Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Do you remember who was the first person to say we should never negotiate with terrorists?—
America will never make concessions to terrorists–to do so would only invite more terrorism- nor will we ask or pressure any other government to do so. Once we head down that path there would be no end to it, no end to suffering of innocent people, no end to the bloody ransom all civilized nations must pay.
President Ronald Reagan made this statement in 1985 when TWA Flight 847 was hijacked. Although the U.S. was closely monitoring this terrorist act, we did not participate in negotiations.
Then we see President Barack Obama supposedly not negotiating with terrorists for the deserter, Bowe Bergdahl in 2014:
The difference with Bergdahl, as Obama argues, is that he wasn’t really a hostage grabbed by terrorists. He pretty neatly fit the classic definition of a prisoner of war. He had just left a military outpost in an obvious war zone while (presumably) wearing his uniform. History is loaded with examples of nations—including America—making deals to free their soldiers.
And however nasty the Taliban may be, it’s not really a “terrorist” enemy as we commonly understand the word. The group is not on the State Department’s official list of terrorist organizations and has long been a battlefield enemy in the ground war for control of Afghanistan. It is not plotting to, say, hijack American airplanes—even if it does have sympathies with people who are. [my bold]
Many of us would agree that Obama did negotiate with terrorists; funny how events and labels can change in the face of our abandoning Afghanistan to the Taliban.
We are now in the position, because of our disastrous decisions in Afghanistan, of having to negotiate with the Taliban. No matter how many times Jen Psaki tries to wordsmith “negotiate,” the results are the same.
* * * *
Whatever you want to call our collaboration with the Taliban, a group that we are now dependent on to allow the flying of citizens and allies out of the country, there is a major concern that no one has addressed regarding the reliability of the Taliban: taqqiya. The terrorists embrace the practice of taqqiya, and it could dangerously compromise our working with them. Here are a couple of definitions:
Quran (3:28) – This verse instructs believers not to take those outside the faith as friends, unless it is to ‘guard themselves’ against danger, meaning that there are times when a Muslim may appear friendly to non-Muslims, even though they should not feel friendly.
Quran (66:2) – ‘Allah has already ordained for you the dissolution of your oaths…’ For today’s reader, the circumstances for betraying your word are not specified, leaving this verse open to interpretation. According to Yusuf Ali in his commentary: ‘if your vows prevent you from doing good, or acting rightly, or making peace between persons, you should expiate the vow.’ (Presumably, whatever advances the cause of Islam would qualify as ‘doing good’).
The message from the Koran is loud and clear, according to Muslim extremists: lying is okay, and Allah does not object to lying.
* * * *
Now we find ourselves in the position of having to work with terrorists who are willing to lie to justify their actions. We have no reason to believe that they will follow through on any of their agreements. We have no reason to think that they are telling us the truth regarding their treatment of citizens or allies. We have no reason to think that they will not harbor terrorists like al Qaeda who have already attacked us in our own country; I’m quite confident that the Haqqani network will be happy to help them out in executing foreign attacks.
Who knows what demands they are making, or will make in the future, to get what they need and want? Why should they value the lives of our countrymen and allies when they do not value life but instead celebrate martyrdom? What makes us think that they will change their “transition government” to a group of people more acceptable to us? In fact, why should they do anything that is acceptable to us?
I see no other choice than our sending in military in some way that we can at least temporarily put the Taliban on their heels. Otherwise, our losses may very well be more deadly than we can imagine.
Congress must act. Now.
Do you have other strategies we could try?Published in