• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. Identifies Vast Riches of Minerals in Afghanistan

No blood for lithium!

In all seriousness, this is great news. Does it make it a certianty that things turn around in Afghanistan? No. However it increases the likelihood and gives some reason hope for the state in the future at least. Here's hoping it can work out in a positive way.

Oh, and in regards to most of us not seeing the benefit of our rich stores of resources in the US. Look at our quality of life, even for many of the "poor" in this country but especially the middle class, and compare it to many various portions of the world. While you may not see direect profits from it there is a definite tangible benefit we all recieve due to boons the US has in regards to its economic prowess.

If you compare us with third world countries you are correct. If you compare us with the rich industrial countries than you are not correct.
 
Sure beats having to work our asses off growing turnips to stave off hunger through the winter months. Thanks to the barons of industry, I don't have a root cellar, but a finished basement with giant screen HDTV.

You must be higher up on the minion scale than me.:roll:
 
watch this:



This is foreshadowing for Afghanistan; and perhaps an underlying reason behind US involvement within that country.


P.S. This is my view on things:

Modern warfare isn't about terrorism; that is contemporary bs; propaganda if you ask me

it is about resources which are limited and will not and cannot be reproduced because humans don't know how to ****ing create vast amounts of raw elements.
 
All that "wealth" means squat if there is no working governmental apparatus. Until a *real* government is in place, you won't be able to exploit the "wealth" to benefit, the gen pop.

Another issue is security. All that mineral wealth will just flow across the border...unchecked and probably would make the already monstrous amount of corruption and rift worse.

They probably make as much on opium than they would on exploiting their natural wealth. There would still be the same amount of poverty because their corruption is part of their culture.
 
They probably make as much on opium than they would on exploiting their natural wealth. There would still be the same amount of poverty because their corruption is part of their culture.
Right but fix the corruption and we may have a pretty decent nation.
 
Let's hope they fail, right?

Its not about "hope they fail"...Its about contracts given.

Until you can have a *real* government, you cannot exploit the resources at hand to benefit your country. For reasons the same in Africa...

Corruption is rampant

Afghanistan: China's Winning Bid For Copper Rights Includes Power Plant, Railroad - Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty

Afghanistan has awarded a state-owned company in China with the right to develop a large copper field to the south of Kabul, following two years of bidding.

China Metallurgical Group agreed to invest billions of dollars in the project and related infrastructure development -- including the construction of a coal-fired electrical power plant and what would be Afghanistan's first freight railway.

By the estimates of some geologists, deposits at Afghanistan's Aynak copper field in Logar Province make it the world's largest undeveloped copper field.

The deal gives China Metallurgical Group the right to extract high-quality copper from the area south of Kabul.
 
Resource abundance offers no assurance of development and economic prosperity. Yemen and Nigeria are case examples where resource abundance has failed to provide such benefits. Given that Afghanistan has a government of suspect legitimacy, has been and remains widely corrupt, and is very provincial in nature, along with Afghanistan's being a fragmented society where genuine authority is diffuse, resource abundance probably won't lead to great benefits in the near-term or medium-term for Afghanistan, much less political stability.

Political stability will require bringing together the nation's tribal leaders--perhaps even starting over on that front--slowly building from there. It will also require military success against the Taliban, but the current Kabul-centric strategy/seeming lack of contingency planning that are playing out in delayed achievement of outcomes increasingly makes a muddy outcome probably more likely than a clear and sustained success. Developments in post-Musharraf Pakistan add to the challenges affecting Afghanistan. Finally, even if a strong central government emerges in Afghanistan, there is little guarantee that the government would not assume ownership of the resources, leading to the benefits/wealth from such resources flowing to the government and its cronies, while the vast majority of the population benefits little and enjoys little accountability from a government that does not depend on their tax revenue to fund its operations.

I agree that it's by no means a certainty that things will get better, but Afghanistan has one critical advantage over places like Yemen or Nigeria - a powerful country is heavily invested in its success.

Given the vast scope of these resources and the projected long-term presence of US forces in the country to provide security, I would expect that there would be foreign corporations interested in securing mining rights. If development can be ramped up at a steady pace, it will provide the government with the necessary funds to provide infrastructure for the citizens and pay more than the Taliban. If it diminishes the importance of the opium trade to the domestic economy, that will cut off a substantial part of the Taliban's influence.

There are certainly short-term and long-term problems that Afghanistan will face, but this is the first thing I've seen that created any possibility that the country would be self-sustainable in the near future.
 
If you compare us with third world countries you are correct. If you compare us with the rich industrial countries than you are not correct.

We're ranked number 13th in regards to Quality of Life Index out of 111 countries. Hardly at the bottom. Hell, within the top 15. To give you some comparison that's ahead of Canada, Japan, Blegium, France, Germany, the UK, South Korea, etc.

When you then take into account the size and population of the countries it also paints a different picture. The U.S. has more people in it than all 12 of the others combined and has far more land mass than 11 of the 12 put together (excluding Australia). This by itself makes notions such as universal high speed internet for all and other forms of public services far more difficult if not impossible by their very nature.

All told, yes, even amongst industrialized countries the U.S. is a rather high quality of living for even some of the lower portions of society.
 
The US has vast riches but only 1% of the population gets much from them except to work their asses off for the barons of industry.

If you compare us with third world countries you are correct. If you compare us with the rich industrial countries than you are not correct.

The median income in the US is the 2nd highest in the world, behind only Switzerland. It's not just the top 1% of the population that does well for itself.
 
The median income in the US is the 2nd highest in the world, behind only Switzerland. It's not just the top 1% of the population that does well for itself.

I'd add that most of the lowest earning Americans are in the top 20% of the worlds income earners.
There shouldn't be many whiners in this country but there sure as hell are a lot of them.
 
I'd add that most of the lowest earning Americans are in the top 20% of the worlds income earners.
There shouldn't be many whiners in this country but there sure as hell are a lot of them.

Are you saying that when I critisize my country I am whining? Conservatives love to wave the flag and talk about freedom of speech except when it conflicts with their beliefs then they call it whining.

BTW, the statistics quoted above are open to debate because there is no credible sources to back them up.

How can you say the country is in such great shape when the unemployment rate is so high and the gulf of mexico is being poisoned by a corporate entity?
 
Are you saying that when I critisize my country I am whining? Conservatives love to wave the flag and talk about freedom of speech except when it conflicts with their beliefs then they call it whining.

BTW, the statistics quoted above are open to debate because there is no credible sources to back them up.

Median household income - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
List of countries by household income - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How can you say the country is in such great shape when the unemployment rate is so high and the gulf of mexico is being poisoned by a corporate entity?

Because one is not dispositive of the other.
 
The treehuggers will find a way to make lithium an eveil, just like oil.

Oh, wait, they already have! ****!!
 

I would not trust any statistics put out by the Census. I have only filled out one census report in my life and that was because they harassed me so much this year that I did not want them ****ing with me anymore. There are a lot of americans who feel the same way.

Statistics and numbers can always be manipulated. Average incomes are an example. For example nine out of ten people can have an income of one thousand dollars per year and one could have an income of one million per year. The average income would be approx. 100,000 per year for the ten people.

There are millions of americans who would love to have a job but can not find one. The average income doesn't mean squat to them.
 
I would not trust any statistics put out by the Census. I have only filled out one census report in my life and that was because they harassed me so much this year that I did not want them ****ing with me anymore. There are a lot of americans who feel the same way.

Statistics and numbers can always be manipulated. Average incomes are an example. For example nine out of ten people can have an income of one thousand dollars per year and one could have an income of one million per year. The average income would be approx. 100,000 per year for the ten people.

There are millions of americans who would love to have a job but can not find one. The average income doesn't mean squat to them.

...which is why I cited median income, not average income.
 
Well, our companies could try to bid.
font emphasis added by bubba

here is something you need to recognize
we have no companies
the companies may be registered to operate in the USA
may even be based there
but the company's vested interest is to its shareholders, and NOT to the nation is which it is able to conduct business
 
Didn't read the thread, but has anyone pointed out that this was well-known since the Soviets occupied the country? Because this isn't news, it's an attempt by the Obama administration to justify the occupation of Afghanistan by presenting this old news as a new discovery.

It's not.
 
Well, our companies could try to bid.

Bidding won't work when China gives cash to politicians who make the decisions.

font emphasis added by bubba

here is something you need to recognize
we have no companies
the companies may be registered to operate in the USA
may even be based there
but the company's vested interest is to its shareholders, and NOT to the nation is which it is able to conduct business

Didn't read the thread, but has anyone pointed out that this was well-known since the Soviets occupied the country? Because this isn't news, it's an attempt by the Obama administration to justify the occupation of Afghanistan by presenting this old news as a new discovery.

It's not.



From the beginning

US companies wont bid on mine projects in Afghanistan as it is still to risky a bet for shareholder equity. China is not as concerned about such risks as it can afford higher level loss's then comparable US companies.

@ Grey Fox, Chinese companies bride governmental officials but they are not the only ones, when it comes to third world countries US ones do as well

Khayembii Communique

You are correct this was known a few years ago. The timing is suspect regarding the reannouncement

China is the winner of this, not the US
 
You are correct this was known a few years ago. The timing is suspect regarding the reannouncement

A few years ago? This has been known of since the 80's at least. There have even been books written and studies conducted on this in the 90's. This isn't news; the reason that these haven't been tapped to any real extent is because of the difficulty in transporting them from the extraction site to port for shipping.

It's not simply "suspect" it's blatantly obvious why they're announcing it now.

Huge obstacles seen in exploiting Afghan minerals

By DEB RIECHMANN and ANNE FLAHERTY (AP) – 6 hours ago

KABUL, Afghanistan — It could take years and possibly even a peace settlement for Afghanistan to reap profits from nearly $1 trillion in mineral resources that U.S. geologists say lie beneath its rugged terrain — some in areas currently controlled by Taliban insurgents or warlords.

Geologists have known for decades that Afghanistan has vast mineral wealth, but a U.S. Department of Defense briefing this week put a startling price tag on the country's reserves of iron, copper, cobalt, gold and other prized minerals: at least $908 billion.

AP Source

Emphasis mine.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom