“Three of a kind” ?
Posted by Big John on February 17, 2012
I may have got this wrong, so please feel free to correct me, but isn’t President Karzi of Afghanistan supposed to be a ’good guy’ who is supported by the US, Britain and other NATO countries with financial aid (OK, I know about his Swiss bank accounts) and military forces to keep him in power and ensure that the Taliban don’t take over his country ? … and …
Isn’t President Ahmadinejad of Iran supposed to be a ‘bad guy’ and complete looney who supports terrorists and who is intent on building nuclear weapons to blow Israel (and probably us) off the face of the earth ? … and …
Isn’t President Asif Ali Zardari of Pakistan sometimes a ‘good guy’ and sometimes a ‘bad guy’ depending on if he is seeking cash from the USA or allowing two-way traffic of insurgants across his border with Afghanistan ?
So ! … What the bloody hell was really going on behind the scenes when these three devious buggers got together recently ?
Well whatever it was … It’s highly likely that the true ‘good guys’ are going …
… to get screwed !
Gabbygeezer said
Those three clowns probably were plotting how to launch new raids on western treasuries. I’d better go over my income tax notice again.
Red Baron said
Well you could see it a number of ways, Karzai has been regarded as a safe pair of hands by the Americans because he has been involved in the oil company Unocal, this was very much not the case with the Taliban who changed their minds on letting the Afghan oil and TAPI gas pipeline.
Ahmadinejad is a big nasty the US hates him, he’s spearheaded much of the drive of Iran’s house system to trade oil commodities in euros instead of dollars, this is serious shit for the Yanqui dollar since the US currency is pretty much propped up on the oil trading. They want him out more than anyone and if Iran does manage to make itself a nuclear power it’ll give it the force to tell the US to leave it the fuck alone.
Zardari is more interesting, Pakistan is needed to be a bridgehead into much of the Middle East and I wouldn’t be surprised if they didn’t want to keep a close eye on India, too close to being lefties for the West to be entirely comfortable. India also trades a lot with Venezuela. Pakistan is also a nuclear power and the US does like to keep its fingers on everyone else’s button! Think Britain could launch its nukes without US approval? Think again no separate weapons delivery system.
SilverTiger said
“Good” and “evil” are just PR terms used by politicians to hoodwink the public into believing that they are right to fight this foreign leader and thwart that other one. In practical or pragmatic politics, the words are meaningless and play no part.
Whatever those three leaders think of one another, and whatever our leaders think of <i<them, doesn’t prevent the usual jiggery pokery of politics taking place. Conference this week, war next week, trade agreement the week after… It’s all part of the game. It takes insider knowledge to know what’s really going on. And whatever it is, be assured that we will be told whatever doctored version of the story it suits our politicos to tell us. In politics, truth lies buried with the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.
Ginnie said
I agree thoroughly with SilverTiger … it’s a political “game” and I never know who or what to believe.
Rummuser said
And the good guys in this case, very likely to be India. It is all about the opium trade John. All three are deeply interested in that.