NYT: Obama leaning towards talks with Taliban leaders

posted at 10:07 pm on March 12, 2010 by Allahpundit

Not quite yet — there’s still the little matter of cleaning out Kandahar to attend to — but if that operation goes according to plan, then maybe. Here’s what I’ll say in semi-defense of this. If you think the Taliban leadership would accept peaceful co-existence with Karzai, then now’s the right time to lean on them. They’ve been run out of Marja and, presumably, will soon be run out of Kandahar; they’ve lost a bunch of top people to raids by Pakistani intel and U.S. drone attacks, with more doubtless to come; and they’re allegedly getting tired of Al Qaeda. The goal always is to negotiate from a position of strength, and this is as strong as we’ve been in awhile. The question, simply, is whether you think negotiations will achieve something meaningful and lasting.

I’m highly skeptical.

President Obama met with his war cabinet on Friday, and the issue of reconciling with the Taliban is gaining traction, even as administration officials debate whether the time is right…

“It is now more a question of ‘when’ than a question of ‘if,’ ” the administration official said, when asked about the idea of reconciliation talks with senior Taliban officials…

But both officials added that, for now, there are no plans for reaching out soon to high-ranking Taliban leaders. That effort, they said, is likely to wait until after the United States takes on Taliban insurgents in Kandahar in what is expected to be the next major military offensive in Afghanistan…

Mr. Gates, traveling in Afghanistan this week, said that despite the success of the Marja offensive, it was too early to expect reconciliation with some senior Taliban members, cautioning not to get “too impatient.” He said that Taliban leaders would not be interested until “they see that the likelihood of their being successful has been cast into serious doubt,” adding, “My guess is they’re not at that point yet.”

My guess is they’ll never be at that point, at least in the sense of being willing to make a commitment to peace that they’ll keep. They will, quite possibly, reach the point where they’re willing to engage in a phony reconciliation, just as tribal chiefs were willing to reach “truces” with Musharraf again and again vowing that they’d keep jihadis out of the tribal areas in return for sovereignty. Surprisingly, they lied, and they’ll lie again if only to give The One the political cover he needs to start drawing down. Which brings us to this amazing statement made today by Pakistan’s foreign minister:

President Obama’s plan to begin withdrawing U.S. troops from Afghanistan in July 2011 has emboldened terrorists and increased distrust of U.S. intentions in the region, Pakistani Foreign Minister Makhdoom Shah Mahmood Qureshi said Thursday.

“The administration’s withdrawal date was music to the ears of the militants and terrorists,” Qureshi said in an exclusive interview with The Washington Examiner. “This sends the wrong signal, and you will have chaos and confusion in Afghanistan if this comes to fruition.”

Meeting with a reporter in his Islamabad office, Qureshi said, “If we walk away sort of leaving things half-baked, that could be the worst thing you could have done to regional stability.”…

An Afghan official with knowledge of current military operations in Afghanistan told The Examiner that the announcement of a planned withdrawal date made the people of his country apprehensive about openly supporting the U.S.-led NATO mission.

I was under the impression that the withdrawal timeframe was music to the ears of Pakistan since it gave them hope that their Taliban proxy would soon be back on the march in Afghanistan and threatening Kabul. To have their own foreign minister now warning Obama not to leave is … perplexing. Either Qureshi is blowing all kinds of smoke or, perhaps, the Pakistani posture towards the Taliban really has changed. But in that case, barring any prospect of near(ish)-term American withdrawal, the only incentive the Taliban has to engage in conciliation talks is if they really, truly fear they’ll be annihilated. With plenty of them still left in Pakistani cities like Karachi and Quetta, how likely is that? In which case, why talk?

I’ve linked it a bunch of times before but if you’ve never read Bill Roggio’s and Thomas Joscelyn’s analysis of why Al Qaeda will flourish wherever the Taliban exists, read it now. Seriously.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

They have a lot to talk about. Common goals can make for strange bedfellows.

RachDubya on March 12, 2010 at 10:11 PM

Let`s face it. Things would only be marginally worse with the Taliban back at the table. It`s not like the folks running Afghanistan now are all sweetness and halos.

But still, this makes it feels like it was all for nothing.

ThePrez on March 12, 2010 at 10:11 PM

Might as well, this fugger is determined to loose. You guys realize we’re lookin’ at three years of salt in the wound, even if we get congress back. I fear an Obama with nothing to loose.

abobo on March 12, 2010 at 10:11 PM


Obama leaning towards talks with Taliban leaders

Hopefully to negotiate their surrender … No Barack, I said THIER surrender!

Tony737 on March 12, 2010 at 10:12 PM

Surprisingly, they lied, and they’ll lie again if only to give The One the political cover he needs to start drawing down.

Exactly. What do they think the Taliban leaders will do with this faux peace agreement? These barbarians need more than goat herding and man-love Thursdays. Bank on an expiration date with them.

conservative pilgrim on March 12, 2010 at 10:12 PM

Over a 6′er of Blue Moon?

daesleeper on March 12, 2010 at 10:14 PM

Obama is really outdoing himself in the “He’s worse than Carter” category.

conservative pilgrim on March 12, 2010 at 10:14 PM

Surprisingly, they lied, and they’ll lie again if only to give The One the political cover he needs to start drawing down…”

Then sitting down with Obowma…

… they should feel right at home.

Seven Percent Solution on March 12, 2010 at 10:15 PM

this makes it feels like it was all for nothing.

ThePrez on March 12, 2010 at 10:11 PM

As they say, elections have consequences.

Del Dolemonte on March 12, 2010 at 10:15 PM

Obama leaning towards talks with Taliban leaders

Capitalizing on his popularity over healthcare reform.

highhopes on March 12, 2010 at 10:17 PM

Once again, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Taliban = New Black Panther Party

BKeyser on March 12, 2010 at 10:19 PM

Pakistan already did this. Pakistan handed an entire section of the country to the Taliban. And the Taliban used that as a base to launch more attacks against the government (not to mention continuing the jaw-dropping brutality against ‘infidels’). Stupid Obama.

Apologetic California on March 12, 2010 at 10:20 PM

Reconciling with the Taliban is akin to having a beer summit with Hitler. Barry’s peace talks are an open invitation for terrorists to continue terrorizing.

anXdem on March 12, 2010 at 10:20 PM

Will Barry be apologizing, bowing or both?

Knucklehead on March 12, 2010 at 10:20 PM

Will he go personally, maybe a side trip on his way home from Indonesia? Let’s hope he doesn’t run into this guy:

Gateway Pundit

RedRedRice on March 12, 2010 at 10:21 PM

The goal always is to negotiate from a position of strength, and this is as strong as we’ve been in awhile.

Horse manure. The goal used to be to exterminate the organization. That still needs to be the goal. With the development of a loose coalition of all kinds of independent Afghan organizations, there is no reason to tolerate any Afghan leader who opts to wear the mantle of “Taliban” any more than we should have cut an armistice with the Axis in 1945, as they begged us to.

This is your typical “candy-ass” strategery, AP. This is not American politics–we have the option of slaughtering the opposition. Let’s do it. Our light casualties and investment in Afghanistan don’t justify bugging out to spare the effort of victory.

Chris_Balsz on March 12, 2010 at 10:21 PM

So will Sheikh Hussain of DC bow to Mullah Omar of Kandahar ???

macncheez on March 12, 2010 at 10:22 PM

The Germans tried to broker talks with the Allies near the end of WWII and the Allies said “Sure, you need to unconditionally surrender right now.”

Needless to say, the talks ended there.

Bishop on March 12, 2010 at 10:23 PM

Negotiating opium prices?

TheBigOldDog on March 12, 2010 at 10:24 PM

More classic eyeore Obama apologist postings….is this the daily kos?

Anti-Harkonnen Freedom Fighter on March 12, 2010 at 10:26 PM

@chris

exactly.

Anti-Harkonnen Freedom Fighter on March 12, 2010 at 10:27 PM

Nuke em

Kini on March 12, 2010 at 10:27 PM

Surprisingly, they lied, and they’ll lie again if only to give The One the political cover he needs to start drawing down.

Yep, The One will declare “Peace in our time!”, and later on they’ll stab us in the back. Can I nominate Barry for a “Captain Louis Renault” award now?

GarandFan on March 12, 2010 at 10:27 PM

president teleprompter….I SUGGEST FACE TO FACE TALKS with the Taliban…get in your little plane and get on it!

HornetSting on March 12, 2010 at 10:29 PM

Vince Owens could not be reached for comment.

Del Dolemonte on March 12, 2010 at 10:29 PM

a family reunion?

katy on March 12, 2010 at 10:29 PM

Obama is really outdoing himself in the “He’s worse than Carter” category.

conservative pilgrim on March 12, 2010 at 10:14 PM

I agree. I cannot hate this douche more.

nyx on March 12, 2010 at 10:31 PM

Obama.

The only tool he has is his voice, his charisma..

Like the guy who only has a hammer, in Obama’s mind, every problem looks like a good time to give an inspiring speech.

Mew

acat on March 12, 2010 at 10:32 PM

Come on, Allah, you know better. These are jihadis. There’s no negotiating, unless it’s to buy some time to recoup after losses to fight again.

illustro on March 12, 2010 at 10:33 PM

The semi-defense stopped being plausible right after “If.”

RedRedRice on March 12, 2010 at 10:38 PM

But both officials added that, for now, there are no plans for reaching out soon to high-ranking Taliban leaders. That effort, they said, is likely to wait until after the United States takes on Taliban insurgents in Kandahar in what is expected to be the next major military offensive in Afghanistan…

Translation :

Run taliban run
run away from Kandahar
before bombs start falling
and comeback when Hussain bows to Mullah Omar

macncheez on March 12, 2010 at 10:38 PM

We withdraw in 2011…and in July? This guy must be the Messiah. My farmers almanac doesn’t see that far in the future. Can we bottle this wisdom for the market?

Electrongod on March 12, 2010 at 10:38 PM

He meets with the head choppers but won’t meet with the GOP…

katy on March 12, 2010 at 10:38 PM

“Let’s talk” is our enemies greatest weapon. That stalling tactic has worked every single time it’s used. SpiffyInMyDinnerJacket being the most recent professional to ply the trade.

The most successful – IMHO – have been the Palestinians, in what has to be about fifty continuous years of Middle East confrontation.

Saddam Hussein almost had the tactic perfected. And then his entire army surrendered to the Boy Scouts and that was that.

GoldenEagle4444 on March 12, 2010 at 10:40 PM

I agree. I cannot hate this douche more.

nyx on March 12, 2010 at 10:31 PM

You know how The Obammunist loves a good challange, I wouldn’t go around saying that where he can hear.

RachDubya on March 12, 2010 at 10:42 PM

These are jihadis. There’s no negotiating, unless it’s to buy some time to recoup after losses to fight again.

illustro on March 12, 2010 at 10:33 PM

Everybody sing
in one loud voice

HUDNA
HUDNA
HUDNA

macncheez on March 12, 2010 at 10:44 PM

How do you negotiate with the Taliban when taqiyya [deception] is part of their religion?

WashJeff on March 12, 2010 at 10:45 PM

I prefer it when the bombs & the bullets do the talking….it takes away the back and forth and negotiations go much smoother.

tommer74 on March 12, 2010 at 10:46 PM

Let’s just admit it. Obama is a dictator, and I am serious.

mobydutch on March 12, 2010 at 10:47 PM

NYT: Obama leaning towards talks with Taliban leaders

Well then, this should turn out well…

If ignorant both of your enemy and yourself, you are certain to be in peril. – Sun Tzu

Seven Percent Solution on March 12, 2010 at 10:47 PM

How do you negotiate with the Taliban when taqiyya [deception] is part of their religion?

WashJeff on March 12, 2010 at 10:45 PM

The One will fit right in. He is a master at taqiyya [deception], look what he has done to America.

tommer74 on March 12, 2010 at 10:51 PM

I’m totally against talks with these thugs. I don’t care if the President would be Obama, or Tom, or Dick, or Harry. NO! I’m not a womens libber, but this is a group, that was soooooo oppressive to women. They couldn’t work, even if their husbands died, they had no means to go out, and make a living, to feed their children. They had to stay indoors unless a male, from within their family escorted them.

These are women who went from being doctors, teachers, lawyers, etc…to being beaten, and oppressed. This regime would instill this harsh reality on women again, given half the chance. Why on earth would we talk with them, and not AT them?

capejasmine on March 12, 2010 at 10:53 PM

Of course he’ll talk to the Taliban, it’s Americans that he won’t talk or listen to.

Maybe he can gift the Taliban with iPods with his Cairo speech loaded. After he bows deeply to them, of course.

obladioblada on March 12, 2010 at 10:53 PM

NYT: “Obama leaning towards talks with Taliban leaders”

What’s he going to do, talk them to death? Where I come from the enemy gets killed!

GFW on March 12, 2010 at 10:56 PM

Bowing down before that crowd has nasty consequences: Daniel Pearl.

ya2daup on March 12, 2010 at 11:00 PM

You dolt! After expending a ridiculous amount of blood and money, we’ve finally managed to cripple that particular group of goons and you wanna play tea-and-cookies?!

The least Obama could do is have negotiations with leaders of a group we can’t hamstring, and oh yes, KEEP THEM $%#@ING SECRET!

Dark-Star on March 12, 2010 at 11:00 PM

Maybe Kerry could meet with them in Paris.

drunyan8315 on March 12, 2010 at 11:09 PM

These are the people who allowed their fellow travelers to plan 9/11 on their soil. They must be ruthlessly crushed, or at least, forced to unconditionally surrender. Preferably the former option, because the latter does not work with these dirtbags. It never has.

illustro on March 12, 2010 at 11:11 PM

To have their own foreign minister now warning Obama not to leave is … perplexing. Either Qureshi is blowing all kinds of smoke or, perhaps, the Pakistani posture towards the Taliban really has changed.

Pakistan is not Britain. Losers don’t go on to serve on Boards of Directors. If America is seen as defeated, ministers who were too friendly to America are danger.

But in that case, barring any prospect of near(ish)-term American withdrawal, the only incentive the Taliban has to engage in conciliation talks is if they really, truly fear they’ll be annihilated.

You’re old enough to REMEMBER this tactic. By demonstrating that America feels a need to talk rather than fight, they discourage cooperation with the American weaklings. Central Asia is not run by people who shirk at killing.

Chris_Balsz on March 12, 2010 at 11:12 PM

So will Obama have face to face talks with the Taliban?
Will he bring his secret weapon, Michelle, with him?
Will she wear a burka?

Maybe a burka with slits to show off her famous biceps, and if they don’t cooperate Michelle can sit on them with her famous ass.

Successes is guaranteed.

MB4 on March 12, 2010 at 11:18 PM

Maybe a burka with slits to show off her famous biceps, and if they don’t cooperate Michelle can sit on them with her famous ass.

Successes is guaranteed.

MB4 on March 12, 2010 at 11:18 PM

Must use sandpaper to erase image.

Electrongod on March 12, 2010 at 11:22 PM

MB4 on March 12, 2010 at 11:18 PM

A burka with a boob belt and $500.00 French sneakers, Michelle be stylin’.

RedRedRice on March 12, 2010 at 11:29 PM

As they say, elections have consequences.

Del Dolemonte on March 12, 2010 at 10:15 PM

Yes, they do say. And one-term Obama is going in the wrong direction.

He said he would close Gitmo and he said he would END the war in Afghanistan. These he will do. These are his crumbs to his far-left and he will do it before the 2012 campaign begins.

And I predict that the consequences for our national security by the 2012 campaign will be his downfall.

Because after three more years of economic woes, a little gain here and little worse there, Americans are going to adjust to the economics, even $4 gasoline.

But our enemies are salivating.

Texas Gal on March 12, 2010 at 11:59 PM

Of course he’ll talk to the Taliban, it’s Americans that he won’t talk or listen to.

Maybe he can gift the Taliban with iPods with his Cairo speech loaded. After he bows deeply to them, of course.

obladioblada on March 12, 2010 at 10:53 PM

Or our allies. Obviously the Iraelis’ mistake is not sending some agents to Afghanistan to kill our soldiers while training terrorists to attack us, and Japan seriously needs to start talking about crashing our economy and relaunching the Great East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere if she wants any respect and attention from Obama.

As for gifts, do you really think Obama will insult an enemy of the US with something as cheap as an iPod and degrading as his speeches. No, he’ll give the Taliban real gifts, like half of Afghanistan, international legitimacy, and one of the greatest victories in history.

jarodea on March 13, 2010 at 12:45 AM

Pure stupidity to think we can ever reason with them.

I’m sure they’ll love to make a deal, then regroup, and come back refreshed.

How many examples of “negotiating” with monsters over the years do we need to look at?

reaganaut on March 13, 2010 at 12:56 AM

Because after three more years of economic woes, a little gain here and little worse there, Americans are going to adjust to the economics, even $4 gasoline.

But our enemies are salivating.

Texas Gal on March 12, 2010 at 11:59 PM

That was not the case in the great depression and I suspect it may also be the case here. I know people that have been out of work for over two years now. Not because they haven’t tried. They have put in hundreds of resumes and had over a dozen interviews. They are out of work because there are at least 50 or 60 people applying for every single job in Michigan. It is hard to get noticed out of the huge pile of people that need jobs.

Some of us would like to move out of Michigan, myself included. But we are stuck here because the depreciation in housing prices has made our homes worth less than what we owe in our mortgages. The only way we can get out if this carp hole is to go bankrupt and give the house back to the bank.

I recently applied for a job that looked like a nice deal for me. It was much closer to home for me and a little more money in salary. With the cost of gas it would have been a very nice raise altogether. But I called the day after I sent them my resume only to find that they had gotten over 250 resumes in 4 hours according to the person in HR that I talked to.

The only way that somebody will be able to adjust to the changing economy is if they are working. You have people that are falling off of unemployment because of how long they have been out of work. There are no jobs for them to take and their haven’t been any either. The economy is still bleeding jobs. It is not gaining them. Once the federal prop to employment from the census is done you will see jobs take another nice dip. If we stop spending federal money to prop up the states and municipalities you will see another jobs dip. If they stop paying out unemployment extensions you will see the tent cities start popping up like happened in Japan.

We are not going to get out of it anytime soon. The problems of the great Depression lasted for over a decade and it took a World War to jump start our economy again. instead of getting purchasing power back into the hands of the middle class consumer, Obama is wasting trillions on inefficient and ineffective government programs that will only serve to drive us further into debt as a nation. We will stay in this funk until Obama leaves office because he is just as clueless as Carter was on how to get out of these types of economic problems. In fact the two of them think pretty similarly concerning many issues.

Hawthorne on March 13, 2010 at 12:59 AM

I was under the impression that the withdrawal timeframe was music to the ears of Pakistan since it gave them hope that their Taliban proxy would soon be back on the march in Afghanistan and threatening Kabul. To have their own foreign minister now warning Obama not to leave is … perplexing.

AP, let me ‘splain it for you -it is music to the ears of Pakistan – and when we are talking about this country we are talking about its military and ISI who use jihadis as instruments of their foreign policy.

The Pakistani Foreign Minister is in the civilian branch of Paki Govt – you have to remember that the Paki military is the state – they play a role that is bigger than what a military does – they practically own most of the country. And they set the country’s foreign policy – NOT the civilians – this has been going on for the last 60 years.

I would refer you and interested readers to Military Inc:Inside Pakistan’s Military Economy by Ayesha Siddiqa (who is Pakistani herself)

http://www.amazon.com/Military-Inc-Inside-Pakistans-Economy/dp/0745325459

Full disclosure: I’m Indian and i feel like you should know these things.

nagee76 on March 13, 2010 at 1:00 AM

The blood and lives of those poor soldiers.

“Negotiating” with the enemy during a time of war, with troops on the ground is an act of treason…

but then so is giving away where and when our next offensives will take place and posting our TOP SECRET interrogation techniques on the internet and telling the world and our enemies that the Army Field Manual will be the only protocol used for future interrogations…and attempting to bring KSM into the civilian court system with all the rights and privileges of a US citizen…

Impeach and Imprison!!

tigerlily on March 13, 2010 at 1:05 AM

Hawthorne on March 13, 2010 at 12:59 AM

Sorry to hear about your woes. I was speaking in generalities.

I’ve no doubt that we have unforeseen economic problems ahead. But I’ve seen Americans adjust before.

If you look ahead even 2 years on the national security horizon.. it don’t look pretty .. nor peaceful.

Texas Gal on March 13, 2010 at 1:14 AM

Obama “met with his war cabinet.” Why does this fail to inspire confidence?

GaltBlvnAtty on March 13, 2010 at 1:23 AM

Wait till hell to talk with the Taliban. There will be lots of time to mull things over then.

Mojave Mark on March 13, 2010 at 1:30 AM

We will stay in this funk until Obama leaves office because he is just as clueless as Carter was on how to get out of these types of economic problems.

Yep, and as clueless as FDR (economically). Hell, Europe recovered before we did from the worldwide depression, and they just had massive death and destruction a couple decades earlier.

I always laugh at the whole “party of no” nonsense being thrown out there. It wasn’t true, yet if we had done absolutely nothing, this recession probably would have turned around on it’s own.

Every single thing Obama has said and done so far has only hurt the economy. Every thing he wants to do hurts the economy. EVERYTHING!

The fact that his approval is still hovering around 50 tells me that A) The spin machine is quite powerful/and our media is useless and B) A lot of folks don’t want to work and be productive.

reaganaut on March 13, 2010 at 1:35 AM

Obama “met with his war cabinet.” Why does this fail to inspire confidence?

GaltBlvnAtty on March 13, 2010 at 1:23 AM

‘cuz this does not inspire confidence…at all

macncheez on March 13, 2010 at 2:11 AM

Everybody forget that it was Clinton that got us into our first alliance with the Taliban and basically let them have Afghanistan to begin with?

How’d that work out for us?

Skywise on March 13, 2010 at 2:26 AM

The Taliban, Al Qaeda, and their cohorts are no less committed an opponent than were the Japanese during WWII. There is the added disincentive that their religion tells them that they don’t have to negotiate in good faith or abide by any treaties if breaking them will further their jihadi aims.

There may be lower level fighters who will go with whoever shows themselves to be the “strong horse”, but the leadership, and many of the foot soldiers, are so invested in their religion/philosophy/worldview that they would rather die than acquiesce, or reach an agreement that doesn’t leave them in absolute control. They may be willing to sign a piece of paper and lay low until we withdraw — all the while regrouping, plotting, and gaining strength for the next push.

The only solution here is the same as the one that was necessary in WW II. Utter defeat and unconditional surrender is the only starting point that doesn’t lead to an Afghanistan that is a harbor for terrorists, a magnet for recruits, and an even more intransigent enemy to the US and a brutal repressive boot on the necks of its people.

hillbillyjim on March 13, 2010 at 2:33 AM

RachDubya on March 12, 2010 at 10:11 PM

Yes. They do share common traits.

CPT. Charles on March 13, 2010 at 2:46 AM

Why the hell are 60 kajillion people commenting on the teh ghey thread but nobody gives a crap about Obama flushing national security and American foreign policy down the toilet?

fiatboomer on March 13, 2010 at 2:53 AM

The only reason to negotiate with the Taliban is to draw them out into the open.

Slowburn on March 13, 2010 at 3:19 AM

Why the hell are 60 kajillion people commenting on the teh ghey thread but nobody gives a crap about Obama flushing national security and American foreign policy down the toilet?

fiatboomer on March 13, 2010 at 2:53 AM

1. It requires less thought to plumb the depths of the dance/no dance debate

2. Our media are asleep at the wheel regarding foreign policy now that they have a president they don’t want to shine too much light upon

3. Our education system has left many ill-equipped to think for themselves regarding anything more serious than American Idol.

hillbillyjim on March 13, 2010 at 3:21 AM

nagee76 on March 13, 2010 at 1:00 AM

Its all about the dollars they get from US. It always has been and it always will be. They may have Mr 10% Bhutto or Musharraf or Sharif or Zia, its always about the money.

Pakistan is hooked on US money like a junkie. They are like welfare queens and everytime they come to a point where they realize that US moneyline will dry out, they find a way to resume the flow .
They are friends to nobody, but they like our money.
And they are hooked on it .
Thats all there is to it.
They use this money to terrorize their 2 dream territories , to acquire them in the name of islam :

1. Kashmir
2. Afghanistan

macncheez on March 13, 2010 at 4:33 AM

‘cuz this does not inspire confidence…at all

macncheez on March 13, 2010 at 2:11 AM

Oh, wise guy, eh?

*boink*

Leave the stooges alone. At least they knew who the enemy was.

Nuck, nuck, nuck.

But seriously, has this guy been even trying to learn anything about the nature of our enemy?

turfmann on March 13, 2010 at 5:48 AM

He’s the latest version of a neutron bomb. He’ll bore the Taliban to death.

jdflorida on March 13, 2010 at 6:14 AM

Hey Prez…..the only thing these individuals understand is that you are weak. They understand the gun and I doubt the iPod dealy is gonna work with these people.

yoda on March 13, 2010 at 6:50 AM

The Taliban are laughing at this fool Obama.Just like Carter.

Denniscat on March 13, 2010 at 6:53 AM

If Obama talks with Taliban leaders, I doubt he’ll do the right thing such as wearing a suicide vest and taking a few of them out.

BottomLine5 on March 13, 2010 at 7:29 AM

Hmmmm.

Oh for Christ’s sake! This is what they did in Vietnam!

What are we going to plan and direct military campaigns to “force the enemy to the negotiating table”? Are we going to hammer them again and again over the same piece of ground because we’ve given it back to them, over and over again, through negotiation?

When your enemy lies supine you don’t extend a helping hand!

memomachine on March 13, 2010 at 7:30 AM

Of course he’s going to talk with the Taliban, what else did anybody expect from him. This guy is the epitome of a “sell out”.

rplat on March 13, 2010 at 7:39 AM

Now, this is a bow I want to see! They’ll bow at the same time and bump heads!
THE BOW HEARD ROUND THE WORLD!

Cybergeezer on March 13, 2010 at 8:21 AM

Whadda ya wanna bet he doesn’t need an interpreter?

Cybergeezer on March 13, 2010 at 8:23 AM

ANYONE THAT CAN MAKE IT TO D.C. ON MARCH 16TH NEEDS TO BE THERE TO DEMONSTRATE AGAINST THIS TOTALITARIAN GOVERNMENT.

Cybergeezer on March 13, 2010 at 8:33 AM

Evil sitting down with Evil and having a discussion; no surprise there.

Keemo on March 13, 2010 at 8:40 AM

Because he’s just arrogant enough to think he can talk his way out of a war. If so, more power to him. My gut says they’ll make a fool of him. Bush was right, we don’t negotiate with terrorists. When has that ever worked? For any country?

scalleywag on March 13, 2010 at 9:01 AM

Where are the women’s rights groups in all this?!?

Their silence is deafening.

The Taliban are the worst repressors of women in modern history. True, even now Afghanistan is no model of a utopia for women’s rights. But at least now there is hope of a continued progression toward women achieving greater rights.

I wonder how Afghan women will feel if they hear the news that the so-called “Leader of the Free World” is willing to sell out to that group of repressive thugs. (I guess Obozo got accustomed to being around repressive thugs in Chicago and now in D.C.) Surely it would feel like a dark shadow is on the horizon and that whatever freedoms they are experiencing now may be short-lived.

This is apalling. It is like letting the Iraqi Republican Guard escape during the first Gulf War in 1991 when we had them pinned between rivers in Basra. Coalition forces could have crushed them right then and wiped them out, but they were given orders not to do so. Instead, the Republican Guard lived on to protect Saddam Hussein for another decade. History has taught us that when you have a repressive enemy on the ropes, YOU FINISH THEM OFF – you don’t let them live to rape and pillage another day.

OneVision on March 13, 2010 at 9:17 AM

What’s he going to do? Promise them jobs? Health care?

Why not just surrender? I doubt the Taliban are as stupid as are Obama supporters.

drjohn on March 13, 2010 at 9:29 AM

If you think the Taliban leadership would accept peaceful co-existence with Karzai,

If you think the tooth fairy will will replace that missing tooth….

drjohn on March 13, 2010 at 9:33 AM

I’m wondering just how they’ll use him for their own benefit.

jeanie on March 13, 2010 at 10:33 AM

How long was the civil war in Afghanistan going on before we came in 2001? This is their way of life. The Taliban are made up of Pashtuns – who would really like a Pashtunistan. A British cartographer drew lines on a map. Afghanistan is a collection of tribes -not a country. There is a reason they call Karzai the Mayor of Kabul – Not their President.

Can Obama convince the Pashtuns to give up their agenda of autonomy? Al Qeada has to be wiped out – look at the recidivism rate of people released from Gitmo who return to the Theater.

Hamid Karzai, an ethnic Pashtun of the Popalzai tribe.

When he was in power Pervez Musharra told the U.S. he didn’t want to go into Waziristan and lean on the Taliban because he didn’t want a Pashtun Civil War started in Pakistan.

Demographics of the Pashtun population

According to Demographics of Afghanistan, Pashtuns constitute 42% of Afghanistan’s population Afghanistan’s 2005 population was 29,928,987. The 42% of total population of Afghanistan, 29,928,987 is 12,570,000.

According to Demographics of Pakistan, Pashtuns constitute over 11.42% of Pakistan’s population. Pakistan’s population in 2005 was 162,400,000. The 11.42% of total population of Pakistan, 162,400,000 is 20,042,080.

Afghanistan

Total Population:29,928,987
Pashtun Population:12,570,000

Pakistan

Total Population:162,400,000
Pashtun Population:20,042,000

Dr Evil on March 13, 2010 at 10:45 AM

Taliban is a religious movement not an ethnicity.

Karzai, the Pashtuns, and the Taliban

This was from last year in 2009.
The Taliban are threatening to disrupt the vote in areas south and east of Kabul, where they are strong, and say that they will take reprisals against anyone who votes. “Afghans must boycott the deceitful American project and head for the trenches of holy war,” said a communique from the Taliban. The Taliban, which is overwhelmingly Pashtun, is apparently counting on its ability to persuade or intimidate Pashtuns to stay away from the polls, which could doom or weaken Karzai.

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

So the people that Obama is really trying to deal with are the PASHTUNS who are part of a religious movement. It would be helpful if the MSM made the distinctions. It would be easier for people to follow. Of course the Taliban followers have reaked terror on the population of Afghanistan and Pakistan but not all Pashtuns are Taliban, but because they are TRIBAL they will protect the members of their tribe.

The Pashtuns following the Taliban teaching are like religious fundamentalist & narco terrorist…..with machine guns.

Dr Evil on March 13, 2010 at 10:53 AM

sure go ahead. What can go wrong?

johnnyU on March 13, 2010 at 1:01 PM