Patterico's Pontifications

9/8/2019

Trump Administration Was Set To Host Taliban Leaders At Camp David Days Before 9/11 Anniversary

Filed under: General — Dana @ 11:11 am



[guest post by Dana]

This is really unbelievable. Well, it would be if it was any other president…

Just days before the 18th anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks that left nearly 3,000 dead, there was to have been a a meeting to discuss peace at Camp David with leaders of the Taliban, who recently justified al Qaeda’s attack on 9/11. We are now learning that the meeting has been cancelled because Taliban members admitted to killing 12 innocent people, including one US soldier in a car bomb attack on Thursday:

Untitled

Of course it’s incredible that a sitting U.S. president would invite leaders of the Taliban, a solidly untrustworthy organization that has allied themselves to al-Qaeda, to the private country retreat of U.S. presidents to talk peace and give them political legitimacy in doing so.

After Trump informed America about the meeting and subsequent cancellation, his loyal supporters provided cover for him for having invited Taliban leaders to Camp David in the first place. Most spectacularly, Rep. Liz Cheney manipulatively defended the President, not by what she said, but by what she didn’t say:

While everything she said in the tweet is true, she is simultaneously asking all of us to believe that Trump had nothing to do with signing off on hosting Taliban leaders at Camp David days before the anniversary of 9/11. Cheney knows better, and we know better. She is willing to sacrifice credibility to protect the President and some bad decision making. A decision that is being defended by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo:

If you’re going to negotiate peace, you often have to deal with some pretty bad actors.

[…]

I know the history, too, at Camp David. Indeed, President Trump reflected on that — we all considered when debating how to try and get to the right ultimate outcome. Well, there have often been discussions about war at Camp David. There have been discussions about peace there as well. There have been some been pretty bad actors travel through that place throughout recorded history. It’s an important place. It’s a place where we thought we could convince all the leaders of Afghanistan — President Ghani and his team, as well as the Taliban — we could convince them to begin to head in a direction that would create better conditions on the ground in Afghanistan not only for the Afghans, but better security for the American people as well.”

Here is some background on the peace agreement document that was finalized, at least “in principle”:

That deal, criticized by Afghan officials for lacking measures that would ensure stability, would include a timeline of about 16 months for a gradual withdrawal of the remaining 14,000 American troops, with about 5,000 of them leaving in 135 days after its signing. In return, the Taliban would provide counterterrorism assurances to ease American fears of repeat of attacks on home soil — such as the attacks by Al Qaeda on Sept. 11, 2001, that precipitated the war in Afghanistan.

Afghan officials said the American side had taken the liberty of negotiating on their behalf the release of thousands of Taliban prisoners in Afghan prisons. Mr. Ghani’s government found that unacceptable, and said it would agree to it only if the Taliban reciprocated with an extensive cease-fire — something the insurgents are reluctant to do at this stage of the talks, with violence their main leverage.

The final rounds of negotiations — and even Mr. Trump’s invitation for a summit meeting at Camp David — had occurred during a period of intensifying violence, including the killing of American soldiers…

The White House is discussing new dates for a possible meeting. Dates and locations were not mentioned.

(Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.)

–Dana

103 Responses to “Trump Administration Was Set To Host Taliban Leaders At Camp David Days Before 9/11 Anniversary”

  1. Good morning.

    Dana (fdf131)

  2. The thought of one of those pos being at Camp David makes me sick.
    Wake up Mr. President.

    mg (8cbc69)

  3. Donald Trump is the worst president for foreign policy, EVER.

    Gawain's Ghost (b25cd1)

  4. 3- You must have been passed out during the obama years.

    mg (8cbc69)

  5. If he wanted to announce the Taliban’s total surrender and capitulation and his full triumph on 9/11 the Don probably should’ve gotten them onboard first.

    Nic (896fdf)

  6. I watched Pompeo explain the rationale of this undertaking on FNS, he did his best and I’ve always been impressed by his ability to analyze complex problems and lay out the approach to be taken and reasons why.

    The risk involved and the fact that the Taliban continue to highlight their bloodthirsty, primitive, untrustworthy nature seem to indicate this was a pipe dream. It’s too bad they can’t gather these SOBs and drop 24 hours worth of 500 pound bombs on them. That would be a service to humankind.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  7. 3… please drop the glass pipe.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  8. Exactly, 18 years later we hold less territory than 2002, after the taliban fell, i think we probably dropped the ball when they tried to topple karzai, abdullah didnt turn out so ahiny either.

    Narciso (9b9220)

  9. I don’t know how much you (or I) want to criticize this, since Trump was correcting a terrible, and obvious mistake. My feeling is like what Karl Rove said.

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

    The Taliban clearly were not interested in peace. If anyone was, and some were in the past, they were assassinated by Pakistan’s rogue military intelligence agency (not so rogue any more maybe)

    The problem is with Pakistan and not with anyone in Afghanistan. It’s about time the State Department (and others) understood this. We’ve had the same problem for 18 years and more.

    Unfortunately, Trump is still interested in this negotiation.

    The Taliban wanted to cancel the scheduled Afghan election set for Sept 28.

    Sammy Finkelman (8dcc71)

  10. Just as with so many other bad decisions, Trump needs to find out who keeps making these decisions and fire them. Whoever it is making these decisions obviously does not like Trump because they’re making him look like a fool.

    Jerryskids (702a61)

  11. Drone them to death

    mg (8cbc69)

  12. the Taliban have sanctuary in Qatar, remember our new best friends, they also provide support for boko haram, for hamas, et al, they are all branches of the moslem brotherhood,

    narciso (d1f714)

  13. and yet we wonder why there is a ban on immigration from Afghanistan, along with other states, we have found the wisdom of that decision, rather recently,

    narciso (d1f714)

  14. narciso @13 Afghanistan is not on the banned list, nor should it be.

    Sammy Finkelman (8dcc71)

  15. Camp David? It’s not good enough for the G7, either; we hear Mar-A-Lago is nicer, eh, Captain, sir?!

    No problem w/this. Cost estimates to USA for Afghan War since 2001 through 2019: $975 billion-plus VA & DoD base cost extras. – source, https://www.thebalance.com/cost-of-afghnistan-war-timeline-economic-impact-4122493

    Memo to Cheney: Long list of evildoing representatives were invited to make themselves at home there at Camp David, Lizzy: Khrushchev, Brezhnev, a Japanese Emperor [Remember Pearl Harbor, dear?] Begin, Arafat, Sadat, Saudi kings and princes [remember who flew-da-planes on, 9/11, hun?] Rumsfeld and, of course, your Daddy– he was there often, too, pork choplette. More Americans have been slaughtered in mass shootings stateside this year than fighting in Afghanistan, sweetie. Perpetual war isn’t a winning strategy, Lizzy. Get your head on straight, conservative girl, and never, ever complain about deficits and debt again.

    Memo to Pompeo: quashing peace-meets using the cover of a dead sergeant is a sad if not weak excuse–and insulting- to all the fallen, foreign and domestic; see shootdown of Anderson’s U2 over Cuba in ’62 for details. [The Saudis sliced and diced Khashoggi but you still meet w/them; oil, arms deals, etc., eh, big fella?] The tentacles of control over events are hard for any organization to manage. Either there’s another reason[s] you’re not sharing with We, the Bill Payers [aka The People]– or as SoS, you’re really not one of Trump’s Cabinet ‘Sharpies’ after all.

    Lots have learned that hard way about Afghanistan; from the Genghis Khan days of old to the British and more recently, Soviet Russia. So will America.

    “In the end, you will walk out.” – Gandhi [Ben Kingsley] ‘Gandhi’ 1982

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  16. Just as with so many other bad decisions, Trump needs to find out who keeps making these decisions and fire them. Whoever it is making these decisions obviously does not like Trump because they’re making him look like a fool.

    Jerryskids (702a61) — 9/8/2019 @ 12:14 pm

    Are you serious?? Do you really believe that Trump wasn’t involved in setting this up, and being informed about it *before* signing off on it? If you and I know, at the very least, that the optics are particularly bad on this (given it was to happen right before the anniversary of 9/11), and that the Taliban are not to be trusted under any circumstance, especially on American soil, then how come the Commander in Chief doesn’t know this? He cannot plead ignorance, and you cannot plead ignorance for him. Let him be the President of the United States and fully own this. The buck stops with him.

    Dana (fdf131)

  17. 3… please drop the glass pipe.

    Drop the insults or drop your presence here.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  18. Just as with so many other bad decisions, Trump needs to find out who keeps making these decisions and fire them. Whoever it is making these decisions obviously does not like Trump because they’re making him look like a fool.

    Trump should fire himself?

    Patterico (115b1f)

  19. Trump’s not managing this; hell, he can’t even read a weather map. He has farmed this out to State and DoD to manage. All he wants to hear is a TeeVee media event is at the ready w/a box of Sharpies on the desk and a peace treaty ready to sign for broadcast.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  20. Are the Taliban just waiting for their pallets of cash? Trump operates within what he believes to be the best interests of the USA. Perhaps we should’ve dropped the hammer on the Taliban and left Afghanistan years ago.

    In 2008-2009, my wife worked with an Afghan woman who left Afghanistan with her husband and two small children and resettled here in NorCal. My wife used to tell me how this woman would rail about what our military was allegedly doing to her country and their abuse of the people. Finally, my wife asked her how the women and children were being treated then, compared to before American military presence. The woman responded that the treatment was worse than before that presence. My wife, knowing that wasn’t the case, then asked her why in the world she would ever come to America given her anger and what seemed to be hatred. She didn’t respond and that was the end of any conversation with that ungrateful woman.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  21. The Russian asset, codename Orange Cuckoo, was dreaming of a Nobel Peace Prize again.

    nk (dbc370)

  22. The russian put a ruthless proxy in chechnya ramzan kadyrov, and most redeployed to other caucasus bases, there was one available in afgjansistan, dostum, but hes problematic.

    Narciso (9b9220)

  23. Afghanistan? Pfft! If Putin wanted to simultaneously weaken both America and China, militarily, economically, and diplomatically, strengthening Russia in a relative way, he couldn’t have picked a better Manchurian than this two-bit chiseling grifter.

    nk (dbc370)

  24. Ball of Confusion Collusion

    People throwin’ down, people throwin’ in.
    Why, because it’s election time again
    Run, run, run, man you sho’ can lie
    That glob in the pool, is not a Baby Ruth
    “Vote for me and you’ll get stuff for free”
    Crap on, brother, crap on.
    Well, the only person talkin’ ’bout love thy brother is the preacher
    And each day you read ’bout chillun gettin’ diddled by their teacher
    Segregation, determination, demonstration, masturbation, aggravation,
    humiliation, obligation to our nation
    Ball Of Collusion that’s what the world is today (yeah, yeah)

    The hottest biz is makin’ payday loans
    young folks walkin’ ’round with their face in their phones
    Nothin’ to watch in the summertime, and oh… the beat goes on
    Eve of destruction, tax deduction,
    City inspectors, bill collectors,
    Thought they’d nail Donald Trump, Mueller’s this year’s Forrest Gump
    Shootin’ rockets off to Mars, Pajama Boys ain’t drivin’ cars
    Supplysiders say more tax cuts will solve ev’rything, and the band played on.
    Round and round and around we go, where the world’s headed the Shadow knows.
    Great googa mooga, can’t you hear me talkin’ to you, just a
    Ball of Collusion that’s what the world is today. (yeah, yeah)

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  25. Trump hasn’t learned this basic lesson: There are no good Taliban.
    Having those bearded religious extremists in a place like Camp David on the eve 9/11 can’t be more stupid. I’ve seen no assurance that they’ve disassociated from al Qaeda.

    Paul Montagu (c3380c)

  26. Trump loves to make deals, but so far I can’t really see that he’s cut any great deals for the US. He left the paris climate accords and walked away from the Iran deal but leaving deals is easier than making them. Looking at what Kim has done with him in NK I’m glad they’re walking away before he makes a bad situation worse. In fairness to Trump making it better may be impossible, but we will see.

    Of course, this could also be a ploy to change the conversation from his lies about Dorrian or using the airforce to line his own pockets. There are so many legitimate screw ups from this white house it’s hard to tell.

    time123 (d54166)

  27. @16 and @18:

    My comment was funnier.

    Jerryskids (702a61)

  28. I’ve been having that kind of day myself, Jerryskids.

    nk (dbc370)

  29. The Taliban would carry Minnesota’s 5th district.

    Munroe (732181)

  30. President trump is not responsible for 9-11 That was george bush who needed a second pearl harbor (progress for new american century 1999) and the neo-cons who are anti trumper free trade traitor scum before they could invade iraq. In august 2001 before 9-11 dubya was given a c.i.a. briefing titled: bin ladin determind to attack in america with aircraft. Dubya’s response Ok you have covered your ass now I am off to the ranch. Congolissa rice said at congressional hearing “who could imagine anyone flying airplanes into buildings!” She was then shown a picture walking pass an anti-aircraft missile battery ready to shoot down any plane trying to crash into the building rice was speaking in milan italy in august 2001. Her answer who you going to believe me or your lying eyes! Never forget george bush alowed 9-11 because he needed a “second pearl harbor” before he could invade iraq and so american people would forget republicans on supreme court stole the election for him by stoping the votes in floriduh being counted. Attorny general ashcroft said he was told along with other official to stop flying commercial. NEVER FORGET BUSH KNEW!

    lany (30b00c)

  31. Doubtful. Omar herself aside, most of the Somalis there are there because they wanted to get away from alShishkebab (or whatever the name of the jihadi group there is).

    Kishnevi (9a9ca3)

  32. Steve Bannon could always primary them. Snicker.

    nk (dbc370)

  33. Well keith ‘ike turner’ ellison was a cair favorite as predecessor, maybe this first incident is a pattern:

    Israeli students violently assaulted in Warsaw by Qatari youths | The Jerusalem post
    https://m.jpost.com/Diaspora/Antisemitism/Israeli-students-violently-assaulted-in-Warsaw-601017

    Narciso (9b9220)

  34. If Trump invited Patriot Prayer to Camp David for peace talks with Antifa, the outrage would be much more over the top.

    Munroe (732181)

  35. Bluff City Law
    I can’t stop laughing.

    mg (8cbc69)

  36. Poland’s not the sort of place that needs to import antiSemites.

    Kishnevi (9a9ca3)

  37. Thats just stupid lany specially since the second pdb had less info than the firsr a year and a half earlier.

    Narciso (9b9220)

  38. President trump is not responsible for 9-11 That was george bush who needed a second pearl harbor

    Ooh, a 9/11 truther. Sad!

    Paul Montagu (a2342d)

  39. Trump thinks Dubya was the worst president in history, endorsed Hillary for president, praised North Korea’s dictator, the Tienanmen Square Massacre, and wanted to host the fans of 9/11 in luxury. If Iran blows up our stuff and attacks our allies, Trump is going to, at worst, write a stern tweet.

    He is real bold when it’s safe. When it’s someone’s wife he might grope them because his fame and celebrity are intimidating, or so he brags.

    Look at Trump’s effect on the world. On NATO, on Russia, on China. Look at what’s changed with Iran and North Korea. It is not praising Obama’s poor foreign policy to note that Trump’s is terrible. Our allies are waiting for him to leave, and our enemies are praying for him to stay. We all know it.

    Dustin (6d7686)

  40. @37 They have enough of their own. I visited Auschwitz a couple of years ago and they have massively, massively sanitized it. Most people don’t go on to Birkenau to see the more honest portrayal.

    Nic (896fdf)

  41. Yeah, Trump’s foreign policy has made Obama look like…well I don’t know, not as bad as Trump. In fact, most actual conservatives would probably have preferred Shillary’s positions to Trump’s. I guess that assumes you can identify Trump’s foreign policy, it seems to always have the brown stains from recently getting pulled out of his ample patootey.

    Colonel Klink (Ret) (6e7a1c)

  42. Jerryskids was being sarcastic in a very clever way. He has left several comments like that recently.

    DRJ (15874d)

  43. I thought most people realized that.

    DRJ (15874d)

  44. 43. Patterico @ #18 was therefore the correct interpretation.

    Sammy Finkelman (8dcc71)

  45. 44. It depended on whether you were familiar with other comments by Jerryskids because it could be, albeit awkwardly, read as a straightforward comment.

    Sammy Finkelman (8dcc71)

  46. “In fact, most actual conservatives would probably have preferred Shillary’s positions to Trump’s.“

    Now that’s amusing!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  47. Mark Levin has Dr. Robert Epstein on tonight as a guest and it has been very interesting hearing about Googles machinations, manipulation and use of bias.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  48. The same guys who said Romney wasn’t a RINO say Trump has a good foreign policy. They aren’t really saying it to us. They are trying to convince themselves. extreme partisanship has more than a little in common with addiction. It’s basically a mental illness once you cross that line.

    Dustin (6d7686)

  49. NeverTrump folks have seen every one of their contentions, every one of their complaints, every one of their fervent dreams to force Trump out of office shattered… EPIC FAILS each and every one of them. This unfortunately results in an empty feeling… a feeling of impotence in their inability to convince any of the steadily shrinking number of people who will still read anything they write or listen to anything they say if given an opportunity to say it.

    It’s a terribly sad situation. Most of us realize what’s at stake and hope the current occupant of the Oval Office will listen to his better angels (and Advisors) overcome his many personal flaws and do the right thing, in the best interests of America. Jobs, wage growth, opportunity, respect for law and order and a long term vision of where America needs to improve to meet their he challenges we will face. No dim witted plans, no pie in the sky will meet our needs.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  50. Donald Trump is the worst president for foreign policy, EVER.

    I wish I could argue with that. I can’t. He’s terrible, and pretty much random terrible.

    Kevin M (66fbad)

  51. Jim Mattis should run.

    Kevin M (66fbad)

  52. 3… please drop the glass pipe.

    Drop the insults or drop your presence here.

    I thought Haiku was speaking metaphorically (“You must be high to think that!”), not as any real claim about drug use.

    Haiku is wrong, of course — Trump is terrible on foreign policy and I am increasingly skeptical of the claim he doesn’t drink — but I never took #3 as an attack on anyone.

    Kevin M (66fbad)

  53. Trump was correcting a terrible, and obvious mistake.

    Most people don’t tweet their terrible, and obvious mistakes.

    Kevin M (66fbad)

  54. Trump was correcting a terrible, and obvious mistake.

    That only works if he was unaware that they were negotiating with the Taliban, and not the Afghan’s actual government. If he is unaware of what his government is doing, as it’s being reported by every paper and news channel, then he’s a moron.

    Oh, wait, he is a moron, so it’s possible he stumbled into the right decision, having exhausted all other options.

    Colonel Klink (Ret) (6e7a1c)

  55. Trump was correcting a terrible, and obvious mistake.

    But in Trump’s mind, of course, he never makes mistakes. He would rather add a ridiculous Sharpie loop to a weather map, and pressure someone at NOAA to disavow the agency’s own public announcement, and then order someone to make a silly cat video, than simply say “Sorry, I made a little error,” as a normal person would do.

    Radegunda (e6c209)

  56. Worst President for everything ever. All bluff and blunder. And that’s the way Vladimir aha, aha, likes it.

    nk (dbc370)

  57. Putins having bad borsht today.

    Narciso (9b9220)

  58. Today:

    Jerryskids was being sarcastic in a very clever way. He has left several comments like that recently.

    DRJ (15874d) — 9/8/2019 @ 7:53 pm

    Last week:

    H: Sarcasm comes from fear and anger, too.

    DRJ (15874d) — 9/5/2019 @ 3:47 am

    BuDuh (d46662)

  59. True, Kish…but is Warsaw Polish for Austin or Nashville?

    urbanleftbehind (d93012)

  60. Buduh,

    Perhaps Jerryskids fears what Trump is doing (like me) but he chooses to deal with it by employing clever sarcasm.

    I know you understand my points but you have a thing about taunting me as hypocritical or whatever instead of discussing my points in good faith.

    DRJ (15874d)

  61. But seriously you have an answer to this anabasis type situation we find ourselves in.

    Narciso (9b9220)

  62. 51… the day Trump starts a war in SE Asia, or steers us into a fairly disastrous war that he won’t allow the military to fight without intrusive civilian oversight, or allows the target of a manhunt to escape or encourages the overthrow of governments that results in terrorist havens being established and mass immigration that will potentially reshape an entire continent and adversely impact western civilization, or provide a known terrorist funder/promoter/murderer of Americans (Iran) access to cash and the US financial system as part of a ridiculous nuclear deal, etc., etc., you might have a point.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  63. Jerryskids was being sarcastic in a very clever way. He has left several comments like that recently.

    DRJ (15874d) — 9/8/2019 @ 7:53 pm

    I thought most people realized that.

    DRJ (15874d) — 9/8/2019 @ 7:55 pm

    I didn’t know that. I am taking comments at face value these days because I don’t have the time or energy to research their comment history or second-guess.

    Dana (9c29f0)

  64. It can be very hard to spot sarcasm online.

    DRJ (15874d)

  65. Maybe the Talibans were hoping for the same sort of pallets of cash that Iranian got…

    Thanks Obama…

    The way I see it, there are FOUR options:

    1) Unilateral withdrawl (ie, Lose the war)
    2) Win the war (ie, Shock and Awe till Taliban is completely destroyed or surrenders)
    3) Status Quo
    4) Negotiation

    Do you see any political will from Americans for 1-3?

    Frankly, I really dislike inviting Taliban leadership to Camp David… but c’mon ya’ll… other detestable figures came here to negotiate. Nevermind some of the yahoos in the freaking UN.

    Are we really wigging out about the fact that Trump is trying to orchestrate peace talks in Camp David?

    I know many, many armed forces personnel who wants the US out of Afghanistan. We did what we needed to do post-9/11… the US armed forces is not equipped/nor has the will for nation-state building.

    whembly (51f28e)

  66. 59: Jerryskids comment #10 is more irony than sarcasm, and it wasn’t directly aimed at its intended readers. It was a clever way of getting us to think about a problem.
    Sarcasm that’s aimed directly at a particular reader or listener is something else. It’s meant only to belittle.
    For example, ridiculing my appreciation of a good song by a highly accomplished singer/songwriter (OBE)– because I mentioned it in connection with Trump’s extraordinarily casual attitude toward facts — was sarcasm, with no purpose but to demean. (Nevertheless, I’ll continue to enjoy Take That’s lively shows alongside my snobby highbrow fare. Said it all.)

    Radegunda (e6c209)

  67. Maybe irony is a better description. Jerryskids’ intent strikes me as humor but there is also an edge to his Trump comments that is sarcastic. I will leave it up to Jerrykids to characterize it if he wants.

    DRJ (15874d)

  68. mr. president donald trump the president who is president of the united states never makes mistakes and if a mistake was made in inviting the taliban who are strong leaders and have control of their country to camp david it was due to some disloyal stone loser in deep state probably anthony scaramucci not to name any names

    nk (dbc370)

  69. Its just terrible that Trump is trying to end our involvement in an endless war. And just days before 9-11 and and just days after the 80th Anniversary of Nazi-Soviet pact. And what about the US Open? Not meeting because its the X anniversary of Event Y doesn’t strike me as a grown-up way to run a country but whatever.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  70. If he ends up doing something during Yom Kippur are we going to discuss that too? And what about Christmas?

    rcocean (1a839e)

  71. There is a total disconnect from what would pass for the political wing of Taliban and the tribal groups, they are uncontrollable. So this agreement could never happen in the first place. It was a very bad idea from the get-go.

    So what was possible in Northern Ireland (with a political wing that controlled the money and a military wing that controlled the bombs and violence) is impossible in Afghanistan.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  72. if mr. president trump the president who is president of the united states wants to bring terrorists who blow up americans to camp david it’s only because he’s so smart and a stable genius and nevertrump wants hillary to be president so there

    nk (dbc370)

  73. 76… This is like happy feet without the intellectual rigor…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  74. 48. Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 9/8/2019 @ 8:10 pm

    Mark Levin has Dr. Robert Epstein on tonight as a guest and it has been very interesting hearing about Googles machinations, manipulation and use of bias.

    I knew Mark Levin’s (radio) show is not on on Sunday so I thought that must have been a rerun, but it wasn’t re-run here on WABC.

    Or, I had a thought, was this television?

    So I checked now:

    https://www.foxnews.com/media/google-bias-search-results-trump-clinton-epstein-levin

    Tune in Sunday at 10 p.m. ET for the full interview on “Life, Liberty & Levin.”

    Google tends to keep people in a bubble.

    Sammy Finkelman (8dcc71)

  75. Substituting Afghans for rabbits, perhaps this could be used as a roadmap/strategy for an exit from Afghanistan?

    https://nypost.com/2019/09/09/vegan-activist-who-rescued-16-rabbits-killed-over-100-in-the-process-report/

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  76. 78… it’s an interesting show, Sammy. Levin usually gets no respect around these parts, but he often interviews people that do. And he’s an excellent interviewer.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  77. The reason the Russian asset wanted to bring the Taliban to Camp David on the 18th anniversary of 9/11 was to seal their victory in the eyes of the world. Their ascension from hunted pederasts hiding in caves to having the President of the United States on his knees before them on American soil.

    nk (dbc370)

  78. Colonel Haiku @75

    So what was possible in Northern Ireland (with a political wing that controlled the money and a military wing that controlled the bombs and violence) is impossible in Afghanistan.

    That picture you have – that there’s some tribal groups that are uncontrollable is not the way it is.

    But you are right that this is impossible. The United States is negotiating with puppets.

    I think it’s Pakistan, or Pakistan’s rogue military intelligence agency which isn’t so rogue right now – who else? * – that controls the money. And it wants victory in Afghanistan.

    It controls the military wing, too. All of the military wings: Taliban, al Waeda, ISIS. Mullah Omar was dead for two years before they decided to annu=ounce it. Now that does not and cannot happen with anyone really in charge. The death doesn’t remain secret for two days.

    If the people in the military wing want to end the war – and soem did – they get liquidated.

    Sometimes by the United States armed forces after information is supplied.

    ————
    * The Irish Republican Army raised money in the United States. But whre would the Islamissts get their money It’s not they don’t need money. It’s not like they steal it all.

    Sammy Finkelman (8dcc71)

  79. You want to know soemthing more about this?

    There were no negotiations spposed to take place at Camp David.

    The Taliban spokesman in Doha said they wouldn’t have gone to the United States without an agrrement already signed.

    You know why? I’ll tell you the reason: The Taliban officials would not be able to have secure communications with their secret bosses!

    There were some negotitations still to take place in Doha:

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-afghanistan-zalmay-khalilzad-taliban-talks-doha-after-bomb-kills-american-troop-kabul-2019-09-06/

    Kabul — U.S. envoy Zalmay Khalilzad has returned to Qatar for more, unscheduled talks with the Taliban. His return comes just four days after Khalilzad announced that his team had reached an agreement “in principle” with the Taliban aimed at ending the longest war ever to ensnare the U.S. military.

    When he announced the draft agreement on Monday, Khalilzad said his negotiations with the extremist group had concluded and that the deal lacked only approval from his bosses in the Trump administration.

    The U.S. envoy’s team would not elaborate Friday on the nature of the resumed discussions in Doha, but they come after a series of deadly Taliban attacks across Afghanistan. As CBS News correspondent Charlie D’Agata reports, while the Taliban may be talking peace with the U.S., they’re still waging a brutal war on Afghan soil.

    There actually wasn’t a finalized agreement, but Zalmay Khalilzad was telling everyone back home in Washington that an agrrement was ThisClose.

    They wanted the U.S. to make some final concessions.

    If Trump hadn’t cancelled the summit, it would…probably have been spurned by the Taliban.

    Sammy Finkelman (8dcc71)

  80. 81. nk (dbc370) — 9/9/2019 @ 11:42 am

    The reason the Russian asset wanted to bring the Taliban to Camp David on the 18th anniversary of 9/11 was to seal their victory in the eyes of the world. </blockquote. Who;s the asset? It's not Trump, because if that's what Trump wanted to do, that's what hewould have done.

    It was Pakistan that wanted to seal the victory. Finally, maybe, the penny dropped, as they say in London.

    Sammy Finkelman (8dcc71)

  81. 69. whembly (51f28e) — 9/9/2019 @ 8:23 am

    The way I see it, there are FOUR options:

    1) Unilateral withdrawl (ie, Lose the war)
    2) Win the war (ie, Shock and Awe till Taliban is completely destroyed or surrenders)
    3) Status Quo
    4) Negotiation

    Of these four, the status quo is the best option.

    #2 is good but not that strategy. Shck and awe won’t work without taking the war into Pakistan.

    Economic sanctions against Pakistan maybe would work, but they’d have to be extreme. And wuick since re-supply to U.S. troops would get cut off. (if U.S. troops were withdrawn from Afghanistan, that might not be a problem.)

    If Pakistan asked for evidence of their involement, it should be refused. They shold not be given any evidence of their guilt, and instead the U.S. should demand that Pakisan supply the evidence of their support for the Taliban and make it public.

    You can’t use Seal teams on Pakistani targets because they maybe are all corrupt now.

    Sammy Finkelman (8dcc71)

  82. Doubtful Imran khan, who may have been hit by one too many cricket bats, has threatened to go to war over Kashmir, among members of his coalition, is Abdul saeez, of lashkar e toiba, who was recently detained in connection with Mumbai attack, one problem is if Taliban seizes Kabul, that may not be enough of a morsel, the tekri Taliban might find greater pickings in Islamabad, and that could get problematic,

    narciso (d1f714)

  83. so it turns out the deal to transit through Prestwick airport, the closest point to doomberg, was negotiated three years ago,

    narciso (d1f714)

  84. 86. narciso (d1f714) — 9/9/2019 @ 12:20 pm

    Doubtful Imran khan, who may have been hit by one too many cricket bats, has threatened to go to war over Kashmir,

    hey may be getting bold, or it may be bluff.

    I think Pakistan is relying on its possession of a nuclear bomb. They need to be argued out of any confidence that that will protect them. The strategic thinking behind that needs to be discredited.

    among members of his coalition, is Abdul saeez, of lashkar e toiba, who was recently detained in connection with Mumbai attack,

    What more proof does anybody need that Pakistan – or people in Pakistan;s military – are nehnd the Taliban?

    The fact that he was detained means Pakistan can be pressured. Even if the main people responsible stay free for awhile the effort can stop.

    one problem is if Taliban seizes Kabul, that may not be enough of a morsel, the tekri Taliban might find greater pickings in Islamabad, and that could get problematic,

    The Pakistani military is maybe like the Japanese military before World War II. They edge toward more and more control and they prevent an opposition government thst will rein them in, but they don’t quite want to officially take over the government. (because maybe then everyone and every country will know?)

    One thing: It really doesn’t make any sense for anyone in Pakistan to be this ambitious)

    So this might be easier to end than most people would think.

    I think maybe it might be that they are simply being bribed by the People’s Liberation Army. And that is China’s biggest secret. It continues because it is so secret that there’s no downside.

    Maybe Xi Jinping will be removed by his colleagues, and this policy, which pre-dates him, end with him.

    Sammy Finkelman (8dcc71)

  85. narciso @87 Yes, of course, while Obama was president.

    And there aren’t very many U.S. troops overnighting at a Trump owned property.

    And they only do so if the soldiers make that choice and its within their budget.

    And they get a discounted rate from the Trump Organization. It’s a totally arms length tranaction.

    Sammy Finkelman (8dcc71)

  86. @whembly

    1) Unilateral withdrawl (ie, Lose the war)
    2) Win the war (ie, Shock and Awe till Taliban is completely destroyed or surrenders)
    3) Status Quo
    4) Negotiation

    #4 is even more of anon-starter than number 2.

    Trump had no exit strategy from the peace agreement ion case the Taliban broke it. The fact of the matetr is there is no political solution to the Afgahan conflict

    At least not with the Taliban.

    Or even with the Pakistanis.

    Maybe it can wrapped into the negotitations with China.

    #2 is possible, but requires a different strategy, otherwise it turns into #3.

    Sammy Finkelman (8dcc71)

  87. china has long standing ties to Pakistan, they were the go between that Nixon used, but aq khan worked with the lap nor reactor complex, to get his nuclear program on the ground, places like gwadar, would provide a warm water port on the indian ocean,

    narciso (d1f714)

  88. #90 @whembly

    1) Unilateral withdrawl (ie, Lose the war)
    2) Win the war (ie, Shock and Awe till Taliban is completely destroyed or surrenders)
    3) Status Quo
    4) Negotiation
    #4 is even more of anon-starter than number 2.

    Trump had no exit strategy from the peace agreement ion case the Taliban broke it. The fact of the matetr is there is no political solution to the Afgahan conflict

    At least not with the Taliban.

    Or even with the Pakistanis.

    Maybe it can wrapped into the negotitations with China.

    #2 is possible, but requires a different strategy, otherwise it turns into #3.

    Sammy Finkelman (8dcc71) — 9/9/2019 @ 12:40 pm

    I’m actually in the camp of #3, status quo.

    But, we have to recognize the public perception now. There’s an overwhelming sense that the public wants us out of these wars.

    The trick here is how do we disengage in a way that ameliorates the political implications home and abroad

    Our enemy, yes the Taliban, gets a vote as well. Don’t lose sight of that.

    whembly (51f28e)

  89. whembly @92

    I’m actually in the camp of #3, status quo.

    So is the Wall street Journal, and I think most newspaper editorials. If you want to criticize Trump you’re in that position and if you don’t analyze things as either pro or anti-Trump but according to general foreign policy principles you’re in that position

    But, we have to recognize the public perception now. There’s an overwhelming sense that the public wants us out of these wars.

    Not true, says the Wall Street Journal, and I agree.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/trumping-the-taliban-11567973992

    There is no domestic political clamor for the U.S. to withdraw all troops, especially with casualties low. The political harm for Mr. Trump would be far greater if a pullout triggered the collapse of the Afghan government and a humanitarian tragedy. A revived terrorist sanctuary in Afghanistan would also erase the political benefit for Mr. Trump from destroying the ISIS caliphate in Syria. The jihadist movement world-wide would declare a great victory.

    Sammy Finkelman (102c75)

  90. The differences from the Vietnam War situation are:

    1) Casualties are much lower.

    2) There is no draft – so pretty much nobody (except for some people who volunteered for other things) is sent there who doesn’t want to go.

    3) Nobody is asking for negotiations. In the case of the Vietnam war, the opposition was always calling for negiotiations with North Vietnam. (They wanted to stop the bombing because that was supposedly necessary to start negotiations.) Here nobody is calling for negitiations to end the war.. Even the people who wanted to negotiate on nuclear weapons, who want to negotiate with Iran, who want to negotiate (better they say) with North Korea, who wanted to negotiate with the Syrian government, who always want Israel to solve its problems with negotiations, are not calling for negotiations with the Taliban or al Qaeda or ISIS.

    Not one Democratic candidate for president I think is doing that, not even Tulsi Gabbard. Not one European country. If they are, they’re not attracting much attention or are very quiet about it.

    The trick here is how do we disengage in a way that ameliorates the political implications home and abroad…

    “Vietnamization” will not work because the Taliban have targeted for assassination anybody in the Afghan military or government who is of high quality.

    That’s why the quality is so bad. They attack and kill the good people while leaving the corrupt and incompetent alone.

    They know what they are doing. Unfortunately, maybe the U.S. military doesn’t understand what the Taliban and the other Pakistani front groups et al are doing.

    Our enemy, yes the Taliban, gets a vote as well. Don’t lose sight of that.

    I know. And they vote to get rid of all the high quality people in the Afghan government.

    BTW it is not true that this war has gone on for many years without success. theer was success, but then, using lessons gained from Iraq the teliban started to come back.

    Sammy Finkelman (102c75)

  91. it’s possible, but I don’t see much good after 18 years, the afghan government hold perhaps 40% of the country, if one is charitable, like Saigon and part of the central highlands, all the cards have been dealt,

    narciso (d1f714)

  92. It is possible to reduce the number of troops (and maybe with it the number of casualties) required to maintain the status quo, but they must be ready for a surprise offensive, and an ineffective home army, like in Iraq in 2014 with ISIS. (there too the Iraqi army was hollowed out, in that case mostly by corruption, or targeted assassination like in Afghanistan.)

    I suppose there is the thought that if terrorist groups can be contained in Nigeria and some other places without U.S. troops, or without any significant number of them, then that should be possible too in Afghanisatan. But in those places (like Yemen even) there are quality foreign allies with secure home bases. In Afghanistan the Taliban and others can explode car bombs in Kabul, the capital.

    Sammy Finkelman (8dcc71)

  93. narciso @ 95. What is possible? What are you referring to?

    Sammy Finkelman (8dcc71)

  94. that the afghan government could fall apart but we have how many troops, there,

    narciso (d1f714)

  95. @15. Postscript memo to Lizzy; CBS News reported this evening the total spent by the U.S. on the Afghan War so far: $2 trillion.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  96. It wasn’t spent on the Afghan war. It was spent on the military and its contractors. Most of it went back into the economy. It reduced unemployment and boosted manufacturing. It’s Keynesian economics.

    nk (dbc370)

  97. (T)he Taliban would provide counterterrorism assurances to ease American fears of repeat of attacks on home soil

    Yeah, right.

    Ripmurdock (2c04e3)

  98. Jerryskids (702a61) — 9/8/2019 @ 12:14 pm

    Trump needs to find out who keeps making these decisions and fire them. Whoever it is making these decisions obviously does not like Trump because they’re making him look like a fool.

    I think he fired the wrong person: John Bolton.

    I think Trump still wants to negotiate with the Taliban.

    Sammy Finkelman (102c75)

  99. Or it could be John Bolton said something to some interlocutor thast Trump did not approve of.

    Or a dispute per “Where do we go now?”

    Sammy Finkelman (102c75)

Leave a Reply

Comment moderation is enabled. Your comment may take some time to appear.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3665 secs.