PDA

View Full Version : Frist says Afghan war can't be won militarily


OregonBronco
10-03-2006, 03:28 PM
More good news from the Afghan front from the beloved Mr. Frist.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1003/dailyUpdate.html

Report: Frist says Afghan war can't be won militarily

Senate leader says his comments about bringing Taliban into government were taken out of context.
By Tom Regan | csmonitor.com

US Senate majority leader Bill Frist (R) of Tennessee said Monday that the war against the Taliban can "never" be won militarily and that it was time to include "people who call themselves Taliban" in the Afghan government.

The Associated Press reports that Mr. Frist said he had learned from military reports that the Taliban were "too numerous and had too much popular support" to be defeated in a military campaign.

"You need to bring them into a more transparent type of government," he said during a visit to a military base in the Taliban stronghold of Qalat. "And if that's accomplished, we'll be successful."

Afghanistan is suffering its heaviest insurgent attacks since US-led forces ousted the fundamentalist Taliban regime in late 2001 for harboring Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

Sen. Mel Martinez (R) of Florida, who was traveling in Afghanistan with Frist, said that negotiations with the Taliban were not "out of the question." But he added that he thought Taliban fighters who did not want to be a part of the political process would have to be defeated militarily.

A few hours later, however, Frist released a statement on the Volunteer Political Action Committee website, saying that his comments had been taken out of context.

First of all, let me make something clear: The Taliban is a murderous band of terrorists who've oppressed the people of Afghanistan with their hateful ideology long enough. America's overthrow of the Taliban and support for responsible, democratic governance in Afghanistan is a great accomplishment that should not and will not be reversed.

Having discussed the situation with commanders on the ground, I believe that we cannot stabilize Afghanistan purely through military means. Our counter-insurgency strategy must win hearts and minds and persuade moderate Islamists potentially sympathetic to the Taliban to accept the legitimacy of the Afghan national government and democratic political processes.

National reconciliation is a necessary and an urgent priority ... but America will never negotiate with terrorists or support their entry into Afghanistan's government.

Ed Morrissey of the conservative blog Captain's Quarters writes that he feels someone confused "Taliban" with "Taliban supporters" and "whether that was Frist or the reporter will probably remain a point of contention between the two." But he also says that the Frist incident does bring up an important point about "the end game" in Afghanistan.

If we want a representative democracy in Afghanistan, it will probably be heavily influenced by the Pashtuns, who have a strong Islamist bent. They did, after all, push the Taliban into power. At some point, we have to find a way to convince these Islamists to buy into democracy, and we have to be willing to allow that democracy to develop its own laws and customs. Otherwise, we will have to prop up a strongman who can keep the Pashtuns oppressed, which will create an even greater Islamist impulse in Afghanistan.

Frist's comments about not being able to "stabilize Afghanistan through purely military means" echo recent ones made by Canadian officials. In early September, the Canadian Defense Minister Gordon O'Connor also said he felt it would be impossible to defeat the Taliban militarily. The Toronto Star reports that a recent poll of Canadians showed that a majority of those surveyed agreed with this sentiment, with 59 percent saying that Canadian soldiers were dying for "an unwinnable cause." And almost three-quarters of those polled said the Bush administration had made the world a more dangerous place because of its actions in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Meanwhile, The Sunday Times of London reported that British troops have agreed to withdraw from one of the most dangerous parts of Afghanistan after "agreeing [to] a secret deal with the local people."

Over the past two months British soldiers have come under sustained attack defending a remote mud-walled government outpost in the town of Musa Qala in southern Afghanistan. Eight have been killed there.

It has now been agreed the troops will quietly pull out of Musa Qala in return for the Taliban doing the same. The compound is one of four district government offices in the Helmand province that are being guarded by British troops. Although soldiers on the ground may welcome the agreement, it is likely to raise new questions about troop deployment. Last month Sir Richard Dannatt, the new head of the British Army, warned that soldiers in Afghanistan were fighting at the limit of their capacity and could only "just" cope with the demands.

The deal allows both sides to avoid losing face, which The Sunday Times reports is key to the Afghans' perception of how events are proceeding. Recent polls show that 70 percent of Afghans are waiting to see who will become "the dominant force" before deciding who to back.

bendog
10-03-2006, 03:32 PM
A war that will last 20 years.

defenseman
10-03-2006, 04:07 PM
Maybe, maybe not. Who knows...dman

Bronco_Beerslug
10-03-2006, 04:13 PM
Maybe, maybe not. Who knows...dman
Everybody but a few Neocons and Republicans apparently.

defenseman
10-03-2006, 04:20 PM
Everybody but a few Neocons and Republicans apparently.

Whatever dude, you have your opinion also. And, again, you've voiced it...dman

fido
10-03-2006, 05:19 PM
Are we going to end up like everyone else who invades afghanistan? Running home with our tales between our legs? Maybe, just maybe, we are not being vicious enough. Iraq is one thing, the taliban are something else entirely. They ok'd the attack on US. There should not be any negotiations at all with them. Kill omar and I'll be good on this.

Hotrod
10-03-2006, 05:30 PM
One major problem with trying to outright win the wars in either country is boarders. If the countrys were isolated to the point we were just fighting the people currently in country we could win easily. The flow into each country of young brain washed fighters could very well last forever.

The key would be to stop that flow but hell we cant even secure our own border.

broncocalijohn
10-03-2006, 05:37 PM
If we ever pull our troops out of Iraq this is one place to put them. Taliban have been patient, regrouped, organized and now ready to fight like their brothers in Iraq. This is one war where an overwelming majority supports our actions. This is the hub of Al Queda.

TheDave
10-03-2006, 07:04 PM
Are we going to end up like everyone else who invades afghanistan? Running home with our tales between our legs? Maybe, just maybe, we are not being vicious enough. Iraq is one thing, the taliban are something else entirely. They ok'd the attack on US. There should not be any negotiations at all with them. Kill omar and I'll be good on this.

From what i have read there is no way in hell anyone could ever be anymore brutal than the Soviet Union was... didn't seem to help them any.

baja
10-03-2006, 07:17 PM
Yes the solution to those that spread hate, oppression and killing is to perpetrate even more vicious hate, oppression and killing. Why didn't I think of that?

baja
10-03-2006, 07:19 PM
We could callit the war on war

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-03-2006, 07:22 PM
Report: Frist says Afghan war can't be won militarily


Gee, does that mean Frist wants to "cut and run?"

Somebody notify SteveTensi.

:D

OregonBronco
10-03-2006, 07:36 PM
We could callit the war on war

ROFL! I can see it now:

::Booming action movie announcer voice::

From the man who brought you The War on Terror...
From the driector of The War on Drugs...
From the writer of The War on Gambling...
comes an epic tale of ignorance and hipocrisy.

Bill Frist in...The War on War.

This film has been rated STFU by the general populace and is not suitable for children.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-03-2006, 07:40 PM
ROFL! I can see it now:

::Booming action movie announcer voice::

From the man who brought you The War on Terror...
From the driector of The War on Drugs...
From the writer of The War on Gambling...
comes an epic tale of ignorance and hipocrisy.

Bill Frist in...The War on War.

This film has been rated STFU by the general populace and is not suitable for children.

:laugh:

Perhaps Frist can parlay this into a book deal as well.

He can write the book from his prison cell while doing his sentence for insider trading.

Rohirrim
10-04-2006, 08:32 AM
More than 2,000 years ago, after fighting in Afghanistan for a couple of years to no success, Alexander married one of the warlord's daughters (Roxanne). That warlord then went out and whacked Alexander's chief enemy in the region. Alexander then gathered up a bunch of the gold he had captured in Babylon and started paying off some of the other warlords to do what he wanted. Of course, they wouldn't accept bribes, so he had to make it look like payment for services rendered.

The funny part is, that would still work today. Bush should marry one of those daughters of his off to an Afghan warlord. Of course, they are devout Muslims. She'd have to cut back on the drinking. ;D

baja
10-04-2006, 08:36 AM
More than 2,000 years ago, after fighting in Afghanistan for a couple of years to no success, Alexander married one of the warlord's daughters (Roxanne). That warlord then went out and whacked Alexander's chief enemy in the region. Alexander then gathered up a bunch of the gold he had captured in Babylon and started paying off some of the other warlords to do what he wanted. Of course, they wouldn't accept bribes, so he had to make it look like payment for services rendered.

The funny part is, that would still work today. Bush should marry one of those daughters of his off to an Afghan warlord. Of course, they are devout Muslims. She'd have to cut back on the drinking. ;D

LOL Ipropose he marry off his mother to a warlord...

Something would have to give...

alkemical
10-04-2006, 09:52 AM
We could callit the war on war



War on War


It's a war on war
It's a war on war
It's a war on war
It's a war on war
It's a war on war
It's a war on war
It's a war on war
There's a war on

You're gonna lose
You have to lose
You have to learn how to die

Let's watch the miles flying by
Let's watch the miles flying by
You are not my typewriter
But you could be my demon
Moving forward through flaming doors

You have to lose
You have to learn how to die
If you want to want to be alive

Okay?

You have to lose
You have to lose
You have to learn how to die
If you want to want to be alive

You have to die
You have to die
You have to learn how to die
If you want to want to be alive

Okay?



found on: Yankee Hotel Foxtrot

words: Jeff Tweedy (Wilco)

alkemical
10-04-2006, 09:54 AM
Yes the solution to those that spread hate, oppression and killing is to perpetrate even more vicious hate, oppression and killing. Why didn't I think of that?



The laws of equivalent exchange apply.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
10-04-2006, 08:12 PM
More than 2,000 years ago, after fighting in Afghanistan for a couple of years to no success, Alexander married one of the warlord's daughters (Roxanne). That warlord then went out and whacked Alexander's chief enemy in the region. Alexander then gathered up a bunch of the gold he had captured in Babylon and started paying off some of the other warlords to do what he wanted. Of course, they wouldn't accept bribes, so he had to make it look like payment for services rendered.

The funny part is, that would still work today. Bush should marry one of those daughters of his off to an Afghan warlord. Of course, they are devout Muslims. She'd have to cut back on the drinking. ;D

Hilarious!

You made me spray my keyboard and monitor, dude. :D