Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : THE WHITE HOUSE -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (5234)	5/31/2007 12:45:30 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25737

"Assuming that large numbers of Pakistani advisors where airlifted out of Afghanistan" Pakistani AND Afghan Taliban (maybe al Qaeda too, they escaped the encirclement of Kunduz as well... and that was the only way out....) We had no headcount, indeed NO VERIFICATION AT ALL of who flew back to safety in Pakistan on those Pakistani military transport flights... (to live to fight us again, another day. :-( "...Well letting that happen doesn't seem all that unreasonable." To you maybe. To Dubya, maybe. But to me it ALWAYS SOUNDED LIKE THE HEIGHT OF IDIOCY. Turning imminent victory into long-term defeat. (UNLESS that was always the real aim to keep the Sunni Taliban and al Qaeda alive as 'Boogie Men', convenient justifications for a never-ending 'global war'. NOW, I'm not saying that I sign up for such conspiratorial thinking --- I much prefer to believe that it was simply strategic INCOMPETENCE, an institutional inability to recognize the true nature of the threat: radical Islamic teachings emanating for our erstwhile 'allies' the corrupt Saudi Monarchs, and the corrupt nuclear proliferators in Pakistan --- both united in Whabbist Sunni teachings, and each with their OWN strategic reasons to keep the Taliban and al Qaeda alive and breathing, as usable tools.) "Pakistan agreed to stop supporting the Taliban," THAT'S A GOOD ONE! (They have a signed ceasefire with the Taliban... and an agreement to provide them with sanctuary. Our C.I.A. reports that their military and Intelligence Services have NEVER STOPPED their support of the Taliban... and also reports that is the likeliest location for bin Laden to be....) "letting them get their guys out seems a reasonable trade off." No. Not without at the very LEAST getting their first, and clearing everyone allowed on the flights one by one, so we KNOW who we are letting loose on the world. (Just HOW MANY al Qaeda and Taliban leaders did we allow to fly away?) "In any case it wouldn't have been the very senior people you mention. I'm sure they where sitting at their desks in their air conditioned offices back in Pakistan." The Taliban collapsed MUCH FASTER in Afghanistan then they expected. (Our C.I.A. reported the presence of many I.S.I. operational leaders, many of the Taliban's best leadership, and who knows how many al Qaeda --- all of whom had moved into the northern sector because they expected to lead a defeat of the invading allied forces. Only idiots could have allowed them to fly away to fight us again....