Wedgebuster wrote:Knocked out of the park, black and blue.blueballs wrote:The SEALs (heroes by any definition) did the right thing in killing bin Laden. The last thing we need is to see video of some hooded terrorist holding an American hostage's head with a knife at his throat demanding bin Laden's release.
As for President Obama, good on him. The operation was a success by almost any imaginable standard and he is the COC. He supervised the mission, gave the orders, and deserves all the credit in the world for this as does every person who had a hand in the search and destroy mission going back to October 2001. Heroes all and great Americans.
President Obama's political fortunes insofar as his re-election bid won't be determined by this great victory. It will be determined by independent voters on the second Tuesday in November 2012 who will likely vote with their pocketbooks, and there is a LOT of water to go under the bridge between now and then. I don't even care about that in the context of what happened Sunday night, that was a wonderful thing for us all.
I have been saddened to see partisan political bickering between members of this board in a time when we should all be celebrating and honoring the heroes who made the mission a success. Damn it guys we are Americans first and foremost, not democrats and republicans. We aren't each other's enemy, al Qaeda and radical Islam is ALL our enemy.
For once can we be big enough and show enough character to put our mutual goals first? To lift up those who we rely on and trust with our safety? Or are we such a petty, selfish, and small minded nation that we seek fault and cheap political points in what are our greatest victories as Americans?
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Baldy, 89er, and JBB..............![]()
Bin Laden Dead
- AZGrizFan
- Supporter

- Posts: 59959
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:40 pm
- I am a fan of: Sexual Chocolate
- Location: Just to the right of center
Re: Bin Laden Dead
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12

-
houndawg
- Level5

- Posts: 25042
- Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 pm
- I am a fan of: SIU
- A.K.A.: houndawg
- Location: Egypt
Re: Bin Laden Dead
It wasn't the SEALs, balls, that's disinformation. It was a super-secret anti-terrorist unit that only four people in the country know about. In fact, it is so secret that the members of the team don't even know what it's name is.blueballs wrote:The SEALs (heroes by any definition) did the right thing in killing bin Laden. The last thing we need is to see video of some hooded terrorist holding an American hostage's head with a knife at his throat demanding bin Laden's release.
As for President Obama, good on him. The operation was a success by almost any imaginable standard and he is the COC. He supervised the mission, gave the orders, and deserves all the credit in the world for this as does every person who had a hand in the search and destroy mission going back to October 2001. Heroes all and great Americans.
President Obama's political fortunes insofar as his re-election bid won't be determined by this great victory. It will be determined by independent voters on the second Tuesday in November 2012 who will likely vote with their pocketbooks, and there is a LOT of water to go under the bridge between now and then. I don't even care about that in the context of what happened Sunday night, that was a wonderful thing for us all.
I have been saddened to see partisan political bickering between members of this board in a time when we should all be celebrating and honoring the heroes who made the mission a success. Damn it guys we are Americans first and foremost, not democrats and republicans. We aren't each other's enemy, al Qaeda and radical Islam is ALL our enemy.
For once can we be big enough and show enough character to put our mutual goals first? To lift up those who we rely on and trust with our safety? Or are we such a petty, selfish, and small minded nation that we seek fault and cheap political points in what are our greatest victories as Americans?
You matter. Unless you multiply yourself by c squared. Then you energy.
"I really love America. I just don't know how to get there anymore."John Prine
"I really love America. I just don't know how to get there anymore."John Prine
-
Ivytalk
- Supporter

- Posts: 26827
- Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 6:22 pm
- I am a fan of: Salisbury University
- Location: Republic of Western Sussex
Re: Bin Laden Dead
And I'll bet that those four people are all tin-hatted supporters of the Anorexic Whippets from Carbondale (or is it Edwardsville?), IL?houndawg wrote:It wasn't the SEALs, balls, that's disinformation. It was a super-secret anti-terrorist unit that only four people in the country know about. In fact, it is so secret that the members of the team don't even know what it's name is.blueballs wrote:The SEALs (heroes by any definition) did the right thing in killing bin Laden. The last thing we need is to see video of some hooded terrorist holding an American hostage's head with a knife at his throat demanding bin Laden's release.
As for President Obama, good on him. The operation was a success by almost any imaginable standard and he is the COC. He supervised the mission, gave the orders, and deserves all the credit in the world for this as does every person who had a hand in the search and destroy mission going back to October 2001. Heroes all and great Americans.
President Obama's political fortunes insofar as his re-election bid won't be determined by this great victory. It will be determined by independent voters on the second Tuesday in November 2012 who will likely vote with their pocketbooks, and there is a LOT of water to go under the bridge between now and then. I don't even care about that in the context of what happened Sunday night, that was a wonderful thing for us all.
I have been saddened to see partisan political bickering between members of this board in a time when we should all be celebrating and honoring the heroes who made the mission a success. Damn it guys we are Americans first and foremost, not democrats and republicans. We aren't each other's enemy, al Qaeda and radical Islam is ALL our enemy.
For once can we be big enough and show enough character to put our mutual goals first? To lift up those who we rely on and trust with our safety? Or are we such a petty, selfish, and small minded nation that we seek fault and cheap political points in what are our greatest victories as Americans?
“I’m tired and done.” — 89Hen 3/27/22.
-
Ivytalk
- Supporter

- Posts: 26827
- Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 6:22 pm
- I am a fan of: Salisbury University
- Location: Republic of Western Sussex
Re: Bin Laden Dead
Post of the year!blueballs wrote:The SEALs (heroes by any definition) did the right thing in killing bin Laden. The last thing we need is to see video of some hooded terrorist holding an American hostage's head with a knife at his throat demanding bin Laden's release.
As for President Obama, good on him. The operation was a success by almost any imaginable standard and he is the COC. He supervised the mission, gave the orders, and deserves all the credit in the world for this as does every person who had a hand in the search and destroy mission going back to October 2001. Heroes all and great Americans.
President Obama's political fortunes insofar as his re-election bid won't be determined by this great victory. It will be determined by independent voters on the second Tuesday in November 2012 who will likely vote with their pocketbooks, and there is a LOT of water to go under the bridge between now and then. I don't even care about that in the context of what happened Sunday night, that was a wonderful thing for us all.
I have been saddened to see partisan political bickering between members of this board in a time when we should all be celebrating and honoring the heroes who made the mission a success. Damn it guys we are Americans first and foremost, not democrats and republicans. We aren't each other's enemy, al Qaeda and radical Islam is ALL our enemy.
For once can we be big enough and show enough character to put our mutual goals first? To lift up those who we rely on and trust with our safety? Or are we such a petty, selfish, and small minded nation that we seek fault and cheap political points in what are our greatest victories as Americans?
And if anyone disagrees:
“I’m tired and done.” — 89Hen 3/27/22.
-
grizzaholic
- One Man Wolfpack

- Posts: 34860
- Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 10:13 am
- I am a fan of: Hodgdon
- A.K.A.: Random Mailer
- Location: Backwoods of Montana
Re: Bin Laden Dead

"What I'm saying is: You might have taken care of your wolf problem, but everyone around town is going to think of you as the crazy son of a bitch who bought land mines to get rid of wolves."
Justin Halpern
Justin Halpern
- Wedgebuster
- Supporter

- Posts: 12260
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 3:06 pm
- I am a fan of: UNC BEARS
- A.K.A.: OB55
- Location: Where The Rivers Run North
Re: Bin Laden Dead
Wedgebuster wrote: Knocked out of the park, black and blue.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Baldy, 89er, and JBB..............

- Wedgebuster
- Supporter

- Posts: 12260
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 3:06 pm
- I am a fan of: UNC BEARS
- A.K.A.: OB55
- Location: Where The Rivers Run North
Re: Bin Laden Dead
El Baldo, why does youse hate Amurika??Baldy wrote:Wedgebuster wrote: Knocked out of the park, black and blue.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Baldy, 89er, and JBB..............![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()

Get with the winning team Baldy, or get your frumpy wrinkled ass run over by it.
TEAM OBAMERICA, FUCK YEAH!!!!
Re: Bin Laden Dead
I'm sure you have at least a decade on me, Pops.Wedgebuster wrote:
Get with the winning team Baldy, or get your frumpy wrinkled ass run over by it.![]()
But at least you're better than deputydawg, I think he's got about a generation and a half on us all.
- Skjellyfetti
- Anal

- Posts: 14622
- Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 9:56 pm
- I am a fan of: Appalachian
Re: Bin Laden Dead
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ ... print.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;The Obama administration is seeking to use the killing of Osama bin Laden to accelerate a negotiated settlement with the Taliban and hasten the end of the Afghan war, according to U.S. officials involved in war policy.
Administration officials believe it could now be easier for the reclusive leader of the largest Taliban faction, Mohammad Omar, to break his group’s alliance with al-Qaeda, a key U.S. requirement for any peace deal. They also think that bin Laden’s death could make peace talks a more palatable outcome for Americans and insulate President Obama from criticism that his administration would be negotiating with terrorists.
“Bin Laden’s death is the beginning of the endgame in Afghanistan,” said a senior administration official who, like others interviewed for this article, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal policy deliberations. “It changes everything.”
Another senior official involved in Afghanistan policy said the killing “presents an opportunity for reconciliation that didn’t exist before.” Those officials and others have engaged in urgent discussions and strategy sessions over the past two days about how to leverage the death into a spark that ignites peace talks.
But actually bringing the various Taliban factions to the negotiating table remains a challenge. Omar’s shadowy organization, based in the Pakistani city of Quetta, does not have a political wing or officials who have been publicly identified as interlocutors. The Obama administration is also depending on deft maneuvering by Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s government, which is supposed to be leading the process, and the cooperation of the Pakistani government, whose intelligence service — long a patron of various Taliban groups — could easily interfere with peace overtures.
“We know where we want to go, but getting there won’t be easy,” the second senior official said. “There’s a long and complicated path ahead.”
Even so, bin Laden’s demise comes at what administration officials deem to be a propitious moment: A surge of U.S. military forces over the past year has pushed insurgents out of strategically important parts of southern Afghanistan, increasing the chances that top Taliban leaders may want to pursue negotiations.
The daring helicopter-borne raid on bin Laden’s house by U.S. Special Operations forces further ups the ante, current and former officials said, by signaling to members of the Taliban’s high command that they are not guaranteed safety by living in parts of Pakistan beyond the typical reach of U.S. drones. Bin Laden had been living near the country’s military academy, in a city in the hills north of the Pakistani capital, for six years.
“It has a tremendous demonstration effect,” said Vali Nasr, who was a senior adviser to the State Department on Afghanistan and Pakistan until last month. “Mullah Omar has to be wondering when he’ll be picked up.”
Nasr said bin Laden’s death “puts more pressure on the Taliban than all of the counterinsurgency [operations] we’ve been doing in Afghanistan.”
A unified strategy
Although a peace deal has long been the preferred outcome for civilian members of the president’s national security team, many of whom question the sustainability of recent military gains, skepticism from Pentagon officials and ground commanders held up a unified U.S. government strategy until this spring.
In a February speech that elicited little attention because of events in the Middle East, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton articulated the outlines of the administration’s new approach. In a significant shift toward encouraging dialogue, she made clear that the Taliban no longer has to renounce violence, break with al-Qaeda or embrace the Afghan constitution as preconditions for talks; now those terms only have to be “necessary outcomes of any negotiation.”
“Reconciling with an adversary that can be as brutal as the Taliban sounds distasteful, even unimaginable. And diplomacy would be easy if we only had to talk to our friends. But that is not how one makes peace,” Clinton said.
Top military officials have expressed concern in internal discussions that calling for negotiations too soon could jeopardize hard-fought gains on the battlefield. They contend that their aggressive campaign is weakening the insurgency, and that if they are left to pursue their strategy without a significant reduction in troops, the Taliban will be forced into a weaker deal, getting no more than a minority role within a U.S.-friendly, democratic government.
But many of the president’s civilian national security advisers contend that the benefits of incremental gains do not merit the cost — in lives and dollars — of such a large military presence. They say negotiations are an essential part of a new war strategy that will allow Obama to announce a substantial reduction in U.S. forces starting this summer but still ensure that the Taliban will no longer rule the entire country.
“How are we going to get there? We can get there by continuing to fight them. I don’t think that’s actually a strategy that is successful. Or we can get there by negotiating with them in such a way to allow a political settlement where they’re part of the government,” Anne-Marie Slaughter, who was the State Department’s director of policy planning until earlier this year, said at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Tuesday.
Bin Laden’s death, she said, “creates a new opportunity to begin real negotiations.”
Another senior U.S. official involved in war policy said the example of a 12-man team of Navy SEALs descending into a walled compound and shooting the world’s most-wanted terrorist leader could help keep pressure on the Taliban even as Obama withdraws conventional military forces starting this summer.
As another potential catalyst for talks, the administration is hoping to announce the completion of a strategic partnership agreement with the Afghan government that will endorse the long-term presence of a modest number U.S. troops in the country to continue to train Afghan security forces and to conduct counterterrorism operations.
Peace talks a priority
After weeks of debate among civilians and military leaders, the National Security Council recently endorsed key elements of the State Department’s reconciliation strategy. Starting peace talks has now become the top priority for Marc Grossman, who succeeded Richard C. Holbrooke as the U.S. government’s special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.
On Tuesday, Grossman met in Islamabad with Pakistan’s foreign secretary and Afghanistan’s deputy foreign minister. The three agreed to constitute a “core group for promoting and facilitating the process of reconciliation and peace in Afghanistan,” Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement.
U.S. officials expressed hope on Tuesday that Pakistan’s failure to find bin Laden — or its possible complicity in sheltering him — could lead Islamabad to adopt a softer position on Afghan reconciliation. They believe that Pakistani officials, who have interfered with peace efforts in the past, now have an opportunity to play a more constructive role.
“Our hope is that they are so embarrassed by this that they try to save face by trying to help their neighbor,” one U.S. official said.
Pakistani officials have long seen a contradiction in Washington’s effort to target those with whom it wishes to negotiate, and they fear that the U.S. goal is an Afghan government more allied with India, Pakistan’s historical adversary. The Pakistani government believes that Taliban insurgents are the only card it has to play in the game for long-term strategic influence in the region.
Although the Taliban has steadfastly refused to renounce al-Qaeda, U.S. officials believe that bin Laden’s death gives Omar an opportunity to distance himself from the group without losing face in front of his followers, because his offer of protection, made more than 10 years ago, was given to bin Laden, not the entire terrorist network.
“It’s not the two-ton gorilla in the middle of the reconciliation issue that it once was,” Nasr said.
And with bin Laden out of the picture, talking to the Taliban could become less politically fraught for Obama. Talking to the Taliban, the second senior official said, “no longer looks like you’re weak on national security.”
“The red lines have become a lot pinker,” Nasr said. “It’s now become a whole lot easier to sell a policy to end the war with negotiations to the American people.”
Correspondent Joshua Partlow in Kabul and staff writer Karen DeYoung in Washington contributed to this report.
"The unmasking thing was all created by Devin Nunes"
- Richard Burr, (R-NC)
- Richard Burr, (R-NC)
- AZGrizFan
- Supporter

- Posts: 59959
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:40 pm
- I am a fan of: Sexual Chocolate
- Location: Just to the right of center
Re: Bin Laden Dead
Jesus what a bunch of pie-in-the-sky bullshit. Don't hold your hand on your ass waiting for any of that to happen, analjelly.Skjellyfetti wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ ... print.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;The Obama administration is seeking to use the killing of Osama bin Laden to accelerate a negotiated settlement with the Taliban and hasten the end of the Afghan war, according to U.S. officials involved in war policy.
Administration officials believe it could now be easier for the reclusive leader of the largest Taliban faction, Mohammad Omar, to break his group’s alliance with al-Qaeda, a key U.S. requirement for any peace deal. They also think that bin Laden’s death could make peace talks a more palatable outcome for Americans and insulate President Obama from criticism that his administration would be negotiating with terrorists.
“Bin Laden’s death is the beginning of the endgame in Afghanistan,” said a senior administration official who, like others interviewed for this article, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal policy deliberations. “It changes everything.”
Another senior official involved in Afghanistan policy said the killing “presents an opportunity for reconciliation that didn’t exist before.” Those officials and others have engaged in urgent discussions and strategy sessions over the past two days about how to leverage the death into a spark that ignites peace talks.
But actually bringing the various Taliban factions to the negotiating table remains a challenge. Omar’s shadowy organization, based in the Pakistani city of Quetta, does not have a political wing or officials who have been publicly identified as interlocutors. The Obama administration is also depending on deft maneuvering by Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s government, which is supposed to be leading the process, and the cooperation of the Pakistani government, whose intelligence service — long a patron of various Taliban groups — could easily interfere with peace overtures.
“We know where we want to go, but getting there won’t be easy,” the second senior official said. “There’s a long and complicated path ahead.”
Even so, bin Laden’s demise comes at what administration officials deem to be a propitious moment: A surge of U.S. military forces over the past year has pushed insurgents out of strategically important parts of southern Afghanistan, increasing the chances that top Taliban leaders may want to pursue negotiations.
The daring helicopter-borne raid on bin Laden’s house by U.S. Special Operations forces further ups the ante, current and former officials said, by signaling to members of the Taliban’s high command that they are not guaranteed safety by living in parts of Pakistan beyond the typical reach of U.S. drones. Bin Laden had been living near the country’s military academy, in a city in the hills north of the Pakistani capital, for six years.
“It has a tremendous demonstration effect,” said Vali Nasr, who was a senior adviser to the State Department on Afghanistan and Pakistan until last month. “Mullah Omar has to be wondering when he’ll be picked up.”
Nasr said bin Laden’s death “puts more pressure on the Taliban than all of the counterinsurgency [operations] we’ve been doing in Afghanistan.”
A unified strategy
Although a peace deal has long been the preferred outcome for civilian members of the president’s national security team, many of whom question the sustainability of recent military gains, skepticism from Pentagon officials and ground commanders held up a unified U.S. government strategy until this spring.
In a February speech that elicited little attention because of events in the Middle East, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton articulated the outlines of the administration’s new approach. In a significant shift toward encouraging dialogue, she made clear that the Taliban no longer has to renounce violence, break with al-Qaeda or embrace the Afghan constitution as preconditions for talks; now those terms only have to be “necessary outcomes of any negotiation.”
“Reconciling with an adversary that can be as brutal as the Taliban sounds distasteful, even unimaginable. And diplomacy would be easy if we only had to talk to our friends. But that is not how one makes peace,” Clinton said.
Top military officials have expressed concern in internal discussions that calling for negotiations too soon could jeopardize hard-fought gains on the battlefield. They contend that their aggressive campaign is weakening the insurgency, and that if they are left to pursue their strategy without a significant reduction in troops, the Taliban will be forced into a weaker deal, getting no more than a minority role within a U.S.-friendly, democratic government.
But many of the president’s civilian national security advisers contend that the benefits of incremental gains do not merit the cost — in lives and dollars — of such a large military presence. They say negotiations are an essential part of a new war strategy that will allow Obama to announce a substantial reduction in U.S. forces starting this summer but still ensure that the Taliban will no longer rule the entire country.
“How are we going to get there? We can get there by continuing to fight them. I don’t think that’s actually a strategy that is successful. Or we can get there by negotiating with them in such a way to allow a political settlement where they’re part of the government,” Anne-Marie Slaughter, who was the State Department’s director of policy planning until earlier this year, said at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Tuesday.
Bin Laden’s death, she said, “creates a new opportunity to begin real negotiations.”
Another senior U.S. official involved in war policy said the example of a 12-man team of Navy SEALs descending into a walled compound and shooting the world’s most-wanted terrorist leader could help keep pressure on the Taliban even as Obama withdraws conventional military forces starting this summer.
As another potential catalyst for talks, the administration is hoping to announce the completion of a strategic partnership agreement with the Afghan government that will endorse the long-term presence of a modest number U.S. troops in the country to continue to train Afghan security forces and to conduct counterterrorism operations.
Peace talks a priority
After weeks of debate among civilians and military leaders, the National Security Council recently endorsed key elements of the State Department’s reconciliation strategy. Starting peace talks has now become the top priority for Marc Grossman, who succeeded Richard C. Holbrooke as the U.S. government’s special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.
On Tuesday, Grossman met in Islamabad with Pakistan’s foreign secretary and Afghanistan’s deputy foreign minister. The three agreed to constitute a “core group for promoting and facilitating the process of reconciliation and peace in Afghanistan,” Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement.
U.S. officials expressed hope on Tuesday that Pakistan’s failure to find bin Laden — or its possible complicity in sheltering him — could lead Islamabad to adopt a softer position on Afghan reconciliation. They believe that Pakistani officials, who have interfered with peace efforts in the past, now have an opportunity to play a more constructive role.
“Our hope is that they are so embarrassed by this that they try to save face by trying to help their neighbor,” one U.S. official said.
Pakistani officials have long seen a contradiction in Washington’s effort to target those with whom it wishes to negotiate, and they fear that the U.S. goal is an Afghan government more allied with India, Pakistan’s historical adversary. The Pakistani government believes that Taliban insurgents are the only card it has to play in the game for long-term strategic influence in the region.
Although the Taliban has steadfastly refused to renounce al-Qaeda, U.S. officials believe that bin Laden’s death gives Omar an opportunity to distance himself from the group without losing face in front of his followers, because his offer of protection, made more than 10 years ago, was given to bin Laden, not the entire terrorist network.
“It’s not the two-ton gorilla in the middle of the reconciliation issue that it once was,” Nasr said.
And with bin Laden out of the picture, talking to the Taliban could become less politically fraught for Obama. Talking to the Taliban, the second senior official said, “no longer looks like you’re weak on national security.”
“The red lines have become a lot pinker,” Nasr said. “It’s now become a whole lot easier to sell a policy to end the war with negotiations to the American people.”
Correspondent Joshua Partlow in Kabul and staff writer Karen DeYoung in Washington contributed to this report.
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12

Re: Bin Laden Dead
Bluebells is the only conk here with a fucking brain and decent disposition. He puts the Three Stooges (baldy,z,t) to shame.
"Sarah Palin absolutely blew AWAY the audience tonight. If there was any doubt as to whether she was savvy enough, tough enough or smart enough to carry the mantle of Vice President, she put those fears to rest tonight. She took on Barack Obama DIRECTLY on every issue and exposed... She did it with warmth and humor, and came across as the every-person....it's becoming mroe and more clear that she was a genius pick for McCain."
AZGrizfan - Summer 2008
AZGrizfan - Summer 2008
- Skjellyfetti
- Anal

- Posts: 14622
- Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 9:56 pm
- I am a fan of: Appalachian
Re: Bin Laden Dead
On schedule to begin withdrawing troops in July. Have Afghanistan in the lead by 2014. Sounds like they're considering moving up the 2014 goal. Why is that "pie-in-the-sky bullshit?"AZGrizFan wrote: Jesus what a bunch of pie-in-the-sky bullshit. Don't hold your hand on your ass waiting for any of that to happen, analjelly.
"The unmasking thing was all created by Devin Nunes"
- Richard Burr, (R-NC)
- Richard Burr, (R-NC)
Re: Bin Laden Dead
That timeline is about as likely to happen as you voting for a republican...in any election.Skjellyfetti wrote:On schedule to begin withdrawing troops in July. Have Afghanistan in the lead by 2014. Sounds like they're considering moving up the 2014 goal. Why is that "pie-in-the-sky bullshit?"AZGrizFan wrote: Jesus what a bunch of pie-in-the-sky bullshit. Don't hold your hand on your ass waiting for any of that to happen, analjelly.
- citdog
- Level3

- Posts: 3560
- Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 12:48 pm
- I am a fan of: THE Citadel
- A.K.A.: Pres.Jefferson Davis
- Location: C.S.A.
Re: Bin Laden Dead
Because the assholes who have killed some of my friends suddenly aren't terrorists anymore? Sell that bullshit somewhere else.Skjellyfetti wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ ... print.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;The Obama administration is seeking to use the killing of Osama bin Laden to accelerate a negotiated settlement with the Taliban and hasten the end of the Afghan war, according to U.S. officials involved in war policy.
Administration officials believe it could now be easier for the reclusive leader of the largest Taliban faction, Mohammad Omar, to break his group’s alliance with al-Qaeda, a key U.S. requirement for any peace deal. They also think that bin Laden’s death could make peace talks a more palatable outcome for Americans and insulate President Obama from criticism that his administration would be negotiating with terrorists.
“Bin Laden’s death is the beginning of the endgame in Afghanistan,” said a senior administration official who, like others interviewed for this article, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal policy deliberations. “It changes everything.”
Another senior official involved in Afghanistan policy said the killing “presents an opportunity for reconciliation that didn’t exist before.” Those officials and others have engaged in urgent discussions and strategy sessions over the past two days about how to leverage the death into a spark that ignites peace talks.
But actually bringing the various Taliban factions to the negotiating table remains a challenge. Omar’s shadowy organization, based in the Pakistani city of Quetta, does not have a political wing or officials who have been publicly identified as interlocutors. The Obama administration is also depending on deft maneuvering by Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s government, which is supposed to be leading the process, and the cooperation of the Pakistani government, whose intelligence service — long a patron of various Taliban groups — could easily interfere with peace overtures.
“We know where we want to go, but getting there won’t be easy,” the second senior official said. “There’s a long and complicated path ahead.”
Even so, bin Laden’s demise comes at what administration officials deem to be a propitious moment: A surge of U.S. military forces over the past year has pushed insurgents out of strategically important parts of southern Afghanistan, increasing the chances that top Taliban leaders may want to pursue negotiations.
The daring helicopter-borne raid on bin Laden’s house by U.S. Special Operations forces further ups the ante, current and former officials said, by signaling to members of the Taliban’s high command that they are not guaranteed safety by living in parts of Pakistan beyond the typical reach of U.S. drones. Bin Laden had been living near the country’s military academy, in a city in the hills north of the Pakistani capital, for six years.
“It has a tremendous demonstration effect,” said Vali Nasr, who was a senior adviser to the State Department on Afghanistan and Pakistan until last month. “Mullah Omar has to be wondering when he’ll be picked up.”
Nasr said bin Laden’s death “puts more pressure on the Taliban than all of the counterinsurgency [operations] we’ve been doing in Afghanistan.”
A unified strategy
Although a peace deal has long been the preferred outcome for civilian members of the president’s national security team, many of whom question the sustainability of recent military gains, skepticism from Pentagon officials and ground commanders held up a unified U.S. government strategy until this spring.
In a February speech that elicited little attention because of events in the Middle East, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton articulated the outlines of the administration’s new approach. In a significant shift toward encouraging dialogue, she made clear that the Taliban no longer has to renounce violence, break with al-Qaeda or embrace the Afghan constitution as preconditions for talks; now those terms only have to be “necessary outcomes of any negotiation.”
“Reconciling with an adversary that can be as brutal as the Taliban sounds distasteful, even unimaginable. And diplomacy would be easy if we only had to talk to our friends. But that is not how one makes peace,” Clinton said.
Top military officials have expressed concern in internal discussions that calling for negotiations too soon could jeopardize hard-fought gains on the battlefield. They contend that their aggressive campaign is weakening the insurgency, and that if they are left to pursue their strategy without a significant reduction in troops, the Taliban will be forced into a weaker deal, getting no more than a minority role within a U.S.-friendly, democratic government.
But many of the president’s civilian national security advisers contend that the benefits of incremental gains do not merit the cost — in lives and dollars — of such a large military presence. They say negotiations are an essential part of a new war strategy that will allow Obama to announce a substantial reduction in U.S. forces starting this summer but still ensure that the Taliban will no longer rule the entire country.
“How are we going to get there? We can get there by continuing to fight them. I don’t think that’s actually a strategy that is successful. Or we can get there by negotiating with them in such a way to allow a political settlement where they’re part of the government,” Anne-Marie Slaughter, who was the State Department’s director of policy planning until earlier this year, said at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Tuesday.
Bin Laden’s death, she said, “creates a new opportunity to begin real negotiations.”
Another senior U.S. official involved in war policy said the example of a 12-man team of Navy SEALs descending into a walled compound and shooting the world’s most-wanted terrorist leader could help keep pressure on the Taliban even as Obama withdraws conventional military forces starting this summer.
As another potential catalyst for talks, the administration is hoping to announce the completion of a strategic partnership agreement with the Afghan government that will endorse the long-term presence of a modest number U.S. troops in the country to continue to train Afghan security forces and to conduct counterterrorism operations.
Peace talks a priority
After weeks of debate among civilians and military leaders, the National Security Council recently endorsed key elements of the State Department’s reconciliation strategy. Starting peace talks has now become the top priority for Marc Grossman, who succeeded Richard C. Holbrooke as the U.S. government’s special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.
On Tuesday, Grossman met in Islamabad with Pakistan’s foreign secretary and Afghanistan’s deputy foreign minister. The three agreed to constitute a “core group for promoting and facilitating the process of reconciliation and peace in Afghanistan,” Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement.
U.S. officials expressed hope on Tuesday that Pakistan’s failure to find bin Laden — or its possible complicity in sheltering him — could lead Islamabad to adopt a softer position on Afghan reconciliation. They believe that Pakistani officials, who have interfered with peace efforts in the past, now have an opportunity to play a more constructive role.
“Our hope is that they are so embarrassed by this that they try to save face by trying to help their neighbor,” one U.S. official said.
Pakistani officials have long seen a contradiction in Washington’s effort to target those with whom it wishes to negotiate, and they fear that the U.S. goal is an Afghan government more allied with India, Pakistan’s historical adversary. The Pakistani government believes that Taliban insurgents are the only card it has to play in the game for long-term strategic influence in the region.
Although the Taliban has steadfastly refused to renounce al-Qaeda, U.S. officials believe that bin Laden’s death gives Omar an opportunity to distance himself from the group without losing face in front of his followers, because his offer of protection, made more than 10 years ago, was given to bin Laden, not the entire terrorist network.
“It’s not the two-ton gorilla in the middle of the reconciliation issue that it once was,” Nasr said.
And with bin Laden out of the picture, talking to the Taliban could become less politically fraught for Obama. Talking to the Taliban, the second senior official said, “no longer looks like you’re weak on national security.”
“The red lines have become a lot pinker,” Nasr said. “It’s now become a whole lot easier to sell a policy to end the war with negotiations to the American people.”
Correspondent Joshua Partlow in Kabul and staff writer Karen DeYoung in Washington contributed to this report.
"Duty is the sublimest word in the English Language"
"Save in defense of my native State I hope to never again draw my sword"
Genl Robert E. Lee
Confederate States of America
"Save in defense of my native State I hope to never again draw my sword"
Genl Robert E. Lee
Confederate States of America
- AZGrizFan
- Supporter

- Posts: 59959
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:40 pm
- I am a fan of: Sexual Chocolate
- Location: Just to the right of center
Re: Bin Laden Dead
Skjellyfetti wrote:On schedule to begin withdrawing troops in July. Have Afghanistan in the lead by 2014. Sounds like they're considering moving up the 2014 goal. Why is that "pie-in-the-sky bullshit?"AZGrizFan wrote: Jesus what a bunch of pie-in-the-sky bullshit. Don't hold your hand on your ass waiting for any of that to happen, analjelly.
Beginning of the endgame? Taliban at the negotiating table? Dependence on Karzi & Pakistan?Skjellyfetti wrote:The Obama administration is seeking to use the killing of Osama bin Laden to accelerate a negotiated settlement with the Taliban and hasten the end of the Afghan war, according to U.S. officials involved in war policy.
Administration officials believe it could now be easier for the reclusive leader of the largest Taliban faction, Mohammad Omar, to break his group’s alliance with al-Qaeda, a key U.S. requirement for any peace deal. They also think that bin Laden’s death could make peace talks a more palatable outcome for Americans and insulate President Obama from criticism that his administration would be negotiating with terrorists.
“Bin Laden’s death is the beginning of the endgame in Afghanistan,” said a senior administration official who, like others interviewed for this article, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal policy deliberations. “It changes everything.”
Another senior official involved in Afghanistan policy said the killing “presents an opportunity for reconciliation that didn’t exist before.” Those officials and others have engaged in urgent discussions and strategy sessions over the past two days about how to leverage the death into a spark that ignites peace talks.
But actually bringing the various Taliban factions to the negotiating table remains a challenge. Omar’s shadowy organization, based in the Pakistani city of Quetta, does not have a political wing or officials who have been publicly identified as interlocutors. The Obama administration is also depending on deft maneuvering by Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s government, which is supposed to be leading the process, and the cooperation of the Pakistani government, whose intelligence service — long a patron of various Taliban groups — could easily interfere with peace overtures.
“We know where we want to go, but getting there won’t be easy,” the second senior official said. “There’s a long and complicated path ahead.”
Even so, bin Laden’s demise comes at what administration officials deem to be a propitious moment: A surge of U.S. military forces over the past year has pushed insurgents out of strategically important parts of southern Afghanistan, increasing the chances that top Taliban leaders may want to pursue negotiations.
The daring helicopter-borne raid on bin Laden’s house by U.S. Special Operations forces further ups the ante, current and former officials said, by signaling to members of the Taliban’s high command that they are not guaranteed safety by living in parts of Pakistan beyond the typical reach of U.S. drones. Bin Laden had been living near the country’s military academy, in a city in the hills north of the Pakistani capital, for six years.
“It has a tremendous demonstration effect,” said Vali Nasr, who was a senior adviser to the State Department on Afghanistan and Pakistan until last month. “Mullah Omar has to be wondering when he’ll be picked up.”
Nasr said bin Laden’s death “puts more pressure on the Taliban than all of the counterinsurgency [operations] we’ve been doing in Afghanistan.”
A unified strategy
Although a peace deal has long been the preferred outcome for civilian members of the president’s national security team, many of whom question the sustainability of recent military gains, skepticism from Pentagon officials and ground commanders held up a unified U.S. government strategy until this spring.
In a February speech that elicited little attention because of events in the Middle East, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton articulated the outlines of the administration’s new approach. In a significant shift toward encouraging dialogue, she made clear that the Taliban no longer has to renounce violence, break with al-Qaeda or embrace the Afghan constitution as preconditions for talks; now those terms only have to be “necessary outcomes of any negotiation.”
“Reconciling with an adversary that can be as brutal as the Taliban sounds distasteful, even unimaginable. And diplomacy would be easy if we only had to talk to our friends. But that is not how one makes peace,” Clinton said.
Bin Laden’s death, she said, “creates a new opportunity to begin real negotiations.”
On Tuesday, Grossman met in Islamabad with Pakistan’s foreign secretary and Afghanistan’s deputy foreign minister. The three agreed to constitute a “core group for promoting and facilitating the process of reconciliation and peace in Afghanistan,” Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement.
U.S. officials expressed hope on Tuesday that Pakistan’s failure to find bin Laden — or its possible complicity in sheltering him — could lead Islamabad to adopt a softer position on Afghan reconciliation. They believe that Pakistani officials, who have interfered with peace efforts in the past, now have an opportunity to play a more constructive role.
“Our hope is that they are so embarrassed by this that they try to save face by trying to help their neighbor,” one U.S. official said.
Pakistani officials have long seen a contradiction in Washington’s effort to target those with whom it wishes to negotiate, and they fear that the U.S. goal is an Afghan government more allied with India, Pakistan’s historical adversary. The Pakistani government believes that Taliban insurgents are the only card it has to play in the game for long-term strategic influence in the region.
Although the Taliban has steadfastly refused to renounce al-Qaeda, U.S. officials believe that bin Laden’s death gives Omar an opportunity to distance himself from the group without losing face in front of his followers, because his offer of protection, made more than 10 years ago, was given to bin Laden, not the entire terrorist network.
“It’s not the two-ton gorilla in the middle of the reconciliation issue that it once was,” Nasr said.
And with bin Laden out of the picture, talking to the Taliban could become less politically fraught for Obama. Talking to the Taliban, the second senior official said, “no longer looks like you’re weak on national security.”
“The red lines have become a lot pinker,” Nasr said. “It’s now become a whole lot easier to sell a policy to end the war with negotiations to the American people.”
I cut out the parts that aren't pie-in-the-sky. It may not be a two-ton gorilla now...it only weighs 1,995. The rest of this is some fuckin' peacenik's wet dream and has about as much chance of happening as you voting republican.
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12

"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12

- CID1990
- Level5

- Posts: 25486
- Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:40 am
- I am a fan of: Pie
- A.K.A.: CID 1990
- Location: กรุงเทพมหานคร
Re: Bin Laden Dead
Skjellyfetti wrote:On schedule to begin withdrawing troops in July. Have Afghanistan in the lead by 2014. Sounds like they're considering moving up the 2014 goal. Why is that "pie-in-the-sky bullshit?"AZGrizFan wrote: Jesus what a bunch of pie-in-the-sky bullshit. Don't hold your hand on your ass waiting for any of that to happen, analjelly.
2014?
The only way we are out of Afghanistan in 2014 is going to be for Ron Paul to be elected president in 2012, and that ain't happening.
Senator Fritz Hollings used to say "There's no education in the second kick of a mule." (Unless your name is SKfelchyfetti)
While SK is "hoping", we will be "changing" in 2012.
"You however, are an insufferable ankle biting mental chihuahua..." - Clizzoris
-
houndawg
- Level5

- Posts: 25042
- Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 pm
- I am a fan of: SIU
- A.K.A.: houndawg
- Location: Egypt
Re: Bin Laden Dead
Ostensibly we went into Afghanistan with full public support to get Osama bin Laden.AZGrizFan wrote:Skjellyfetti wrote:
On schedule to begin withdrawing troops in July. Have Afghanistan in the lead by 2014. Sounds like they're considering moving up the 2014 goal. Why is that "pie-in-the-sky bullshit?"Beginning of the endgame? Taliban at the negotiating table? Dependence on Karzi & Pakistan?Skjellyfetti wrote:
I cut out the parts that aren't pie-in-the-sky. It may not be a two-ton gorilla now...it only weighs 1,995. The rest of this is some ****' peacenik's wet dream and has about as much chance of happening as you voting republican.
We got him. (Good job SEALS, good job CinC).
Now gtfo.
You matter. Unless you multiply yourself by c squared. Then you energy.
"I really love America. I just don't know how to get there anymore."John Prine
"I really love America. I just don't know how to get there anymore."John Prine
- CID1990
- Level5

- Posts: 25486
- Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:40 am
- I am a fan of: Pie
- A.K.A.: CID 1990
- Location: กรุงเทพมหานคร
Re: Bin Laden Dead
houndawg wrote:Ostensibly we went into Afghanistan with full public support to get Osama bin Laden.AZGrizFan wrote:
Beginning of the endgame? Taliban at the negotiating table? Dependence on Karzi & Pakistan?
I cut out the parts that aren't pie-in-the-sky. It may not be a two-ton gorilla now...it only weighs 1,995. The rest of this is some ****' peacenik's wet dream and has about as much chance of happening as you voting republican.
We got him. (Good job SEALS, good job CinC).
Now gtfo.
Agree 100%. Even Karzai is saying get out. (When we do, I wonder how long it will be before he is in exile in Malta or somewhere like that?)
"You however, are an insufferable ankle biting mental chihuahua..." - Clizzoris
-
YoUDeeMan
- Level5

- Posts: 12088
- Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 8:48 am
- I am a fan of: Fleecing the Stupid
- A.K.A.: Delaware Homie
Re: Bin Laden Dead
Disgusting...and jellyboy doesn't even get it.Skjellyfetti wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ ... print.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;And with bin Laden out of the picture, talking to the Taliban could become less politically fraught for Obama. Talking to the Taliban, the second senior official said, “no longer looks like you’re weak on national security.”“The red lines have become a lot pinker,” Nasr said. “It’s now become a whole lot easier to sell a policy to end the war with negotiations to the American people.”
Hey, forget our men and women who are dying for nothing...they don't mean anything. What is important is for Obama to be able to look good and get re-elected.
Instead of being a leader and pulling our troops out, Obama and his team have been letting our soldiers die in Afghanistan so that Obama can find the best time for his political gain to pull them out.
Obushma...tossing the lower/middle class into the meat grinder for his personal gain.
These signatures have a 500 character limit?
What if I have more personalities than that?
What if I have more personalities than that?
-
kalm
- Supporter

- Posts: 67800
- Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
- I am a fan of: Eastern
- A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
- Location: Northern Palouse
Re: Bin Laden Dead
Or get disemboweled like the leader left behind after the soviet withdrawal. If Karzai were to stay in power, would he eventually become the next Mubarak or Ghaddafi?CID1990 wrote:houndawg wrote:
Ostensibly we went into Afghanistan with full public support to get Osama bin Laden.
We got him. (Good job SEALS, good job CinC).
Now gtfo.
Agree 100%. Even Karzai is saying get out. (When we do, I wonder how long it will be before he is in exile in Malta or somewhere like that?)
But there is no way in he'll we should be negotiating anything with the Taliban.
- BDKJMU
- Level5

- Posts: 35230
- Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
- I am a fan of: JMU
- A.K.A.: BDKJMU
- Location: Philly Burbs
Re: Bin Laden Dead
AZGrizFan wrote:houndawg wrote:All praise to mighty Obama, the compassionate, the merciful. Does in two years, with an entire antiterrorism and interrogation methodology established by Bush, what Bush was flamesprayed for doing and now Obama gets sucked off for.
JMU Football:
4 Years FBS: 40-11 (.784). Highest winning percentage & least losses of all of G5 2022-2025.
Sun Belt East Champions: 2022, 2023, 2025
Sun Belt Champions: 2025
Top 25 ranked: 2022, 2023, 2025
CFP: 2025
4 Years FBS: 40-11 (.784). Highest winning percentage & least losses of all of G5 2022-2025.
Sun Belt East Champions: 2022, 2023, 2025
Sun Belt Champions: 2025
Top 25 ranked: 2022, 2023, 2025
CFP: 2025
- BDKJMU
- Level5

- Posts: 35230
- Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
- I am a fan of: JMU
- A.K.A.: BDKJMU
- Location: Philly Burbs
Re: Bin Laden Dead
GD double post.
Last edited by BDKJMU on Wed May 04, 2011 9:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
JMU Football:
4 Years FBS: 40-11 (.784). Highest winning percentage & least losses of all of G5 2022-2025.
Sun Belt East Champions: 2022, 2023, 2025
Sun Belt Champions: 2025
Top 25 ranked: 2022, 2023, 2025
CFP: 2025
4 Years FBS: 40-11 (.784). Highest winning percentage & least losses of all of G5 2022-2025.
Sun Belt East Champions: 2022, 2023, 2025
Sun Belt Champions: 2025
Top 25 ranked: 2022, 2023, 2025
CFP: 2025
- BDKJMU
- Level5

- Posts: 35230
- Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
- I am a fan of: JMU
- A.K.A.: BDKJMU
- Location: Philly Burbs
Re: Bin Laden Dead
Christ KY, do you have to post the whole damn several page article?Skjellyfetti wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ ... print.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;The Obama administration is seeking to use the killing of Osama bin Laden to accelerate a negotiated settlement with the Taliban and hasten the end of the Afghan war, according to U.S. officials involved in war policy.
Administration officials believe it could now be easier for the reclusive leader of the largest Taliban faction, Mohammad Omar, to break his group’s alliance with al-Qaeda, a key U.S. requirement for any peace deal. They also think that bin Laden’s death could make peace talks a more palatable outcome for Americans and insulate President Obama from criticism that his administration would be negotiating with terrorists.
“Bin Laden’s death is the beginning of the endgame in Afghanistan,” said a senior administration official who, like others interviewed for this article, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal policy deliberations. “It changes everything.”
Another senior official involved in Afghanistan policy said the killing “presents an opportunity for reconciliation that didn’t exist before.” Those officials and others have engaged in urgent discussions and strategy sessions over the past two days about how to leverage the death into a spark that ignites peace talks.
But actually bringing the various Taliban factions to the negotiating table remains a challenge. Omar’s shadowy organization, based in the Pakistani city of Quetta, does not have a political wing or officials who have been publicly identified as interlocutors. The Obama administration is also depending on deft maneuvering by Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s government, which is supposed to be leading the process, and the cooperation of the Pakistani government, whose intelligence service — long a patron of various Taliban groups — could easily interfere with peace overtures.
“We know where we want to go, but getting there won’t be easy,” the second senior official said. “There’s a long and complicated path ahead.”
Even so, bin Laden’s demise comes at what administration officials deem to be a propitious moment: A surge of U.S. military forces over the past year has pushed insurgents out of strategically important parts of southern Afghanistan, increasing the chances that top Taliban leaders may want to pursue negotiations.
The daring helicopter-borne raid on bin Laden’s house by U.S. Special Operations forces further ups the ante, current and former officials said, by signaling to members of the Taliban’s high command that they are not guaranteed safety by living in parts of Pakistan beyond the typical reach of U.S. drones. Bin Laden had been living near the country’s military academy, in a city in the hills north of the Pakistani capital, for six years.
“It has a tremendous demonstration effect,” said Vali Nasr, who was a senior adviser to the State Department on Afghanistan and Pakistan until last month. “Mullah Omar has to be wondering when he’ll be picked up.”
Nasr said bin Laden’s death “puts more pressure on the Taliban than all of the counterinsurgency [operations] we’ve been doing in Afghanistan.”
A unified strategy
Although a peace deal has long been the preferred outcome for civilian members of the president’s national security team, many of whom question the sustainability of recent military gains, skepticism from Pentagon officials and ground commanders held up a unified U.S. government strategy until this spring.
In a February speech that elicited little attention because of events in the Middle East, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton articulated the outlines of the administration’s new approach. In a significant shift toward encouraging dialogue, she made clear that the Taliban no longer has to renounce violence, break with al-Qaeda or embrace the Afghan constitution as preconditions for talks; now those terms only have to be “necessary outcomes of any negotiation.”
“Reconciling with an adversary that can be as brutal as the Taliban sounds distasteful, even unimaginable. And diplomacy would be easy if we only had to talk to our friends. But that is not how one makes peace,” Clinton said.
Top military officials have expressed concern in internal discussions that calling for negotiations too soon could jeopardize hard-fought gains on the battlefield. They contend that their aggressive campaign is weakening the insurgency, and that if they are left to pursue their strategy without a significant reduction in troops, the Taliban will be forced into a weaker deal, getting no more than a minority role within a U.S.-friendly, democratic government.
But many of the president’s civilian national security advisers contend that the benefits of incremental gains do not merit the cost — in lives and dollars — of such a large military presence. They say negotiations are an essential part of a new war strategy that will allow Obama to announce a substantial reduction in U.S. forces starting this summer but still ensure that the Taliban will no longer rule the entire country.
“How are we going to get there? We can get there by continuing to fight them. I don’t think that’s actually a strategy that is successful. Or we can get there by negotiating with them in such a way to allow a political settlement where they’re part of the government,” Anne-Marie Slaughter, who was the State Department’s director of policy planning until earlier this year, said at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Tuesday.
Bin Laden’s death, she said, “creates a new opportunity to begin real negotiations.”
Another senior U.S. official involved in war policy said the example of a 12-man team of Navy SEALs descending into a walled compound and shooting the world’s most-wanted terrorist leader could help keep pressure on the Taliban even as Obama withdraws conventional military forces starting this summer.
As another potential catalyst for talks, the administration is hoping to announce the completion of a strategic partnership agreement with the Afghan government that will endorse the long-term presence of a modest number U.S. troops in the country to continue to train Afghan security forces and to conduct counterterrorism operations.
Peace talks a priority
After weeks of debate among civilians and military leaders, the National Security Council recently endorsed key elements of the State Department’s reconciliation strategy. Starting peace talks has now become the top priority for Marc Grossman, who succeeded Richard C. Holbrooke as the U.S. government’s special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.
On Tuesday, Grossman met in Islamabad with Pakistan’s foreign secretary and Afghanistan’s deputy foreign minister. The three agreed to constitute a “core group for promoting and facilitating the process of reconciliation and peace in Afghanistan,” Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement.
U.S. officials expressed hope on Tuesday that Pakistan’s failure to find bin Laden — or its possible complicity in sheltering him — could lead Islamabad to adopt a softer position on Afghan reconciliation. They believe that Pakistani officials, who have interfered with peace efforts in the past, now have an opportunity to play a more constructive role.
“Our hope is that they are so embarrassed by this that they try to save face by trying to help their neighbor,” one U.S. official said.
Pakistani officials have long seen a contradiction in Washington’s effort to target those with whom it wishes to negotiate, and they fear that the U.S. goal is an Afghan government more allied with India, Pakistan’s historical adversary. The Pakistani government believes that Taliban insurgents are the only card it has to play in the game for long-term strategic influence in the region.
Although the Taliban has steadfastly refused to renounce al-Qaeda, U.S. officials believe that bin Laden’s death gives Omar an opportunity to distance himself from the group without losing face in front of his followers, because his offer of protection, made more than 10 years ago, was given to bin Laden, not the entire terrorist network.
“It’s not the two-ton gorilla in the middle of the reconciliation issue that it once was,” Nasr said.
And with bin Laden out of the picture, talking to the Taliban could become less politically fraught for Obama. Talking to the Taliban, the second senior official said, “no longer looks like you’re weak on national security.”
“The red lines have become a lot pinker,” Nasr said. “It’s now become a whole lot easier to sell a policy to end the war with negotiations to the American people.”
Correspondent Joshua Partlow in Kabul and staff writer Karen DeYoung in Washington contributed to this report.
JMU Football:
4 Years FBS: 40-11 (.784). Highest winning percentage & least losses of all of G5 2022-2025.
Sun Belt East Champions: 2022, 2023, 2025
Sun Belt Champions: 2025
Top 25 ranked: 2022, 2023, 2025
CFP: 2025
4 Years FBS: 40-11 (.784). Highest winning percentage & least losses of all of G5 2022-2025.
Sun Belt East Champions: 2022, 2023, 2025
Sun Belt Champions: 2025
Top 25 ranked: 2022, 2023, 2025
CFP: 2025
- Skjellyfetti
- Anal

- Posts: 14622
- Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 9:56 pm
- I am a fan of: Appalachian
Re: Bin Laden Dead
Damn. Last week it seemed like everyone wanted out of Afghanistan and were blaming Obama for the fact that we were still there.
Now it seems like everyone thinks we need to be there past 2014?
Now it seems like everyone thinks we need to be there past 2014?
"The unmasking thing was all created by Devin Nunes"
- Richard Burr, (R-NC)
- Richard Burr, (R-NC)





