threat and now they view China as such threat and Russia. Even if it is a terrorist organistation non-state actors if they can sell their propaganda enough for the US to believe this people are threat they will view them as significiant threat but now it is China and Russia who is seen as the single biggest threat to the existence of the western civilization.

Also note that when they say he or she is a ''Threat to the western civilisation'' it means threat to the US world hegemony and also note when they say he or she or that entity is a threat to the world it means threat to the ''US world hegemony''
 
Last edited:
.
Nice attempt as discrediting the messenger

The problem is mr Wilkerson is not just random guy off the street

Every thing the US has done has reinforced the so called tin foil hat theories


It is high time you realize since the days of Kennedy and Ike US administration is nothing more a organised criminal organization masquerading as champions of democracy …



Wilkerson was involved in creating the narrative that Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destrustion (WMDs) and retired in 2005.

What he has to say after 2005 is his personal opinion.

He is a critic of the American security regime but his statements do not seem to match facts on the ground.

As pointed out in here, United States (US) has helped Pakistan improve its security regime after 2001. The links that I have shared in my previous post are reputable sources. Pakistani Media will not advertise this fact of-course because Anti-American sentiments run high in the country for completely absurd reasons.

Remember those days when Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) was near Islamabad after the Lal Masjid episode?


The Lal Masjid episode was but a reminder of the fact how far and deep Taliban mindset had infiltrated Pakistan due to patronization of the Establishment since the 1990s. The Establishment might have a reason to support these elements in the 1990s but it did not pay much attention to these elements courting Al-Qaeda Network and how this relationship will harm Pakistan.

Raheel Sharif and PML(N)-led government agreed to counter TTP in 2014 with Operation Zarb-e-Azm due to failure of the previous policy of negotiating with TTP. A step in the right direction but Pakistan - US relationship was damaged at this point.

----

US launched War On Terror in Afghanistan in 2001.

China launched BRI in 2013.

Does it make sense to assume that US was in Afghanistan to shut down BRI? Since WHEN and HOW?

If Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) is in your mind, there is the whole Indo-Iranian angle to this issue. But hey - don't mention Iran. Murad Saeed will protest.

Your problem is that you do not pay attention to information shared with you. You have made up your mind about everything.

Americans also have their internal conflicts and tend to undermine each other. John F. Kennedy's assassination is but one example of this fact.

WE are better off with checking what American institutions are up to.
 
. .
I just don't trust them.. as they have a long history of being inaccurate at best.

What is the criteria of truthfulness in your view? A book that is not peer reviewed? A retired officer's opinion that is not independently fact-checked?

I do not rely on any individual or singular source to convey my perspective. I look at multiple sources including academic in relation to a topic to decide what might be correct or not.

Criticism should be logical, not emotional.

There is a limit to digesting conspiracy theories.
 
.
There is a limit to digesting conspiracy theories.


lol

so US went to fight terrorism?.. right?

so why didn't they just leave post OBL incident ? after all most of the NATO allies left.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom