Posted on 10/02/2006 3:29:40 PM PDT by Roscoe Karns
Edited on 10/02/2006 3:49:15 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Bill Frist: "I’m currently overseas visiting our troops in Afghanistan, but I wanted to take a moment to address an Associated Press story titled, “Frist: Taliban Should Be in Afghan Gov’t.” The story badly distorts my remarks and takes them out of context.
First of all, let me make something clear: The Taliban is a murderous band of terrorists who’ve oppressed the people of Afghanistan with their hateful ideology long enough. America’s overthrow of the Taliban and support for responsible, democratic governance in Afghanistan is a great accomplishment that should not and will not be reversed.
Having discussed the situation with commanders on the ground, I believe that we cannot stabilize Afghanistan purely through military means. Our counter-insurgency strategy must win hearts and minds and persuade moderate Islamists potentially sympathetic to the Taliban to accept the legitimacy of the Afghan national government and democratic political processes.
National reconciliation is a necessary and an urgent priority … but America will never negotiate with terrorists or support their entry into Afghanistan’s government. "
Related thread: U.S. Senate majority leader calls for efforts to bring Taliban into Afghan government
No, not if you convince them Kennedy is wrong. Similarly what Frist is saying is to convince these "moderate Islamists potentially sympathetic to the Taliban" that the Taliban are wrong so that they don't support the Taliban. Now I doubt that there are such persuadable Islamists but I'm not on the ground. If there are such, I certainly am not against persuading them. You know a few million bucks goes a long way in that part of the world.
Thank you Alia. I appreciate the nice response.
Unless we make them cleanly reject that vision and agree to a secular society - which, frankly, no Muslim will do, as we are seeing in Iraq now - there's no place for them.
That's right. That's what I think I've been hearing through Frist, Musharaff and Karzai. But to uphold a law which upholds that not one religion is more "equal" than another.
Frist is naive in the extreme if he things that a serious member of the Taleban is going to just agree to disagree and say why can't we all just get along. It's a pity, but we seem to have given up.
Given up? huh? I see this as another step in the WOT. Not as a "giving up"? To be making these kinds of statements, NOW, says that AQ/Taliban aren't quite as "numerous" as they'd like everyone to think they are. AQ/Taliban are being given a choice -- assimilate, obey the laws, or go to hell. That's what I've gleened.
Women all over Afghanistan are probably nearly suicidal right now, because we were their great hope - and now, thanks to the new improved Taleban, girls' schools are having to be opened in secrecy.
What is the "new improved Taliban"?
absolutely wicked links in the "this is the Taliban" links.
I believe they distorted it, but I also believe that Frist is essentially playing footsie with the very concept he's denying he voiced support of in the first place. Yes he attacks the very idea he'd agree with Taliban gaining office, but then explains how something must be done to bring discenters on board? I still think a Taliban component in governance is what he is intimating even though he's labeled that idea preposterous.
It's sortof like a no amnesty amnesty thing.
First, there was various screaming headlines about a truce between Pakistan and the Taliban.
Here's one;
Then there was the Musharraf clarification;
This is a textbook example of 40 years of agenda driven, left wing media bias. As we and others have pointed out. There are still way too many people, including here on FR, that are naive to the tactics and will believe these agenda driven, political extensions of the DNC before they give someone on their own team the benefit of the doubt.
Simple hint '101' to fellow FReepers; look for quotes in these articles, and most importantly, where they are placed within the sentence or paragraph.
You won't like my analogy; but here goes. Any ideology which supports murder as their premise has got to be quarantined and put into braces. Do you think the feminists at Gitmo would complain uber loudly about not getting their hair done? Toss Roe V Wade writs into the toilet?
I caught that. And also witnessed many people driving RIGHT OVER that point and into rave mode. Thanks for reposting this.
I appreciate the clarification. I think we need to reach out to people like the Pastun. That process would not include the Taliban, wink wink. I say that somewhat in jest, because we'll never know exactly who is and who isn't a radical Taliban member.
Bringing the Pustan into the process is good. I realize that some percentage of Taliban may slip in. On the record I completely disagree with that. In practical terms off the record, I understand what needs to be done and don't object.
Still, our Senators on the ground in these nations DO NOT need to telegraph what our objectives should be. They should go, visit bases, talk to political leaders in general terms, but they should not be making policy announcements from those nations.
What our leaders do, is at times better off left unsaid. They do not need to telegraph everything that pops into their heads on foreign soil.
If a Taliban component does make it's way into the government, and it's winds up being benign, I would rather have them think they pulled a fast one, than to have them think we're giving blessing to such a thing.
I want terrorists in the future to realize they will never gain power if they resort to terrorism. Telegraphing the possibility of something different isn't a good idea IMO.
including here on FR, that are naive to the tactics and will believe these agenda driven, political extensions of the DNC before they give someone on their own team the benefit of the doubt.
Bears repeating. And especially as we enter into McCain Feingold preliminaries.
Simple hint '101' to fellow FReepers; look for quotes in these articles, and most importantly, where they are placed within the sentence or paragraph.
I only add, go to the original source -- the person being "spoken of/about". Check out their website/blog.
Was turning either Dresden or Tokyo into a firestorm a military objective? Was the bombing of Hiroshima or Nagasaki about defeating an army?
Please. We won that war because we defeated whole nations, not just armies.
The AQ/Taliban are NOT a nation. They have no land. No government. Nada. They are violent usurpers in multiple countries, creating havoc and wreaking terrorism and murder. Which nation -- Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan -- do you prefer to drop the bombs on?
For the most part we know the Taliban big-turbins. They've been on our terrorist kill-lists for both Afghanistan and Pakistan.
The rank-and-file, yes we'll never know and in the long run it may not matter.
It is exactly within that wiggle room that we can co-opt our enemies.
No secular, modern state is going to arise out of Afghanistan anytime soon. It will with time, and by providing them a stable government that's less extreme than the one before, we can coax them out of extremism slowly.
To do more would require a massive influx of troops, money, and resources that quite frankly our government is willing to commit. But this plan should work, too, in the long run.
He may well have been misinterpreted. But again, my point is that he should have spoken in such a way as to make himself as clear as possible. People often don't. Even with dishonest media, it can make a difference.
Oh, I agree, they should definitely be put into quarantine.
Nation of Islam has been around for a long time, but they've become more dangerous now that they are semi-accepted by more traditional Muslims. The problem is that Islam itself is a violent ideology, and while it may go underground for awhile when it feels powerless, as soon as it feels it has a chance, it bursts out again (kind of like the worm in Dune...). We're at one of those moments now, unfortunately for us.
Exquisite.
*sniff, sniff, sniff...........*
If Frist is so surprised that his words were mauled by the MSM, he'd better think twice, before he throws his hat into the '08 presidential primary ring.
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.