old salt wrote: ↑Sun Feb 09, 2020 12:29 am
MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 08, 2020 11:58 pm
old salt wrote: ↑Sat Feb 08, 2020 11:43 pm
Kismet wrote: ↑Sat Feb 08, 2020 1:08 pm
Then there's this today from Afghanistan (where we are supposed to be leaving shortly)...a reminder these were th epeople DOPUS was considering inviting to Camp David.
They would not have survived the helo flight from Dulles to Camp David.
...& when you smack talk about Trump in Afghanistan, you forget how Obama surged us to 100k troops there, while undermining the operation by annoucning they'd leave before our next election.
https://www.npr.org/2016/07/06/48497929 ... nder-obama
Why does it need to be a partisan response? It’s fair to say that it was an idiotic idea to invite the Taliban to Camp David. Doesn’t matter which idiot had that idea or from what party. The only relevant aspect is that he’s still got the job.
Partisan response to DOPUS ? Partisan ghouls politicizing our casualties in Afghanistan ?
It would have been an idiotic idea, unless it worked.
Arafat went to Camp David & it didn't work.
Is our objective to remove the Tailban, reform the Taliban, or reach a modus vivendi where we leave them alone, so long as they don't harbor & support terrorists who are a threat to us ?
Yes, "DOPUS" is indeed a slam. (not mine, btw)
But does it require a knee jerk response?
You do, of course, know the difference between Arafat and Barak both coming to Camp David with Clinton, much less Sadat and Begin with Carter (with 12 days of secret negotiations before even being announced) and this stupid foray by Trump.
Yes the Arafat/Barak summit effort didn't work, IMO a calamitous mistake for the Palestinians, but it was an effort with both sides at the table, an effort which had been worked on by the diplomats and in which each side agreed to participate. That Arafat blew it is not somehow a parallel to the Taliban being invited to Camp David, no participation by the Afghan government, and with no prior diplomacy setting the stage for a remotely possible positive resolution.
Stupid.
And that judgment really does not need to be seen as 'partisan'. It would have been equally stupid, regardless of party in power.
That is, unless one conflates Trump's political interests with the USA's national security interests...thus 'partisan'?