US Government negotiates with Taliban

[Murkwood]

I can't believe this deserter got a Rose Garden Ceremony. Lest we forget, he deserted, and peopled died looking for him. Sure, we are all glad he's back. But don't being him to the Rose Garden.

[Valaran]

Except Opium production has nothing to do with taliban control. Its how they make their money in the parts where they control. In the parts the government controls, its how everyone else makes their money. And it already takes place by the Afghani's without our help, which explains this years bumper crop.

Fine by me, as I said earlier.
So basically you're complaining that I refuse to advocate destroying ALL the opium, despite the fact I never said this should be our goal in the first place.
You're using statistics that show that areas we aren't concerned about are still growing opium to counter my claim that "Well, in the areas we do give a shit about, this is working."
You're baffled by the notion that the destruction of opium crops has crippled the taliban, because people unrelated to the taliban still grow opium.

How the hell do you manage to not defeat your own argument when you think about it?
I cannot comprehend how you could post something like this and not realize before you did "Wait, this is obviously wrong."
It's a literal what the fuck moment for me here.

wait a minute. I was pointing out that the current strategy was inconsistent, and subsequently not working. I was also refuting your point that the Taliban had been 'crippled' which was just wrong. also, you make statements about my arg which I did not say. The record production came form Helmand, where the British had been trying to get rid of it for years (thus we are concerned about this area, not just neglecting it). Hence, even in areas we do care about, this strategy is a) inconsistent and b) not working.

[New Terricon]

I don't know why we saved that fool of a soldier to begin with, we should have let him died. He deserved it for walking away from his post, hence he failed to follow basic orders and disregarded common sense putting himself in danger. He doesn't deserve to live and ceartainly isn't worth 5 or 6 people that we are exchanging for him.

[Distruzio]

So... poppy farms are taliban owned? Are there no non-taliban farmers?

Where the hell did you get that idea?
Did I ever give you the impression that I said that?
Can you find where?

If I say
"The destruction of tank factories and oil pipelines was crucial to the defeat of X nation."
and then you spin around and say
"NUH-UH! COS WE STILL HAVE THOSE! SO CLEARLY NUFFIN TO DO WITH IT!"

What the hell man. I'm utterly fucking baffled how you people managed to justify that leap in logic.

Especially when you use the further argument
"Also, if you count all OUR tank factories and oil pipelines, it's increased year on year!"

Now now, Ostro, I am sincerely confused by your comments about all of this. I'm not trying to be offensive and I apologize if I have offended you. I'm not mocking at all. I'm really, genuinely, confounded about this. It makes no sense to me and I'm trying to piece it all together.

I haven't suggested that the continued existence of heroin/poppy/opium disproves your assertions. Hell, I'm still confused about what your assertions are. To me, all you seem to be saying is that poppy farmers are terrorists because they finance the taliban.

To me, farmers (be they poppy or otherwise) are civilians. I don't see why civilians should have their livelihoods targeted. I don't see how the profession of a non-combatant makes him a terrorist or, alternatively, a terrorist sympathizer.

[The UK in Exile]

Except Opium production has nothing to do with taliban control. Its how they make their money in the parts where they control. In the parts the government controls, its how everyone else makes their money. And it already takes place by the Afghani's without our help, which explains this years bumper crop.

Fine by me, as I said earlier.
So basically you're complaining that I refuse to advocate destroying ALL the opium, despite the fact I never said this should be our goal in the first place.
You're using statistics that show that areas we aren't concerned about are still growing opium to counter my claim that "Well, in the areas we do give a shit about, this is working."
You're baffled by the notion that the destruction of opium crops has crippled the taliban, because people unrelated to the taliban still grow opium.

How the hell do you manage to not defeat your own argument when you think about it?
I cannot comprehend how you could post something like this and not realize before you did "Wait, this is obviously wrong."
It's a literal what the fuck moment for me here.

Because, the map pretty clearly shows some of the biggest increases are in areas controlled by the taliban, and the decreases in relatively quiet areas. "Ah!" you go. "this proves my point, where we've been destroying it their are less taliban than areas where we haven't!"

No. it broadly correlates with the taliban heavy locations since 2002.

[Valaran]

Its just the selling of the opium to make drugs funds the Taliban, allowing them to buy weapons and continue to fight. Its their source of revenue (not the only one but a major one). Thanks for the appreciation

See.... here is the crux of my confusion. If attacking the taliban indirectly via purging poppy farms is considered legitimate, then why isn't Ostro arguing that the armed forces involved expand their indirect war to include the non-drug related farms? After all, don't the taliban eat? If we're supposed to be comfortable destroying the livelihood of some farmers then why shouldn't we make it all farmers?

Is this whole shebang just an excuse to combine two convenient enemies - drugs and terrorists?

But, the food would affect the civilian populace, while destroying opium farms is (theoretically) only harming the Taliban. (obviously this isn't actually true, but that is the logic used here).

But I should add that there is a definite link, the Taliban are funded by opium. Its just the strategy to deal with it is wrong in my opinion.

[The Grim Reaper]

I can't believe this deserter got a Rose Garden Ceremony. Lest we forget, he deserted, and peopled died looking for him. Sure, we are all glad he's back. But don't being him to the Rose Garden.

For a non-American, what is a rose garden ceremony?

[Distruzio]

See.... here is the crux of my confusion. If attacking the taliban indirectly via purging poppy farms is considered legitimate, then why isn't Ostro arguing that the armed forces involved expand their indirect war to include the non-drug related farms? After all, don't the taliban eat? If we're supposed to be comfortable destroying the livelihood of some farmers then why shouldn't we make it all farmers?

Is this whole shebang just an excuse to combine two convenient enemies - drugs and terrorists?

If the Taliban were selling the food you might have a point.
They aren't.
They sell the drugs to buy guns.

But they eat the food. Surely that's a more direct support of terrorism than the refinement and distribution of poppy is?

[Ostroeuropa]

Fine by me, as I said earlier.
So basically you're complaining that I refuse to advocate destroying ALL the opium, despite the fact I never said this should be our goal in the first place.
You're using statistics that show that areas we aren't concerned about are still growing opium to counter my claim that "Well, in the areas we do give a shit about, this is working."
You're baffled by the notion that the destruction of opium crops has crippled the taliban, because people unrelated to the taliban still grow opium.

How the hell do you manage to not defeat your own argument when you think about it?
I cannot comprehend how you could post something like this and not realize before you did "Wait, this is obviously wrong."
It's a literal what the fuck moment for me here.

wait a minute. I was pointing out that the current strategy was inconsistent, and subsequently not working. I was also refuting your point that the Taliban had been 'crippled' which was just wrong. also, you make statements about my arg which I did not say. The record production came form Helmand, where the British had been trying to get rid of it for years (thus we are concerned about this area, not just neglecting it). Hence, even in areas we do care about, this strategy is a) inconsistent and b) not working.

Of the villages we purged, less than 50% continued to produce later on. That's a big score in terms of attacking the enemies revenue and recruitment base, as well as their political influence.
And yeh, the Taliban has been crippled. They are now largely confined to their areas of local importance. They are no longer an international entity.

[Valaran]

Clearly this means that Obama should be publicly beheaded on the White House lawn and his head tarred and mounted on a spike outside Speaker Boehner's office. It's the only rational response to what might be a clerical error.

Obviously. What kind of commie liberal idiot would say otherwise? Fox news has the truth.

[Murkwood]

I can't believe this deserter got a Rose Garden Ceremony. Lest we forget, he deserted, and peopled died looking for him. Sure, we are all glad he's back. But don't being him to the Rose Garden.

For a non-American, what is a rose garden ceremony?

The Rose Garden is used frequently to greet distinguished visitors and for special ceremonies and public statements. Usually when a foreign leader arrives in the US, he gets a ceremony at the Rose Garden.

[Farnhamia]

I can't believe this deserter got a Rose Garden Ceremony. Lest we forget, he deserted, and peopled died looking for him. Sure, we are all glad he's back. But don't being him to the Rose Garden.

For a non-American, what is a rose garden ceremony?

There's a nice rose garden at the White House and it often serves as the setting for announcements and ceremonies. I think one of President Nixon's daughters was married in the Rose Garden.

[Distruzio]

See.... here is the crux of my confusion. If attacking the taliban indirectly via purging poppy farms is considered legitimate, then why isn't Ostro arguing that the armed forces involved expand their indirect war to include the non-drug related farms? After all, don't the taliban eat? If we're supposed to be comfortable destroying the livelihood of some farmers then why shouldn't we make it all farmers?

Is this whole shebang just an excuse to combine two convenient enemies - drugs and terrorists?

But, the food would affect the civilian populace, while destroying opium farms is (theoretically) only harming the Taliban. (obviously this isn't actually true, but that is the logic used here).

But I should add that there is a definite link, the Taliban are funded by opium. Its just the strategy to deal with it is wrong in my opinion.

Ah... then it must be ignorance of that link that is so confusing for me. Any such link seems so... tepid (at best) to me when we consider all the other more direct, more certain, contributing factors involved.

[Chadacian]

I thought we didn't negotiate with terrorists :/

[Ostroeuropa]

Where the hell did you get that idea?
Did I ever give you the impression that I said that?
Can you find where?

If I say
"The destruction of tank factories and oil pipelines was crucial to the defeat of X nation."
and then you spin around and say
"NUH-UH! COS WE STILL HAVE THOSE! SO CLEARLY NUFFIN TO DO WITH IT!"

What the hell man. I'm utterly fucking baffled how you people managed to justify that leap in logic.

Especially when you use the further argument
"Also, if you count all OUR tank factories and oil pipelines, it's increased year on year!"

Now now, Ostro, I am sincerely confused by your comments about all of this. I'm not trying to be offensive and I apologize if I have offended you. I'm not mocking at all. I'm really, genuinely, confounded about this. It makes no sense to me and I'm trying to piece it all together.

I haven't suggested that the continued existence of heroin/poppy/opium disproves your assertions. Hell, I'm still confused about what your assertions are. To me, all you seem to be saying is that poppy farmers are terrorists because they finance the taliban.

To me, farmers (be they poppy or otherwise) are civilians. I don't see why civilians should have their livelihoods targeted. I don't see how the profession of a non-combatant makes him a terrorist or, alternatively, a terrorist sympathizer.

I said at the beginning of this that I think a way better strategy would be for US to purchase their crop and corner the Taliban out of the market.
But simply proposing to not do that either is inadequate. Something must be done.

[Distruzio]

Yeah, because responding to mockery with mockery is rational.

You lost your credibility when your disagreement descended into raving. I, personally lost my capacity to take you seriously when you started foaming at the mouth about "the liberals".

Oh, so just because I "lost" credibility means I'm wrong? Obama did break the law..How can you deny that?

And I use his middle name not to mock him, I myself am black(even though this guy is half white/mulatto.) I don't believe he was born in Kenya or anything, so if you'd people kindly stop assuming..

No one questioned your race. No one assumed anything about you, actually. We're just confused about why his name is emphasized?

[Murkwood]

I thought we didn't negotiate with terrorists :/

That's an easy talking point, but hard in practice. Yes, 98% of the time we don't or shouldn't negotiate with those monsters. But 2%, it comes in handy.

[Valaran]

wait a minute. I was pointing out that the current strategy was inconsistent, and subsequently not working. I was also refuting your point that the Taliban had been 'crippled' which was just wrong. also, you make statements about my arg which I did not say. The record production came form Helmand, where the British had been trying to get rid of it for years (thus we are concerned about this area, not just neglecting it). Hence, even in areas we do care about, this strategy is a) inconsistent and b) not working.

Of the villages we purged, less than 50% continued to produce later on. That's a big score in terms of attacking the enemies revenue and recruitment base, as well as their political influence.
And yeh, the Taliban has been crippled. They are now largely confined to their areas of local importance. They are no longer an international entity.

When were they ever an international entity? They did nothing internationally when they were in power (and even then, they still never had the north). We did cripple them when they first invaded, but they have regained ground since 2005 ish. Also, 50% may have been destroyed, but farmers can just regrow. I wonder what the stats were a year after we 'purged' said villages. Also, it is generally known that 2013 was a bumper opium crop for the Taliban, so your stat can't be that right.

[The UK in Exile]

Of the villages we purged, less than 50% continued to produce later on. That's a big score in terms of attacking the enemies revenue and recruitment base, as well as their political influence.
And yeh, the Taliban has been crippled. They are now largely confined to their areas of local importance. They are no longer an international entity.

When were they ever an international entity? They did nothing internationally when they were in power (and even then, they still never had the north). We did cripple them when they first invaded, but they have regained ground since 2005 ish. Also, 50% may have been destroyed, but farmers can just regrow. I wonder what the stats were a year after we 'purged' said villages. Also, it is generally known that 2013 was a bumper opium crop for the Taliban, so your stat can't be that right.

Its 23 villages that were visited in 2008.

For the the entire of afghanistan.

[Distruzio]

Now now, Ostro, I am sincerely confused by your comments about all of this. I'm not trying to be offensive and I apologize if I have offended you. I'm not mocking at all. I'm really, genuinely, confounded about this. It makes no sense to me and I'm trying to piece it all together.

I haven't suggested that the continued existence of heroin/poppy/opium disproves your assertions. Hell, I'm still confused about what your assertions are. To me, all you seem to be saying is that poppy farmers are terrorists because they finance the taliban.

To me, farmers (be they poppy or otherwise) are civilians. I don't see why civilians should have their livelihoods targeted. I don't see how the profession of a non-combatant makes him a terrorist or, alternatively, a terrorist sympathizer.

I said at the beginning of this that I think a way better strategy would be for US to purchase their crop and corner the Taliban out of the market.
But simply proposing to not do that either is inadequate. Something must be done.

Well, yeah. That certainly makes more sense that "purging." Especially if we want to stop the creation of more terrorists. But still, how does farming supply terrorism? I don't see the link. Like... at all.

[Distruzio]

I thought we didn't negotiate with terrorists :/

That's an easy talking point, but hard in practice. Yes, 98% of the time we don't or shouldn't negotiate with those monsters. But 2%, it comes in handy.

What's wrong with negotiating for the release of this soldier?

[Murkwood]

That's an easy talking point, but hard in practice. Yes, 98% of the time we don't or shouldn't negotiate with those monsters. But 2%, it comes in handy.

What's wrong with negotiating for the release of this soldier?

When did I say it was wrong? We can't know until we have the full story.

[Ostroeuropa]

Of the villages we purged, less than 50% continued to produce later on. That's a big score in terms of attacking the enemies revenue and recruitment base, as well as their political influence.
And yeh, the Taliban has been crippled. They are now largely confined to their areas of local importance. They are no longer an international entity.

When were they ever an international entity? They did nothing internationally when they were in power (and even then, they still never had the north). We did cripple them when they first invaded, but they have regained ground since 2005 ish. Also, 50% may have been destroyed, but farmers can just regrow. I wonder what the stats were a year after we 'purged' said villages. Also, it is generally known that 2013 was a bumper opium crop for the Taliban, so your stat can't be that right.

Uh, it is a year later. A year later, around 50% stopped farming opium. And I bet you if we came back every year to the same villages and kept burning the crop, that number would shoot up damned quickly to around 100%. At that point, we can move on to new villages.
As for the bumper year, well yeh. They grew it elsewhere in the areas they already control. But forcing them into a smaller and smaller domain is kind of the whole point of the excercise.
It also means that they have to stop growing other crops and start producing opium, which is going to fuck with those areas in the long term and mean that the areas under non-taliban control quickly outpace the ones under it, leading to a situation where the Afghani's can police this matter internally.

[Valaran]

But, the food would affect the civilian populace, while destroying opium farms is (theoretically) only harming the Taliban. (obviously this isn't actually true, but that is the logic used here).

But I should add that there is a definite link, the Taliban are funded by opium. Its just the strategy to deal with it is wrong in my opinion.

Ah... then it must be ignorance of that link that is so confusing for me. Any such link seems so... tepid (at best) to me when we consider all the other more direct, more certain, contributing factors involved.

With respect, it is one of their 2 main sources of funding (the other being support by the Pakistani tribes who are sympathetic/allied to them), so I wouldn't describe it as a tepid. And cutting their funding would be good, as it cripples their recruiting ability as well as their weapons. Though yeah, there certainly other contributing factors.

[Llamalandia]

Yes, going awol in a time of war (though undeclared) in a war zone is an act of betrayal.

Awful hyperbolic, though.

---

You know, the last time I checked the military doesn't rightly give a shit if you've gone AWOL. If you're a POW they want you back.

I can easily believe that being their policy.

Fair enough like I've been saying though there needs to be and also there should already have been a thorough investigation of this incident, especially considering he basically the only POW captured in afghanistan and held for this long a period of time.