When exactly did Bin laden become “not our priority” considering he was the sole reason you told everybody on Earth you invaded Afghanistan?
And what is your new priority in Afghanistan that justifies a continued invasion and occupation?
Building any pipelines these days?
Anybody in your family making money from “defense” contracts?
I never heard a single such question asked of Bush and minions.
Maybe Jeff Gannon, Bush’s White House-boy pseudo-named sodomite infil-traitor into the WHPC was the only guy doing his job?
October 2003 is the earliest date I can find of NATO troops deploying in Afghanistan; long after Bush aborted his original war motive and objective; catching Bin laden. But what was NATO’s mission and how does that mission satisfy the legal requirements set forth in the NATO charter?
While the USA certainly had the sympathies of the world following 9/11, did the USA really have the legal case to invade, and remove by military force, a sovereign government and replace it with their own version?
Is that what NATO is about?
Clearly NATO is a mutual defense pact. The legitimate Afghanistan government threatened and invaded no one.
Of course we now know that the invasion of Iraq was illegal and based on lies and fabricated crap. But NATO was not involved in that. Why not? What’s the essential difference? What is NATO’s excuse for occupying Afghanistan but not Iraq?
Is it just another Bullies Bush & Blair enterprise?
Who condoned it?
Who ordered it?
Soldiers of NATO member countries are getting killed and maimed too. Yet I see no outrage from anyone that their country is over there for God-knows-for-what-reason. Talk about ignoring the 600lb gorilla that’s in the room!
With all I have written, and all we know, the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan by the USA military ordered by Commander-in-Chief Bush, looks questionable in many legal and fundamental ways; not to mention what the true motives were.
