Posted on 06/05/2014 10:39:31 AM PDT by TangledUpInBlue
The controversy surrounding the circumstances under which Bowe Bergdahl was captured by the Taliban continue to rage on. Lost in that debate is the fact that, for the first time, the White House successfully negotiated with the Taliban.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) has been one of the more vocal critics of the president. He told Fox News that the terms of the Bergdahl deal amount to a significant change in U.S. policy toward terrorists.
“Ambassador Rice basically said to you, ‘Yes, U.S. policy has changed. Now we make deals with terrorists,’" Cruz said, referring to comments made by National Security Adviser Susan Rice. “The reason why the U.S. has had the policy for decades of not negotiating with terrorists is because once you start doing it, every other terrorist has an incentive to capture more soldiers."
Cruz’s condemnation of the deal is mild compared to that of former Florida Congressman Allen West (R). In an op-ed published on The Washington Post’s website Wednesday, he called for the president to be impeached.
“Ladies and gentlemen, I submit that Barack Hussein Obama’s unilateral negotiations with terrorists and the ensuing release of their key leadership without consult — mandated by law — with the U.S. Congress represents high crimes and misdemeanors, an impeachable offense.”
(Excerpt) Read more at finance.yahoo.com ...
Obama and Smarter in the same sentence is an Oxymoron
I love this: “The Taliban have been involved in peace negotiations with the United States and the Afghan government for years. Afghan President Hamid Karzai has even accused the United States of colluding with the Taliban. If Obama’s critics are right, then the United States has been negotiating with terrorists for years.”
THis is supposed to be a good thing????
They actually pay this idiot!
Breakout the 10 lbs. dumbells!
So how does the headline match the article?
This only proves that Obama will negotiate with terrorists.
How is that smart?
The whole thing is to lay the groundwork for closing down Guantanamo.
Giving in is not negotiating. He gave in to their demands.
Exactly what I was thinking. It proves that maybe there was precedent. The only “smart angle” is that it may get the Taliban to negotiate.
To which I say - 1) do we want that? and 2) even if we do, I don’t friggin believe it.
classic case of someone trying to be the smartest guy in the room. This is idiotic.
Ya see - we're not smart enough or enlightened enough to know how smart that is.
Ya see?
And a camel may be a butterfly in another dimension.
That's like saying, "For the first time, my child successfully reached a deal with a car dealer" after a preschooler trades several million dollar worth of jewelry for a Hot Wheels car. Some people have a remarkably low standard for success.
Right, I don’t see the “win” in this argument.
I’ll give you $50000 for that cookie is a successful negotiation?
This kind of negotiation reminds me of establishment Republicans with Democrats. No movement to the right, just a small debate how far to leap left. In that regard I see similarities and as with Obama, Republicans also suffer failure along with America for this kind of bargaining.
Thanks for the pics.
Two of my kids were in harm’s way that day. Two—in different locations.
It took several hours to find out that they were both okay.
I certainly will never forget.
.
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.