• Report: White House to Pursue "Direct Talks" With Taliban
    20 replies, posted
https://www.thedailybeast.com/report-white-house-to-pursue-direct-talks-with-taliban
Before anyone asks, Obama did the same thing: https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2013/07/02/obama-wrong-to-negotiate-with-taliban-in-afghanistan Still stupid though. Negotiating with such a loose coalition of terrorist organisations is a waste of time.
Can't wait for Trump to praise them
oh my fucking god, if this happens and people still somehow fucking support him, then I give up on this goddamned country
Is it? The US regularly trades terrorist prisoners or their associates for captured US soldiers / human assets.
How have you not already?
Trading prisoners is quite different from conducting peace negotiations with a coalition of loosely affiliated terrorist groups who splinter yearly.
These guys are smart, so smart. Our top generals can't catch them, they're hiding amongst the civilians. They're in caves, caves! Can you imagine it? I think we could learn something from them, something valuable. But we gotta reign 'em in. Show' s over guys! We won't risk American lives though, we're funding a small group of elite guerrilla specialists in the Mideast, and problem solved!
I heard they just resqued some kids from cave, must be really good taliban kids, we love yem, best cave
It's worth noting that we have worked with certain Taliban groups in order to achieve cease fires. Working with the Taliban is also something that the Afghan government wishes for us too do, so that we can find some form of peace in the region. It's not exactly the easiest pill to swallow, but peace in Afghanistan means working with the Taliban, whether or not we like it.
Fancy that coming from a UK poster lmao
I hope you guys can understand the Afghanistan situation from their point of view, rather than an American or global POV. Afghanistan is a massive country with many tribal areas that even the US or ANA troops had difficulties with the local areas. They generally distrust government and troops, so they're go to guy was whichever powerful tribe or in some cases, the taliban. These tribes are usually a 'don't mess with me and I won't mess with you' kind of people and they just want peace. Perhaps achieving some levels of peace may require giving certain parts of the Taliban some concessions.
Why don't we just leave?
Both our countries can be equally stupid at the same time, although I will say that Trump, whilst probably less destructive than Brexit in the long-term, is certainly an even stupider decision in the sense that people went out and voted for somebody who said the shit he has.
Well at least you admitted it. I don't think Trump simply saying weird or silly shit (which he certainly does) neccessarily means that voting for him was a bad decision though considering who was on the flip side of that ballot. I would argue though that it's better to judge Trump ultimately by his policy rather than his words.
British cynicism means we're taught to hate ourselves most of all from a young age. If he just said 'weird' or 'silly' things, I'd agree with you, but dangerous, destructive and worrying stuff such as talking about killing innocent families of terrorists or dismantling Obamacare are reasons that voting for him was stupid.
He said it, previous presidents actually did it. Maybe he has too, I haven't heard anything on that front.
He's tried to do many of the things he mentioned he wanted to do that are bad though, like trying to ban Muslims, etc. On the Obamacare subject: whilst the NHS in the UK is far better than the watered down system America has, health insurance only works if the healthy people pay for the sick, so you can't just set it up for opt-out otherwise the price would be insane due to all the healthy people opting out. Also, I'd rather have to pay more money than I need to via a tax than have thousands die due to not having access to healthcare, wouldn't you? You're equivocating where it's not justified, IMO.
The "Muslim Ban" was constructed using data from the Obama administration on countries singled out for terror. And it was a temporary travel ban anyways. I wouldn't say that it impacted American Muslims as much as some people would have you believe. Also, the point of insurance is that they bet on your asset, or even you, to not break. Then the hope is that they can turn a profit by making sure they bet on enough people that don't "break" so that they don't have to pay as much for the people that do "break". It's a gamble, and it's unattractive, but that's how it works. If I wanted to implement some kind of municipal health policy to provide basic healthcare I wouldn't go to insurance companies to do it. And actually I think there's some potential to make it so that healthcare just isn't as expensive to begin with. I had a vomiting fit when I was in Hong Kong earlier this year and I went to a clinic for treatment. All in all that visit cost 50 USD plus some meds which I got at the same clinic. Over here it could be several hundred dollars for the visit and then even more for the meds. I think it might be looking into making a system more like HK's rather than trying to do this weird insurance fuckery. Of course, HK is a wildly different animal from the US and is also incredibly urban (to a fault) so there would probably have to be numerous considerations made.
Mate, argue your healthcare stuff somewhere else
People seem perfectly content now to bring off topic arguments into this board where many years ago I was banned for doing just that even though I didn't intend to In fact I got criticism in a different thread for trying to shift the subject of discussion back on Antifa after rebuking Codemaster's rant
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.