Biden says Taliban is not our enemy

[Jim in CT]

White House Stands By Biden Statement That Taliban Isn't U.S. Enemy | Fox News

Yes, our vice president says that the Taliban is not our enemy. That would come as a surprise to Army Rangers like my younger brother, who was given orders to find members of the taliban and kill them all on sight. You only do that in a war, and you only declare war on an "enemy".

Jesus God Almighty. And Spence tells us that Sarah Palin was stupid?

It's too bad for Hitler that Biden wasn't around in, say, 1940. I can hear Joe (with Sean Penn and Susan Sarandon) making pleas for appeasment.

[Fly Rod]

We have more important issues then Joe and the Taliban.

Such as: Supreme court sends memo to congress, "not to use Merry Christmas in greetings."

I'm still looking for a Holiday Tree. I have been pointed to Xmas Trees though.

If you watched 60 minutes Sunday maybe Joe would suggest giving the Taliban Ohio, let them move into the abandon homes and subsidize them, after all they are our friends.

[Duke41]

He really is a big, dopey, bastard. How insulting to familes that have suffered losses.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Fly Rod

We have more important issues then Joe and the Taliban.

I agree. Such as Joe and Barack. That's our biggest issue. Did these clowns really win the election in 2008? Really?

Biden has a son in the Army, that makes his statement even more amazing.

[spence]

Sounds like we're positioning to close a peace deal. Biden is drawing a line, we're only there to kill Taliban when they harbor terrorists that may hurt US interests...not eliminate them regardless.

The flip side is endless war.

-spence

[justplugit]

Ya, peace is on the way from the radical Islamists. Be nice, say we know you really don't mean to harm us or want to plot terrorist attacks against us.

Geez, look how fast Iran is responding to our request to" please send us
back our downed Drone". Just be nice, don't place any blame for being
attacked on 9/11 or other attacks in the world, say it's all our fault
and all will be well.
Ya, that will do it.

[spence]

Originally Posted by justplugit

Ya, peace is on the way from the radical Islamists. Be nice, say we know you really don't mean to harm us or want to plot terrorist attacks against us.

Don't think the Taliban could give one whip about what we do, they're in it for their own power.

What's the alternative?

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Sounds like we're positioning to close a peace deal. Biden is drawing a line, we're only there to kill Taliban when they harbor terrorists that may hurt US interests...not eliminate them regardless.

The flip side is endless war.

-spence

First of all, let me say, Spence, that I'm SHOCKED that your reaction is to bend over backwards to defend Biden.

"Sounds like we're positioning to close a peace deal."

That's idiotic for 2 reasons. First of all, regardless of what that statement "sounds like" to you, yuo are assigning benign intentions when you cannot know what Biden meant. Spence, are you this forgiving when conservatives say stupid things? When Palin puts her foot in her mouth, was your initial reaction "hold on, here's what this sounds like to me...", or was your first reaction to insult her?

Second, while we are negotiating an end to our involvement, that negotiation does not involve the Taliban, we are working with the Afghan govenrment, which (no thanks to you) is no longer the Taliban. As of today, as of right now, we are in a declared war with the Taliban. That means they are the "enemy".

You literally have no shame.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

What's the alternative?

-spence

You wouldn't know what the alternative is, because they won't talk about it on MSNBC. But here's the alternative...you bring the Taliban to their knees, and at the same time you build up the Afghan security forces. At some point, the Afghanis can handle the Taliban on their own, and then we leave.

That's the alternative, and it's pretty simple. It's also exactly what is happening. If you weren't such a close-minded, brainwashed lunatic, you'd know that. I guess the liberals you watch don't "challenge their audiences" the way you claim, because if they did, you'd know this.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

That's idiotic for 2 reasons. First of all, regardless of what that statement "sounds like" to you, yuo are assigning benign intentions when you cannot know what Biden meant.

Actually, listening to the quotes it seemed quite clear what he meant. You stopped listening after "Taliban".

Second, while we are negotiating an end to our involvement, that negotiation does not involve the Taliban, we are working with the Afghan govenrment, which (no thanks to you) is no longer the Taliban.

Rumors of negotiations with the Taliban have gone on for some time, and it's hard to think we could reach agreement with the Afghanistan Government without some form of agreement with the Taliban. The Pakistani variable in the equation would make elimination nearly impossible.

As of today, as of right now, we are in a declared war with the Taliban.

This is factually not true.

Operation Enduring Freedom was a military action approved by Congress, there was no legal declaration of war.

The objective was to eliminate al Qaeda's safe haven and remove the Taliban from power.

We are still fighting the Taliban yes, but we are not "at War" with them. Doesn't make much difference to those doing the fighting, but it's an important distinction to those trying to end it successfully.

-spence

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

You wouldn't know what the alternative is, because they won't talk about it on MSNBC. But here's the alternative...you bring the Taliban to their knees, and at the same time you build up the Afghan security forces. At some point, the Afghanis can handle the Taliban on their own, and then we leave.

Sounds like the Obama Doctrine.

That's the alternative, and it's pretty simple. It's also exactly what is happening. If you weren't such a close-minded, brainwashed lunatic, you'd know that. I guess the liberals you watch don't "challenge their audiences" the way you claim, because if they did, you'd know this.

You think we're bringing the Taliban "to their knees"?

The reports earlier this year were that they were actually getting stronger...

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Sounds like the Obama Doctrine.



You think we're bringing the Taliban "to their knees"?

The reports earlier this year were that they were actually getting stronger...

-spence

"Sounds like the Obama Doctrine"

No, it sounds like Obama is doing exactly what Bush did. Obama made no significant changes to the Afghan strategy that weren't already on the table. If I'm wrong (and I could be), please explain?

Bush comes up with the stratregy, and now that it's working, yuo call it the "Obama doctrine". If we put the "Obama doctrine" in place in Afghanistan, there would be TV commercials telling the poor Afghanis that rich white people were to blame for their problems. That's the "Obama doctrine".

"You think we're bringing the Taliban "to their knees""

They used to rule a country, now they're hiding in caves.

Are they gone? Nope. Are they weakened? You bet. Thanks to heroes like my kid brother, no thanks to folks like you, who bend the events there to advance a political argument.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

No, it sounds like Obama is doing exactly what Bush did. Obama made no significant changes to the Afghan strategy that weren't already on the table. If I'm wrong (and I could be), please explain?

According to Robert Gates bush didn't really have a strategy... in 2009..."I will tell you, I think that the strategy the president [Obama] put forward in late March, is the first real strategy we have had for Afghanistan since the early 1980s," he told CNN. "And that strategy was more about [the] Soviet Union that it was about Afghanistan."

Obama certainly shifted the focus from nation building to counter-terrorism, treating Afghanistan and Pakistan as part of the same problem etc...

If you want I can send you my copy of the Bob Woodward book "Obama's wars" which goes into the process in great detail.

Bush comes up with the stratregy, and now that it's working, yuo call it the "Obama doctrine". If we put the "Obama doctrine" in place in Afghanistan, there would be TV commercials telling the poor Afghanis that rich white people were to blame for their problems. That's the "Obama doctrine".

I think the pile of dead terrorists with OBL at the top is proof enough you're description is a bit off...

They used to rule a country, now they're hiding in caves.

They've been hiding in caves since the USSR leveled all their buildings in the 1980's.

Reality is that the Taliban seem to still be quite strong in the north and east according to the last report I read.

Are they gone? Nope. Are they weakened? You bet. Thanks to heroes like my kid brother, no thanks to folks like you, who bend the events there to advance a political argument.

I appreciate your brother's service, but I can't say I appreciate your incessant childish remarks challenging people's fortitude or patriotism. Perhaps you're just trying to get a rise without the effort required to make a thoughtful post.

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

According to Robert Gates bush didn't really have a strategy... in 2009..."I will tell you, I think that the strategy the president [Obama] put forward in late March, is the first real strategy we have had for Afghanistan since the early 1980s," he told CNN. "And that strategy was more about [the] Soviet Union that it was about Afghanistan."

Obama certainly shifted the focus from nation building to counter-terrorism, treating Afghanistan and Pakistan as part of the same problem etc...

If you want I can send you my copy of the Bob Woodward book "Obama's wars" which goes into the process in great detail.


I think the pile of dead terrorists with OBL at the top is proof enough you're description is a bit off...


They've been hiding in caves since the USSR leveled all their buildings in the 1980's.

Reality is that the Taliban seem to still be quite strong in the north and east according to the last report I read.


I appreciate your brother's service, but I can't say I appreciate your incessant childish remarks challenging people's fortitude or patriotism. Perhaps you're just trying to get a rise without the effort required to make a thoughtful post.

-spence

"They've been hiding in caves since the USSR leveled all their buildings in the 1980's."

The Taliban were not hiding in caves on September 10, 2001. They ruled a nation.

Again, there are no limits to the jibberish you will invent to support your agenda, or to dismiss the alternate (sane) agenda. You feel comfortable making it up as you go along. Stunning.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"They've been hiding in caves since the USSR leveled all their buildings in the 1980's."

The Taliban were not hiding in caves on September 10, 2001. They ruled a nation.

Again, there are no limits to the jibberish you will invent to support your agenda, or to dismiss the alternate (sane) agenda. You feel comfortable making it up as you go along. Stunning.

Ahhh, I think I see the problem. You're confusing insight with jibberish.

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Ahhh, I think I see the problem. You're confusing insight with jibberish.

-spence

Spence, if there were even a shred of truth to your statement (that the Taliban have been hiding in caves since the Soviets invaded in1980), your comment would be insightful. But your comment is absolutely, demonstrably false. That makes it jibberish, the Taliban controlled Kabul until we drove them out. That you won't admit it's jibberish, even though it's demonstrably false, tells us everything we need to know about you.