Should we negotiate with Bin Laden?

[Crispy]

Is there any reason not to?

Is there any reason to?

 

[cnredd]

No not appease them, leave them to themselves and then they will run out of steam.

Clinton tried that...

Didn't work...:shrug:

 

[galenrox]

No not appease them, leave them to themselves and then they will run out of steam.

No, the difference is that the wars you listed were between govts., this is between a govt. and say "guerrillas", a guerrilla war is more uncontrollable and can't be stopped automatically, but can be reduced, by eliminating the cause for it. But still many people still treat the wars you listed like they are still fighting.

We've done it before.

I've gotta say I disagree, from a pragmatic stance. You know what causes them to lose their steam? The realization that they cannot get anything from us, no matter how hard they try. People may be willing to blow themselves up for ideals (however perverted they may be), but people will more often then not not blow themselves up if it becomes clear that it will, in the long run, not make any difference whatsoever.
It is well known our stance on negotiations with terrorists. If we change that now and actually negotiate with the one terrorist that has been the bane of our collective existance since the early 90's will send the clear message that if you keep blowing yourselves up, eventually you'll get their way. This will put off the loss of steam for a LONG time. What we need to do, as horrible as it is, is simply stand our ground, take the losses that we have to, until they realize that there's simply no point.

 

[cnredd]

I've gotta say I disagree, from a pragmatic stance. You know what causes them to lose their steam? The realization that they cannot get anything from us, no matter how hard they try. People may be willing to blow themselves up for ideals (however perverted they may be), but people will more often then not not blow themselves up if it becomes clear that it will, in the long run, not make any difference whatsoever.
It is well known our stance on negotiations with terrorists. If we change that now and actually negotiate with the one terrorist that has been the bane of our collective existance since the early 90's will send the clear message that if you keep blowing yourselves up, eventually you'll get their way. This will put off the loss of steam for a LONG time. What we need to do, as horrible as it is, is simply stand our ground, take the losses that we have to, until they realize that there's simply no point.

Well said...

As I've stated a few times on this forum...

The options are NOT "right" or "wrong"

The options are "sucks" or "really sucks"...

 

[galenrox]

Well said...

As I've stated a few times on this forum...

The options are NOT "right" or "wrong"

The options are "sucks" or "really sucks"...

damn right

 

[Comrade Brian]

I've gotta say I disagree, from a pragmatic stance

Then that is your opinion.

You know what causes them to lose their steam?

I find that many of these "terrorist" groups are motivated because they feel the US is like say "invading" the Mid-East. al-Qaeda and several other groups were originally created as anti-Soviet resistance, when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in 1979. So I think that they are reacting to the US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. And also many other reasons too. US has strong ties to Saudi Arabia, Israel, Kuwait, and several other countries. And our govt. I have noticed is quite negative on Palestine and Iran. So I think what motivates them is say "US imperialism".

The realization that they cannot get anything from us, no matter how hard they try.

They will keep on trying, is because no one is invinceable. And also if what motivates them is strong enough, they will try as long as they can.

People may be willing to blow themselves up for ideals (however perverted they may be),

I agree.

but people will more often then not not blow themselves up if it becomes clear that it will, in the long run, not make any difference whatsoever.

They think it will make a difference.

It is well known our stance on negotiations with terrorists

Negotiate when they are doing something that acts in our interests or can't "win" against them.

What we need to do, as horrible as it is, is simply stand our ground, take the losses that we have to

My opinion differs.

 

[Mickyjaystoned]

After the Americans bombed that house in Pakistan killing about twenty civilians it was plain to see that Bin Laden was not pleased.

IMO Bin Laden does not want this kind of thing to happen and i think he knows in an on going war with America more of the same is bound too.

I believe Osama's work has been to organise a recognised military force in the middle east, capable of testing any would be invaders or aggressors, a sort of rebel militia fighting against the prospect of invasion by Western Ideals and corruption(in the religious sense).

And because he has succeeded in creating an opposition to American rule there will never be a truce, even Osama asking for a truce was probably a dubbed tape, so it looks like the American government are in charge over there, making it look like they got Osama on the run when he's probabley sittin by a pool having a laugh at all the people in the CIA who trained him and have now created a monster.

And anyway, the war on terror will not end with the death of Osama Bin Laden, your a fool if you think they will even try to kill him, no he has been to good a tool for the American Government, without him they couldn';t have their war in Iraq, without CIA Bin laden they couldn't have their pipelines through Afghanistan, without Cia Bin Laden they could not have the justification for such legislation as "The Patriot Act" and there would be no need for the NSA's increased infringement of the AMerican public aswell as general liberties being thrown overboard.

No Osama has much more value to the Zionists alive than dead, this is why when he was spotted in the nineties on dialysis by the FBI they let him go, this is why he was originally trained by American Intelligence agenicies and this is why the Bush Snr Administartion gave millions of dollars to the taliban in order to defend Iraq, in the Iran Iraq war.

Whatever way you look at it, George Bush wants to change this world, without Osama Bin Laden he would have no hope of doing so, thanks to Osama he is changing the world, for the worse.

 

[DeeJayH]

Well said...

As I've stated a few times on this forum...

The options are NOT "right" or "wrong"

The options are "sucks" or "really sucks"...

war, politicians.....that statement can apply to so many things in this wonderful world

 

[Gardener]

"I am a meat popsicle"


and having dispensed with what is unquestionably the very best line in 5th Element, I can turn my attention to this "truce".

as in, it isn't necessariliy a truce.

It is a hudna. This may sound like mere semantics, but sematic distinctions are very meaningful here in that when we hear the word truce, it evokes certain western notions, whereas hudnas don't quite translate directly to the word truce, especially inasmuch as they have differing attitudes when it comes to their hudnas depending upon whether one is Muslim or infidel. We need to understand it from their perspecive and not just ours.

I think we also need to understand the notion of al takeyya and how it pertains to calling of the hudna, itself, as well as influencing any potential negotiations if such were ever a real possibility.

 

[galenrox]

Then that is your opinion.

Indeed it is

I find that many of these "terrorist" groups are motivated because they feel the US is like say "invading" the Mid-East. al-Qaeda and several other groups were originally created as anti-Soviet resistance, when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in 1979. So I think that they are reacting to the US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. And also many other reasons too. US has strong ties to Saudi Arabia, Israel, Kuwait, and several other countries. And our govt. I have noticed is quite negative on Palestine and Iran. So I think what motivates them is say "US imperialism".

And I agree, that is a large motivator.
Another large motivator is the belief that these sort of actions will bring about the change that they want, and thus in allowing said change it will vindicate their tactics to many, and thus rejuvinate the entire movement.

They will keep on trying, is because no one is invinceable. And also if what motivates them is strong enough, they will try as long as they can.

True, but then you have to also accept that only so many of them actually believe in this strong enough to blow themselves up just on principle, with no hope of actually bringing about said change, and so once we break their collective spirit, then those are the only ones we need to worry about.

I agree.

Alright

They think it will make a difference.

Now they do. Give it a while though, and eventually they'll realize that it won't.

Negotiate when they are doing something that acts in our interests or can't "win" against them.

Exactly, we negotiate when we can't win against them, and they know it. Thus if we negotiate with them it'll be taken as an admission that we can't win against them, and this will become a huge vindication for their tactics from a Machiavellian viewpoint, and thus will only lead to more terrorism.

My opinion differs.

And that is fair.