Negotiate with the Taliban?!

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
21

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]hedo wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]hedo wrote:
That strategy won’t work. This one will. Pick a local warlord that has respect and power. Back him quietly. Make sure you id his enemies for him with your western voodoo magic (predators and spy satellites). Help him become the strongest warlord. Make sure he crushes AQ and any other anti-western groups. Keep a short leash on him. Slowly introduce reforms to the Afgani’s so they decide they would rather make money than blow each other up.[/quote]

That could have worked.

Whether it will work 8 years into the war is another matter.

[/quote]

Well after 8 yrs. the allies should know who the strongest warlord is. Get a CIA or MI6 guy on the inside as one of his aides so we can keep an eye on him if he veers off course.[/quote]

The problem is that if they hate Americans they will also hate an Americas, um, partner.

Plus, the strongest one already will be in power once America leaves, he has no reason to cooperate.

And then I seriously doubt that the Obama administration can pull something like that off.

[/quote]

I agree with you about the Obama administration not being able to pull it off.

Guess we could seek out the second most powerful warlord…and see what kind of ambition he has to be number one. Greed always works to motivate people.

22

[quote]hedo wrote:
That strategy won’t work. This one will. Pick a local warlord that has respect and power. Back him quietly. Make sure you id his enemies for him with your western voodoo magic (predators and spy satellites). Help him become the strongest warlord. Make sure he crushes AQ and any other anti-western groups. Keep a short leash on him. Slowly introduce reforms to the Afgani’s so they decide they would rather make money than blow each other up.[/quote]

Your plan may be taking shape:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5gV5XehsgR2zUnU2hACvPTtiEI5Zg

23

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]spyoptic wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]TQB wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TQB wrote:

[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
You cannot negotiate with Taliban as they’re not organized like a regular army.
Sure, they have certain frontmen like bin Laden, the occasional training camp, even a think-tank (or cave;).
But that’s about it.

You can negotiate with a few clans or warlords, not with the “Taliban”, a construct that today stands for international and radically islamist terrorism.

[/quote]

Not really. 1)They ran Afghanistan and the country was more stable than anytime since the early seventies. 2)They probably have around 20% of the population as supporters. 3) Once the international force goes home, they will still be there.

At best, that Afghanistan will not support al Qaida, not be linked to extremist movements elsewhere and acheive a certain degree of tolerance for other points of views among its population. The two first are acheivable, the latter will require more effort. Massive funding/bribes will play a major role.

Afghanistan will not be a liberal democracy where rights of women and minorities will be fully respected. It is more a question at what level we can halt the slide.[/quote]

You do not ever negotiate with terrorists, period.[/quote]

Of course you do. I was covering Afghanistan at the end of the 90’s when the US was very eager to put a pipeline though Afghanistan from Turkmenistan to the Arabian Sea. This was of course so that Iranian terrorists could not stop the flow. Human rights abuses in Afghanistan were not a major deterrent.
[/quote]

Plus, their tactics are similar to those used against the SU.

When those tactics are terrorism now they must have been terrorism then.

Was Ronald Reagans administration giving aid and comfort to terrorist?

[/quote]

Thats irrelevant because theres no place for morality in international politics; each nation must work or eliminate competition depending on their own interests, which change frequently, so that your ally one year turns into an adversary the other.
[/quote]

But that is not how it is sold to the American public.

It is never about the US military doing the bidding of at best amoral people but always about the “most noble and brightest” bringing the light of civilization to undeserving savages.

This whole idea of “we dont negotiate with terrorists” is pointless when you a) do it all the time and b) define everyone as a terrorist defending his country against a US invasion.

It is almost as if many Americans expect everyone on this planet to roll over and spread them whenever the US federal government makes a demand, just because they themselves do that almost by instinct now.

[/quote]

haha true but thats how all governments push their bullshit - nationalism.

24

Maybe I was sadly wrong:

25

It seems Karzai has been wrong all along.

Apparently he has been having talks with a person claiming to represent the Taliban. This guy was an imposter.

Maybe some people here were correct in saying there is NO moderate Taliban.

Nato and Karzai look like laughing stocks.

26

[quote]orion wrote:
This whole idea of “we dont negotiate with terrorists” is pointless when you a) do it all the time and b) define everyone as a terrorist defending his country against a US invasion.

[/quote]

Finally, somebody fucking gets it.

27

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
This whole idea of “we dont negotiate with terrorists” is pointless when you a) do it all the time and b) define everyone as a terrorist defending his country against a US invasion.

[/quote]

Finally, somebody fucking gets it.[/quote]

Common sense tells me that when we try to kill our enemy we are in essence attempting to stop them. I wonder how horrible it would be to speak directly to them to get them to stop? Call it negotiating, or anything else you like. The point is to stop the killing. We can kill more of them as they kill more of us, or we can talk them out of continuing to take this path.

28

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
This whole idea of “we dont negotiate with terrorists” is pointless when you a) do it all the time and b) define everyone as a terrorist defending his country against a US invasion.

[/quote]

Finally, somebody fucking gets it.[/quote]

Common sense tells me that when we try to kill our enemy we are in essence attempting to stop them. I wonder how horrible it would be to speak directly to them to get them to stop? Call it negotiating, or anything else you like. The point is to stop the killing. We can kill more of them as they kill more of us, or we can talk them out of continuing to take this path.

[/quote]

There is no significant terrorist threat to America. “the terrorist” is simply the war mongers boogeyman and a mindless way for the right to drum up support for any cause they want.

Remember Bush and is “Either you’re with us or you’re with the terrorists” bullshit?

Yeah.

29

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
This whole idea of “we dont negotiate with terrorists” is pointless when you a) do it all the time and b) define everyone as a terrorist defending his country against a US invasion.

[/quote]

Finally, somebody fucking gets it.[/quote]

Common sense tells me that when we try to kill our enemy we are in essence attempting to stop them. I wonder how horrible it would be to speak directly to them to get them to stop? Call it negotiating, or anything else you like. The point is to stop the killing. We can kill more of them as they kill more of us, or we can talk them out of continuing to take this path.

[/quote]

What are the odds the Taliban will stop being what they are?

30

[quote]Big Banana wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
This whole idea of “we dont negotiate with terrorists” is pointless when you a) do it all the time and b) define everyone as a terrorist defending his country against a US invasion.

[/quote]

Finally, somebody fucking gets it.[/quote]

Common sense tells me that when we try to kill our enemy we are in essence attempting to stop them. I wonder how horrible it would be to speak directly to them to get them to stop? Call it negotiating, or anything else you like. The point is to stop the killing. We can kill more of them as they kill more of us, or we can talk them out of continuing to take this path.

[/quote]

What are the odds the Taliban will stop being what they are?[/quote]

First of all I don’t think we need to stop them from being what they are. We only need to stop them from trying to kill us. Secondly, even if the odds of trying to stop them are 100-1 it’s still worth a try as we can kill them anyway if that doesn’t work.

And to Cap - Tell the 3000 who died in the TERRORIST ATTACK that there is no threat of terrorism in America.

31

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Big Banana wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
This whole idea of “we dont negotiate with terrorists” is pointless when you a) do it all the time and b) define everyone as a terrorist defending his country against a US invasion.

[/quote]

Finally, somebody fucking gets it.[/quote]

Common sense tells me that when we try to kill our enemy we are in essence attempting to stop them. I wonder how horrible it would be to speak directly to them to get them to stop? Call it negotiating, or anything else you like. The point is to stop the killing. We can kill more of them as they kill more of us, or we can talk them out of continuing to take this path.

[/quote]

What are the odds the Taliban will stop being what they are?[/quote]

First of all I don’t think we need to stop them from being what they are. We only need to stop them from trying to kill us. Secondly, even if the odds of trying to stop them are 100-1 it’s still worth a try as we can kill them anyway if that doesn’t work.

And to Cap - Tell the 3000 who died in the TERRORIST ATTACK that there is no threat of terrorism in America.
[/quote]

Yawn.

Was waiting for the 9/11 card again.

One terrorist attack nearly a fucking decade ago does not mean there is a significant terrorist threat today.

Get over it.

32

[quote]Big Banana wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
This whole idea of “we dont negotiate with terrorists” is pointless when you a) do it all the time and b) define everyone as a terrorist defending his country against a US invasion.

[/quote]

Finally, somebody fucking gets it.[/quote]

Common sense tells me that when we try to kill our enemy we are in essence attempting to stop them. I wonder how horrible it would be to speak directly to them to get them to stop? Call it negotiating, or anything else you like. The point is to stop the killing. We can kill more of them as they kill more of us, or we can talk them out of continuing to take this path.

[/quote]

What are the odds the Taliban will stop being what they are?[/quote]

Who cares?

They never operated outiside of Afganistan, with the possible exception of Pakistan.

33

[quote]ZEB wrote:

First of all I don’t think we need to stop them from being what they are. We only need to stop them from trying to kill us. Secondly, even if the odds of trying to stop them are 100-1 it’s still worth a try as we can kill them anyway if that doesn’t work.

And to Cap - Tell the 3000 who died in the TERRORIST ATTACK that there is no threat of terrorism in America.
[/quote]

That comes down to the question if we are in Afghanistan to help the people throw off the yoke of oppression or to kill OBL. If it is to kill OBL then we should get out because he isn’t there.

We don’t need to talk to them to leave.

34

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Big Banana wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
This whole idea of “we dont negotiate with terrorists” is pointless when you a) do it all the time and b) define everyone as a terrorist defending his country against a US invasion.

[/quote]

Finally, somebody fucking gets it.[/quote]

Common sense tells me that when we try to kill our enemy we are in essence attempting to stop them. I wonder how horrible it would be to speak directly to them to get them to stop? Call it negotiating, or anything else you like. The point is to stop the killing. We can kill more of them as they kill more of us, or we can talk them out of continuing to take this path.

[/quote]

What are the odds the Taliban will stop being what they are?[/quote]

First of all I don’t think we need to stop them from being what they are. We only need to stop them from trying to kill us. Secondly, even if the odds of trying to stop them are 100-1 it’s still worth a try as we can kill them anyway if that doesn’t work.

And to Cap - Tell the 3000 who died in the TERRORIST ATTACK that there is no threat of terrorism in America.
[/quote]

If you define “threat” as “as likely as being hit by a meteor”, well then terrorism is a terrible threat.

35

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Big Banana wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
This whole idea of “we dont negotiate with terrorists” is pointless when you a) do it all the time and b) define everyone as a terrorist defending his country against a US invasion.

[/quote]

Finally, somebody fucking gets it.[/quote]

Common sense tells me that when we try to kill our enemy we are in essence attempting to stop them. I wonder how horrible it would be to speak directly to them to get them to stop? Call it negotiating, or anything else you like. The point is to stop the killing. We can kill more of them as they kill more of us, or we can talk them out of continuing to take this path.

[/quote]

What are the odds the Taliban will stop being what they are?[/quote]

First of all I don’t think we need to stop them from being what they are. We only need to stop them from trying to kill us. Secondly, even if the odds of trying to stop them are 100-1 it’s still worth a try as we can kill them anyway if that doesn’t work.

And to Cap - Tell the 3000 who died in the TERRORIST ATTACK that there is no threat of terrorism in America.
[/quote]

If you define “threat” as “as likely as being hit by a meteor”, well then terrorism is a terrible threat.

[/quote]

You’ll also note the strawman he used – I never said there is “no threat”, I said there is “no significant threat”.

36

Cause of Death Lifetime Odds
Heart Disease

1-in-5

Cancer

1-in-7

Stroke

1-in-23

Accidental Injury

1-in-36

Motor Vehicle Accident*

1-in-100

Intentional Self-harm (suicide)

1-in-121

Falling Down

1-in-246

Assault by Firearm

1-in-325

Fire or Smoke

1-in-1,116

Natural Forces (heat, cold, storms, quakes, etc.)

1-in-3,357

Electrocution*

1-in-5,000

Drowning

1-in-8,942

Air Travel Accident*

1-in-20,000

Flood* (included also in Natural Forces above)

1-in-30,000

Legal Execution

1-in-58,618

Tornado* (included also in Natural Forces above)

1-in-60,000

Lightning Strike (included also in Natural Forces above)

1-in-83,930

Snake, Bee or other Venomous Bite or Sting*

1-in-100,000

Earthquake (included also in Natural Forces above)

1-in-131,890

Dog Attack

1-in-147,717

Asteroid Impact*

1-in-200,000**

Tsunami* 1-in-500,000
Fireworks Discharge

1-in-615,488

** Perhaps 1-in-500,000

Risk of dying in a terrorist attack: 1 -in- 20 000 000-30 000 000

It is really not worth bothering.

37

Its worth bothering when the word “terrorist” has the ability to scare everyone into magically agreeing with everything you say.

Been waiting years for people to catch on to this.

38

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]TQB wrote:

[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
You cannot negotiate with Taliban as they’re not organized like a regular army.
Sure, they have certain frontmen like bin Laden, the occasional training camp, even a think-tank (or cave;).
But that’s about it.

You can negotiate with a few clans or warlords, not with the “Taliban”, a construct that today stands for international and radically islamist terrorism.

[/quote]

Not really. 1)They ran Afghanistan and the country was more stable than anytime since the early seventies. 2)They probably have around 20% of the population as supporters. 3) Once the international force goes home, they will still be there.

At best, that Afghanistan will not support al Qaida, not be linked to extremist movements elsewhere and acheive a certain degree of tolerance for other points of views among its population. The two first are acheivable, the latter will require more effort. Massive funding/bribes will play a major role.

Afghanistan will not be a liberal democracy where rights of women and minorities will be fully respected. It is more a question at what level we can halt the slide.[/quote]

You do not ever negotiate with terrorists, period.[/quote]

You can negotiate, just be ready to back it up.

39

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Big Banana wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
This whole idea of “we dont negotiate with terrorists” is pointless when you a) do it all the time and b) define everyone as a terrorist defending his country against a US invasion.

[/quote]

Finally, somebody fucking gets it.[/quote]

Common sense tells me that when we try to kill our enemy we are in essence attempting to stop them. I wonder how horrible it would be to speak directly to them to get them to stop? Call it negotiating, or anything else you like. The point is to stop the killing. We can kill more of them as they kill more of us, or we can talk them out of continuing to take this path.

[/quote]

What are the odds the Taliban will stop being what they are?[/quote]

First of all I don’t think we need to stop them from being what they are. We only need to stop them from trying to kill us. Secondly, even if the odds of trying to stop them are 100-1 it’s still worth a try as we can kill them anyway if that doesn’t work.

And to Cap - Tell the 3000 who died in the TERRORIST ATTACK that there is no threat of terrorism in America.
[/quote]

Yawn.

Was waiting for the 9/11 card again.

One terrorist attack nearly a fucking decade ago does not mean there is a significant terrorist threat today.

Get over it.[/quote]

Why don’t you tell a family member who lost a loved one to the most horrific attack ever to take place on mainland America to “Get over it”.

I guess it’s easy to be insensitive when no one you know lost their life.

40

[quote]Big Banana wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

First of all I don’t think we need to stop them from being what they are. We only need to stop them from trying to kill us. Secondly, even if the odds of trying to stop them are 100-1 it’s still worth a try as we can kill them anyway if that doesn’t work.

And to Cap - Tell the 3000 who died in the TERRORIST ATTACK that there is no threat of terrorism in America.
[/quote]

That comes down to the question if we are in Afghanistan to help the people throw off the yoke of oppression or to kill OBL. If it is to kill OBL then we should get out because he isn’t there.

We don’t need to talk to them to leave.[/quote]

Who said we should leave?