DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Can Democrats Be Trusted with Foreign Policy?

**preachadaq** · 09-30-2009, 09:11 PM

OK, I believe that we should continue to pursue the Taliban and Al Qaeda and attempt to replace the opium income with something else. If what I've read is true a good number of the Taliban are no more than mercenaries than followers and they are paid with opium money. In dirt poor countries a lot of loyalty is garnered with cash. I also am in favor to funding Pakistan's effort to keep the Taliban and Al Qaeda on the run and support them with the drones. We have to keep their feet to the fire to be sure they don't go back to their old ways.

Europe also has a major stake in this and should be encouraged to stay engaged because they are also a target. After saying all that I'm tired of spending the lives of our military and our resources being the policeman of the world. We police and they reap the benefits.

A "target" for what? The Taliban are nationalists, not "terrorists". They have no agenda outside of a unflinching devotion to rid their country from foreign occupation... a job they're VERY good at as history illustrates. And no, what you read is completely false. The Taliban are mostly Pashtun, a religious group that vehemently prohibits the use of opium. It was the Taliban that completely eradicated the drug trade throughout the 90's thanks to a healthy stream of U.S. funding. The gravy train was derailed in early 2001 though after they cut a pipeline deal with an Argentinian firm instead of a preferred U.S. vendor. The brass tax here is Caspian Oil and pipeline politics.

The mercenaries you speak of are OUR current allies: The northern alliance. A motley crew of drug dealing rapists and warlords... primarily comprised of Uzbeks and Taijks with a close affiliation to Karzai and his cabinet. These cancerous individuals have corrupted whatever central government does exist.

What we need is exactly what you protest. The 'old ways'. Afghanistan is a TRIBAL entity and the dynamic is not one which will ever cater to a strong central government. The Uzbeks, Taijks, Pashtuns, and Hazaras will ultimately require a solid degree of autonomy linked by a weak central government. And spare me the harboring terrorism BS... 9/11 was hatched in Saudi Arabia, Hamburg, San Diego, UAE, Pakistan, and god knows where else. In most cases it would make more sense to leverage the sovereignty of strong nations than to roll the dice in despotic ones where foreign governments are free to meddle with impunity.

If you want to curtail Anti-American sentiment, we need to stop killing innocent men, women, and children with the utterly ineffective unmanned drones your hail as prudent policy and rely on police action and strong intelligence (i.e. the arrest of Saleh Ali Saleh Nabhan in Somalia last week).

09-30-2009, 09:11 PM	#32
preachadaq Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 413 Senior Member	OK, I believe that we should continue to pursue the Taliban and Al Qaeda and attempt to replace the opium income with something else. If what I've read is true a good number of the Taliban are no more than mercenaries than followers and they are paid with opium money. In dirt poor countries a lot of loyalty is garnered with cash. I also am in favor to funding Pakistan's effort to keep the Taliban and Al Qaeda on the run and support them with the drones. We have to keep their feet to the fire to be sure they don't go back to their old ways. Europe also has a major stake in this and should be encouraged to stay engaged because they are also a target. After saying all that I'm tired of spending the lives of our military and our resources being the policeman of the world. We police and they reap the benefits. A "target" for what? The Taliban are nationalists, not "terrorists". They have no agenda outside of a unflinching devotion to rid their country from foreign occupation... a job they're VERY good at as history illustrates. And no, what you read is completely false. The Taliban are mostly Pashtun, a religious group that vehemently prohibits the use of opium. It was the Taliban that completely eradicated the drug trade throughout the 90's thanks to a healthy stream of U.S. funding. The gravy train was derailed in early 2001 though after they cut a pipeline deal with an Argentinian firm instead of a preferred U.S. vendor. The brass tax here is Caspian Oil and pipeline politics. The mercenaries you speak of are OUR current allies: The northern alliance. A motley crew of drug dealing rapists and warlords... primarily comprised of Uzbeks and Taijks with a close affiliation to Karzai and his cabinet. These cancerous individuals have corrupted whatever central government does exist. What we need is exactly what you protest. The 'old ways'. Afghanistan is a TRIBAL entity and the dynamic is not one which will ever cater to a strong central government. The Uzbeks, Taijks, Pashtuns, and Hazaras will ultimately require a solid degree of autonomy linked by a weak central government. And spare me the harboring terrorism BS... 9/11 was hatched in Saudi Arabia, Hamburg, San Diego, UAE, Pakistan, and god knows where else. In most cases it would make more sense to leverage the sovereignty of strong nations than to roll the dice in despotic ones where foreign governments are free to meddle with impunity. If you want to curtail Anti-American sentiment, we need to stop killing innocent men, women, and children with the utterly ineffective unmanned drones your hail as prudent policy and rely on police action and strong intelligence (i.e. the arrest of Saleh Ali Saleh Nabhan in Somalia last week).
	Quote