Home› A Moving Train

US to back "reintegration" of Taliban

he still standshe still stands Posts: 2,835
edited January 2010 in A Moving Train
I'm confused... weren't we fighting these guys just a few years ago?

Doesn't this set up a Taliban controlled local government in the valleys of Afghanistan, just like it was pre-9/11?

I'm not saying we should be fighting them... I just think it is funny that our 19 year olds were killing them a few years ago and now our government supports the Taliban who aren't supporters of Al-Qaeda. (by the way... how the hell do you know which ones do and which ones don't?)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100127/ap_ ... fghanistan

(disclosure: I know very little about these wars because I generally don't follow the news... so feel free to correct any errors in my statements above.)
Everything not forbidden is compulsory and eveything not compulsory is forbidden. You are free... free to do what the government says you can do.
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • OutOfBreathOutOfBreath Posts: 1,804
    Nah, this is more of a "lay down your arms and return to society, and we will help you" aimed at the non-fundamentalist fighters. I guess kinda like a weapons amnesty with the incentive of aid and development to sugar the deal.

    I've heard worse plans.

    Peace
    Dan
    "YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death

    "Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
  • Drowned OutDrowned Out Posts: 6,056
    I'd be intersested in hearing the conditions of this debt relief...

    I found this lil footnote interesting:
    Meanwhile, NATO said it had reached agreement with Kazakhstan to open a new supply route for international forces through Central Asia, offering an alternative to the alliance's main logistics chain through Pakistan, which has come under repeated militant attack.
    nice. let's get Kazakhstan more involved. I'm sure Russia will be thrilled. Maybe they'll get lucky and find an excuse to float some drones over their territory too. :roll:
  • he still standshe still stands Posts: 2,835
    OutOfBreath wrote:
    Nah, this is more of a "lay down your arms and return to society, and we will help you" aimed at the non-fundamentalist fighters. I guess kinda like a weapons amnesty with the incentive of aid and development to sugar the deal.

    I've heard worse plans.

    Peace
    Dan

    Yeah I want us to stop the fighting especially with these guys too, but I'm getting conflicting messages. The US just sent 30,000 additional troops to the region to fight the fundamentalist Al-Qaeda guys, but we want help from the Taliban (who we fought in late 2001), to fight off the "terrorists" who are there because we have troops there, and you only know who is a "terrorist" when they shoot at you, and as soon as the US leaves the Taliban will take over again, inevitably going down the "fundamentalist" route again... I just don't get it.
    Everything not forbidden is compulsory and eveything not compulsory is forbidden. You are free... free to do what the government says you can do.
  • Pepe SilviaPepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    he still stands wrote:
    OutOfBreath wrote:
    Nah, this is more of a "lay down your arms and return to society, and we will help you" aimed at the non-fundamentalist fighters. I guess kinda like a weapons amnesty with the incentive of aid and development to sugar the deal.

    I've heard worse plans.

    Peace
    Dan

    Yeah I want us to stop the fighting especially with these guys too, but I'm getting conflicting messages. The US just sent 30,000 additional troops to the region to fight the fundamentalist Al-Qaeda guys, but we want help from the Taliban (who we fought in late 2001), to fight off the "terrorists" who are there because we have troops there, and you only know who is a "terrorist" when they shoot at you, and as soon as the US leaves the Taliban will take over again, inevitably going down the "fundamentalist" route again... I just don't get it.


    welcome to us foreign policy....
    don't compete; coexist

    what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?

    "I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama

    when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
    i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
  • rebornFixerrebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    he still stands wrote:
    Yeah I want us to stop the fighting especially with these guys too, but I'm getting conflicting messages. The US just sent 30,000 additional troops to the region to fight the fundamentalist Al-Qaeda guys, but we want help from the Taliban (who we fought in late 2001), to fight off the "terrorists" who are there because we have troops there, and you only know who is a "terrorist" when they shoot at you, and as soon as the US leaves the Taliban will take over again, inevitably going down the "fundamentalist" route again... I just don't get it.

    Maybe its just me, but it doesn't seem that confusing. An increase in force numbers to send a message to the fundamentalists who are unlikely to stop fighting, and an "olive branch" to the moderates who are fighting largely because there are foreign troops on their soil. If nothing else, this sort of overture is exactly what many wanted ... At least its an attempt to do something besides drop more bombs. Like OutofBreath said, I've heard worse ideas.
  • Pepe SilviaPepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    interestingly enough, i was flipping around the tv today and on national geographic there was a commercial for something like camp leatherneck which is about the "us marines fighting the elusive taliban"
    don't compete; coexist

    what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?

    "I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama

    when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
    i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
Sign In or Register to comment.