US Government negotiates with Taliban

[The New Lowlands]

IIRC the approach that worked best in Afghanistan was in Uruzgan.

It was a soft-power approach. As in none of this "no negotiation" bullshit.

[The UK in Exile]

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.

The Taliban tax it. Of course, they aren't international terrorists.

[Valaran]

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.

This. Thanks for the info.

[Ostroeuropa]

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.

23 villages is no small fry here when you consider we're dealing with a relatively small organization who's most successful attack basically involved about a dozen guys.

[Llamalandia]

Awful hyperbolic, though.

---

I can easily believe that being their policy.

I get the feeling that a lot of people here don't realize that every single US soldier is in some way an intelligence asset. Letting them stay in enemy hands is a security risk.

That's true to an extent, but really he is a private I'm not to worried about him compromising any huge secrets. Plus we've already got wikileaks so yeah, doubt there's much he can provide even it he wants to.

[The UK in Exile]

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.

Except the map doesn't change from 2006-2013, same regions, different date.

[Distruzio]

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.

Ah... see.. I didn't know this at all. I just thought this was all conjecture because, you know, drugs are bad and terrorists are bad too. I thought the hawks were putting two convenient enemies together to make the taliban "extra" bad. Like they did when the war first started in 2001 regarding women and the taliban.

[Llamalandia]

Why leave him? He is an american and a soldier no matter what he did. We can punish him here in the Us, Not let him die in a foreign nation. So what would you say to his parents about this? I guarantee a word would not even come out your mouth then...

I would tell them straight to their face that their boy is not only a coward, but a disgrace. He deserved what he got as a result of his desertion and I would have been fine with leaving him. (I am currently enlisted.)

Well I certainly thank you for your service sir.

[Distruzio]

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.

The Taliban tax it. Of course, they aren't international terrorists.

That makes sense now. Thanks.

My confusion about this whole argument is, slowly, lifting.

[Ostroeuropa]

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.

Ah... see.. I didn't know this at all. I just thought this was all conjecture because, you know, drugs are bad and terrorists are bad too. I thought the hawks were putting two convenient enemies together to make the taliban "extra" bad. Like they did when the war first started in 2001 regarding women and the taliban.

The thing about piracy funding terrorism always made me collapse into fits of laughter, so I can see why you'd think that.

[Draica]

Just imagine if this was Mitt Romney, I'm sure almost everyone here would be ripping him apart.

Seriously, how loyal are you people to the President?

[Valaran]

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.

So take it 7 years later (we've been there for that long, so lets see the long term impact, which I bet is negligible). These areas are vast, and they can slip across the border to Pakistan. One cannot force them into anything. Also we lack the troops to patrol everywhere so they just return when we leave. Hence build up the Afghan army. Also, it may fuck up those areas, but only in the very long term, and the rest of Afghanistan ain't exactly gonna grow nearly as much as you say with a hostile enemy so close at hand (no one will invest, our aid is already decreasing rapidly as we pull out).

[Llamalandia]

Obama negotiates with Taliban to retrieve last American POW: guy is a deserter, Obama is weak.
Hypothetical where Obama doesn't make the trade, come 2016: When we had a liberal president, we left a soldier behind! Vote Republican!
turns out it's impossible to win.

Yes, sometimes the political reality is a catch twenty two, but surely there is some objectively correct decision here is there not? Plus politics is really supposed to mix with foreign policy/diplomacy, politics stops at the water's edge or so the saying goes.

[Murkwood]

Why leave him? He is an american and a soldier no matter what he did. We can punish him here in the Us, Not let him die in a foreign nation. So what would you say to his parents about this? I guarantee a word would not even come out your mouth then...

I would tell them straight to their face that their boy is not only a coward, but a disgrace. He deserved what he got as a result of his desertion and I would have been fine with leaving him. (I am currently enlisted.)

First off, God bless you for your service.

I have to agree with you. This man is a ginormous coward, and not what the Army is about.

Since he's back, he should be court marshaled.

[Distruzio]

I would tell them straight to their face that their boy is not only a coward, but a disgrace. He deserved what he got as a result of his desertion and I would have been fine with leaving him. (I am currently enlisted.)

Well I certainly thank you for your service sir.

I don't. Being enlisted doesn't grant one the liberty of disregarding the life of another soldier. It's reprehensible. Regardless of the man's choices, he's an American soldier and should be freed. Whatever "justice" must be handed out to him should be done by Americans. Not gwaca gets no respect from me for those words up there - especially for being a soldier himself.

[Llamalandia]

the Taliban may be incentivized to kidnap more American citizens if the USA sets up a precedent where they are subject to blackmail...

its about the bigger picture. Negotiating with terrorists opens all sorts of future problems...

Or, back here in reality land, it might show them that we aren't just a bunch of fat white pigs who don't give two shits for the lives of others.

There's no way to convince them of that. They don't care about reason, only power and fundametal islamic bullshit which just hurts Islam and everyone else.

[Valaran]

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.

Ah... see.. I didn't know this at all. I just thought this was all conjecture because, you know, drugs are bad and terrorists are bad too. I thought the hawks were putting two convenient enemies together to make the taliban "extra" bad. Like they did when the war first started in 2001 regarding women and the taliban.

Oh no (though I see where you are coming from). I am a liberal by US standards (as well as support Obama generally) and it is fairly well documented (as in they find these huge poppy fields in Taliban areas)

[Wisconsin9]

Just imagine if this was Mitt Romney, I'm sure almost everyone here would be ripping him apart.

Seriously, how loyal are you people to the President?

Hmm... nope. Still glad that an American soldier is coming home.

I may have missed this, but how exactly did Obama break the law here?

[Murkwood]

Well I certainly thank you for your service sir.

I don't. Being enlisted doesn't grant one the liberty of disregarding the life of another soldier. It's reprehensible. Regardless of the man's choices, he's an American soldier and should be freed. Whatever "justice" must be handed out to him should be done by Americans. Not gwaca gets no respect from me for those words up there - especially for being a soldier himself.

He should get respect for serving. That doesn't mean his view is automatically valid. But he should still get respect.

[Distruzio]

Just imagine if this was Mitt Romney, I'm sure almost everyone here would be ripping him apart.

Seriously, how loyal are you people to the President?

As loyal as he deserves, I suppose. Are you ever going to answer our questions?

[Ostroeuropa]

Just imagine if this was Mitt Romney, I'm sure almost everyone here would be ripping him apart.

Seriously, how loyal are you people to the President?

Hmm... nope. Still glad that an American soldier is coming home.

I may have missed this, but how exactly did Obama break the law here?

Apparently an American Traitor. I could be misunderstanding what people are saying though.

[Murkwood]

Just imagine if this was Mitt Romney, I'm sure almost everyone here would be ripping him apart.

Seriously, how loyal are you people to the President?

Hmm... nope. Still glad that an American soldier is coming home.

I may have missed this, but how exactly did Obama break the law here?

Before releasing anyone from Gitmo, he must alert Congress 30 days in advance. He didn't.

[Valaran]

Just imagine if this was Mitt Romney, I'm sure almost everyone here would be ripping him apart.

Seriously, how loyal are you people to the President?

Hmm... nope. Still glad that an American soldier is coming home.

I may have missed this, but how exactly did Obama break the law here?

Apparently he had to notify congress 30 days before this, which he didn't (not actually major, but technically true). Urgency and context may have also been at play, but we don't know how much yet.

[Draica]

Just imagine if this was Mitt Romney, I'm sure almost everyone here would be ripping him apart.

Seriously, how loyal are you people to the President?

As loyal as he deserves, I suppose. Are you ever going to answer our questions?

What's your questions?

[Distruzio]

I don't. Being enlisted doesn't grant one the liberty of disregarding the life of another soldier. It's reprehensible. Regardless of the man's choices, he's an American soldier and should be freed. Whatever "justice" must be handed out to him should be done by Americans. Not gwaca gets no respect from me for those words up there - especially for being a soldier himself.

He should get respect for serving. That doesn't mean his view is automatically valid. But he should still get respect.

I'm not the sort who is inclined to prostrate myself at the feet of those who willingly go to war simply for having made that choice. Respect is earned, in my book. Not demanded. The comment above is clearly not just an appeal to authority (because he's a soldier he can say what he wants about another soldier being left behind) but also a demand for respect of that appeal on the basis of that appeal. Both are offensive and both deserve dismissal.