[1FastFox]

Alright, seriously... What the hell.

Obama is in talks with Taliban head Mullah Mohammed Omar and as a sign of good faith is release 5 hand picked Taliban leaders who are prisoners from Gitmo. Since when do we negotiate with terrorists?

I dont see this ending well for us...

Report: Taliban leader sent letter to Obama - CBS News

The only appropriate response to the letter in my eyes are "You made your bed, now sleep in it".

These terorists kill women in soccer stadiums for entertainment, what makes you think they are in any way interested in any kind of peace.

First we meddle in the middle east letting radical Muslims work on taking control of Egypt/Lybia and now this...

This is beyond disappointing...

[quadracer786]

[T-Lee. 30]

Would you prefer we try and talk with these ppl since they use to be our allies decades ago or should we just not even try and talk with them and keep the fight going. Women Usally stay mad at eachother and hold a lasting grudge Men usually try to talk out there differences to come to some kind of common ground. They need to communicate the soldiers on the ground through forign affairs cant do all the peacemaking it would help if the ppl up top opened up communication.

People want the President to take charge on things but when he does.... I just dont see how the talks will hurt at least they can come to an agreement of holding talks with all that is going on. I disagree with them putting out on the news every single thing that goes on.

[1FastFox]

No offense but fuck that. If I murdered your family but then called you up and said "You know, rather than being enemies why dont you come buy me dinner and we will talk about it."

What would your response be?

What does releasing 5 of their leaders that we have already captured and hold as one less terrorist that can harm us have to do with talking peace with them? Why should we even consider releasing them before any negotiations have ever began? This is beyond ridiculous...

I do wish the President would take more charge of situations but this is not the kind of taking charge we as a country need.

I dont see how this could possibly end well for us.

Theres a reason we dont negotiate with terrorists...

[T-Lee. 30]

Originally Posted by 1FastFox No offense but fuck that. If I murdered your family but then called you up and said "You know, rather than being enemies why dont you come buy me dinner and we will talk about it." What would your response be? What does releasing 5 of their leaders that we have already captured and hold as one less terrorist that can harm us have to do with talking peace with them? Why should we even consider releasing them before any negotiations have ever began? This is beyond ridiculous... I do wish the President would take more charge of situations but this is not the kind of taking charge we as a country need. I dont see how this could possibly end well for us. Theres a reason we dont negotiate with terrorists...

I see what you're saying. Im sure there are ALOT of moving parts that we or the media just dont see or hear about. Hopefully the head of Defense and the brass up top has an idea of what they are doing and have the best interest longterm in mind.

[T-Lee. 30]

Originally Posted by 1FastFox No offense but fuck that. If I murdered your family but then called you up and said "You know, rather than being enemies why dont you come buy me dinner and we will talk about it." What would your response be? ...

And the govt cant react the way some of us act on personal levels if that was the case we never would have put troops on ground we would have nuked the entire place or do daily airstrikes until no movement was spotted and then send in sweeping crews. But thats not the case and the govt want react that way.

[1FastFox]

Originally Posted by Rockwell29 And the govt cant react the way some of us act on personal levels if that was the case we never would have put troops on ground we would have nuked the entire place or do daily airstrikes until no movement was spotted and then send in sweeping crews. But thats not the case and the govt want react that way.

I disagree. I think the actions are equivilant on their own levels. We couldnt nuke them for the same reason I cant just set a bomb on the corner where dealers commonly reside. Because actions have consequences and if we broke out a nuke as a response it would cause problems we are no where close to wanting to deal with. If we did that do you know how many countries would be all up our ass? It would be the same as if I bombed that corner as I would have brothers and friends sending bullets through my window before I could microwave a bag of popcorn. Then you have police intervention ( Russia ) all over me because regardless of if they agree with my actions it poses a threat as it shows Im dangerous and impulsive and there is no telling what I might lash out about in the future.

[nileppezdel77!]

Originally Posted by 1FastFox Why should we even consider releasing them before any negotiations have ever began?

"An administration official would say only that the message represented views consistent with what Taliban emissaries had been telling U.S. officials during the clandestine meetings... [C]landestine meetings between U.S. and Taliban representatives began last year"

Apparently we already have been. Besides, this is all conjecture, isn't it. We're hearing about what the administration is "considering," not "doing" are we not? Since when are we under the impression that Obama is consistent with the things he considers and the things he actually does?

[1FastFox]

Originally Posted by nileppezdel77! "An administration official would say only that the message represented views consistent with what Taliban emissaries had been telling U.S. officials during the clandestine meetings... [C]landestine meetings between U.S. and Taliban representatives began last year" Apparently we already have been. Besides, this is all conjecture, isn't it. We're hearing about what the administration is "considering," not "doing" are we not? Since when are we under the impression that Obama is consistent with the things he considers and the things he actually does?

I find it pretty unnerving that the US has been in discussion for the past year and this is the first peep we have heard from the media about it. What else is going on that we dont know about?

But that is a valid point that what Obama says and does are two totally separate things. But I dont see how it was under consideration. Its simple... We dont negotiate with terrorists. The answer should have been put simply along the lines of "Fuck off".

[codycat91]

And those people that we released, do you think they are gonna be like "Oh, thank you U.S. so much for releasing us, you're so nice." or "Fuck you U.S. motherfuckers that held us captive and may or may not have tortured us."? We're just freeing more people that are pissed at the U.S.


Sent from my Autoguide iPhone app

[nileppezdel77!]

Originally Posted by 1FastFox What else is going on that we dont know about?

Probably quite a bit, to be honest. Anonymous recently leaked some information regarding a cover-up of the Haditha killings. Then there's the Pat Tillman story, of course. Some things, the government doesn't really want us to know about, I guess. Makes them look bad?

[T-Lee. 30]

Originally Posted by 1FastFox I find it pretty unnerving that the US has been in discussion for the past year and this is the first peep we have heard from the media about it. What else is going on that we dont know about? ".

Does Everybody really want to know Every single thing that happens between the U.S. and the taliban and Every single thing that goes on between the taliban soldiers and american soldiers? Some ppl may be interested others are completely turned off by it and get sick to their gutt. I say let the troops , Dod and the President do their job and not televise it all like its some type of reality show. There are quite a few things that go on tht goes untold its not for Everybody to see and read about.

[1FastFox]

Im not talking about an open share of information cause I agree. I dont need nor want to know some of the details. But the fact that we have been in talks with the Taliban is a pretty big thing and things like that should be known by the public. Its info like that I was referring to.

[nileppezdel77!]

Originally Posted by Rockwell29 I say let the troops , Dod and the President do their job and not televise it all like its some type of reality show.

You mean, like how it was during the Vietnam war? Because popular support of that war dropped precipitously when all that was ever televised were shots of the caskets of dead soldiers being shipped back to grieving families. Bush made sure to put a moratorium on that type of journalism very quickly. Maybe if people didn't have such romantic notions about war, we'd get into fewer of them.

[T-Lee. 30]

Originally Posted by nileppezdel77! You mean, like how it was during the Vietnam war? Because popular support of that war dropped precipitously when all that was ever televised were shots of the caskets of dead soldiers being shipped back to grieving families. Bush made sure to put a moratorium on that type of journalism very quickly. Maybe if people didn't have such romantic notions about war, we'd get into fewer of them.

Not everybody need or want to hear about every single detail. Example I would tell you about Spc Richmond and his Nco that got hit by an IED in Afghanistan and their trutck turned over and they were trapped in with the flames so you know what happened after than. But I wouldnt tell my family or parents about it and it doesnt belong in the news. Some soldiers themselves have enough mental issues dealing with the things they see and the screams of death they hear. that stuff doesnt belong on the news for Everyone to see. Let the ppl who signed up to take the risk see and deal with it along with their bosses all the way up to ther President it isnt for everybodys eyes and ears bc some of it can cause some serious permanent mental damage. IMO and some may agree with that.

I remember zoning out telling a few ppl i know some personal experiences from my 2nd deployment and it brought a few tears to some and they asked me to stop talking about it. Not everyone want to hear or need to hear everything ya digg?!

[T-Lee. 30]

Originally Posted by 1FastFox Im not talking about an open share of information cause I agree. I dont need nor want to know some of the details. But the fact that we have been in talks with the Taliban is a pretty big thing and things like that should be known by the public. Its info like that I was referring to.

Oh ok I gotcha. I know they mentioned Trying to open talks with them a long time ago but they didnt put out they already opened talks with them already.

[nileppezdel77!]

Originally Posted by Rockwell29 Not everybody need or want to hear about every single detail. Example I would tell you about Spc Richmond and his Nco that got hit by an IED in Afghanistan and their trutck turned over and they were trapped in with the flames so you know what happened after than. But I wouldnt tell my family or parents about it and it doesnt belong in the news. Some soldiers themselves have enough mental issues dealing with the things they see and the screams of death they hear. that stuff doesnt belong on the news for Everyone to see. Let the ppl who signed up to take the risk see and deal with it along with their bosses all the way up to ther President it isnt for everybodys eyes and ears bc some of it can cause some serious permanent mental damage. IMO and some may agree with that. I remember zoning out telling a few ppl i know some personal experiences from my 2nd deployment and it brought a few tears to some and they asked me to stop talking about it. Not everyone want to hear or need to hear everything ya digg?!

I'm not talking about pictures of dead people and the gory details of horrendous events, I'm talking about information about things like the troops that were killed whose bodies were dumped in landfills (Air Force dumped ashes of more troops’ remains in Va. landfill than acknowledged - The Washington Post) and the caskets that return home and the number of civilian casualties. We could get some more prominent human interest pieces on the effect the war is having on the people involved. We don't get much of that here. All we get is a romanticized notion that what we are doing out there somehow doesn't involve death. ~2000 troops have died, haven't they? That's a ridiculous amount and needs to be addressed more prominently in the media. We should not be sending people out to be killed haphazardly and the more harsh realities of war need to be taken more seriously, not sanitized for the sake of political gain or to protect our delicate sensibilities.

[T-Lee. 30]

Originally Posted by nileppezdel77! I'm not talking about pictures of dead people and the gory details of horrendous events, I'm talking about information about things like the troops that were killed whose bodies were dumped in landfills (Air Force dumped ashes of more troops’ remains in Va. landfill than acknowledged - The Washington Post) and the caskets that return home and the number of civilian casualties. We could get some more prominent human interest pieces on the effect the war is having on the people involved. We don't get much of that here. All we get is a romanticized notion that what we are doing out there somehow doesn't involve death. ~2000 troops have died, haven't they? That's a ridiculous amount and needs to be addressed more prominently in the media. We should not be sending people out to be killed haphazardly and the more harsh realities of war need to be taken more seriously, not sanitized for the sake of political gain or to protect our delicate sensibilities.

Oh yea I get your point on that not and i agree. I thought they use to do that.

[101fng]

The Taliban are not terrorists. Al-qaida was the terrorist group. The Taliban were a conservative political party turned guerrilla army circa 2002. The guerrilla tactics currently being employed by Taliban are no different from what hitler asked of his SS after allies surrounded Berlin. Regardless of what the media has tried to make people believe, the Taliban didn't perpetrate 9/11, they don't murder American babies, and they don't orchestrate international terrorists attacks. Hezbe Islami Gulbudeen on the other hand... they may claim to be a guerrilla army but they also dabble in international terrorism. I see no problem with us holding talks with the Taliban. Keep in mind, they still have at least one American soldier in their custody. The only issue I see is that these talks undermine George W's policy regarding countries that harbor terrorists and extremists, but then again, there's a islamic militant group HQ'd in America... Lol

Also, in keeping with my WWII analogy, Afghans, specifically the Pashtuns, are a lot like the imperialist Japanese. They have a core set of values very different from our own. Well, they're similar, but stress is given to some values that we as Americans don't particularly stress. Hospitality is one of those values. If anyone remembers September and October 2001, W Bush made demands of then Afghan-head-honcho Mullah Mohammed Omar. One demand was that he give up OBL to the US for prosecution. To us, that's reasonable, but to Afghans it is unimaginable to give up a guest knowing that the guest will be harmed. It's akin to the Japanese surrendering. It just won't happen like that. Anyway, point is, much like the Japanese, the fact that the Taliban are in possible peace talks would be somewhat disgraceful to those involved. That is most likely why the talks were kept secret. Had we made it public, the Taliban would have backed out just to save face and then we'd be locked in another 5 years of war. If there's one thing I've learned in all my time in Afghanistan, it's that you must allow an afghan to save face. Shit can get ugly when he feels he's been called out and caught in a corner of humiliation. But ideally, you don't want to let it get to that. Feeding their egos was by far the best method to get them to talk to me. And when you think they know where some IEDs are buried, getting them talking is definitely something you should try and do.

[101fng]

Hold on, ~2000 casualties is not an alarming number. It's actually over 5000 but that's still pretty fucking low for a ten plus year conflict. Obviously, one death is one too many but in sustained warfare it's gonna happen. It's not like soldiers are getting mowed down in human wave attacks. The thing about this asymmetric war is that the objective of the enemy is to erode the will of the policy makers. They do that by keeping the conflict alive but maintaining their distance so as to never allow an all out defeat. This, in turn, forces policy makers to keep spending money in search of the elusive victory, but all their constituents see is a never ending war with no clear objective. And it's hard to have a clear objective when you have no clear enemy. It's not as easy as "ok, the Germans are over there, let's go kill them and continue the advance to Berlin". Anyway, I'll just continue rambling so I'll go ahead and stop now. Go find some books on asymmetric warfare and have a read. It's interesting stuff and it helps to put things into perspective.