Afghan Update
The U.S. government will be remanding Afghan detainees into the custody of the Afghan government in coming months. I'm not sold on the idea, but I think it could work, at least in theory. What I do know is that a lot of the detainees who have just been flat out released have joined back up with the Taleban and al Qaeda, so releasing them isn't the right solution. If the Afghan government keeps them locked up, it's that much less that we have to deal with, and it probably makes sense given the historical and legal precedents on the issue. Hamid Karzai understands the implications of letting these lunatics go, and he knows that doing so would be counter-productive for the establishment of stability and prosperity in his country. Like I said, I'm not sold on it, but I'm willing to wait and see.
As I've said before, and will probably say again, I support the indefinite detention of enemy combatants and terrorists at Gitmo, or wherever else the U.S. government chooses to hold them. Contrary to the expert testimony of President Jimmy "One Term" Carter, Gitmo is not an embarassment, and it is completely legal under the laws of armed conflict; I've probably mentioned before, the Geneva Conventions do not apply to the guys who are sitting down in Gitmo. I only hope that this isn't a move by the federal government that's aimed at alleviating political pressure from the so-called "humanitarian organizations" that consistently provide comfort and support to terrorists and terrorist nations by criticizing U.S. policy. Organizations like Amnesty International and Greenpeace won't be satisfied with American foreign policy until President Bends withdraws American troops and the evil American corporations from around the world, and then bends over a table to sign into law an act raising federal taxes to one hundred percent to fund universal worldwide health care and food aid on the American dime, while he's simultaneously sodomized by Usama bin Laden. Sending a couple hundred Afghans home isn't going to do [expletive] to appease any of America's enemies or critics, military or political.
The other news out of Afghanistan, now that I've written two long paragraphs on the Gitmo transfer, is that NATO will take over security operations in 2006. They're expected to be ready to take on the responsibility by the end of next year. To be honest, I don't know that this will constitute much of a change, but I think that it's a positive thing that NATO is taking such a big role in Afghanistan, and plans to take a larger one. Though NATO was divided on Iraq, their involvement in Afghanistan serves as indirect logistical support. For every administrative or operational task NATO can perform, an individual or a unit, even if it's just a squad, is free to take care of business in Iraq. Hopefully this will turn out to be a good development; I'm optimistic, at least.
As I've said before, and will probably say again, I support the indefinite detention of enemy combatants and terrorists at Gitmo, or wherever else the U.S. government chooses to hold them. Contrary to the expert testimony of President Jimmy "One Term" Carter, Gitmo is not an embarassment, and it is completely legal under the laws of armed conflict; I've probably mentioned before, the Geneva Conventions do not apply to the guys who are sitting down in Gitmo. I only hope that this isn't a move by the federal government that's aimed at alleviating political pressure from the so-called "humanitarian organizations" that consistently provide comfort and support to terrorists and terrorist nations by criticizing U.S. policy. Organizations like Amnesty International and Greenpeace won't be satisfied with American foreign policy until President Bends withdraws American troops and the evil American corporations from around the world, and then bends over a table to sign into law an act raising federal taxes to one hundred percent to fund universal worldwide health care and food aid on the American dime, while he's simultaneously sodomized by Usama bin Laden. Sending a couple hundred Afghans home isn't going to do [expletive] to appease any of America's enemies or critics, military or political.
The other news out of Afghanistan, now that I've written two long paragraphs on the Gitmo transfer, is that NATO will take over security operations in 2006. They're expected to be ready to take on the responsibility by the end of next year. To be honest, I don't know that this will constitute much of a change, but I think that it's a positive thing that NATO is taking such a big role in Afghanistan, and plans to take a larger one. Though NATO was divided on Iraq, their involvement in Afghanistan serves as indirect logistical support. For every administrative or operational task NATO can perform, an individual or a unit, even if it's just a squad, is free to take care of business in Iraq. Hopefully this will turn out to be a good development; I'm optimistic, at least.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home