US Government negotiates with Taliban

[Pilotto]

Soooo we should just give them whatever they want then lest they BE OFFENDED OR ANGRY AT US!!!!

No, we shouldn't give them whatever they want, but that doesn't mean we have to be a bunch of ignorant, violent invaders. When people get angry at us, they fly planes into our buildings, so avoiding that is a pretty good idea.

That's weird, we had no troops in either Afghanistan or Iraq in 2001, yet Al Qaeda still felt the need to murder 3,000 of our innocent civilians.

[Getrektistan]

No, we shouldn't give them whatever they want, but that doesn't mean we have to be a bunch of ignorant, violent invaders. When people get angry at us, they fly planes into our buildings, so avoiding that is a pretty good idea.

Even if they crash the plane into our buildings just because of our religion what then make all religion illegal in America to keep the Taliban happy or make us all convert to Islam?

...No, I didn't say any of that at all. Don't put words in my mouth please. We have many more options than "Bend over and take it" and "Be a bunch of dicks".

[Juggalo land]

Even if they crash the plane into our buildings just because of our religion what then make all religion illegal in America to keep the Taliban happy or make us all convert to Islam?

...No, I didn't say any of that at all. Don't put words in my mouth please. We have many more options than "Bend over and take it" and "Be a bunch of dicks".

Which would be? *is waiting for other options

[Getrektistan]

No, we shouldn't give them whatever they want, but that doesn't mean we have to be a bunch of ignorant, violent invaders. When people get angry at us, they fly planes into our buildings, so avoiding that is a pretty good idea.

That's weird, we had no troops in either Afghanistan or Iraq in 2001, yet Al Qaeda still felt the need to murder 3,000 of our innocent civilians.

Afghanistan and Iraq were not our first forays into the Middle East.

[Pilotto]

Your right. We should ask the terrorists nicely to stop waging eternal war against the US.

Eternal war? It's only been a couple of decades. The only reason they have as much support as they do (which is not very much) is because the United States uses violent rhetoric unnecessarily.

Violent rhetoric? Is this a joke? You honestly believe that the terrorists hate us because of violent rhetoric?

[Getrektistan]

...No, I didn't say any of that at all. Don't put words in my mouth please. We have many more options than "Bend over and take it" and "Be a bunch of dicks".

Which would be? *is waiting for other options

Focus on reconstruction and peacemaking while letting the very small remaining support for the Taliban die out.

[Ashmoria]

No, it's not. Not only is killing people not fun at all, but it would be completely pointless as well since that would only serve to hurt us and destabilize Afghanistan further. Ham-fisted violent foreign policy doesn't work.

Soooo we should just give them whatever they want then lest they BE OFFENDED OR ANGRY AT US!!!!

yeah

its not wise to do things that create more terrorists than it kills.

[Wisconsin9]

Eternal war? It's only been a couple of decades. The only reason they have as much support as they do (which is not very much) is because the United States uses violent rhetoric unnecessarily.

Violent rhetoric? Is this a joke? You honestly believe that the terrorists hate us because of violent rhetoric?

I think that the number of Middle Eastern governments we've overthrown may have something to do with it.

[Getrektistan]

Eternal war? It's only been a couple of decades. The only reason they have as much support as they do (which is not very much) is because the United States uses violent rhetoric unnecessarily.

Violent rhetoric? Is this a joke? You honestly believe that the terrorists hate us because of violent rhetoric?

Rhetoric and action, but yes. Did you have some other reason in mind?

[Juggalo land]

Soooo we should just give them whatever they want then lest they BE OFFENDED OR ANGRY AT US!!!!

yeah

its not wise to do things that create more terrorists than it kills.

Wow.. so your solution is simply "oh no the fundamentalist militant group hates us we better do whatever they demand unless we offend them or even worse *GASP defend ourselves.

[Pilotto]

That's weird, we had no troops in either Afghanistan or Iraq in 2001, yet Al Qaeda still felt the need to murder 3,000 of our innocent civilians.

Afghanistan and Iraq were not our first forays into the Middle East.

The only other forays int the Middle East we've had are the Barbary Pirate Wars and the First Gulf War, both of which were 100% justified.

[Getrektistan]

Afghanistan and Iraq were not our first forays into the Middle East.

The only other forays int the Middle East we've had are the Barbary Pirate Wars and the First Gulf War, both of which were 100% justified.

We've overthrown a number of governments in the Middle East. I imagine you've heard of at least the Shah and the White Revolution?

[Pilotto]

Violent rhetoric? Is this a joke? You honestly believe that the terrorists hate us because of violent rhetoric?

Rhetoric and action, but yes. Did you have some other reason in mind?

Did you say action before? No, you didn't, you just said rhetoric, which is laughably ridiculous. But please, tell me, exactly what were those actions by the US that made the terrorists hate us in the first place? What were they?

[Wisconsin9]

Afghanistan and Iraq were not our first forays into the Middle East.

The only other forays int the Middle East we've had are the Barbary Pirate Wars and the First Gulf War, both of which were 100% justified.

Yup, we had nothing to do with the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Iran.

[Pilotto]

The only other forays int the Middle East we've had are the Barbary Pirate Wars and the First Gulf War, both of which were 100% justified.

We've overthrown a number of governments in the Middle East. I imagine you've heard of at least the Shah and the White Revolution?

The Sunni Shah in Iran? You do know that both the Taliban and Al Qaeda are Sunni, right?

[The Batorys]

No, it's not. Not only is killing people not fun at all, but it would be completely pointless as well since that would only serve to hurt us and destabilize Afghanistan further. Ham-fisted violent foreign policy doesn't work.

Your right. We should ask the terrorists nicely to stop waging eternal war against the US.

Taliban=/= Al Qaeda.

At this point, they're joined at the hip.

Not really. No more than any two allies are. They both want to see the USA and all western and secular influence driven from Afghanistan.

Al Qaeda wants to drive western and secular influence from the entirety of the Islamic world, and they see Afghanistan as part of that fight. They're a largely Arab group, but are international in membership, non-governmental, and led by al Zawahiri, who is, as I recall, Egyptian, and served as one of the top officers under Osama Bin Laden (who was Saudi Arabian).

The Taliban want to drive the USA and other westerners out of Afghanistan, because they want to take over the country again. They are a largely Afghan group, and are the former government of Afghanistan, led by, if I recall correctly, Mullah Omar, who is of Afghanistan's Pashto (which I've maybe misspelled) ethnicity.

Al Qaeda like the Taliban because the Taliban are Muslim fundamentalists, and the type of government they would like to see across the Islamic world. The Taliban like Al Qaeda because they, naturally, appreciate just about any help they can get in their efforts to take back what they (wrongly) see as the country that's theirs to rule.

It's similar to why we backed the Northern Alliance, which also consisted of warlords not that much different from the Taliban. They were more amenable to the idea of a secular government, so we liked them, and we were going to help them defeat their enemies, the Taliban, so they liked us because they'd take what help they could get.

[Getrektistan]

Rhetoric and action, but yes. Did you have some other reason in mind?

Did you say action before? No, you didn't, you just said rhetoric, which is laughably ridiculous.

Don't condescend. No need to be rude.

But please, tell me, exactly what were those actions by the US that made the terrorists hate us in the first place? What were they?

We overthrew many governments in the region, we support Israel, we have a presence in Saudi Arabia, etc, etc. This is basic information.

[Getrektistan]

We've overthrown a number of governments in the Middle East. I imagine you've heard of at least the Shah and the White Revolution?

The Sunni Shah in Iran? You do know that both the Taliban and Al Qaeda are Sunni, right?

What makes you think that means they like us overthrowing leaders? Not that that's the only example, by any means.

[Ashmoria]

yeah

its not wise to do things that create more terrorists than it kills.

Wow.. so your solution is simply "oh no the fundamentalist militant group hates us we better do whatever they demand unless we offend them or even worse *GASP defend ourselves.

no

my idea is "genocide is bad"

[Juggalo land]

Wow.. so your solution is simply "oh no the fundamentalist militant group hates us we better do whatever they demand unless we offend them or even worse *GASP defend ourselves.

no

my idea is "genocide is bad"

Then how do you propose we handle terrorist groups?

[Kelinfort]

no

my idea is "genocide is bad"

Then how do you propose we handle terrorist groups?

Leave em be, unless they attack us, then drone the shit out of them.

[Juggalo land]

Then how do you propose we handle terrorist groups?

Leave em be, unless they attack us, then drone the shit out of them.

Sounds like a decent enough plan but im still more in favor of harder military strikes because if they became strong enough eventually they could just knock our drones out of the sky.

[Sociobiology]

and here I thought this thread was going to be about Reagan arming the Taliban.

[Getrektistan]

Leave em be, unless they attack us, then drone the shit out of them.

Sounds like a decent enough plan but im still more in favor of harder military strikes because if they became strong enough eventually they could just knock our drones out of the sky.

They won't get strong enough if we leave well enough alone, their support base comes from interventionist policies in the first place, so if we let them be, they'll die out.

[Kelinfort]

Leave em be, unless they attack us, then drone the shit out of them.

Sounds like a decent enough plan but im still more in favor of harder military strikes because if they became strong enough eventually they could just knock our drones out of the sky.

We have technology, a stable government, and investment. We'll always be ahead of them, no matter what, honestly.