But....but... We don't negotiate with trrsts.

MI6 to USSD: :^P

You mean they're going to take marching orders from Al Qaeda?

submitter: So don't tell anyone

No one shall press the red button!

strangeguitar: But....but... We don't negotiate with trrsts.

We also don't torture people!

I never really understood why people are so averse to talking with the people with whom we are in conflict.

To me, that seems like if your caught your child doing something bad, you immediately threw him into his room and locked him in for the day without talking to him.

Oh wait, that's that thingy in Cuba everyone's talking about...

We were very close to announcing official diplomatic ties with them in 2000-2001. Talks broke down in June (I think) due to oil pipeline negotiations. Course then 9/11 happened and that went out the window.

strangeguitar [TotalFark] Quote 2007-12-27 09:14:11 PM
But....but... We don't negotiate with trrsts.

I thought it was spelled tuurists?

Onager: I never really understood why people are so averse to talking with the people with whom we are in conflict.



Gee I can't imagine. I mean they are just like us. We just need to talk

Hang On Voltaire: Gee I can't imagine. I mean they are just like us. We just need to talk

So you could go to one of two stupid extremes.

1) Talk to the Taliban and give them whatever they want.

2) Refuse to ever speak to them and go on as before.

These are the only two possible outcomes.

Onager Quote 2007-12-27 09:50:59 PM
I never really understood why people are so averse to talking with the people with whom we are in conflict.


The Japanese were only interested in peace talks after we had dropped the bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima- and they were a 'civilized' enemy.

Cowboy Spencer: Hang On Voltaire: Gee I can't imagine. I mean they are just like us. We just need to talk

So you could go to one of two stupid extremes.

1) Talk to the Taliban and give them whatever they want.

2) Refuse to ever speak to them and go on as before.

These are the only two possible outcomes.

With animals like them number 2 is the only option

I imagine that after all this time, they might need some more ammunition to keep up their end of the War on Terror[tm].

hej: I imagine that after all this time, they might need some more ammunition to keep up their end of the War on Terror[tm].

Precisely why we should not tolerate these turrurist conventions!

Hang On Voltaire: With animals like them number 2 is the only option

It hasn't worked too well so far.

Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.

They must be out of ammun.......... aw damnit hej!

link farked?

Hang On Voltaire: With animals like them number 2 is the only option

Really? It's the only option? There's absolutely no other approach? At all?

Hang On Voltaire
With animals like them

Dehumanization of the enemy may be comforting, but it does not lead to clarity of mind.

I won't tell a soul. Like that time I helped with the disposal of Stacy Peterson. I'm like a vault i tells ya.

I can understand this development, as they have to get that pipeline through Afghanistan built.

Hang On Voltaire: Cowboy Spencer: Hang On Voltaire: Gee I can't imagine. I mean they are just like us. We just need to talk

So you could go to one of two stupid extremes.

1) Talk to the Taliban and give them whatever they want.

2) Refuse to ever speak to them and go on as before.

These are the only two possible outcomes.

With animals like them number 2 is the only option

Anyone who denies another his rightful claim to humanity should experience his own denied.

Dear FT.com;

I am not subscribing. Get farked.

Love,

LMS


PS. I tried BugMeNot, but they were all 'past the 30 article limit' shiat you've imposed. I hate you.

Can we find out where the meetings are to be held, and then drop a huge stone buddha on the building?

But....but...they're EVIL DOERS!
We don't negotiate with terrorists
Except...

Charlie Wilson unavailable for comment.

Hang On Voltaire: With animals like them number 2 is the only option


so in 2001 when they privately insisted that they didn't want to deal with Osama and would turn the other cheek if the US "secretly" missile struck his known hideout, you decided that Osama wasn't worth dignifying those animals?

No wonder we're in shiatters. Because of dumbness.

Jeff_from_MD: so in 2001 when they privately insisted that they didn't want to deal with Osama and would turn the other cheek if the US "secretly" missile struck his known hideout

Cite, please?
I don't recall that.

I do recall the taliban offering to turn OBL over to us if we provided proof that he was involved in the September 11 attacks, which we refused.

It's simply amazing how liberals will accuse Bush and Cheney of being all guns and no talk, and finally, when negotiations are on the table you liberals still will find some way to whine about this adminstration.

skookum: and finally, when negotiations are on the table you liberals still will find some way to whine about this adminstration.

1.) They're negotiating with the same people that we attempted to destroy and/or drive out of Afghanistan (at the cost of American lives). The farking TALIBAN.

2.) Why do you assume that everybody who disagrees with you is "a liberal"?

3.) I'm still trying to decide whether you're a troll or an idiot. Tie goes to the runner, so I still stand by the former.

HowlingFrog

I'm not sure where I first read about it. But these couple links are similar:

Taliban told US it would give up Osama: report(http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2004/06/05/1125339.htm )


How Bush Was Offered Bin Laden and Blew It(http://www.ccmep.org/2004_articles/general/110204_give_him_an_f.htm)

The second link discusses the missile strikes that the Taliban insisted they'd allow. However it's a real crap link, and again, I'll have to look for the source I originally saw years ago.

Until I see stronger sources, I'm not gonna 100% verify my last post either.

Send in the Marine Core to deal with those terra-ists! and their wives.

Jeff_from_MD: I'm not sure where I first read about it. But these couple links are similar:

Thanks for the first link; this I remember well.
We refused their offer and commenced bombing (presumably because we had no proof to offer them). And we still don't.
The 9/11 attacks are STILL not listed on Osama's FBI rap sheet, and an FBI spokesperson has admitted that it's because they have no hard evidence that he had anything to do with the attacks.
Which I assume includes the "confession videos", like the infamous Jamaican Santa Video.

It's a myth that that has been propagated and repeated from Day One. And people repeat it mindlessly, like a mantra. They hear it, and repeat it until everybody agrees.

And so the question remains: who was behind the 9/11 attacks?
Follow the money. Like John O'Neil was doing, until he got canned. And then dead.

The 9/11 attacks are STILL not listed on Osama's FBI rap sheet, and an FBI spokesperson has admitted that it's because they have no hard evidence that he had anything to do with the attacks.

In fact, when questioned about it, Condoleeza Rice assured us that there was PLENTY proof that Osama was behind the attacks, and that proof would be released to the American public SOON.
That was 2003.
We're still waiting, Condi.

HowlingFrog: And so the question remains: who was behind the 9/11 attacks?
Follow the money. Like John O'Neil was doing, until he got canned. And then dead.

But he was killed on 9/11 wasn't he?

Tor_Eckman: But he was killed on 9/11 wasn't he?

Yes. On his first (second?) day at his new job.
He had been President Bush's top anti-terrorism expert. He started following the money, started uncovering ties between the Bush administration and the bin Ladens (apparently not just the well-known and perfectly legit ones), and was removed from his post. And given a cush new job in the North Tower.

HowlingFrog: Tor_Eckman: But he was killed on 9/11 wasn't he?

Yes. On his first (second?) day at his new job.
He had been President Bush's top anti-terrorism expert. He started following the money, started uncovering ties between the Bush administration and the bin Ladens (apparently not just the well-known and perfectly legit ones), and was removed from his post. And given a cush new job in the North Tower.

I see. It seemed like you were saying he was following the money after 9/11 and then got killed.

I try not to buy into all of this because I just can't believe that this group of farkwads had the brains and the audacity to actually pull 9/11 off. But a lot of it does stink to high heaven. I suppose we will never know what actually went down.

Tor_Eckman: I see. It seemed like you were saying he was following the money after 9/11 and then got killed.

Sorry, I phrased that poorly.

I try not to buy into all of this because I just can't believe that this group of farkwads had the brains and the audacity to actually pull 9/11 off.

I'd hardly call Cheney or Rove or Rumsfeld stupid. Bush? Sure; that's why they sent him to read with kids in Florida. It was a job that was more up to his mental abilities, while leaving the smart guys in charge. I question how much he knew.
"Some bad things are going to happen while you're gone, Mr President. But they will be for the greater good of our nation." Don't forget that Dick Cheney was a signatory on PNAC's "Rebuilding America's Defenses" paper.
Who profited from 9/11? Who gained fistfuls of control over the American People?
It sure as hell wasn't the Islamists.

I suppose we will never know what actually went down.

I respectfully submit that you are wrong.
There are enough people asking the hard questions, and it's becoming more clear to more people daily how manipulated and controlled our media is. All we need are more whistleblowers from the top of the food chain. They are in the wings, but are currently afraid for their jobs and their families.
Just wait.

justoneznot: You mean they're going to take marching orders from Al Qaeda?

Yes.

Mars232: False dichotomy. Try again.

Thanks for the tip! I never would have thought of it on my own and made two absurd choices to demonstrate it :)

I sure hope they start prosecuting these criminals some day. But they probably won't. Not since Nixon was pardoned, does any corrupt government guy ever really face justice. We're a worse nation for it.

vdantev: The Japanese were only interested in peace talks after we had dropped the bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima- and they were a 'civilized' enemy.


Uhhhh, no.

Japan knew it was beat, and was more than willing to surrender before the nukes were dropped.

Thing was, they wanted a conditional surrender, and the U.S. was in no mood to negotiate.

Besides, at the time the bombs were seen as a great way to "send a message" to the Soviet Union.

Whether or not Nuking Japan was the RIGHT thing to do is a whole other debate (I think so, personally, though there are some interesting arguments on the "we shouldn't have" side) but that doesn't change the fact that Japan was willing to negotiate an end to the war before the bombs dropped.

=====================================

As far as negotiating with the Taliban goes, it's probably the most realistic thing to do. The U.S. is simply unwilling to put the number of troops in country necessary to truly defeat them.

I think we would have been VASTLY better off if we had left Iraq alone and poured all that manpower and resources into Afghanistan. Not doing so was a BIG mistake.

But, if we're not going to do the right thing to drive them out, then negotiating with the eventual rulers of Afghanistan makes sense.

Riche: I think we would have been VASTLY better off if we had left Iraq alone and poured all that manpower and resources into Afghanistan. Not doing so was a BIG GIGANTIC HUGE ASININE mistake.

FTFY

You know, reasoning out whether or not there was an American conspiracy two blow up the WTC is fairly easy in my mind. It goes something like this:

Quickly think of your 10 best friends. If you don't have 10 friends then throw a few aqquaintances in there. Now tell all of these friends a very explosive secret. Do you honestly think that not a single one of them is going to tell somebody? Once it leaves that circle what's to stop it from spreading?

Now consider the vast numbers of people who would have had to be invovled in a conspiracy of this magnitude. Dozens, maybe? Hundreds, more likely? And not one of those people had the moral decency to question the sacrifice of innocent American lives for nothing more than political capital?

We're talking about a federal government who's commander in chief once got implicated in a hotel burglary, and you're trying to tell me that the current nimrod has the brainpower to pull something like this off?

No, I'm sorry, none of the conspiracy passes even a cursory litmus test. The simple facts tell the truth, a bunch of pissed off Islamic fanatics quietly plotted and carried out a massive strike. No matter how many times you run the video in slow motion, Occum's Razor will shrewdly cut the legs out from under your sad little theories.

I suppose this is all moot. With the way Kennedy assassination theories are still circulating (I'm guilty of it myself) I know this will pretty much never go away.