Comments on: U.S. May Rethink Talking To Taliban

U.S., NATO May Negotiate With Moderate Taliban Leaders As Afghan Situation Worsens

[mcfinished]

tuckerndfw at 02:02 AM : Oct 09, 2008 wrote:

"Muslim fanatics are little different than Jewish or Christian fanatics.

The "war on terror" as being conducted by the Bush administration (and supported by McCain) is a total waste of lives & resources."

Indeed.

One argument I''ve seen is that the Jews and Christians aren''t blowing people up. This is debatable and we only need to look back through history - both recent and older - to see that all religions have used violence.

Heck, GW Bush claimed that God had spoken to him and that is why he invaded Iraq killing and maiming many hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians.

Unfortunately, many Christians support war when it''s waged under the flag of Christianity.

Jesus didn''t believe in wars - and he certainly didn''t say it was ok to invade Iraq.

[siobama]

"Regardless of ones position, we need to understand the differences and base our decision on the facts, not shallow or inaccurate comparisons."

Dear rhs648,

You are completely off the wall. Your comparisons are completely weird to say the least and your fear is absurd. Paranoia is not helpful in this case and it is making you see phantoms. Phantoms do not exist.

[hermitdave]

So right tucker. I love the way this poster shrugs off the NAM mess as just a slight mistake. Forget the thousands of dead Americans that died for a filthy lie. There was no more of a chance of all those countries going commie, than there is that the Bush crusades were necessary.

[hermitdave]

Come on David, what you mean consider, we have been talking to them since before 9/11. Osama is CIA for crying out loud. This is a sham from the start. We owe Osama big time for helping throw out those evil Russians. As long as the drugs are flowing and the pipeline is moving along things are cool. So we blow up a few Afghan kids once in awhile, who cares they are not Christian kids.

[rhs648]

Many posters fail to see the difference between Vietnam and the Muslim terrorists. It is neccessary to begin with the cold war and the fear Americans felt in the 1950''s and early 1960''s. Communists in the Soviet Union and China had vowed to destroy us. Many of our leaders believed that if Vietnam became a communist country, one country after the next would fall to communism. This was know has the "domino theory." However, it appears that the North Vietnamese were mostly interested in both North and South Vietnam becoming a communist nation and more or less restricted their ambitions to that region. The terrorists seem to have more ambitious plans. They want to destroy the western world and spread the Muslim religion everywhere. In effect, Vietnam was more ideological whereas the terrorist threat involves religious fanatics who wish to dominate the world. In light of this, we have to decide whether to stop them or let them grow until stopping them is too late. Regardless of ones position, we need to understand the differences and base our decision on the facts, not shallow or inaccurate comparisons.

[mcfinished]

Just a few years ago, I recall GW Bush telling us that we don''t deal with terrorists.

Apparently, now we do.

Republicans - you just can''t trust them.

[brianbwb-2009]

"Bush is a liberal?" Posted by GetReelTex

Actually yes, his policies of welfare for the rich, reduced regulation of the rich, tolerance of corruption of the rich, and using the military as mercenaries for the rich, and now the nationalization bailout of failed, corrupt businesses, is extremely liberal.

But only if you are rich.

[rhs648]

Looks like President Obama and the Democratic Congress will have to fix all this after Bushie leaves office.

I''''m not worried.

Posted by Toby2958

You might be if the next president decides it won''t be possible to end the war quickly. Politicians are notorious for promising things but not delivering on their promises.

[zietzke-2009]

"We will NEVER negotiate with terrorists" !! (Bush''s own words)...further: "we will hunt down these killers" !.....ANOTHER Failure and lie by this administration....Hell, this country is falling apart !

[smurfcrusher]

Another nail in that coffin which is Republican ideology.

[billpl-2009]

what and we NObama the Taliban no more?

[smurfcrusher]

Another Bush "victory."

I guess this means he shouldn''t have engaged a War of Choice in Iraq under false pretenses.

[getreeltex]

There is no such thing as a moderate Terrorist. This is just more of the same sick Liberal hypocrisy which infests the West. While we''''re at it, let''''s make Bin Laden the Democratic VP. Then all the terrorists and fanatics in the world will like us.

Posted by Neo269 at 12:46 AM : Oct 09, 2008




Bush is a liberal?

[toby2958]

let''''s make Bin Laden the Democratic VP. Then all the terrorists and fanatics in the world will like us.

Posted by Neo269 at 12:46 AM

Well if Bush and the neocons had done their job, Bin Laden would be dead.

But of course, they didn''t.

Bush.

Cheney.

Neocons.

Failed.

[FHMullane]

Seems Obama is ahead of them all. Patraeus is McCain''s hero and look... even he knows that it is smart to talk.

[user168-2009]

But McNobrain and Painineck didn''t want to talk to any enemy.

[claydowner]

The situation in Afghanistan has been deteriorating for several years. Taliban fighters make money from narcotics trade, have safe sanctuaries in Pakistan, and can rearm and equip new fighters faster than we can hunt them down. The Afghanistan war is more important than Iraq but has received way less resources. We are short infantry so we have to use airpower that increases civilian casualties.

There needs to be direct talks between Karzai and local leaders of the Taliban. But, the Taliban are nearly impossible to deal with because they are religious extremists who do not even want girls to go to school. The US negotiating with them will be very difficult.

I wonder when this war will ever end. It seems as if the fighting in the mountains of Afghanistan is going to go on indefinitely. If we do not use our braincells this whole conflict could last another 10 years or more. Some type of political accommodation between the Karzai government and the Taliban is necessary. There must be civil administration projects combined with a humanitarian aid packages that accompany any political agreement between the warring parties. This whole diplomatic process needs to replace the fighting with rebuilding a wartorn country from the ground up. There is no military solution to the Afghanistan problem.

[ramaci]

I%u2019m liberal and I feel so dumb you are right. We, America, Bush and/or McCain have no representation or influence with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Maybe we should do what we (the west) have been doing in the Middle East over the last 100 years or so, install an %u201Cacceptable dictator%u201D. Wait a British ambassador in a coded French diplomatic cable mention it. Those NATO people, what will they think of next?

[neo269]

There is no such thing as a moderate Terrorist. This is just more of the same sick Liberal hypocrisy which infests the West. While we''re at it, let''s make Bin Laden the Democratic VP. Then all the terrorists and fanatics in the world will like us.

[toby2958]

Perhaps we should send Palin into Afghanistan. I hear she''s quite a marksman. err. woman. Err... whatever. ;)