It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

US to pay Taliban to switch sides

page: 3
14
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 07:34 AM
link   
What is the point of the wars then JJ? More 'insurgents' were created because of the invasion than there were before we invaded! If it was truly a matter needed taking care of, wouldnt we have?
Hitler had a huge army, powerful industry, the best scientists in the world, and it took like 6 years to crush.
In Iraq and Afghanistan we outnumber them, outgun them... whats the problem?

If we really wanted to SOLVE the problem and not just remedy, we WOULD have. But theres profit in prolonging the problem!

Jeez I think Im starting to sound like dooper...

Why is the opium trade still fourishing (some say increased)?! Why are we doing nothing about Pakistani border? Why are we ignoring rape of little boys by the Afghan police and army?!!




posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 07:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by dooper
This is a terrible idea.

If you want peace from the Taliban, or peace from Al-Queda, you kill them.

It's guaranteed to work without fail.

Apparently not so guaranteed
perhaps you haven't been keeping up to date on current events



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 08:08 AM
link   
Hmmmm, where did we try this before? Vietnam? Did we win? I'm disabled for 2 years and I can't even get a hearing from social security yet they can take my wife's tax dollars and send them to our enemies who happen to be opium growers. Got it! At least the Taliban doesn't muscle me out of any money. So who is the greater threat to me?



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 09:40 AM
link   
This has actually proven to work.
The Italians alreadypaid the Taliban to keep peace [an Aghan officiers told Uk sources] in the Sarobi and Herat area. Only one Italian died during those years. When the French took over, tens were killed in merely weeks.
Italy angry denied it but most sources confirm it, now the US just tells it is policy..

news.bbc.co.uk...

After paying you should gather intel about their hideouts and then strike them all when they're offguard


Although i do agree, paying them could also mean rearming them indirectly, i dont know what cost more, the deployment of troops [doing routines and recon] or paying them off.

[edit on 28-10-2009 by Foppezao]



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ridhya
What is the point of the wars then JJ? More 'insurgents' were created because of the invasion than there were before we invaded! If it was truly a matter needed taking care of, wouldnt we have?
Hitler had a huge army, powerful industry, the best scientists in the world, and it took like 6 years to crush.
In Iraq and Afghanistan we outnumber them, outgun them... whats the problem?

If we really wanted to SOLVE the problem and not just remedy, we WOULD have. But theres profit in prolonging the problem!

Jeez I think Im starting to sound like dooper...

Why is the opium trade still fourishing (some say increased)?! Why are we doing nothing about Pakistani border? Why are we ignoring rape of little boys by the Afghan police and army?!!

The opium trade is flourishing because the warlords make their money that way. Then they buy new weapons. The Pakistan ISI assists them. Bhutto was assassinated because she interfered. Karzai is being pushed out because he caved too.
But the way this will be solved is when Islam uses WMD. Then we can retaliate the way we should have on 911 but we were blind then.

Islam will not stop raping little boys, it is part of their culture. Islam will be stopped, it's just a matter of time and doing the right thing for history.



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
Hmmmm, where did we try this before? Vietnam? Did we win? I'm disabled for 2 years and I can't even get a hearing from social security yet they can take my wife's tax dollars and send them to our enemies who happen to be opium growers. Got it! At least the Taliban doesn't muscle me out of any money. So who is the greater threat to me?

Actually it's the Taliban who are a greater threat to you in the big picture.



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 09:51 AM
link   
Seems a lot of countries may be paying fighters not to fight (or) paying Taliban to fight al Qaida, but not Coalition troops.

Italians

Canada

While Iran seems may be paying them to fight...

Iran

This is more complicated and interwoven than a carry forward of Bush's plan...



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 10:03 AM
link   
wasnt the taliban given $1billion in aid around july 2001?
then look what happened september that year



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 10:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by LadySkadi
Seems a lot of countries may be paying fighters not to fight (or) paying Taliban to fight al Qaida, but not Coalition troops.

Italians

Canada

While Iran seems may be paying them to fight...

Iran

This is more complicated and interwoven than a carry forward of Bush's plan...


Taqiyya. The Taliban and AQ are one in the same. As is the Muslim Brotherhood and 1.6 billion muslims. Islam is one unit, this is according to Islam and the 57 OIC countries who belong.



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 10:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by JJay55
Taqiyya. The Taliban and AQ are one in the same. As is the Muslim Brotherhood and 1.6 billion muslims. Islam is one unit, this is according to Islam and the 57 OIC countries who belong.


The one ray of hope for the West is the Muslim world's inherent tribalism and suspicion of their immediate neighbour. It may be their undoing.

Resentment of whoever is doing better than them runs strong. If a Dubai model prospers it makes the Saudis and Iranians feel foolish. Immediate actions are geared to pulling down something not learning from it. That's why there's such a hard-on for the destruction of Israel.

Destructive impulses as opposed to constructive.

Can they lean from their previous failures?

We'll see.


Mike

[edit on 28-10-2009 by mmiichael]



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 10:28 AM
link   
This is simply a quick fix, and a bad one at that. Akin to putting a plaster on a stab wound. Paying off warlords and tribe chiefs only works for so long and simply treats the short term symptoms and not the disease. Either the USA must rid Pakistan of any corruption within the ISI and military, we know the CIA work with the ISI so why they have not done this before is anyones guess, though i have my *conspiracy theories* regarding that. Funnel even more money into the Pakistani government/military and tell them to launch a substantial attack in the northwest or all funding will be cut, it is fierce fighting no doubt but Pakistan still has taliban sympathizers within the military,intelligence agencies and government. Pakistan is holding back and until they stop the problem will never go away. You can never defeat an enemy such as the taliban,simply dilute the problem long enough until the social and political scene is more stable and naturally the ideology which fuels it will dilute in time also. America needs pakistan to win the war and there is no way America can literally invade the north west, so it's all up to pakistan. Course when i say taliban i refer to the various groups fighting, they are not all one cohesive group of fighters.



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Solomons
we know the CIA work with the ISI so why they have not done this before is anyones guess, though i have my *conspiracy theories* regarding that. .

Where do you get these myths from?
The ISI and CIA aren't a team and never have been. The ISI did however protect and house Kalid Shiek Mohammed after he brutally beheaded Daniel Pearl because the ISI was about the be exposed and they still protect AQ.



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Beefcake
 



i make i speak of a global elite of all nationalities that enable these conflicts to continue and want them too so the leaders of these countries and line their pockets.


You mean it takes a war for them to line their pockets?


We have international banks that launder money for these terror groups and they use these funds to kill our troops and then we pay them to not attack us and we get our money from these same banks and then the banks get ineterst on this money they lend.


Guess none of this happens during peace time



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 12:26 PM
link   
A much cheaper solution. We have spent more than the country is worth invading it.



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by JJay55

Originally posted by Ridhya
What is the point of the wars then JJ? More 'insurgents' were created because of the invasion than there were before we invaded! If it was truly a matter needed taking care of, wouldnt we have?
Hitler had a huge army, powerful industry, the best scientists in the world, and it took like 6 years to crush.
In Iraq and Afghanistan we outnumber them, outgun them... whats the problem?

If we really wanted to SOLVE the problem and not just remedy, we WOULD have. But theres profit in prolonging the problem!

Jeez I think Im starting to sound like dooper...

Why is the opium trade still fourishing (some say increased)?! Why are we doing nothing about Pakistani border? Why are we ignoring rape of little boys by the Afghan police and army?!!

The opium trade is flourishing because the warlords make their money that way. Then they buy new weapons. The Pakistan ISI assists them. Bhutto was assassinated because she interfered. Karzai is being pushed out because he caved too.
But the way this will be solved is when Islam uses WMD. Then we can retaliate the way we should have on 911 but we were blind then.

Islam will not stop raping little boys, it is part of their culture. Islam will be stopped, it's just a matter of time and doing the right thing for history.

Starting holy wars makes baby Jesus cry.



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 12:39 PM
link   
Is this how America handles conflicts in the 21st century, just pay off the guys killing you? This is a mockery of those troops that gave up their lives fighting this political war, why send troops when you can pay off the opposition?

I already knew they (gov) was paying off resistance fighters during the Iraq war but i thought that situation was one in a million.

Now i question the involvement of the US in other worldly conflicts. Do they pay of those warlords in Africa? Are they secretly slipping supplies to North Korea (i know China is)? Bah, i've had enough of this corrupt government, it's time to shake the tree of liberty and see what falls out!

I think, strongly think, that those poppy fields those Afghan warlords have are being used to grease pockets in Washington.

[edit on 28-10-2009 by cenpuppie]



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Emerald The Paradigm
This is nothing new. The U.S. has been paying the Taliban since the Soviet War. They are just now announcing it to the world.


The Taliban did not exist at the time of the Soviet War. That makes this statement false, which in turn makes the entire rest of the post suspect.

___________________________________________________________

I'm of the opinion that there is no better way to win a war than by fighting it like you mean it. Loosen up ROE, use smaller hunter/killer teams and air support on call to close with and kill them.

Money to the opposition goes against my grain, but a buy off will cause some of the "less committed" to desert - until they get drafted again by the Taliban.

Or hunted down and "made an example of".

For the hardcore Taliban, according to sharia once they accept the Jizya (more or less a tax to be allowed to be subservient to the muslims), they are forbidden to kill the payees.

Unless they payees revolt, or refuse to submit.

All in all, hunting down and erasing the enemy is the way to end the war. If the payoffs don't work, please refer back to the OP quoted text to find out where to place the blame for the failure. Some are named explicitly, some are named by inference. An appropriations bill has to come from somewhere.



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by earthdude
Starting holy wars makes baby Jesus cry.

Tell that to muslims who are rioting over a German incident. Tell that to the youths in France who are lighting up cars because some kid killed himself.



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Beefcake

This tactic is failure personified it is sad and a kin to giving in to Blackmail. It never stops you never get to stop paying you keep paying and when the payments stop the violence starts again.

I love how the supporters of this rediculous wars can spin anything to make it sound like it is a good tactic. THE US IS PAYING THE ENEMY IN HOPES THAT THEY STOP KILLING THEM.

Wake up folks you can't spin this it is pathetic.


Paying folks to turn their coat inside out and fight their former comrades is nothing new. It's been done successfully time and time again in the past. That's what this is about, paying enemy fighters to turncoat and become Home Guards instead.

Spin THAT.



I am not in the military and unlike some on this site won't pretend i am but i do have a 2 cousins who joined and even they are not blind to what is going on. Although they signed up they did it for free education and a paycheck in this tough economy this is why most sign up it isn't to free the Afghanistan people or to stop Al CIAda my cousins know who starts wars they know it is a racket and i know that when they hear about this they will be disgusted.


Your cousins fight solely for financial gain, even though they believe themselves to be in the pay of the NWO, Elite, or whatever your word for the day is? And they would have the affrontery to be digusted by THIS?

Sounds like faulty reasoning may run in the family.



posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu
For the hardcore Taliban, according to sharia once they accept the Jizya (more or less a tax to be allowed to be subservient to the muslims), they are forbidden to kill the payees.

Unless they payees revolt, or refuse to submit.

Hardcore? Like there is a softcore?
Jizya is a tax for non-muslims to have free access to land. This applies to Israel, or Coptic Christians in Egypt, and other non-muslims on Islamic land. And at anytime can be revoked and those people are not protected.

In Afghanistan Fard Ayn applies. That means that it's every muslims duty to fight until the unwanted non-christian visitor is off the land. That's a concept the West doesn't understand. And peaceful farmers will pick up weapons along with the Taliban to achieve this.
We can't pay to erase this theology, there will always be forces against this Islamic belief even in the form of suicide bombers like in Iraq.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join