or what? [/quote

No more mr. nice guy. Exactly how that plays out is up to the military. IMOP mosques, cemetaries, measured civilian causualties, mountain tribes, etc. will no longer restrain our efforts to kill terrorists. That our priority will be to fight this war to win American objectives whether or not democracy in the ME is acheived.

Rob, the AP story quotes Senator Martinez not Senator Frist as saying that negotiations are not “out of the question.”

Senator Frist is certainly not saying that we haven’t been using political means in Afghanistan. He was simply emphasizing the importance of these political means after his meetings with commanders on the ground.

And finally, Senator Frist is in fact trying to clear up some wildly misleading reporting. It wouldn’t be the first time for the AP, would it?

It looks like this AP story is just more of that liberal bias that lefties assure us doesn’t exist.

Aren’t the insurgents currently fighting along side the terrorists? Are they not sympathetic to the terrorists?

Moderate Islamists sympathetic to the Taliban at the expense of US soldiers lives, their own liberty and the liberty of their fellow citizens, need to be eliminated not negotiated with. How can these ever be trusted to defend and secure the liberty of their people?

Interesting quoting yourself in successive posts. I don’t think I’ve seen that before.

I find it hilarious that the lefties pretend they worry about what we knew before 9/11.

After all after 9/11 they are doing their best to keep us from fighting terrorism.

For example all the crap we have to go through at the airport. But you can’t profile. And you certainly can’t even talk to more than two men from the middle east.

That’s today after we all should be aware of the terrorist threat.

Those poor sunni’s, what to do after they can’t lord over the Shiites?

The problem here is the mixing of nomenclature. Lets begin with the Taliban. Taliban is not a single, monolithic structure, it is a conglomerate of militant, fundamentalist clerics, each with their own merry band of cutthroats and theifs, all of whom are seeking the greatest advantage for themselves. They live among the established Tribes, not in command of them, but at their sufferage. When they ran Afghanistan it was not as a “government” in any manner westerners would recognize. They attained power by assasinating the top leaders of the Muhajadeen and Provisional government and placed themselves and their trusted leutenants in the primary positions, then ran it in the manner of the original caliphate structure from the early years of Islam. Who everyone is speaking of bringing into the Afghani Government are the Tribal Leaders, who are not accepted by the Talibani Banditos as part of their clique. The tribal leaders, given the opportunity, will cut the throats of the Talibani clerics and frogmarch their bands of cutthroat theifs off to the executioner’s block. The problem with this is we are not imbuing the tribes with confidence that the Talibani clerics, and said bands of cutthroat theifs, will not regain control. To further muddy this puddle, every one, from the Dept of State to the EU and UN, and the Arab League keep scrambling all these disperate groups together as if they are just one giant Baby Huye, bumbling around crying because no one will play pattycake with him. Well, it ain’t so! You need a scorecard to keep track of all the playas between the Red Sea and the Ganges, and American politicians and media just ain’t getting the job done. Hope that clears that all up for y’all!

Another option is we tell the Iraqi’s and Afghani’s you have 6 months to step up or we’re not playing nice anymore. We let them know we are in the ME to secure and protect America; that Americans have tolerated the threat of terrorism for about 15 years; that we will not live like the Israeli’s; that our tolerance has afforded them a monumental opportunity for freedom; that we have been restrained in our efforts long enough; and that they have had long enough to decide to act decisively.

I personally heard Newt say that the military can’t win in Iraq, that it must be won politically and that war is far from being won.

..it can be watched online.

Nice defeatism. Let’s give up then. Cut and run from Afghanistan. It’s impossible, I see now; nothing will possibly work. Oh well! It’s easier that way, I see now. We can just hunker down until it all blows over.

It might just be that the best weapon we have in the war on terrorism is our economic engine. For Afghanistan, we have to see what they have to offer, and build an economy around that. We have to cut off the opium market, and give them something else to grow, and maybe cut down on how many farmers there are, from a market perspective. When they can be economically self-sustaining, they may be too busy working and being upwardly mobile to waste their time doing terrorism. Idle hands are the devil’s workshop, you know.

Rob-
All of us are thrown off balancce by the First-Martinez-AP stories, comments. Clarifcations seem to only muddy the water.

Does it bother anyone to learn that 8,000 US troops will now be fighting under a UN flag and UN commander in Afghanistan??? What the Hades is going on over there? Are cutting and running? Why is all this commentary not coming from our Commander=in-Chief. Who the heck is in charge???

MikeA: It’s so tough these days to get any kind of a true statement in the MSM regarding anything a Republican has to say about any war stuff, that I really don’t know what Frist is really talking about. I will have to check into it farther, but negotiating with any terrorists doesn’t make any sense in general, IMO.

umm, and what does the insurgency does? doesn’t it try to achieve its goal by aiming to kill and terrorize the groups they oppose?

rob, what are the difference betwen the Iraqi insurgents and the Taliban that make you have such divergent opinions of the two?

Thanks Lik.

Make sure every Afghan family has the opportunity to earn that stuff, and then you might have something. As we have discovered in our inner cities, when you get things without working for them, disaster follows. Just check out the results of the so-called “War on Poverty”.

Give every Afghan family a big screen TV, premium service Satelliite, two sheep and two goats a month , generators, heat AC and a small pick up truck.
They’d love us and it would be a bargain.

that’s not really teaching them how to fish, which is what we really have to do.

not all, but probably most. They generally don’t restrain themself to attacking US Troops, they also attack the Iraqi police army, as well as innocent Iraqi civilians. I also hold the Shiite groups and militias like the Badr Brigade and the Mahdi Army to be terrorist groups. The insurgent ins Iraq are arguably worst than even Hezbullah in Lebanon.

If the Iraqi government can get the latter to lay down their arms and engage in the democratic process in exchange for amnesty and the promised departure of American troops I think they have to go for it.

This is how peace is made. This is the way out of Iraq.

Rob,

You are probably right given there is little political will to wipe out Isalmic fascists on a scale that would drastically marginalize those who escape. I wish this was the case. However, I still think the peace won will be temporary and we are only putting off the inevitable.

No, that is the Muhadajeen. Talibani thugs did not appear until after the war was over.

rob, you asked me the following in this thread:

rob:

I’m curious. Afghanistan has almost no natural resources, no industrial base to speak of, and a largely uneducated population. Their economic development, if the totalitarians can be kept at bay for a generation or two, will come as a result of benefiting from other nations outsourcing to them. When they can accumulate enough capital by selling what they have – cheap land and cheap labor(low overhead), they may be able to take their place among modern nations

Here’s how I responded:

rob, by doing something of the sorts the European Union has done for countries like Spain and Ireland.

Stuff like this take a novel plan and great thinking.

I would said we should taken advantage of the urgency created by 9/11 to convince/intimidate our oil rich muslim friend to to match our funds we should’ve convinced/intimidated our European friends with the urgency of 9/11 to get behind funding our plan or else they would probably also be target, we should created an organization of foundations and endowment with their fund and expertise to get behind us.

This ultra serious under taking would have been directly exuctated by the US government (a special agency perhaps) not UN or any other international org., though their insight and expertise would have been actively welcomed.

our intimidation to our oil rich muslims friend, (Saudi Arabia, UAE/Dubai): no one more than you is perhaps more responsible for this attacks on our soil, (using diplomatic language,of course) here is our plan for Afghanistan and since you have been to some extent responsible for this attack we want you to redeem yourself by funding X amount (a substantial amount) of our vision, which we will execute.

The plan would have been executed by what I have come to refer to as a appointed “six star general” (denoting the urgency and importance), the current secretary of the Treasury would have been a good choice as the first general of what I denoted our “World War Three: ideological fight against ideological radicalism (or something to that extent).

We would create extremely preferable access to our market to Afghanistan, (sort of as the European Union meant to Ireland and Spain, or what we did/currently do with Puerto Rico)

we would created an Afghanistan economy, somewhat as we did with Puerto Rico, operation Boot Strap etc.

we would created a modern educational system, to some extent what India has done ..Israel too. to compete with the madrassas

I would do a similar thing with Palestine

..link with video

I see, according to that above an insurgent in Iraq cannot be a terrorist too. I hold otherwise. Many insurgents in Iraq also go after the heads Iraqis they view to be too simpathetic to the “occupiers.” The insurgency also are responsible for many of the bombing against Shiites. The insurgents are mostly Sunnis and many work in tandem with foreign groups, including al-Qaeda. A great number are former members of Saddam’s party, particularly professinal militery type people of his army, who weren’t to nice to Shiites than and aren’t so now. In fact, they despice having lost power to them.

Once again, I hold them as a group to be worst than the Taliban.

I hope you watch the following documentary.

HG: Ultimately, Afghanistan must have a functioning economy in order to secure long term peace. Find out what they have to offer(probably cheap labor and real estate), and capitalize them by buying what they have.

as well as what we have to offer. e.g. turn Afghanistan into another India. Lets build the educational system in a systematic way never seen before (to be done under the supervision of my “five Star General” e.g. Henry Paulson.

.gotta go, ..be back tomorrow.

..and it can be more sustainable than what we currently are doing. It will also deflate all the claims of the insurgents etc. As it has vis a vis North and South Korea.

Give em a bunch of junk and the Afghans will be Americans.

You first, Woof. Give them your “junk”.

He clarified it later, but no matter. You will take the meaning that fits your belief system. I thought you were in favor of negotiation.

In all the news articles about the Afghani government. They have never said word one about talks with Talibani clerics. That has all come from leftist politicians, in EU, UN, and US. I believe several of your prominent leftards regularly say the same things. Canadian military officers and diplomats clearly state that Talibanis will not be included. The representatives of the Afghani government clearly state the same. Leftarded morons in all of the Western governments continue to say we will include The Taliban in negotiations. There is no The Taliban. Does not exist. Talibanis are drug-running,kiddnapping,raping,murdering,fake religious leader scumbags. Period. Why is something so eloquently simple so F***ing difficult for peole to understand?!?!?!

…Ms. Rice, the national security adviser at the time, said it was “incomprehensible” to suggest she had ignored dire terrorist threats two months before the Sept. 11 attacks….

….A review of White House records has determined that George J. Tenet, then the director of central intelligence, did brief Condoleezza Rice and other top officials on July 10, 2001, about the looming threat from Al Qaeda, a State Department spokesman said Monday.

No one could have imagined her memory could be so selective.

We have to cut off the opium market, and give them something else to grow, and maybe cut down on how many farmers there are, from a market perspective.

R108,

We can’t even win our own war on drugs.

When they can be economically self-sustaining, they may be too busy working and being upwardly mobile to waste their time doing terrorism. Idle hands are the devil’s workshop, you know.

This hate is centuries old. Economic development will likely only fund their evil schemes. Islamic fascism isn’t going anywhere unless we send it there.

What everyone seems to ignore is the fact that it’s not our Government to dictate to. If Karzai wants to negotiate with the Taliban that’s his business.

Here’s one that suggests that we may both be right…isn’t that nice?

The world first became aware of the Taleban in 1994 when they were appointed by Islamabad to protect a convoy trying to open up a trade route between Pakistan and Central Asia. The group – comprised of Afghans trained in religious schools in Pakistan along with former Islamic fighters or mujahedin – proved effective bodyguards, driving off other mujahedin groups who attacked and looted the convoy.

They went on to take the nearby city of Kandahar, beginning a remarkable advance which led to their capture of the capital, Kabul, in September 1996.

I see, according to that above an insurgent in Iraq cannot be a terrorist too. I hold otherwise.

No, according to you an insurgent cannot be anything other than a terrorist.

It is my contention that there are some insurgents who are not terrorists, and if they can be convinced to lay down their arms in Iraq and engage in the political process it will be all the better.

That has been my point all along.

Mr. Smith: My mistake. I’ll edit the post.

Long day today. Can’t seem to get my brain to work right.

Give every Afghan family a big screen TV, premium service Satelliite, two sheep and two goats a month , generators, heat AC and a small pick up truck.
They’d love us and it would be a bargain.

But I’m just a jackass.

Yes, you are.

I think you’re confusing the insurgency with what the media calls the insurgency.

From an earlier post:

It is important to differentiate between “terrorists” and “insurgents” in Iraq. Put simplisticly, terrorists are those who use atrocities to wage their war and/or are fighting against the formation of a democratic government in Iraq. Insurgents are typically just fighting because we Americans are in their country and they see us as occupiers. If the Iraqi government can get the latter to lay down their arms and engage in the democratic process in exchange for amnesty and the promised departure of American troops I think they have to go for it.

This is how peace is made. This is the way out of Iraq.