Posted on 10/12/2009 9:44:51 AM PDT by Crush
Just when you thought things couldn't possibly get any worse (from The Times)...
The Obama administration is considering outbidding the Taliban to persuade Afghan villagers to lay down arms as it struggles to find a new approach to a war that is fast losing public and congressional support.Didn't we send troops to Afghanistan to fight the Taliban? Now the Obama administration is wanting to legitimize yet another terrorist group:
Apart from training more Afghan troops, the focus has shifted to accepting a political role for the Taliban, while also trying to weaken them by winning some over.Once again, it is impossible to win over people who have a religious duty to eliminate our civilization through jihad. There is no middle ground, and they will only use our money against us. The even bigger problem I believe is that the Obama administration has to know this.
Here's what passes for war strategy when community organizers and revolutionaries run the government:
Paying Taliban foot-soldiers to switch sides could spare US lives and save money, say its advocates. A recent report by the Senate foreign relations committee estimated the Taliban fighting strength at 15,000, of whom only 5% are committed idealogues while 70% fight for money — the so-called $10-a-day Taliban. Doubling this to win them over would cost just $300,000 a day, compared with the $165m a day the United States is spending fighting the war.These "advocates" are so far off base this isn't even worth analyzing. But I had been under the impression we sent troops to Afghanistan to fight the Taliban and al Qaeda-associated movements - not to save money! I wonder why we didn't just pay off the Wermacht in 1944 rather than invade Normandy.
At least someone has a clue:
Some experts disagree. Gilles Dorronsoro from the Carnegie Institute insisted: “You cannot break an insurgency that strong with money. It’s not a mercenary force — it’s a very powerful movement.”The thing is that the Afghans know that the U.S. is about to cut and run just like every other civilization that has occupied Afghanistan throughout human history. The ones who take the money will be left high and dry when Obama decides enough is enough, but the Taliban are there to stay, and will remember who wasn't willing to continue the jihad. All this would be is another collosal waste of taxpayer money, which the Taliban will end up appropriating anyways.
This is obviously a UK story because they actually found more than one person who isn't in lockstep with the administration. Obama is getting caught up in his own words:
Leslie Gelb, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations, argues that the president has only himself to blame. “It was Obama who insisted in March and again last month that this was a ‘war of necessity’ and must be fully resourced rather than looking at what we really have at stake in Afghanistan.”
We are soooo screwed..paying off your enemies worked so well for the Byzantines *snorts*.
He being a good Kenyan-born, illegal alien, devout muslim, why are we surprised. Can’t wait to find out in a tell-all book about his muslim prayer rug. What a POS!
Recall Chamberlain and Hitler and notice the outcome.
The outcome will be similiar or worse. Obama may happily BAIL THEM OUT with our tax dollars of ocurse, and they can use the money to drop a bomb on all of us. How nice!
Same with Chamberlain and Hitler ... .
There does our debt, AGAIN!
What happens when the Taliban ups the payment to $30 per day? Will we jump in with $40?
Maybe this is the way obama plans to handle crime, too - pay the perps to not murder, cheat, and steal.
With the removal of the defense missiles in Poland, your statement takes on a new level of truth.
God help us all.
Gee, what if King George had thought of this? We all know that the Patriots were totally lacking in faith in the cause and were in it just for the money.
BHO has no clue what so ever, at least that guy does. The Taliban are an ideologically/religiously driven movement. No way money will “buy” them at least not for long. Maybe our Nobel laureate can put the bidding up on Ebay for transparency purposes./s It would be ironic if the Taliban refused dollars and wanted other currencies just like the Saudis are talking about doing with their oil transactions.
Ah sheesh! Who gave this ahole a blank check? Get him out before it’s too late. VOTE against the person that isn’t Bush.
Let’s give them Massachusetts, but they have to take Barney Frank or no deal.
Apparently, while Neville Chamberlain and his predecessor, Baldwin, were appeasing the Germans, the Brits were developing the Hurricane and Spitfire, the radar system and the doctrine that defended the UK and won the Battle of Britain. In fact, this may be very reason he was “appeasing” the Nazis. So, he wasn't all bad.
Unlike Obama.
Of course, Bush did it too by paying off the insurgents.
They’re probably now gonna want to be paid in EUROs, since ZERO is letting the Dollar drop down to same!
That’s funny...I must have missed the insurgents flying planes into buildings. Paying them to turn on the mullahs and turn in those our troops were hunting for isn’t what BJ Clinton was doing.
Nice try though.
They'll take our money and pull the trigger anyway.
While I don’t think it is a good idea here, the Byzantine reference is a poor example. The Byzantines used this tactic, along with others for a thousand years and survived through numerous enemies. It was only when the West completely turned their backs on them that the Byzantines were overcome.
The Pashtun Taliban also did not fly planes into buildings. Those were Arab Sunni members of Al Qaeda from Saudi Arabia and Egypt. In case you weren’t reading the papers, the insurgents bribed by Bush were the same ones killing Americans and civilians with suicide bombers allied with the Arab Al Qaeda in Iraq.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.