So then you concede that there are bases all along the pipeline route even in nations where there have been no terrorist camps which target the US.
Good.
Read this.
http://www.indiareacts.com/archivefeatures/nat2.asp?recno=10∓ctg=policy
This article was published June 26th 2001.
http://www.janes.com/security/international_security/news/jir/jir010315_1_n.shtml
This one in March of 2001.
Janes is pretty reliable I'd say. You can knock them if you'd like but you probably wouldn't have any takers.
I will explain to you how those bases you describe were obtained AFTER 9-11, to support the war in Afghanistan.
Some built by the bin Laden construction company. At any rate, we were performing joint excercises in Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan in 1997 and 1998. Interestingly enough this coincided with the acquisition of oil and gas contracts by US companies.
I don't think I've laid this all at Bush's feet. He's merely continuing plans that were started back in his father's administration (if not before then) continued during the Clinton administration and perhaps now completed under his administration. This isn't some evil plan hatched by Bush. It's the continuation of an interventionist policy that doesn't serve the interests of the American people but does serve the interests of some big oil companies who've managed to negotiate contracts with countries in a very unstable region.
So then you concede that there are bases all along the pipeline route even in nations where there have been no terrorist camps which target the US.
Well, of course they exist...but your timeline, and the motives you ascribe for their establishment are highly suspect.
We have bases in dozens of countries that 'have no terrorist camps which target the US'. Why? Because they are strategically placed NEAR countries which bear us ill-will. Duh.
Just because a duck is near the hen's nest, that doesn't prove that it laid a chicken egg.