If Obama is ready to discuss with hamas, is he ready with talibans ? [Archive]

View Full Version : If Obama is ready to discuss with hamas, is he ready with talibans ?

frenchy

01-09-2009, 08:28 AM

It would be a no-sense I think.

Mr Gently Benevolent

01-09-2009, 08:34 AM

It would be a no-sense I think.Hamas are not involved in a conflict with the US the Taliban are so I would imagine no he will not. I suppose this is the problem being the only big guy on the block these days everyone wants you to recognise them and their cause.

Mr. Nielsen

01-09-2009, 08:36 AM

Frankly I doubt the story.

frenchy

01-09-2009, 08:37 AM

Hamas are not involved in a conflict with the US the Taliban are so I would imagine no he will not. I suppose this is the problem being the only gig guy on the block these days everyone wants you to recognise them and their cause.

Right. All the world is waiting for.

Holycrusader

01-09-2009, 08:53 AM

It would be a no-sense I think.

Why not?

He will talk to taliban sooner or later... Just like Bush administration talk with sunni insurgents in time of surge. Directly or indirectly such talks already take place.

And pls do not mix Taliban with Al-qaida. Its not always the same.

delio

01-09-2009, 09:54 AM

Will the top military guy in charge of the region -- Genera Petreaus -- is. So I don't see why Obama shouldn't be. Much as with the bad guys in Iraq circa 2006, not viewing the Taliban as a monolithic group and then ending up making monolithic decisions on how to deal with its members is key.

GNR

01-09-2009, 10:03 AM

And pls do not mix Taliban with Al-qaida. Its not always the same.

(/sarcasm) Yeah, we'd hate to insult either one of them. (/end sarcasm)

Nano

01-09-2009, 10:06 AM

It depends on what Obama is supposed to be ready to discuss with the Taliban.
I suppose one should be always ready to discuss the terms of surrender with their enemy.
If I were Obama I'd stay out of the Palestinian/Israeli issue and let them sort themselves out one way or another. Use all the aid money from both sides to fund massive energy projects back home.

matthew.manhorn

01-09-2009, 10:08 AM

I hope Obama won't end up like Rabin and Sadat. Best luck of him.

Hollis

01-09-2009, 10:17 AM

Atlantic Friend

01-09-2009, 10:21 AM

Afghan President Karzai, heading the nation in the name of which most of the fighting is done these days, says there should be talks with the Talibans, because some of them could be won to the new Afghan government. So why not ?

At some point there will have to be some talks - why not try it when it's still possible to choose with whom they are held ?

Bia

01-09-2009, 10:32 AM

Hollis

01-09-2009, 10:54 AM

Dont be absurd...

Goerge Bush @ some speech...

"The Taliban is no more" (followed by 4 minutes of applause from old craggy asswipes in expensive suits we tax payers paid for)

So get with the program.... the war is over and there's no Taliban.... my ruler... King George Bush said so!!!!!!!!!!11111!!!!

The king strolls through his lands, inspecting his subjects. People are admiring at how well dressed he is, a spunky little girl (Bia) looks at her parents and say, Mommy, why is the king naked?

I guess it depends on what no-more means. They are no longer in power?

Marginal? I guess it gets back to the concept, you can not kill a idea. Sort of like the cold war is over, but is communism dead?

I think I will find a nice bistro, have a latte and contemplate all of this.

Rictor

01-09-2009, 11:29 AM

If Obama is ready to discuss with hamas, is he ready with talibans ?

Hopefully.

Bia

01-09-2009, 12:03 PM

The king strolls through his lands, inspecting his subjects. People are admiring at how well dressed he is, a spunky little girl (Bia) looks at her parents and say, Mommy, why is the king naked?

I guess it depends on what no-more means. They are no longer in power?

Marginal? I guess it gets back to the concept, you can not kill a idea. Sort of like the cold war is over, but is communism dead?

I think I will find a nice bistro, have a latte and contemplate all of this.I like^

Seriously though with semantics we could debate "no more" for eons. But we all know when he said that back in 03 I believe... his intent was indeed the war was over and the Taliban had been destroyed.
I do believe he really believes with good intent his actions were correct.
I've never said GW was evil or indifferent to war/death.... just a daft pawn wearing a kings crown.

Hollis

01-09-2009, 12:16 PM

I like^

Seriously though with semantics we could debate "no more" for eons. But we all know when he said that back in 03 I believe... his intent was indeed the war was over and the Taliban had been destroyed.
I do believe he really believes with good intent his actions were correct.
I've never said GW was evil or indifferent to war/death.... just a daft pawn wearing a kings crown.

I am still reviewing my opinion of GW, I would be easy to join the mob.

Now, has there been any information on what exactly Obama may talk to the Taliban about?

The weather, the food, family, ????

Bia

01-09-2009, 12:24 PM

I am still reviewing my opinion of GW, I would be easy to join the mob.

Now, has there been any information on what exactly Obama may talk to the Taliban about?

The weather, the food, family, ????Getting heroin production back in full swing. You know how those leftys love teh drugs! :P

I remember critics of GW admin saying while the Taliban was in power heroin use in Europe & America were at all time lows for years. And it did indeed make a comeback with the Talibans removal. And during all of this women in Afghan.... never did get that empowerment the Administration fed us during the drumbeat to war.

budgie

01-09-2009, 01:40 PM

I hope Obama won't end up like Rabin and Sadat. Best luck of him.

How subtle of you...

Plekszy Gladz

01-09-2009, 02:24 PM

I will not be suprised if they all pay a visit to Damascus these comming days. Damascus holds all the cards at the moment.

Jobu

01-09-2009, 02:28 PM

we all know when he said that back in 03 I believe... his intent was indeed the war was over and the Taliban had been destroyed.

We all know this? Really?

Or is it what you choose to believe while others put his statements in context?
I was under the impression that we all knew he meant the Taliban regime was no more which is of course true still to this day.

The_Android

01-09-2009, 02:32 PM

If it suits the interests of the US he probably will.

Hollis

01-09-2009, 02:49 PM

I will not be suprised if they all pay a visit to Damascus these comming days. Damascus holds all the cards at the moment.

Don't know about Damascus, At the worse they are puppets of Tehran. Maybe Damascus can be persuaded to change sides/alliances.

matthew.manhorn

01-09-2009, 03:44 PM

How subtle of you...

Just trying to state that moderate policies aren't as easy as they seem to be.

Laworkerbee

01-09-2009, 03:49 PM

It would be a no-sense I think.

Unconditional Surrender (and thus not negotiating) only really applies to industrial war; in a peoples war such as in being fought in Afghanistan and Pakistan negotiation is really the only way to end the conflict. You can't kill your way to victory in a peoples war unless you are prepared to commit genocide on a grand scale.

deagle

01-09-2009, 06:42 PM

i don't know why the bashing on talking to hamass....Obama is gonna talk to them..... and let them know USA aint to me messed with !!! thats whats gonna be said, and thats the message thats going to be made, so i'm all for Obama to talk with them

budgie

01-09-2009, 09:06 PM

Well part of the message will no doubt contain such warnings. But America's role in many conflicts is also as a mediator, not just a player. In the Hamas talks thread someone likened the organisation to a schoolyard bully and suggested that fighting back is the only response for bullies. Well in this case it is Israel's role to fight back:

Firstly, America is not in the position of the 'victim' of this particular 'Bully'. It's more like the school principal. And the 'Bully' is not so much the meanest kid in school as an anti-social outcast lashing out at his classmates. While the other children in this scenario (Israel and neighbours) have to deal with the 'Bully' on his own level, the adults need a different approach.

And like it or not Hamas is not simply a 'school bully'. It is an organisation made up of adults. Yes they may be belligerant and militant but somebody, somewhere in the organisation must also be capable of reason.

It is unlikely that in the future Hamas or the Taliban will ever be completetly wiped out. But with both carrots and sticks they could someday be persuaded to lay down their arms and remain mere political parties in a particpatory government rather than militant challengers. While, of course the contributing circumstances are vastly different, this is eventually what became of many militants in places like Southern Africa, Yugoslavia and Northern Ireland.

Talking might be for sissies as far as some immature flag-wavers are concerned but violence alone is not the be-all-end-all. Talks should never be taken completely off the table.

Laworkerbee

01-09-2009, 09:51 PM

Talking might be for sissies as far as some immature flag-wavers are concerned but violence alone is not the be-all-end-all. Talks should never be taken completely off the table.

Not too mention that if the gloves finally do come off, in the end one can always claim they tried peaceful dialog first before pursuing a military option.

sinophile

01-09-2009, 11:21 PM

So what?

I've revised my thinking on the value of talking. US cuts a deal with Hamas, Taliban, whomever... and it doesn't stick. Let them talk and make all the deals they want.

At the end of the day there is no deal if both sides don't share values. Its just a pause and cover to continue fighting.

“All things entail rising and falling timing. You must be able to discern this..." "...“Perceive that which cannot be seen with the eye.”
....Miiyamoto Mushashi (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1590302486/interactiveda878-20)