US dealmaking with Taliban?

[jimnyc]

I thought we didn't negotiate with terrorists? Why is the Obama administration making deals with the Taliban? Is this the message Obama sends, fight with us for a long time and then we'll come to the table and deal with terrorists?

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/asia/la-fg-afghanistan-attack-20110619,0,6553593.story?track=rss

[Kat]

Oh how times have changed. Pretty disgusting, isn't it? :mad:

[jimnyc]

I just can't imagine even this shithead Obama and Shrillary agreeing to sit down with the Taliban - but they are, and yes, it's sickening.

[maineman]

at the end of the day, it's their fucking country and not ours. If the Afghan people would prefer to live under taliban rule and are content to live in the eleventh century, who the fuck are we to demand they change?

As long as the taliban does not actively export their brand of Islamic fundamentalism, as long as they don't send their people to fly airplanes into our buildings, I am perfectly willing to let them live in whatever squalor they chose to live in.

If we can negotiate that sort of arrangement, I would applaud it. Why wouldn't ANY american applaud it?

[jimnyc]

at the end of the day, it's their fucking country and not ours. If the Afghan people would prefer to live under taliban rule and are content to live in the eleventh century, who the fuck are we to demand they change?

As long as the taliban does not actively export their brand of Islamic fundamentalism, as long as they don't send their people to fly airplanes into our buildings, I am perfectly willing to let them live in whatever squalor they chose to live in.

If we can negotiate that sort of arrangement, I would applaud it. Why wouldn't ANY american applaud it?

So, should we negotiate with Al Qaeda next? What other terrorist organizations should we negotiate with, in your pathetic little mind?

It never ceases to amaze me just how much you're willing to support the (D), whether right or wrong. It also doesn't surprise me, that as a man who "claims" to be former military, you would think it's a good idea to go to the negotiation table with terrorists.

Btw, shithead, weren't you complaining about the spelling and capitalization of other just a day ago or so? You would think former military would AT LEAST capitalize "American".

[Kat]

at the end of the day, it's their fucking country and not ours. If the Afghan people would prefer to live under taliban rule and are content to live in the eleventh century, who the fuck are we to demand they change?

As long as the taliban does not actively export their brand of Islamic fundamentalism, as long as they don't send their people to fly airplanes into our buildings, I am perfectly willing to let them live in whatever squalor they chose to live in.

If we can negotiate that sort of arrangement, I would applaud it. Why wouldn't ANY american applaud it?


The Afghan people? Where is anything said about what the Afghan people want?

[maineman]

So, should we negotiate with Al Qaeda next? What other terrorist organizations should we negotiate with, in your pathetic little mind?

It never ceases to amaze me just how much you're willing to support the (D), whether right or wrong. It also doesn't surprise me, that as a man who "claims" to be former military, you would think it's a good idea to go to the negotiation table with terrorists.

Btw, shithead, weren't you complaining about the spelling and capitalization of other just a day ago or so? You would think former military would AT LEAST capitalize "American".

I have ZERO problem with negotiating withe the taliban. they WERE, as much as we hate to admit it, the legitimately elected government before we invaded. If they agree to not export their brand of Islam beyond their borders, and if the people of afghanistan are OK with them participating in their government, I have no problem with them and wonder why you would either.

and, ASSFUCK, if you could produce ONE SINGLE SOLITARY POST from me where I EVER complained about someone's fucking CAPITALIZATION of words, that would be real fucking cool. If not, I doubt that a spineless fucking worm like you would EVER admit that you made a mistake.

I'll wait.

but I'd fucking die if I held my breath waiting, that's for sure.

[jimnyc]

I have ZERO problem with negotiating withe the taliban. they WERE, as much as we hate to admit it, the legitimately elected government before we invaded. If they agree to not export their brand of Islam beyond their borders, and if the people of afghanistan are OK with them participating in their government, I have no problem with them and wonder why you would either.

and, ASSFUCK, if you could produce ONE SINGLE SOLITARY POST from me where I EVER complained about someone's fucking CAPITALIZATION of words, that would be real fucking cool. If not, I doubt that a spineless fucking worm like you would EVER admit that you made a mistake.

I'll wait.

but I'd fucking die if I held my breath waiting, that's for sure.

Did you preach this way? Or did you learn this from your years of making believe you were in the military? Maybe just from years and years of lying?

[revelarts]

I thought we didn't negotiate with terrorists? Why is the Obama administration making deals with the Taliban? Is this the message Obama sends, fight with us for a long time and then we'll come to the table and deal with terrorists?

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/asia/la-fg-afghanistan-attack-20110619,0,6553593.story?track=rss

Umm wait a minute

OK the taliban harbored alQudia and we Attacked Afghan to get Bin-Laden and AlQuida. No taliban ever attacked us. They just refused to give us Bin Laden. Other than that they are just fight to get back control of
THEIR COUNTRY from foreign invaders. The CIA Cheifs under Bush said Alquida left Afghan YEARS AGO.
There Are no Taliban "terrorist" ANYWHERE, except Afghanistan. If you can even call them that, We Usually call them Insurgents.

That's 1st.

2nd
Until 911 the Taliban was A-OK with GW Bush, the Taliban were special guest of the Prez In the U.S.. none of their treatment of Women or hard core Islamic laws and persecutions were a problem until 9-11.

While Bush was in power we were willingly PAYING the Taliban second hand. I posted a thread about it a year or so ago that got ZERO response. Where was the Outrage for that? no wait our friend from Ireland responded saying that it's been common knowledge in the U.K.. for years.


...The real secret to trucking in Afghanistan is security on the perilous roads, controlled by warlords, tribal militias, insurgents and Taliban commanders. The American executive I talked to was fairly specific about it: "The army is basically paying the Taliban not to shoot at them. It is Department of Defense money."

That is something everyone seems to agree on. Mike Hanna is the project manager for a trucking company called Afghan American Army Services. The company, which still operates in Afghanistan, had been trucking for the United States for years but lost out in the host nation trucking contract that NCL won. Hanna explained the security realities quite simply: "You are paying the people in the local areas – some are warlords, some are politicians in the police force – to move your trucks through."...


...Welcome to the wartime contracting bazaar in Afghanistan. It is a virtual carnival of improbable characters and shady connections, with former CIA * officials and ex–military officers joining hands with former Taliban and mujahideen to collect US government funds in the name of the war effort.

In this grotesque carnival, the US military's contractors are forced to pay suspected insurgents to protect American supply routes. It is an accepted fact of the military logistics operation in Afghanistan that the US government funds the very forces American troops are fighting. And it is a deadly irony, because these funds add up to a huge amount of money for the Taliban.

"It's a big part of their income," one of the top Afghan government security officials admits. In fact, US military officials in Kabul estimate that a minimum of 10% of the Pentagon's logistics contracts – hundreds of millions of dollars – consists of payments to insurgents. ...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/13/us-trucks-security-taliban


Does anyone else see how crazy this is.
It's a farce, If we are paying the Taliban to "not shot at our supply lines", WHO IS IN CONTROL?
It Ain't us.
Obama Increase troops to stupid levels and we still are hunkerd down in a few main cities.
For What?
They are not "terrorist" and we are not winning. As harsh a blow that it is to our pride. Were in good company, starting with Rome to the USSR.

Prez Karzi Is as corrupt as they come , a drug dealer and not much better at all with women's rights.
WHY should we spend another nickel or loose another soldier there?
There's no good reason Jim.
Not one.

The 1000 AlQuida world wide have moved on. so should we Jim.

[jimnyc]

The taliban are a terrorist organization. We also had "relations" with Saddam before he went nuts on his reign of terror. Just because prior to 9/11 they did one thing doesn't mean they aren't a terror group now who also support other terrorists. We have/had a $10 million dollar reward for their leader. They supported Al Qaeda. They gave safe haven and terrorist bases/camps to Al Qaeda for training.

[Gaffer]

al qaeda consist mostly of arabs and other foreign nationals, taliban are afghans. Other than that there is no difference in their goals and politics. The taliban were not elected to office, they took control through violence. They were forced out the same way with US support. They are made up of warlords and thugs with a seventh century mentality.

karzi is a corrupt warlord they call a president. Most of the country is corrupt and not worth bothering with other than a place to practice killing al qaeda and taliban. Dealing with them is just giving them time to rebuild and attack again.

[fj1200]

The taliban are a terrorist organization.

What are there terrorist goals? How long should we continue this way against the Taliban?

[jimnyc]

What are there terrorist goals? How long should we continue this way against the Taliban?

Kill, abuse & power.

Until they are eliminated or surrender.

[fj1200]

Kill, abuse & power.

Some clarification: What are their terrorist goals against the US? Also, are you now supporting the Libya action as Qaddafi has similar goals?


Until they are eliminated or surrender.

Are they worth the effort if they are no threat to the US?

[jimnyc]

Some clarification: What are their terrorist goals against the US?

The supported Al Qeada and allowed them to train there before 9/11, and afterwards.


Also, are you now supporting the Libya action as Qaddafi has similar goals?

Not sure what one man's goal is, but he attacked his own citizens, he should see the same treatment as Saddam as far as I'm concerned.


Are they worth the effort if they are no threat to the US?

ALL terrorist organizations are a threat to all of us. You allow them to fester and they only get stronger and grow. You eliminate them or have them surrender.

If a country has an epidemic and many are getting sick and dying - are they worth our effort?

[Gaffer]

What are there terrorist goals? How long should we continue this way against the Taliban?

They are the same goals as they have always been. To destroy democracy and establish sharia law throughout the world.

There is only one way to stop them and that is to destroy islam. It won't happen because no one in our government or any other government will even admit islam is the enemy.

You get rid of rabies by killing off all the animals with rabies.

[revelarts]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/07/afghan-contractors-senate-armed-services_n_754965.html

Senate Report: U.S. Bases In Afghanistan Employed Taliban-Linked Mercenaries

WASHINGTON — Heavy U.S. reliance on private security in Afghanistan has helped to line the pockets of the Taliban and threatens the safety of coalition troops because contractors often don't vet local recruits and wind up hiring warlords and thugs, Senate investigators said Thursday.

The report by the Senate Armed Services Committee follows a separate congressional inquiry in June that concluded that trucking contractors pay tens of millions of dollars a year to local warlords for convoy protection....


http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/09/03/us-globalpost-afghanistan-update-idUSTRE5823IL20090903

...KABUL (GlobalPost) — The United States Agency for International Development has opened an investigation into allegations that its funds for road and bridge construction in Afghanistan are ending up in the hands of the Taliban, through a protection racket for contractors.

And House Foreign Affairs Committee member, Rep. Bill Delahunt (D-Mass.) vowed to hold hearings on the issue in the fall, saying: "The idea that American taxpayer dollars are ending up with the Taliban is a case for grave concern."

U.S. officials confirmed that the preliminary investigation and the proposed hearings were sparked by a GlobalPost special report on the funding of the Taliban last month that uncovered a process that has been an open secret in Afghanistan for years among those in international aid organizations.

The report exposed that the Taliban takes a percentage of the billions of dollars in aid from U.S. and other international coalition members that goes to large organizations and their subcontractors for development projects, in exchange for protection in remote areas controlled by the insurgency....

Ok Gaffer Jim
I get it your afraid of the Taliban and AlQuida.
And you want to KILL THEM ALL.

Well Both Bush and Obama have been trying for the last 11 years, And the generals tell us that the War in Iraq and Afghanstan have acutully CREATED more fighters that there were before.

The first way to stop getting into a hole is stop digging.
You guys want to get a backhoe.
I hate to break it to you but gun is not the ultimate solution.
And your not going to kill all of Islam, frankly that's just crazy talk.
What's your serious solution?

the Above Quotes and the ones previous Show plainly that strategically we are not even close to Winner in Afghanistan.

WE ARE PAYING OUR ENEMY, TO PROTECT US AND NOT TO KILL US.?!?!?!!

Um we need to take some -wake the heck up- pills folks.
This is not what winning looks like.

IF you are correct and the KALIF is around the corner. We've got to come up with a better plan. Or we'll be paying them to not kill us here.
Frankly gentlemen Guns and patriotism is not what the people of the Arab world need they need a new religion and that doesn't spread well by Guns.

[J.T]

I thought we didn't negotiate with terrorists? Why is the Obama administration making deals with the Taliban?

Since when does the State Dept. consider the Taliban to be a terrorist organization?


I just can't imagine even this shithead Obama and Shrillary agreeing to sit down with the Taliban - but they are, and yes, it's sickening.
Do you ever want to leave or not?



The Afghan people? Where is anything said about what the Afghan people want?
Why do we care what they want? If they're not willing to rise up and fight alongside us and see the creation of a legitimate and peaceable government conducive to stability in the world and region, then it is only natural for us to inflict our will upon them to secure our own safety.


Kill, abuse & power.

Until they are eliminated or surrender.
So you're another warmonger calling for an eternal war to feed the profits of the M-I Complex?

How many American lives are you willing to sacrifice to make a dollar for BAE systems?



The supported Al Qeada and allowed them to train there before 9/11, and afterwards.


We trained and armed them in the first place and have had so-called terrorists at the White House.

Talk about throwing stones in a glass house..

[Gaffer]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/07/afghan-contractors-senate-armed-services_n_754965.html

Senate Report: U.S. Bases In Afghanistan Employed Taliban-Linked Mercenaries



http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/09/03/us-globalpost-afghanistan-update-idUSTRE5823IL20090903


Ok Gaffer Jim
I get it your afraid of the Taliban and AlQuida.
And you want to KILL THEM ALL.

Well Both Bush and Obama have been trying for the last 11 years, And the generals tell us that the War in Iraq and Afghanstan have acutully CREATED more fighters that there were before.

The first way to stop getting into a hole is stop digging.
You guys want to get a backhoe.
I hate to break it to you but gun is not the ultimate solution.
And your not going to kill all of Islam, frankly that's just crazy talk.
What's your serious solution?

the Above Quotes and the ones previous Show plainly that strategically we are not even close to Winner in Afghanistan.

WE ARE PAYING OUR ENEMY, TO PROTECT US AND NOT TO KILL US.?!?!?!!

Um we need to take some -wake the heck up- pills folks.
This is not what winning looks like.

IF you are correct and the KALIF is around the corner. We've got to come up with a better plan. Or we'll be paying them to not kill us here.
Frankly gentlemen Guns and patriotism is not what the people of the Arab world need they need a new religion and that doesn't spread well by Guns.

Sorry Rev, but unfortunately I'm not in charge. If I were I would begin withdrawing the troops. I would establish a naval and air base in Israel to begin with. Replace the yemen port with and Israeli one. I would stop all immigration from the middle east and ship out anyone that doesn't declare allah as second to the constitution. I would close down all the madrassa schools. And explain to the entire middle east that any attacks on us or our allies by islamic terrorist will be met with immediate carpet bombing of mecca. All other islamic sites will be targeted after that if attacks continue. Oh, and iran's nuclear sites would cease to exist. There would be no muslims in my cabinet.

That's just for starters. I know, I'm a heartless bastard.

[Kathianne]

LOL! More of that honesty I've come to know and admire, not to mention learned a thing or two from! :thumb:

[jimnyc]

Since when does the State Dept. consider the Taliban to be a terrorist organization?

Are terrorists not on that list "good people"? I won't play your semantics game. The Taliban ARE a terrorist organization whether our state department declares it or not. What about Mullah Omar? If you're run by people that you have a $25 million dollar bounty on, let's assume they are not the "good people".


Do you ever want to leave or not?


When the job is done, which is eliminating them, yes. If liberals won't let our Men fight properly, then bring them home.


So you're another warmonger calling for an eternal war to feed the profits of the M-I Complex?

Yeah, that's exactly what I wrote. And you chain yourself to trees on the weekends and run around wearing pink all week long.


We trained and armed them in the first place and have had so-called terrorists at the White House.

Talk about throwing stones in a glass house..

I didn't train them nor did the people they terrorized or still do nor do the men fighting them.

And yes, I agree, they should come up with a new terrorist label for someone like Obama who can bring down a country so quickly.

[J.T]

When the job is done, which is eliminating them, yes.

So you never want to leave...

Americans are stupid. They never learn.

YOU'RE FIGHTING BIN LADEN'S WAR FOR HIM, YOU STUPID FUCK


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEXphFgYryE


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1PjtXkSbew


On 11 March 2005, Al-Quds Al-Arabi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Quds_Al-Arabi) published extracts from Saif al-Adel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saif_al-Adel)'s document "Al Quaeda's Strategy to the Year 2020".<sup id="cite_ref-40" class="reference">[41] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda#cite_note-40)</sup><sup id="cite_ref-41" class="reference">[42] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda#cite_note-41)</sup> Abdel Bari Atwan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdel_Bari_Atwan) summarizes this strategy as comprising five stages:


Provoke the United States into invading a Muslim country.
Incite local resistance to occupying forces.
Expand the conflict to neighboring countries, and engage the U.S. in a long war of attrition.
Convert al-Qaeda into an ideology and set of operating principles that can be loosely franchised in other countries without requiring direct command and control, and via these franchises incite attacks against countries allied with the U.S. until they withdraw from the conflict, as happened with the 2004 Madrid train bombings, but which did not have the same effect with the 7 July 2005 London bombings.
The U.S. economy will finally collapse under the strain of too many engagements in too many places, similarly to the Soviet war in Afghanistan. Arab regimes supported by the U.S. will then collapse, and a Wahhabi Caliphate will be installed across the region.

[jimnyc]

Tone it down and please refrain from making posts with huge letters like that. All it serves to do is make the post harder to read and make you look foolish.

** Edit ** I fixed it for you and made it fit the screen so others won't have trouble reading. :)

[jimnyc]

YOU'RE FIGHTING BIN LADEN'S WAR FOR HIM, YOU STUPID FUCK

Bin Laden's plan didn't go to well, he's now a rotting brown cockroach at the bottom of the sea.

[fj1200]

The supported Al Qeada and allowed them to train there before 9/11, and afterwards.

Was that past tense? The British hired Hessians.


Not sure what one man's goal is, but he attacked his own citizens, he should see the same treatment as Saddam as far as I'm concerned.

And we should be the police that decide that for all? Assad in Syria is no picnic, neither is Mugabe, neither is Kim Jong Il...


ALL terrorist organizations are a threat to all of us. You allow them to fester and they only get stronger and grow. You eliminate them or have them surrender.

Not all. Does the course of action for the past 10 years show any indication of either of your goals being attained?


If a country has an epidemic and many are getting sick and dying - are they worth our effort?

Not if the cure is worse or no better than the disease.

[fj1200]

They are the same goals as they have always been. To destroy democracy and establish sharia law throughout the world.

The Taliban's goals or the goal of Islam (buying your premise for the moment)? We're not going to win that war by sticking it out in Afghanistan.


There is only one way to stop them and that is to destroy islam. It won't happen because no one in our government or any other government will even admit islam is the enemy.

You get rid of rabies by killing off all the animals with rabies.

Certainly not in Afghanistan.

[J.T]

Bin Laden's plan didn't go to well, he's now a rotting brown cockroach at the bottom of the sea.
That's like saying our strategy in the American War for Independence didn't go well because Washington is dead now.

You really think we won the war when we kill bin laden? Then why are our men still being killed? :laugh:

[jimnyc]

That's like saying our strategy in the American War for Independence didn't go well because Washington is dead now.

You really think we won the war when we kill bin laden? Then why are our men still being killed? :laugh:

Where did I say we won?

[revelarts]

Excellent points JT!



So you never want to leave...

Americans are stupid. They never learn.

YOU'RE FIGHTING BIN LADEN'S WAR FOR HIM, YOU STUPID FUCK


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEXphFgYryE


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1PjtXkSbew


On 11 March 2005, Al-Quds Al-Arabi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Quds_Al-Arabi) published extracts from Saif al-Adel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saif_al-Adel)'s document "Al Quaeda's Strategy to the Year 2020".<sup id="cite_ref-40" class="reference">[41] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda#cite_note-40)</sup><sup id="cite_ref-41" class="reference">[42] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda#cite_note-41)</sup> Abdel Bari Atwan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdel_Bari_Atwan) summarizes this strategy as comprising five stages:


Provoke the United States into invading a Muslim country.
Incite local resistance to occupying forces.
Expand the conflict to neighboring countries, and engage the U.S. in a long war of attrition.
Convert al-Qaeda into an ideology and set of operating principles that can be loosely franchised in other countries without requiring direct command and control, and via these franchises incite attacks against countries allied with the U.S. until they withdraw from the conflict, as happened with the 2004 Madrid train bombings, but which did not have the same effect with the 7 July 2005 London bombings.
The U.S. economy will finally collapse under the strain of too many engagements in too many places, similarly to the Soviet war in Afghanistan. Arab regimes supported by the U.S. will then collapse, and a Wahhabi Caliphate will be installed across the region.


yeah, but we've got this big military and an enemy that hates us.
so we got to fight RIGHT?

To a man with Hammer every problem is a nail.

the U.S. Military is our hammer.
But you don't kill roaches and termites with hammers.

we've got to stop letting the enemy dicate the terms They teach SunTzu in the war collages still. But seems Bin Ladens the and the Afghans are the ones that have applied the lessons. we need to as well.


17. According as circumstances are favorable,
one should modify one's plans.


2. When you engage in actual fighting, if victory
is long in coming, then men's weapons will grow dull and
their ardor will be damped. If you lay siege to a town,
you will exhaust your strength.

3. Again, if the campaign is protracted, the resources
of the State will not be equal to the strain.

4. Now, when your weapons are dulled, your ardor damped,
your strength exhausted and your treasure spent,
other chieftains will spring up to take advantage
of your extremity. Then no man, however wise,
will be able to avert the consequences that must ensue.

6. There is no instance of a country having benefited
from prolonged warfare.