because the Chinese care less about the govt and are probably not hated like the westerners. Hmmm and the Chinese can continue hoarding the rare mineral deposits ;)

...your expectation could be wrong?

Just an idea.

"In combat one should be very suspicious of painless moral choices. When you are confronted with a seemingly painless moral choice, the odds are that you haven't looked deeply enough." ~ Karl Marlantes

The Us where doing the chinese's dirty work by keeping their muslims ..terrorists'' populations in check or to occupied fighting the ''crusaders''.

...it could be for reasons that we have no idea about, not actually knowing much about the Chinese and all.

Radical thought, I know, given our demonstrated collective expertise on every other culture and political system under the sun.

"In combat one should be very suspicious of painless moral choices. When you are confronted with a seemingly painless moral choice, the odds are that you haven't looked deeply enough." ~ Karl Marlantes

The other reason is they see the U.S. destroying itself on the rocks of Afghanistan as the Soviets did and so many before. That could be but then China gets the oil deals? Doesn't make sense. It's a small amount of oil, true, but the U.S. has its own history of not allowing such things without quid pro quo.
China gets very belligerent when they see encroachment on their borders. It's hard to believe that the U.S. in Afghanistan would not trigger such a thing without meeting their own demands. Also, the U.S. surrounding Iran would be another concern to them. China has been very quiet.

Is it so hard to acknowledge that things might happen for reasons we don't understand and can't integrate with things we think we understand like oil?

"I have this interview technique when I'm looking for new young analysts. If they can't say 'I don't know' they don't get hired. Of course, if they don't then know how to they could get to knowing, they don't get hired either." ~ that cranky old man known as me

Oh, it's a big chess game and we are not able to understand what the grandmaster is seeing. The chess moves are strategic and have the purpose of making all the pieces work together in ways that mere mortals cannot foresee creating downstream opportunities that are better for everyone. That cannot be the reason for the war in Afghanistan; it would truly be a stoner idea.

Afghanistan is to the West of one of the only two places in the world where energy production is increasing; of course we are all to believe that the U.S. presence in Afghanistan is a coincidence with this development; but wait there is more. To the South West is Iran with third largest oil reserves in the world and and some relatively recent oil discoveries that are as yet relatively undeveloped; all of this is of course not important to the chessmaster; all is coincidental to U.S strategy in Central Asia; RIGHT!

The United States invaded Afghanistan before the current economic trouble really got underway in 2007 but it was known back in the 90's that world oil production was headed for trouble; just go to The Oil Drum and read some of the history there. To understand how dire this situation is today you only have to look at today's oil price, which is greater than $100 for WTI. Yes oil has gone up a couple of bucks in the last few days because of Iran but it was already hovering around $98 and Brent has been well above $100 for the better part of a year now. We are on the precipice between two recessions not having recovered from the first and facing a new one with the Price of oil above $100. Consider this as you watch world events because the U.S. cannot keep itself from the financial abyss unless relatively cheap energy is secured soon. Let me repeat that: there is no, zero, zip, chance of economic recovery with oil at such a high price.

Afghanistan sits between the new energy development in Central Asia and its potential market. There is an oil pipeline traveling West through Armenia and Turkey to the Mediterranean that can carry a good portion of the oil produced but other than that there is not a good way for the gas production to find a market. The U.S. is unlikely to ever have access to that gas but it doesn't need to. The U.S. wants that gas production to go to Chinese and Indian consumption. This will lessen the demand of Chinese and India on other energy markets available more directly to the U.S. As far as the U.S. is concerned, that gas going to China is good for our economy and we have probably given them assurances that we are not interested in putting a "hand on the spigot" to control their destiny. Here is the problem, India and China and everyone else for that matter are not interested in investing in energy infrastructure in a place like Afghanistan and its surroundings with the way things are so the U.S. is attempting to change that; this is the purpose of the war.

If you have some other thought than "no one knows" than put it down; let's hear it.

One doesn't do Afghanistan for the equivalent of one day's worth of global production, it's just that simple - no matter what fictitious secondary effects one makes up. You want to spend the time indulging in this rather than acknowledge the possibility that you might not know, have at it.

"In the main, national level strategy as practiced in the West isn't chess. It's something maybe as complex as Connect 4, played by people that don't know the rules of the game and are high on acid. The more developed games are played on the margins, in the crowd and in the non-West." ~ me (wishing to hell it was chess, because that would be a lot more comforting)

Because if we knew we wouldn't approve so we have to guess.

That is a quite harsh slap in the face for the US. Betcha Afghanistan will not put sanctions on Iran, hind of a double whammy.

"In combat one should be very suspicious of painless moral choices. When you are confronted with a seemingly painless moral choice, the odds are that you haven't looked deeply enough." ~ Karl Marlantes

...security of Chinese nationals in Pakistan and about forward leaning security for the western provinces. That presumes it's real in the first place. I'm not sure how much trust we can put into Pakistani sourced reporting on stuff like this right now - looks to me that the Pakistanis are wanting to change horses and loudly expressed wishful thinking seems to figure prominently in their strategic worldview.

The Chinese have seen this movie for a while now and I think they understand that friends with benefits arrangements with Pakistan involve large doses of IV antibiotics to keep the crotch cooties under control. By extension, this reporting could be way blown out of proportion - it seems to me that the Chinese are distinctly reluctant to cuddle too close to Pakistan, while Pakistan is deathly afraid that they will have to face the world without major power backing.

Me, I have about zero sympathy for the Pakistani plight and would frankly find it difficult to throw a drowning Pakistani strategist (should I ever come across one), anything other than an anvil. The only circumstance in which I could foresee that I might hesitate would be if I thought there was a possibility that I could quickly put my hands on an exploding anvil.

"In combat one should be very suspicious of painless moral choices. When you are confronted with a seemingly painless moral choice, the odds are that you haven't looked deeply enough." ~ Karl Marlantes

I have located your Exploding Anvil:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhQ4dE_RGnQ

Make haste Dave!

I would not previously have anticipated that there was such a thing as a "World Champion Anvil Shooter". I may have found a new calling.

That looks to be black powder and I know I can produce a lot more energetic mixtures than that...

"In combat one should be very suspicious of painless moral choices. When you are confronted with a seemingly painless moral choice, the odds are that you haven't looked deeply enough." ~ Karl Marlantes

loosing visual contact after launch, remember keep your eyes on the Anvil.

is derogatory?

however for me it is a term which requires fewer key strokes. However I will say I consider the term Crusader to be a compliment. Let it be said that any intended derogatory words or phrases are aimed not at the people in question but the holders of power who formulate policy.
You are the news editor and I yeild to your authority to edit
or omit.

to delete to omit, I just wondered if you knew.