Lifting the Tali-BAN
Here is the interesting problem: We went to war with the Taliban government of
If we refuse to let anyone in the Taliban movement into the government, and continue to fight we risk the possibility that we can’t subdue them.
We can either fight forever, or put more boots on the ground. The former is not appealing, and the latter is impossible because of
If we let them join, then we need to resolve the Mullah Omar question. If we let Mullah Omar, and his cadre of 911 era leaders, go then all our fighting in
The other fact that needs to be addressed is that the Taliban are very tied to the Pashtoon ethnic identity. Peace in
I suppose that the greatest irony is that Frist is saying we should consider making peace with these insurgents, but that Iraqi insurgents need to be defeated.
Maybe (I never thought I would be saying this) Frist is at least partially right, but if he is, then we need to apply this reasoning to
I just wish that the public discourse was not so toxic so that ideas like this are not even given real consideration and discussion.
posted by The sane one @ 3:51 PM
5 Comments:
"Frist is at least partially right" ....i'm going to remember that for future reference...
but anyway, that is a similar argument, to me at least, for leaving saddam in 'power'. if there isn't a primary figure in place, you have... well... iraq.
maybe this will lead to something good decades or centuries from now... maybe being the key word. despite everything, i remain optimistic.
clinton was criticized for being pragmatic, so why not frist!
our leaders tend to think in black and white. being flexible and able to think outside the box is the only way to find the middle, and perhaps, someday peace in the "middle" east.
nice post. i enjoyed a reasonable point-of-view!
has everyone forgotten that the u.s. of a. put the taliban in power in the first place when we supported afghanistan against the commie russian invaders...
that alone should be proof enough that the united states of america should stop deciding what kind of government a country should adopt just because it suits the current politik in d.c.
now then... yes, any and all ideas need to be examined and considered regardless of their source... it's called brainstorming... and if we kill the messenger or disregard the message because the messenger doesn't suit, we lose an opportunity to discover a creative solution... bill frist may just be on to something.. and i cannot tell you how i hate saying that because i simply cannot abide bill frist... however, i refuse to be guilty of contempt prior to investigation in this matter!
we aren't into spreading democracy... we're into spreading oppression.
for the same reason, we won't push for the radical idea of wiping out third world dept. it is how the world order remains "in line". it is how we remain a superpower... for now...
This raises an interesting question: Why is it that nobody is talking about Mullah Omar (who ran Afghanistan) and his buddy Ossama?
The merits of bringing Afghan society back together and ending the fighting is a worthy debate, but those two at the very least have to answer for their crimes.
I am all for peace and trying to find local solutions to local political problems, but those two heads belong on pikes.
I don't think that these two demands are incompatable: Peace and Justice.
Post a Comment
<< Home