Page 1 of 31
The US does not negotiate with terrorists . . . sometimes
Posted:
Mon Jun 02, 2014 7:58 am
by Professor
Re: The US does not negotiate with terrorists . . . sometime
Posted:
Mon Jun 02, 2014 8:29 am
by eynon81
I don't think the Taliban are really terrorists. They're a political faction.
I doubt these guys were that valuable. If we had much dirt on them they would have gone to trial long ago. The fact that they are still kicking their heals in Gitmo indicates to me that they aren't too important. (besides they've been out of the loop for 13 years, they're going to be utterly clueless when they get back to Pakistan)
Not leaving a man behind > negotiating with terrorists.
Congress can't meddle with the Commander in Chief being Commander in Chief.
*although this does lend some ammo to the argument that Obama could have closed Gitmo long ago if he wanted to*
Re: The US does not negotiate with terrorists . . . sometime
Posted:
Mon Jun 02, 2014 8:33 am
by The dane
Agreed, I think this was a bad trade, and it will cause problems in the future.
If the US is willing to risk soldiers on the battlefield in order to capture terrorists, it doesn't make sense to turn around and trade those terrorists back to save one soldier.
Re: The US does not negotiate with terrorists . . . sometime
Posted:
Mon Jun 02, 2014 9:02 am
by Professor
I talked with my cousin (Navy 20+ years, attached to several special forces units during that time) about this. He simply doesn't understand this, again for 2 reasons:
1) He thinks the same as I do about this encouraging future abductions in the hopes that we will negotiate their release.
2) Why would the US trade 5 high-value terrorists (and, the fact that they were in Gitmo for 13 years proves they were, else they'd have been freed before now) for one soldier who was AWOL? Long before now, as viewed by his peers, this guy was viewed as "damaged goods" because he wasn't "capture on the battlefield". In his (my cousin's) words, "Why would a soldier leave his post, in the middle of the night, to wander around in an unfriendly city?"
So, we traded 5 terrorists for a guy who, if we are going to be fair, will not face court-martial for abandoning his post?
Re: The US does not negotiate with terrorists . . . sometime
Posted:
Mon Jun 02, 2014 9:40 am
by eynon81
Re: The US does not negotiate with terrorists . . . sometime
Posted:
Mon Jun 02, 2014 9:45 am
by Professor
Re: The US does not negotiate with terrorists . . . sometime
Posted:
Mon Jun 02, 2014 9:48 am
by eynon81
an interesting issue. did this guy desert? did he defect? did he just get drunk and do something stupid?
Re: The US does not negotiate with terrorists . . . sometime
Posted:
Mon Jun 02, 2014 10:05 am
by Professor
From what I heard (still looking for reliable news source), he left camp late at night and was picked up in town by the Taliban.
Re: The US does not negotiate with terrorists . . . sometime
Posted:
Mon Jun 02, 2014 10:11 am
by Professor
Re: The US does not negotiate with terrorists . . . sometime
Posted:
Mon Jun 02, 2014 10:33 am
by Indy
Lose/lose.
If he leaves the guy behind OMG OBAMA DESERTED OUR TROOPS.
If he deals five Taliban for him OMG OBAMA LOVES TAYERISTS!
This is really, really getting old.
First of all, these guys are Taliban. It's not like they gave away Zawahiri.
Second, and we were/are going to do what with them? Keep them at Gitmo for the rest of their lives? Why do we even still HAVE Gitmo?
The Taliban didn't attack us on 9/11. Everybody has to remember that.