US Government negotiates with Taliban

[The Serbian Empire]

There's some lithium and gold deposits that might be worth a trillion dollars assuming the place will stabilize. Afghanistan isn't worthless, but good luck trying to get a mining effort to be successful in a place so unstable.

So, "effectively" worthless?

At this time, but if it were to stabilize it's worth a lot.

[Farnhamia]

no no no no no no no no no!
ANY soldier would prefer to be tortured rather than have five ENEMY COMMANDERS (of all the people, COMMANDERS?) released in exchange for them.
why?

I take it that you would rather leave one of our brave troops behind in the hands of the Taliban? Tsk, is this modern patriotism?

[The UK in Exile]

no no no no no no no no no!
ANY soldier would prefer to be tortured rather than have five ENEMY COMMANDERS (of all the people, COMMANDERS?) released in exchange for them.
why?

guys who have been kept in prison for a dozen years while younger men have commanded in their place? they aren't SUPERMEN for god's sake.

Unless they are.....

Thanks Obama.

[Fionnuala_Saoirse]

Yeah, Northern Ireland wasn't made peaceful(ish) by the soldiers, but by the negotiations.

To be fair, it was both.

Nah not particularly.

[The UK in Exile]

To be fair, it was both.

Nah not particularly.

*shrug*

Not worth derailing the thread over.

[The Batorys]

Well, we are trying to determine whether Obama negotiated illegally with terrorists to secure Bergdahl release, to do so, one must show that the Taliban is or should be considered a terrorist group (I think they either are or should be).

Negotiated illegally? Show me the law that says it is illegal to negotiate with terrorists. The legalities come in because of the requirement that Congress be notified 30 days before the release of a prisoner from Guantanamo, which was not done.

It wouldn't even be relevant, even if it exists. The US has negotiated with terrorists many times, but that doesn't matter.

The Taliban aren't terrorists. They're a deposed government. People conflate the Taliban and Al Qaeda, but they are incorrect to do so. They are separate organizations with goals that, while aligned in that both want the USA out of Afghanistan, and the religious fundamentalist Taliban to be in charge, are not actually the same. The Taliban is an Afghan organization that wants to reclaim its former position. Al Qaeda is a largely Arab non-governmental organization that wants to drive all American, western, and secular influence from the Islamic world.

[The Batorys]

Don't fucking bullshit me. We're at war.


Well, it may surprise you, but things weren't always this way. Republicans didn't like Clinton or Carter, but they didn't harangue them for negotiating with people we're at war with or bowing to foreign leaders. There's something new at play, and given the right's history here in the US, I find it really hard to think that it has nothing to do with the fact that this particular Kenyan Muslim Socialist is black.

"Senior Taliban Commanders", give me a fucking break. He's our last guy lost out there and we had to exchange some guys who have little bearing on the effectiveness of Taliban efforts to get him. It's easy to say it was the wrong move if you understand numbers but not war or negotiations, something that you seem to either be afflicted with or putting on as a way to dislike Obama more. I think blowback against this deal relates more to the President than the thing that happened.

Also so what? we didn't negotiate the prisoner swap with a legitimately recognized government or opposition group, we nogtiated with terrorists. we aren't supposed to do that.

Again, the Taliban are a deposed government. Not a terrorist group. They seek to control the country of Afghanistan, as its state.

[Juggalo land]

Shoot them 5 taliban leaders on live t.v show them we wont negotiate with terrorist.

[The Batorys]

We negotiated with the Taliban, a group we fight a lot.

Also, you apparently see "we don't negotiate with terrorists" as an unbreakable rule, but you don't say why. Is it just because it's catchy? That seems like the reason most people on here seem to find it so unbreachable a violation of conduct.

Holy crap I've been over this as have others, first Reagan declared it policy by executive order (which i've already linked to a couple times now. Secondly, because negotiating only further emboldens and encourages more hostage taking.

An executive order isn't a law.

It can be reversed by another executive order or action, by a later president, or even the same one at a later date.

Your bizarre fetish for Reagan's executive order demonstrates that you have no idea how government works, let alone how war works.

[The Batorys]

George W. Bush's policies prevented Al Qaeda from blowing our country to smithereens, but liberals continue to act like the current president is the messiah and that George W. Bush was the worst president in history. Obama has proven that he is the only president who is worse than Jimmy Carter because his policies are the only ones that can actually cause the economy to collapse. Anyone who says that any citizen who voted for Bush is a fool should not be allowed to comment on other people's replies because they obviously can't avoid being a troll on the forum.

Bush's administration repeatedly ignoring the warnings from the intelligence community and previous administration allowed the September 11th attacks to happen and three thousand people to die.

Bush's abysmal foreign policy and fixation on Iraq caused his administration to skimp on the Afghan War and grossly mishandle it, which resulted in what could have been a decisive victory becoming a quagmire that we will leave at best a draw.

[Herskerstad]

Also so what? we didn't negotiate the prisoner swap with a legitimately recognized government or opposition group, we nogtiated with terrorists. we aren't supposed to do that.

Again, the Taliban are a deposed government. Not a terrorist group. They seek to control the country of Afghanistan, as its state.

You mean the organization responsible for 76% of civilian casualties in that nation, and has a laundry list of actions such as poisoning wells so to poison young school girls, so that they cannot receive education?

Fine, they are a government then, just a few points south of the moral equivalent Nazi Germany and deserving of exactly the same treatment.

[The Batorys]

So the USA is a terrorist organization, then? Because we've aided and abetted terrorists. Including the Afghan Mujahadin, in the 1980s.

Note, the enemy of the Mujahadin was the USSR who was also an enemy of the US. In that case, the Mujahadin may have been considered as the better of two evils to Ronald Reagan who was strongly anti-communist.

And?

So fucking what? It doesn't make them not terrorists, especially given that they included Al Qaeda.

We aided terrorists, because we (in my view, erroneously) believed them to be less unpalatable than the USSR.

The Taliban aids terrorists, because they believe the terrorists to be more agreeable than the USA.

Yes, the USA's government is VASTLY preferable to the Taliban, at least by our own standards, but the Taliban obviously disagrees, and the action isn't really that different.

[The Batorys]

no no no no no no no no no!
ANY soldier would prefer to be tortured rather than have five ENEMY COMMANDERS (of all the people, COMMANDERS?) released in exchange for them.
why?

Their current commanders are too good, we're hoping the 5 that were released will be shit.

After a decade spent in cells instead of on the battlefield?

You can bet they will be.

[The Serbian Empire]

Shoot them 5 taliban leaders on live t.v show them we wont negotiate with terrorist.

Damn, bringing a bad reputation to Juggalos again...

[The Batorys]

Sounds kinda like the Red Army or the IJA.

Desertion is not capture, the poster merely mentioned an investigation to determine if desertion was involved in Bagdahl's fate.

You're both being needlessly and ineffectually hyperbolic.

Last I heard, the American troop was AWOL, not a deserter. I've also heard rumors about a latrine trench. Maybe he was having digestive issues.

The idea of anyone deliberately deserting in the middle of Afghanistan sounds a bit too far-fetched to me. I don't believe everyone's a genius, but I have trouble believing that this soldier could possibly be that stupid.

[Juggalo land]

Shoot them 5 taliban leaders on live t.v show them we wont negotiate with terrorist.

Damn, bringing a bad reputation to Juggalos again...

How so because I dont believe in negotiating with terrorist?

[Kelinfort]

Shoot them 5 taliban leaders on live t.v show them we wont negotiate with terrorist.

No. That would serve to encourage others, and two, we're not actually at war with the Taliban. We overthrew their government because they harboured Osama Bin Laden. Our mission's done.

[The Batorys]

no no no no no no no no no!
ANY soldier would prefer to be tortured rather than have five ENEMY COMMANDERS (of all the people, COMMANDERS?) released in exchange for them.
why?

guys who have been kept in prison for a dozen years while younger men have commanded in their place? they aren't SUPERMEN for god's sake.

Yep.

The decade that these five guys spent in cells, the guys who replaced them spent on the battlefield, gaining experience, learning how their enemy (us) operates, how to stay alive, etc.

Is there really any doubt who's going to be the more effective commander?

[Ashmoria]

Desertion is not capture, the poster merely mentioned an investigation to determine if desertion was involved in Bagdahl's fate.

You're both being needlessly and ineffectually hyperbolic.

Last I heard, the American troop was AWOL, not a deserter. I've also heard rumors about a latrine trench. Maybe he was having digestive issues.

The idea of anyone deliberately deserting in the middle of Afghanistan sounds a bit too far-fetched to me. I don't believe everyone's a genius, but I have trouble believing that this soldier could possibly be that stupid.

its more that he left base without permission. he was captured too quickly for it to count as awol.

[United States of Devonta]

Damn, bringing a bad reputation to Juggalos again...

How so because I dont believe in negotiating with terrorist?

You obviously are not a true Juggalo... Jealous that the Taliban can sell more dope then you, Kill more people then you, and get way more bitches then you? Osama had a ton!

[Getrektistan]

Shoot them 5 taliban leaders on live t.v show them we wont negotiate with terrorist.

No. That would serve to encourage others, and two, we're not actually at war with the Taliban. We overthrew their government because they harboured Osama Bin Laden. Our mission's done.

^What this guy said. Groups like the Taliban hate the United States because they see us as overbearing and oppressive, so publicly executing their leaders (illegally, it sounds like) would do far more harm than good.

[Juggalo land]

Shoot them 5 taliban leaders on live t.v show them we wont negotiate with terrorist.

No. That would serve to encourage others, and two, we're not actually at war with the Taliban. We overthrew their government because they harboured Osama Bin Laden. Our mission's done.

Now we should finish it, kill every last one of them, kill them wherever they hide burn them out of their fucking holes and caves.

[Pilotto]

Note, the enemy of the Mujahadin was the USSR who was also an enemy of the US. In that case, the Mujahadin may have been considered as the better of two evils to Ronald Reagan who was strongly anti-communist.

And?

So fucking what? It doesn't make them not terrorists, especially given that they included Al Qaeda.

We aided terrorists, because we (in my view, erroneously) believed them to be less unpalatable than the USSR.

The Taliban aids terrorists, because they believe the terrorists to be more agreeable than the USA.

Yes, the USA's government is VASTLY preferable to the Taliban, at least by our own standards, but the Taliban obviously disagrees, and the action isn't really that different.

1) Al Qaeda didn't exist back then.
2) The USSR was trying to add Afghanistan to it's empire. The Mujaheddin at the time was not the international terrorist organization that it would become, but a group committed to haling the imperialistic ambitions of the archenemy of the United States. In retrospect, aiding them was probably a mistake, but Reagan couldn't have known what his temporary allies would evolve into.

[Juggalo land]

How so because I dont believe in negotiating with terrorist?

You obviously are not a true Juggalo... Jealous that the Taliban can sell more people then you, Kill more dope then you, and get way more bitches then you? Osama had a ton!

No I am a true Juggalo I dont see why you would think im fake based on wanting to have terrorist killed.

[Kelinfort]

No. That would serve to encourage others, and two, we're not actually at war with the Taliban. We overthrew their government because they harboured Osama Bin Laden. Our mission's done.

Now we should finish it, kill every last one of them, kill them wherever they hide burn them out of their fucking holes and caves.

Genocide isn't fun, kids. That's destructive and pointless as well.