Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2014 16:45:15 GMT -5
Jun 9, 2014 11:05:32 GMT -5 @misspractice said:
I have never said 'we need to let them go' - I'm not in any decision making loop. Can you name one Taliban inspired/led/conducted terrorist attack on us? If you recall, we went into Afghanistan after al-Qaida re 9/11. Our conflicts with the Taliban started their - it is their country and they may well be infested with al-Qaida but the Taliban as a group is an element of the Afghanistan government and I'm guessing that those that say the non al-Qaida Taliban need to be freed when we leave that country are basing their interpretation on that fact. MP - You had said:
Simple answer - in one year when we complete our withdrawal and our active part in any hostilities they would go free - totally, unequivocally free and have no negotiating value to obtain Bergdahl's release. Instead, we get him back and they spend a year in Qatar under watchful "eyes" and "ears"!
Maybe I misunderstood but I inferred that there was some requirement to set these guys free.
That has always been the situation in prior conflicts - now let me be clear, I am not including those that are tied to al-Qaida, just those pure (gag/retch) Taliban fighters captured in Afghanistan fighting our forces there. That group has not been declared a terrorist organization by the US. I don't think the US will want to set a precedent by keeping those folks when we are out of that country, I could be wrong but I strongly doubt it. We are also under a great deal of pressure to dispose of the Gitmo detainees and their release back to Afghanistan will reduce the Gitmo population, a very desired outcome by many on both sides of the aisle. Qatar has a good relationship with our country and I think they will do everything in their power to keep these guys in check and under watchful eyes and ears. Since the NSA has had its mission reduced somewhat (gag/retch again) I am sure there are many assets available to track these guys and follow the strings to their rats' nests.