# Allegations of NATO complicity in heroin/opium trade in Afghanistan?



## TcDohl (9 Apr 2010)

I am exposed to a few people (which surprising that this has not yet been brought up in these forums) who have the opinion that NATO or the USA invaded Afghanistan in order to secure a steady supply of heroin to traffic for the rest of the world. One of these people specifically say that the Taliban banning the growth of opium poppies was among the causus belli, and the purpose of the US-led invasion was to re-establish opium cultivation and trade. 

I would like to know the opinions of the people in these forums to these allegations. 

Another of the people who have this opinion came to this conclusion because of all the reports and photos of poppy fields left alone by NATO forces. I find this connection ridiculous as the destruction of these crops would leave these farmers out of pocket and would be ripe for recruitment for the enemy.


----------



## GAP (9 Apr 2010)

And there are still people out there who believe in the Tooth Fairy, Easter bunny (my favorite) and others. 

Whole programs run on a nightly basis with some of the weirdest conspiracy theories....George Norry is the host. Tell you friends to call into Coast-to-Coast.....


----------



## Greymatters (10 Apr 2010)

1. Everyone is entitled to their opinion in this country, even when its weird or misinformed or the result of an overactive ego.

2. If I see a manual for 'Canadian Operations, BG-123456-04, Re-Establishment of Narcotics Operations in Foreign Countries', then maybe these people might have a leg to stand on.  Some might suggest you ignore such people, I however advocate always challenging such theories/opinions for the bullshit they are.  

3. Ive known people with this kind of attitude and basically told them to keep their BS to themselves when they're around me. 

4. NATO or  the USA invaded?  They still cant decide who?

5. Wow a conspiracy theory!  Look I can make one up too: "Any poppy field left alone is all part of the plan.  Its part of the great military conspiracy that every soldier is indoctrinated into once they reach the rank of Corporal and get a Level 2 clearance.  Shhh, dont tell anyone"...  :

6. Thats my opinion.


----------



## Retired AF Guy (10 Apr 2010)

GAP said:
			
		

> And there are still people out there who believe in the Tooth Fairy, Easter bunny (my favorite) and others.
> 
> Whole programs run on a nightly basis with some of the weirdest conspiracy theories....George Norry is the host. Tell you friends to call into Coast-to-Coast.....



Or you can start reading Eric Margolis. You can find him every Sunday in the Toronto (Calgary, Ottawa, etc) Sun. I think his column is on the same page as the horoscopes.


----------



## armyvern (10 Apr 2010)

Greymatters said:
			
		

> "Any poppy field left alone is all part of the plan.  Its part of the great military conspiracy that every soldier is indoctrinated into once they reach the rank of Corporal and get a Level 2 clearance.  Shhh, dont tell anyone"...  :



You forgot:

"Any poppy field erradicated" is simply part of the planned conspiracy to cover up the conspiracy.


----------



## Tetragrammaton (10 Apr 2010)

I've often wondered why a concerted effort isn't being made to locate and destroy the poppy fields (unless it is happening and I am just unaware).  I find the idea of the US invading Afghanistan for heroin more than a little preposterous.


----------



## The Bread Guy (10 Apr 2010)

By the logic of "them":

Cops policing
+
Drug problems occurring
=
Cops policing to keep drugs flowing

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight...


----------



## 40below (10 Apr 2010)




----------



## Greymatters (10 Apr 2010)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> You forgot:
> 
> "Any poppy field erradicated" is simply part of the planned conspiracy to cover up the conspiracy.



Its like the Masons, you dont get to learn about that until you get higher up...


----------



## The Bread Guy (10 Apr 2010)

Greymatters said:
			
		

> Its like the Masons Stonecutters, you dont get to learn about that until you get higher up...


There, fixed that for you  ;D


----------



## Greymatters (10 Apr 2010)

Taking pictures of our secret meetings and then posting them is not an approved activity...


----------



## The Bread Guy (10 Apr 2010)

DOOOOHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## ModlrMike (10 Apr 2010)

Tetragrammaton said:
			
		

> I've often wondered why a concerted effort isn't being made to locate and destroy the poppy fields (unless it is happening and I am just unaware).



That course of action has failed miserably, turning farmers into "monetary taleban". What needs to be done more efficiently is crop replacement. Unfortunately, there are few crops in Afghanistan that bring in the money poppies do. While substitution is a much slower approach to eradication, it's more effective in the long run.


----------



## TcDohl (10 Apr 2010)

You know what baffles me about these conspiracy theorists is that since this involves thousands of military personnel, supposedly protecting the poppy fields and the poppy harvest, why is it that none of this has gone out to the public from whistleblowers? I'd be there's at least one person with a conscience there, and that at least one of those people with a conscience would, even under threat of reprimand or other disciplinary action, speak out about it? 

Then again, those conspiracy theorists would say that they're under mind control. -_-


----------



## Greymatters (11 Apr 2010)

TcDohl said:
			
		

> You know what baffles me about these conspiracy theorists...



There are a lot of things that baffle me (and others) when it comes to conspiracy theorists:

1) Why they think that with access only to the Internet and no classified information or corporate documents that they can find proof of widespread complicity and evil-doing.

2) Thinking that because something is remotely possible it therefore becomes probable, and therefore is good enough to be fact.

3) Thinking that they themselves are the only ones to have figured out a particular line of reasoning because they're smarter than everyone else.  

4) Making astounding leaps of logic and insight from opinions rumour assumptions and heresay that would make even Fox Mulder of the Xfiles go 'Hunh?'.  

5) Cherry-picking information from credible sources that support their theories but if information from the same source is contradictory they ignore it.

6) Countering any statement of rebuttal from a credible source with 'its a lie!' or 'theyre all in on it!'.

7) Thinking that thousands of military personnel would willingly be part of a conspiracy to cause death and or massive property damage to their country and citizens.

8 ) Think the military forces in democratic countries does whatever and invades whoever it wants without any political or civilian oversight.

I'm sure others can came up with more...


----------



## Greymatters (11 Apr 2010)

Oh that reminds me of a forum I was perusing during the Olympics:

Some yahoos were talking in one forum (while the Olympics were ongoing) about how there was going to be a terrorist attack during the Olympics that was actually a 'false-flag' operation, and at least two of them claimed that certain events were typical indicators of false flag operations.  : 

I wouldnt mind seeing this checklist of indicators, I might get a few laughs out of it...


----------



## SeanNewman (11 Apr 2010)

While I can't attempt to speak for UK operations (much less CF operations), it does seem that the UK has a much more aggressive counter-narcotics program in Helmand than Canada ever did in Kandahar.

It all depends on the perspective your country has, I guess.

Do you not want the locals to turn against you so you don't burn their crops down, allowing the insurgents to get rich?

Do you not want the insurgents to get rich so they can buy more weapons and recruit more fighters against you so you burn the crops?

Do you deflect responsibility for the ANA/ANP to burn down the crops and then have the people hate them which is even more counter-productive to the big picture?

Do you decide that the less drugs in the world (including your own streets) the better, and that is more important of a factor than anything that happens in Afghanistan?

I have not by any means been involved with political strategic matters (nor do I think many people on this site have been), but in my very small sphere it observation in Afghanistan I did not see anything to lead me to believe anything like that.  And any decisions not to destroy crops were because of a COIN mindset in trying to keep the Afghan people on our side, not because anyone wanted more drugs.


----------

