Comments on: Both And And And And And And…. Thinking http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/2009/11/both-and-and-and-and-and-and-thinking/ Mon, 15 Mar 2010 21:48:24 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Meet the New… Ah Fuck It, You Know The Line | The League of Ordinary Gentlemen http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/2009/11/both-and-and-and-and-and-and-thinking/#comment-33093 Meet the New… Ah Fuck It, You Know The Line | The League of Ordinary Gentlemen Fri, 04 Dec 2009 20:20:28 +0000 http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/?p=11432#comment-33093 [...] fancy Obama’s move as just the kind of strategic wizardry that I described in the lead up to the actual announcement. “He’s hemmed the hawks in!” they say, [...] [...] fancy Obama’s move as just the kind of strategic wizardry that I described in the lead up to the actual announcement. “He’s hemmed the hawks in!” they say, [...]

]]> By: Scott http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/2009/11/both-and-and-and-and-and-and-thinking/#comment-32853 Scott Wed, 02 Dec 2009 22:10:22 +0000 http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/?p=11432#comment-32853 No, not an exaggeration. The Taliban are Pashtuns who live with a code of honor that demands unfailing hospitality towards guests, like al-Qaeda. The US asked the Taliban to give OBL at the start but they refused. No, not an exaggeration. The Taliban are Pashtuns who live with a code of honor that demands unfailing hospitality towards guests, like al-Qaeda. The US asked the Taliban to give OBL at the start but they refused.

]]> By: Mike at The Big Stick http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/2009/11/both-and-and-and-and-and-and-thinking/#comment-32843 Mike at The Big Stick Wed, 02 Dec 2009 20:47:46 +0000 http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/?p=11432#comment-32843 Scott, Isn't 'host' a little bit of an exaggeration? Could have the Taliban removed AQ even if they wanted to? They controlled maybe even less of Afghanistan than Karzai does currently. AQ was there because the country was lawless...not because they had found a great ally in the Taliban. Scott,

Isn’t ‘host’ a little bit of an exaggeration? Could have the Taliban removed AQ even if they wanted to? They controlled maybe even less of Afghanistan than Karzai does currently. AQ was there because the country was lawless…not because they had found a great ally in the Taliban.

]]> By: Scott http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/2009/11/both-and-and-and-and-and-and-thinking/#comment-32838 Scott Wed, 02 Dec 2009 20:26:43 +0000 http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/?p=11432#comment-32838 Your really not sure what difference it makes? How about the difference between a regime that hosts our enemies while they plot to attack us and one that doesn't? Your really not sure what difference it makes? How about the difference between a regime that hosts our enemies while they plot to attack us and one that doesn’t?

]]> By: Mike at The Big Stick http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/2009/11/both-and-and-and-and-and-and-thinking/#comment-32836 Mike at The Big Stick Wed, 02 Dec 2009 20:18:18 +0000 http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/?p=11432#comment-32836 The issue really isn't about who controls what in Afghanistan. AQ is not hoping for a Taliban return to power so they can have a bse again. What they actually want is areas that no one controls. While yes, the Taliban might have been sympathetic to AQ's Islamic goals prior to 9/11, AQ was in Afghanistan because it was a lawless region where they could operate with no interference. If they could get the same situation in France, that's where they would go. So the ultimate goal for the US is wither A) prevent lawless areas from existing anywhere in the world or B) Hunt AQ wherever they are, damn international borders and kill every last one of them. A) Is not practical. B) Is do-able but made harder if we are wasting resources fighting a Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan that really has nothing to do with terrorism and is much more about an Afghan civil war that has been fought for the last 30 years or so. Because we targeted the Taliban in 2001 we have now been sucked into this civil war and lost nearly 1000 men in the process. The issue really isn’t about who controls what in Afghanistan. AQ is not hoping for a Taliban return to power so they can have a bse again. What they actually want is areas that no one controls. While yes, the Taliban might have been sympathetic to AQ’s Islamic goals prior to 9/11, AQ was in Afghanistan because it was a lawless region where they could operate with no interference. If they could get the same situation in France, that’s where they would go.

So the ultimate goal for the US is wither A) prevent lawless areas from existing anywhere in the world or B) Hunt AQ wherever they are, damn international borders and kill every last one of them.

A) Is not practical. B) Is do-able but made harder if we are wasting resources fighting a Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan that really has nothing to do with terrorism and is much more about an Afghan civil war that has been fought for the last 30 years or so. Because we targeted the Taliban in 2001 we have now been sucked into this civil war and lost nearly 1000 men in the process.

]]> By: Zach http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/2009/11/both-and-and-and-and-and-and-thinking/#comment-32826 Zach Wed, 02 Dec 2009 19:36:41 +0000 http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/?p=11432#comment-32826 I'm not sure what difference it makes for the United States, no. To your earlier point, you claimed that the Taliban would come back. But the Taliban already control significant parts of the country. If you mean back to power, well, that's already happened as well. Leaders of what now constitute the Taliban will in all probability continue to play a role in Afghan politics and society well into this century. I’m not sure what difference it makes for the United States, no. To your earlier point, you claimed that the Taliban would come back. But the Taliban already control significant parts of the country. If you mean back to power, well, that’s already happened as well. Leaders of what now constitute the Taliban will in all probability continue to play a role in Afghan politics and society well into this century.

]]> By: Scott http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/2009/11/both-and-and-and-and-and-and-thinking/#comment-32794 Scott Wed, 02 Dec 2009 17:10:44 +0000 http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/?p=11432#comment-32794 Yes the Taliban control some parts of the country but not most of the country as they did when they ran the gov't and were hosting OBL. You do understand the difference between some and most? Yes the Taliban control some parts of the country but not most of the country as they did when they ran the gov’t and were hosting OBL. You do understand the difference between some and most?

]]> By: Barry http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/2009/11/both-and-and-and-and-and-and-thinking/#comment-32793 Barry Wed, 02 Dec 2009 16:58:23 +0000 http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/?p=11432#comment-32793 "Besides, what does it say when George Will and Michael Moore are on the same page and it’s a different page than you’re on? Yeah, might be something to think about." How often in the past 20-odd years has George Will been correct? He's pretty close to a perfectly reliable wrong-way compass - just see what he says, and then do the opposite. “Besides, what does it say when George Will and Michael Moore are on the same page and it’s a different page than you’re on? Yeah, might be something to think about.”

How often in the past 20-odd years has George Will been correct? He’s pretty close to a perfectly reliable wrong-way compass – just see what he says, and then do the opposite.

]]> By: Zach http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/2009/11/both-and-and-and-and-and-and-thinking/#comment-32670 Zach Tue, 01 Dec 2009 19:04:42 +0000 http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/?p=11432#comment-32670 The Taliban do not have to "come back" from anywhere. The Taliban already control significant portions of the country. The Taliban do not have to “come back” from anywhere. The Taliban already control significant portions of the country.

]]> By: Scott http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/2009/11/both-and-and-and-and-and-and-thinking/#comment-32607 Scott Tue, 01 Dec 2009 04:24:41 +0000 http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/?p=11432#comment-32607 What is Obama supposed to do at this point? If he runs like some Dems want him to do, the Taliban will come back and I'm fairly confident their al-Qaeda buddies will come back as well. The best hope may be to pump in more US troops and try and stabilize the afghan gov't, so they can take over. What is Obama supposed to do at this point? If he runs like some Dems want him to do, the Taliban will come back and I’m fairly confident their al-Qaeda buddies will come back as well. The best hope may be to pump in more US troops and try and stabilize the afghan gov’t, so they can take over.

]]>