Also, you could bring home your war trophies without filing 100 forms and donating it to the unit.
Which, really, there were some awesome war trophies decorating some of the bases we had in Iraq. I guess we left them all behind. Just shows what great guys we really are, doesn't it? Not that we got any credit for it.
Yeah, Xerxes wants out so badly he has agreed to release 70 Taliban high-value *guests* from Gitmo just to get a definate possibility of an affirmative maybe that they'll a.) come to the peace table; b)actually bargain in good faith; and c) stick to their bargain after we've held up our end.
Sorta makes one stop and consider who is latrine worthy.
That reminds me of an old Iris joke, which prompts me to start prioritizing those individuals who would be at the top of my list. A list I might add, that would not require a passport in order to visit their final resting place --should I be fortunate enough to live so long.
As far a WWII trophies, what Eric said... Beyond that, I plead 5A on behalf of the old man.
I'm hearing that it's closer to six than seventy, and instead of "release" it's "transfer to the custody of Qatar, which will hold them as hostages... er, as a goodwill gesture."
Ya can't bring home cool stuff, ya can't piss on the dead enemy, ya can't have booze- I will tell ya, most armies in history would revolt under those sorts of rules. Any guesses about what they were toting around in the wheelbarrow?
Congressman Allen West offered his take here: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/allen-west-marines-incident-shut-your-mouth-war-hell_616699.html
The Weekly Standard had this take on the efficacy of negotiating with the Taliban: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/taliban-openly-rejects-goals-peace-talks_616682.html
Well, the Standard is failing to properly analyze the diplomatic situation. What it is describing as 'the goals of the peace talks' is, and rather obviously is, merely the administration's opening position. It will be quickly negotiated away, and it would be madness for any negotiator to concede it.
By the same token, the Taliban opening position is that it is simply using politics to advance the same aims it is advancing with its military wing -- which is just what Clausewitz would tell us is always the case in these matters.
The actual goal of the peace talks is not that the Taliban should submit to terms in negotiation that they have successfully resisted on the battlefield. The administration's goal is, rather, to find terms on which the fighting can stop and we can come home. Those terms will be more generous than our opening position, and less expansive than the Taliban's -- but probably substantially closer to their opening position than to ours, because the President wants the conflict to end more than they do.
We should behave with highest honor toward enemies. Those who don't should be punished.
That said, we're human beings and asking for superhuman goodness doesn't make it so. When we fall short it's not an international incident, unless we make it so.
Also, you could bring home your war trophies without filing 100 forms and donating it to the unit.
ReplyDeleteWhich, really, there were some awesome war trophies decorating some of the bases we had in Iraq. I guess we left them all behind. Just shows what great guys we really are, doesn't it? Not that we got any credit for it.
Seriously, though, these Marines are in bad trouble. The State Department is doing its best to open high-level talks with the Taliban this week, because the President wants out. By contributing to an honor barrier to the Taliban leadership agreeing to those talks, our Marines have stepped in that latrine themselves. They're going to get it good and hard pour encourager les autres.
Yeah, Xerxes wants out so badly he has agreed to release 70 Taliban high-value *guests* from Gitmo just to get a definate possibility of an affirmative maybe that they'll a.) come to the peace table; b)actually bargain in good faith; and c) stick to their bargain after we've held up our end.
ReplyDeleteSorta makes one stop and consider who is latrine worthy.
ReplyDeleteThat reminds me of an old Iris joke, which prompts me to start prioritizing those individuals who would be at the top of my list. A list I might add, that would not require a passport in order to visit their final resting place --should I be fortunate enough to live so long.
As far a WWII trophies, what Eric said... Beyond that, I plead 5A on behalf of the old man.
I'm hearing that it's closer to six than seventy, and instead of "release" it's "transfer to the custody of Qatar, which will hold them as hostages... er, as a goodwill gesture."
ReplyDeleteMake that Irish, not Iris, joke.
ReplyDeleteI guess I need to keep an eye on my typing.
Ya can't bring home cool stuff, ya can't piss on the dead enemy, ya can't have booze- I will tell ya, most armies in history would revolt under those sorts of rules.
ReplyDeleteAny guesses about what they were toting around in the wheelbarrow?
..."the custody of Qatar, which will hold them as hostages..."
ReplyDeleteIIRC, I read somewhere that the Taliban were to open an office in Qatar? Is that a done deal?
And is Qatar not like the acquaintance to which one knows one should never present their back? Possible useful, on occasion, but wholly untrustworthy?
Man! It's hard to keep score with the straterizing this long war setting demands.
You're right about the branch office. Qatar's a pretty reliable ally at the moment, though; our guys there get beer and everything.
ReplyDeleteCongressman Allen West offered his take here: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/allen-west-marines-incident-shut-your-mouth-war-hell_616699.html
ReplyDeleteThe Weekly Standard had this take on the efficacy of negotiating with the Taliban: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/taliban-openly-rejects-goals-peace-talks_616682.html
I can't say that either of them are far wrong.
Eric Hines
Well, the Standard is failing to properly analyze the diplomatic situation. What it is describing as 'the goals of the peace talks' is, and rather obviously is, merely the administration's opening position. It will be quickly negotiated away, and it would be madness for any negotiator to concede it.
ReplyDeleteBy the same token, the Taliban opening position is that it is simply using politics to advance the same aims it is advancing with its military wing -- which is just what Clausewitz would tell us is always the case in these matters.
The actual goal of the peace talks is not that the Taliban should submit to terms in negotiation that they have successfully resisted on the battlefield. The administration's goal is, rather, to find terms on which the fighting can stop and we can come home. Those terms will be more generous than our opening position, and less expansive than the Taliban's -- but probably substantially closer to their opening position than to ours, because the President wants the conflict to end more than they do.
We should behave with highest honor toward enemies. Those who don't should be punished.
ReplyDeleteThat said, we're human beings and asking for superhuman goodness doesn't make it so. When we fall short it's not an international incident, unless we make it so.