Home » Big Taliban catch in Pakistan

Comments

Big Taliban catch in Pakistan — 41 Comments

  1. Doesn’t this idiot realize that these people lie about their experiences? Check out the book Five Years of My Life by Murat Kurnaz at Amazon. (Don’t buy, it. Kuraz has probably earned more than enough.). Read some of the book reviews and note their authors (Vanessa Redgrave). I heard something on TV a short while ago repeating the Koran-on-the-floor story. And note also that at Camp X-ray there were spiders and skorpions. Poor baby! I’m sure that the caves of Afghanistan, most likely the goal of his little trip to Pakistan, are 5-star accommodations.

    Kurnaz has probably made a bundle. He is the darling of the peaceniks. And he probably has great street creds among the ethnic machos. Does anyone think he would give us credit for the quality of the food he got at Gitmo.

  2. So Lorenzo, let us get to the heart of the matter.

    If you were faced with an inescapable choice; a captured top terrorist brags that a nuclear bomb has been smuggled into Wash DC and will be set off in two hours and gloatingly states that he knows where it is…what would you advise?

    The evidence is overwhelming that he’s telling the truth.

    Your choice is simple; torture him on the chance that he might break or intentionally do less than you could and by that decision allow millions to die.

    Either choice is morally wrong, no one denies that reality. Which, by your moral calculus, would be the greater evil? Because you will have to live with the consequences of your choice.

    Sure, it’s hypothetical but someone may have to make that choice some day. So, don’t equivocate, just give us a straight up answer.

  3. My’o’My, we have some SOP cluelessness about the art of interrogating Top Terrorists right here at Neo’s home.

    I’m actually shocked at the true lack of knowledge. Sounds like folks at Puffington & kos huffing about mistreatment of butchers and the “they’ll say anything under torture!!!”

  4. “The ultimate point of fighting the Taliban is to compel them to give up fighting and accept some version of a post-Taliban order in Afghanistan kill every mother-lovin’ one of ’em we catch until any remaining ones think the better of the whole enterprise.”

    Fixed that for ya, Ackerman.

  5. I agree with some of Lorenzo’s point. The effect on us and the effect on third parties is real.

    But the usual confusion of the moral and the pragmatic is in his post as well.

    If one is against torture because it is immoral, then make a moral case. If one is against it because you believe in the long run it doesn’t work, then make that case. What we see more often from the critics is a sliding back-and-forth-between the two, evading both questions by always running to the other when pressed. It might be both a breath mint and a candy mint, but each needs to be established on its own grounds.

    As an aside, I also dislike the lack of distinctions made when we define torture broadly. I don’t consider sleep deprivation on the same level with electricity and drills. We do have to draw a line somewhere as a matter of law, but moral questions admit of more comparative factors.

  6. “…and a close associate of Osama bin Laden…”

    Guilt by association? Better to remain objective. Al-Qaeda is not the Taliban; the Taliban is not al-Qaeda. The Taliban had no connection with 9/11 … and neither did Saddam Hussein, Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, Hugo Chavez and whoever else … but, I digress … though you did provoke me … or your quote did. And while we’re about it, you’ll never make a case for torture. It’s just wrong for so many reasons; moreover, it doesn’t work. We can debate it if you want.

    Now, to my main point. You’ve mentioned bringing him across to US to possibly face charges in a civilian court, but what is this guy guilty of? Or rather, what are the allegations? Having the will to live? Defending his country? Organising resistance? Let’s not forget, this was an imposed war. US … and to our shame, so did the UK … attacked and invaded his country. After 9/11, and before the bombing of Afghanistan in October 2001, the Taliban leadership, which would include this guy as the number two, offered to handover bin Laden (if they could find him) to the International Court. Bush turned them down and invaded. What case can you bring? Failing to find bin Laden in double-quick time? Your guys spent over eight years trying to find bin Laden … and have failed … miserably, some might say.

    It seems to me, that in a court of law, Mr Baradar would have a very good defence: we were busy running our country from the city; some criminal took refuge in the mountains somewhere, we offered to hand him over, but these ‘crazies’ were too impatient and started bombing and shooting at us. Everything I’ve done has been self-defence, like any good, patriotic citizen. I rest my case, sir. Now …can you direct me to the nearest international airport? Thank you, sir.

  7. It’s a good thing these whiners weren’t around for WW II. The firebombing of German and Japanese cities would have really set them off. As Curtiss LeMay said, If you kill enough of them, eventually they will quit.

  8. Lorenzo…waiting…sound of crickets chirping…

    To point to the obvious Lorenzo, the refusal to respond is an indication of an inability to do so and the lack of moral fiber necessary to acknowledge it, i.e. moral cowardice.

  9. Good point, Martyn. The Taliban are just like the Provisional IRA freedom fighters, who were defending their country by organising resistance to the English (as they then were, before the Act of Union), who had imposed war on them. England spent over 300 years trying to impose her will on them. Everything the Provos did was in self-defence, like the good patriotic citizens they were.

    So…as we say in the States, how do ya like them apples?

  10. I know torture works. I sang like a bird when a cop threatened to call my parents as a teenager.

    And i’m for employing the don’t ask don’t tell policy when it comes to Pakistani prisoner customs.

  11. The Taliban had no connection with 9/11

    Sure, they did. They provided material support to al Queda prior to that event, and could have extradited bin Laden and his merry band, but refused.

    Did you forget that, Martyn of England? yes, you must have.

  12. Martyn of England, dhimmitude awaits you and nothing less, do you deserve.

    “The Taliban had no connection with 9/11”

    They were providing physical refuge and allowing Al Qaeda terrorist training camps within territory that the Taliban controlled. That’s active collaboration.

    “you’ll never make a case for torture. It’s just wrong for so many reasons; moreover, it doesn’t work”

    Everyone agrees it’s wrong. Of course it works, it if didn’t, its use wouldn’t be so widespread. Organizations who routinely torture have had plenty of time to ascertain the actual efficiency of the method. You have no experience by which to judge, only opinion based in supposition.

    “Let’s not forget, this was an imposed war.”

    Sorry, you don’t get to rewrite history. It was a legitimate, legal response to an act of war committed by an ally of the Taliban. Moreover, the Taliban refused to eject Al Qaeda and continued to harbor them.

    “the Taliban leadership, … offered to handover bin Laden …to the International Court.”

    Bush refused that offer for two reasons, it would have provided bin Ladin with a forum and platform to air his blatantly untrue charges against the US and in front of a ‘court’ composed of appeasers such as yourself.

    There would have been no justice, Al Qaeda would have remained protected by the Taliban and confused moral cowards such as yourself would have likely set him free. As your ‘case’ made for him just proved.

    Your intellectual ancestor though, would have approved, “We should seek by all means in our power to avoid war, by analyzing possible causes, by trying to remove them, by discussion in a spirit of collaboration and good will. I cannot believe that such a program would be rejected by the people of this country, even if it does mean the establishment of personal contact with dictators, and of talks man to man on the basis that each, while maintaining his own ideas of the internal government of his country, is willing to allow that other systems may better suit other peoples.” —Neville Chamberlain, explaining Munich

    Last time, your intellectual pacifist predecessors got 60 million killed, this time the butcher’s bill is likely to be much higher and upon your hands shall the blood be because not only do you lack the guts to fight for what’s right but even worse, you actively oppose those who would defend freedom.

    There’s a name for such as you, and the name is collaborator.

  13. Occam’s Beard. I’m pleased you like my point – thanks. However, your assertion that “the Taliban are just like the Provisional IRA” is not correct, though there are some parallels. You seem to have the history of Irealnd a little mixed-up. Neither is your understanding of the formation of the Provisional IRA correct; they weren’t formed until 1969. The original occupation started in the 12th century. Are you perhaps confusing them with the IRA? Never mind, you tried your best – but proof that a little knowledge is dangerous thing.

    There was an audible sigh of despair in 2001 (and again in 2003) when we learnt we were to get involved in another war of attrition, having only just managed to get on a road to peace in Northern Ireland. We thought the lesson had been learned. Trial by tribunals, rough treatment of prisoners, oppression, marginalising their politicos – and all the other head-banging stuff didn’t work. A political solution was sought, ceasefires declared, and prisoners were released. Now those so-called ‘terrorists’ hold positions of power, which is, probably what will end up happening eventually in Afghanistan, after all the head-banging is over. Then, all the troops can come home, and everyone will realise what a complete waste of time, money and life the whole exercise has been – not necessarily in that order.

    You went to a lot of trouble to evade the main point: what charges would you bring?

    (I like Russet apples BTW — leathercoats – delicious.)

  14. Waterboard him early and often. When he stops talking, return him to his people from a high altitude.

  15. “the Taliban are just like the Provisional IRA” is not correct,

    It’s absolutely correct.

    Trial by tribunals, rough treatment of prisoners, oppression, marginalising their politicos – and all the other head-banging stuff didn’t work. A political solution was sought, ceasefires declared, and prisoners were released.

    Rubbish. You tried your best to make a cogent point, but sadly failed. But the effort’s the thing, isn’t it?

    Still, ignorance is no excuse. You might profitably Google “Force Research Unit” and “Stakeknife.” The British finally scuppered terrorism in Northern Ireland not by hugging it out with the terrorists, but by taking the gloves off and outbrutalizing them. The British did what needed to be done. British undercover agents killed people to establish and maintain their credibility with the Provos:

    “I was a terrorist but I was a British agent,” says Kevin. “You had to do things to stay there, otherwise, believe me, there would have been a lot more dead people. When I had to do my IRA job I had to do it. I’m not going to sit here and say that people lost lives at my hands, because basically the way the law works now is, I will go to jail for the rest of my life and I don’t think I deserve that. I broke the law seven days a week, 24 hours a day. Everything I done broke the law. I helped to make bombs. Some of those bombs got caught. They were never used. Some of those bombs exploded and damaged property and that gave me credibility.”

    Further, among those they killed were…other Brits:

    Only this week, the government obtained an injunction banning the broadcast of an Ulster Television documentary. That documentary alleged the agents — in order to maintain cover and ultimately save lives — took part in the manufacture of bombs and assisted in the killings of soldiers and policemen.

    For a rather less temperate perspective see this.

    As for Baradar, enemy combatant out of uniform? Military tribunal and a firing squad.

  16. > If it’s the left speaking about Americans under the Bush administration’s aegis doing the interrogating, the definition of torture is fairly inclusive.

    Tickled the bottom of his feet for fifteen seconds with a feather. CHECK.

    Sneered condescendingly at combatant while looking down nose at him. CHECK.

    Played Terry Jacks’ “Seasons in the Sun” three times successively in his cell after noon meal. CHECK.

    Advised combatant that Mohammed was actually a bed-wetting pansy, and insisted “No, really!” when said claim was rejected. CHECK.

    Yep, you’re right. It’s pretty inclusive.

  17. Occam’s Beard
    Still avoiding the subject and going off-topic to evade my question? If there were any weight to the claim that ‘Stakeknife’ managed to infiltrate the top levels of the Provisional IRA, how do you explain that he didn’t manage to discover all the many attacks on the British public and establishment, including the attempts to assassinate British Prime Ministers? As I said, you’re proof that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. You’ve only got one piece of the jig-saw.

    Martin McGuinness and Gerry Adams were invited to negotiate the Belfast Agreement and produce the Joint Framework Document, which lead ultimately to the Northern Ireland Assembly How is it that ‘Stakeknife’ didn’t manage to have them taken out?

    The Provisional IRA didn’t announce that its armed campaign was over until 2005, even though the Northern Ireland Assembly had taken on powers in back 1999. Martin McGuiness, former Provisional IRA member, is now the current deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland. I hate to keep repeating myself, but I think it’s necessary with you: the solution came through political dialogue, and not as the result of a military defeat.

    ”As for Baradar, enemy combatant out of uniform? Military tribunal and a firing squad.”

    That’s why America is still bogged down fighting this war after eight long years. Despite having all that expensive military equipment, the most advanced satellite communications systems, computer controlled drones, a trained fighting force and the best officers West Point Military Academy is capable of producing, a war-weary America still cannot beat the sandal-wearing Taliban. You should be asking serious questions about the Dept of Defense.

    America went to Afghanistan to get Osama bin Laden, but just like someone who goes to Wal-Mart to buy one item, and comes back much, much later having bought everything but . . . America’s forgotten why they went to Afghanistan in the first place. Easily distracted, forgetful, unfocused, and scatter-brained. That you’ve gone way off-topic is just another illustration of that tendency.

  18. If there were any weight to the claim that ‘Stakeknife’ managed to infiltrate the top levels of the Provisional IRA, how do you explain that he didn’t manage to discover all the many attacks on the British public and establishment, including the attempts to assassinate British Prime Ministers? […]How is it that ‘Stakeknife’ didn’t manage to have them taken out?

    How can you dare say “Stakeknife” never existed, and that British authorities always behaved as perfect gentlemen?

    See? I can do straw man too. Now stop currying (no pun intended) favor with your Muslim soon-to-be overlords.

  19. Easily distracted, forgetful, unfocused, and scatter-brained.

    Yup, but still ahead of you.

  20. Martyn of England,

    You point out a legitimate problem for us in that Baradar can’t be tried in US courts, because his activities, while undoubtedly criminal, were committed in Pakistan and Afghanistan and not here.

    He is however, under the Geneva Conventions and the laws of war, an illegal combatant and not entitled to any protections. If found on a battle field he would be liable to be executed of hand.

    Therefore combining your logic and mine I believe our allies should squeeze every drop of information out of him they possibly can by any means they find appropriate. I mean, how arrogant of us to presume to judge their domestic cultural mores by our decadent western standards, Right?

    If the information he provides proves, as you claim it will, to be unreliable; Oh well… But when they have squeezed him dry they should execute him and dispose of his body in the most ignoble way they can devise.

    I hope this solution approaches your refined standards of moral rectitude. On the other hand, I could give a sh*t what you think about this or anything else as you have amply demonstrated your nature as a gutless and morally clueless simp.

    Have a nice day. (que smiley face)

  21. Occam’s Beard
    Talking about infiltration, it seems its the Taliban who’ve been successful in that area. Seven C.I.A. officers including the chief killed by a Taliban double-agent in December. Another six agency employees wounded in the same attack.

    This ‘infiltration’ thing – shouldn’t it be the other way round? I’d call that sloppiness – or is it plain incompetence? Either way, it’s a further sign the C.I.A. have lost the plot.

  22. Wm Lawrence

    “If found on a battle field …”

    Shame whatever point you were going to make collapsed so quickly. I didn’t need to read any further.

  23. Martyn is absolutely right: The UK defeated the IRA by handholding, sweets and kind words leaving London safe to be blown up by Muslim terrorists instead of Irish terrorists. Well done.

    Furthermore, the Taliban and Al Qaeda are as different as a river herring is to a lake herring.

    Of course we should have only focused on capturing the figurehead of Al Qaeda instead of unravelling his networks, funding and capturing his capos and lieutenants! While capturing and trying bin Laden would have led to someone, perhaps a Taleb, taking his place; it would have been a great symbolic victory. Worthy of derision and applause.

    We sighed audibly at getting involved in another war of attrition and then criticised the entire idea of arresting and trying them as criminals. After all, they were just patriots of no particular country.

    Baradar, and those like him, planning and conducting attacks in the UK and US are simply stateless, rootless Freedom Fighters defending themselves when we attacked a country they don’t live in and bear no allegience to.

    An implacable enemy can be placated. A nationless fighter can justly defend his nation and killing a terrorist only makes him stronger. More Mosques leads to less separtism and violence. Burkhas are a symbol of female empowerment. The Iraqis were perfectly happy under Saddam and The Taliban are the rulers of Afghanistan and cannot be held responsible for what happens there. Americans are stupid evil geniuses.

    How can you people not see this?

  24. If there were any weight to the claim that ‘Stakeknife’ managed to infiltrate the top levels of the Provisional IRA, how do you explain that he didn’t manage to discover all the many attacks on the British public and establishment, including the attempts to assassinate British Prime Ministers?

    It’s profoundly “not OK” when the Irish try that. Oppressed moslems can be forgiven and released for such justifiable behaviour.

  25. Shame whatever point you were going to make collapsed so quickly. I didn’t need to read any further.

    That’s a great rhetorical device; silences debate, prevents any comeback, displays an open mind and doesn’t make one look like a pompous pommy ass at all.

  26. Further to Martyn,

    “America went to Afghanistan to get Osama Bin Laden,”

    What stupidity. Just because it’s a lefty meme doesn’t make it true and it’s usually a contra-indicator.

    America went to Afghanistan to deprive Al Queda of its primary base of support and to keep them from reconstituting their training camps there. Osama was always secondary and would have been (still will be?) gravy. The intent was always to degrade his organization and it’s ability to operate with impunity. That part has been quite successful.

    The only reason Al Queda and the Taliban still exist is because they have been able to run away like little girls and hide out in the tribal areas of Pakistan. This development may mean the end of their sanctuary. Smells like victory to me.

  27. Now that the troll and/or dhimmi has left…

    There’s another possibility with Bandahar. He won’t be tortured at all, much less executed.

    Consider that other than the possible location of Omar and bin Ladin (probably already moved) and a bit of tactical and logistical info, he really doesn’t have much to offer us. Plus the Pakistani’s have known for a long time where the Taliban and Al Qaeda headquarters are located, yet when they finally do act, they go after just one man? A bit odd that if you’re really serious and have decided to root out the Taliban.

    He’s top commander but easily replaced, I’m sure they’ve planned for it, as they all expect to die during Jihad, plus the Taliban’s tactics are simple enough that it won’t take his replacement long to get up to speed. It’s guerrilla tactics, gradually wear down your enemy until the gain simply isn’t worth the cost.

    Baradar would have real value though if they could get him to act as a high level negotiator for reaching a peace settlement with the US.

    Does anyone doubt that Obama wants out of Afghanistan and that if the political cost is low enough, (he can declare victory with honor) then he’ll be satisfied, regardless of the long-term repercussions in the WoT?

    I strongly suspect that Obama’s strategy is to arrive at a ’settlement’ with the Taliban, turn over the security of the Afghan region to the Karzai administration with Pakistani military support promised and leave. Guarantees of ongoing financial aid will be made as part of the deal.

    That is a formula that will directly result in the Taliban taking over both Afghanistan and Pakistan. Probably fairly quickly too.

    When we leave, the Taliban will know we’re not coming back and they will start planning a coup in Pakistan with the many elements in the ISI and Pakistani military sympathetic to their brand of Islam. The loss of American aid will not dissuade religious fanatics. Besides, they can always sell a nuke or two.

    After they seize power in Islamabad, they’ll focus on Kabul. Shouldn’t take too long, all the fanatical passion is on their side.

    Once the Taliban have consolidated their hold on power, Al Qaeda will resurface and now have access to nukes with nuclear protection for their bases.

    All courtesy of Obama, Biden, Pelosi and the useful idiots who elected them.

  28. And, just think, all the Taliban had to do after 9-11 was hand over bin Laden, al-Zawahiri and their butchers and, Baa-Daa-Bing, No Invasion. Omar’s choice. Similarly, the mass murdering Baathist Saddam just needed to let free unhindered inspections and behave his fecal self. His call. But, heck fire, No more rape rooms, No more hundreds of mass death pits in the former cancer of the Mid-East.

  29. “c ya.” Martyn had a little trouble with pushback, I think? Made multiple controversial claims; changed the subject whenever one was addressed individually. My prediction is that he is over at another more congenial site at the moment, telling them how he really gave it to us and how dim we were.

    MofE’s displayed tactic (which OB handled nicely) is a liberal standard: 1. Bring up an array of pertinent but less-well-known points, hoping to catch your opponent off-balance. 2. Sneer and condescend, informing everyone that all the reasonable people who actually know anything disagree with them. That one’s less effective, as it works better on other liberals, who have a horror of being thought unfashionable in their ideas. 3. Respond to counter-arguments by bringing in additional lesser-known facts. These usually start getting a bit tangential and obscure, but a practiced liberal can usually go two or three rounds before they fall apart.

    I’m sure OB and others want more of him, but I don’t think you’re going to get it. Patience, young Padawan. Let the game come to you.

    I say that humorously, but I think it is increasingly true. The ground of the argument is changing because of the new media. We don’t have to carve out a place as often, but can let the discussion come to us. (From your mouth to God’s ears, AVI! I know, I know.)

  30. MofE’s displayed tactic (which OB handled nicely) is a liberal standard

    Thanks, AVI. I’m all too familiar with the type, I’m afraid.

  31. If you want a moral argument against torture, I make the relevant points (or link to them) here. A link I put in my original comment, which is why I also added in the pragmatic arguments.

    As to the “ticking bomb” story, none of the torture folk are talking about is such a case, so it is just a distraction. But to respond to that directly, first, it is so unlikely a scenario that it is not the basis for public policy. Second, if it actually happened, it would be covered by the “in extreme circumstances” let out that (for example) common law has. (It has always be understood, for example, that respect for property does not stop a starving man from eating.)

    There is a lot of spurious bravado in all this stuff “I hate these guys so much/love my country so much that …”

    Really, I am with the House of Lords: we had this out in the C17th, why is it even up for discussion? I can give you chapter and verse on why the jihadis are evil and noxious and need to be extirpated. I am just in favour of doing so effectively and not giving away what we are in the process.

  32. Assistant Village Idiot

    ”I’m sure OB and others want more of him, but I don’t think you’re going to get it.”
    Well, you got that wrong, didn’t you?

    “Martyn had a little trouble with pushback, I think?
    Correction — I had little trouble with pushover. It was too easy — Occam’s Beard couldn’t stay focused on the topic and strayed off into something about the Provisional IRA, 300 years ago and ‘Stakeknife.’ It had little to do with Mr. Baradar — the topic — facing a civilian trial in the US and what charges he might face. Occam’s Beard obviously found the question too perplexing.

    ”Bring up an array of pertinent but less-well-known points…”
    Only less-well-known to those of lesser knowledge. #;+)

    ”MofE’s displayed tactic…”
    No tactic – perhaps you should borrow OB’s razor, its obviously not used. I was simply asking now that Mr A G Baradar has been arrested, what are you going to charge him with, if as NeoNC suggests, he may be brought to the US.

    Would you care to have a go at the question AVI?

  33. Lorenzo

    Yes – I checked out your link yesterday. Thanks. I also left a comment on another thread on your blog.
    As torture is already illegal, those advocating its use need to make a case for changing the law to allow torture in future.

  34. So, let’s see, Homes. Wetting the membranes of a mass butcher is…TORTURE ? Hearing said sewage sing like a lark as a result is…BAD ?

    Not in a post 9-11 world. Ridiculous.

  35. I was simply asking now that Mr A G Baradar has been arrested, what are you going to charge him with, if as NeoNC suggests, he may be brought to the US.

    Already asked and already answered:

    Baradar, and those like him, planning and conducting attacks in the UK and US are simply stateless, rootless Freedom Fighters defending themselves when we attacked a country they don’t live in and bear no allegiance to.

    Of course he can’t be charged with a crime, or charged with anything. The entire criminal system was built to protect those arrested by the military with no “habeas corpus”, tortured, and forced to testify against themselves.

    Baradar is a patriot without a country, a freedom fighter against freedom and a soldier without an army. I’m sure he, and those like him, will respond to a good example. If only we could be nicer to him, give him a cottage in Sheffield with room for his wives, a “living wage”, a mosque next door and The World’s Best Healthcare (audible sigh) That’s what he deserves!

  36. There is an Italian saying “he was so good he was good for nothing.” Martyn of England’s arguments necessitate inaction and legalistic excuses for avoiding practical actions or any action (the UK in a nutshell). It is not liberalism, it is Walt Disneyism.

  37. Martyn of England.

    You and your fellow mullah-sniffers have no business lecturing us about anything:

    http://tinyurl.com/ykponmz

    You’ve rolled over and got your gary glitter right in the air for the jihadis.

    Yeah…. I’ve spent some time in Londonistan. You’ve got not so much to be proud about that.

    Stop pretending terror and capitulation is virtue.

  38. The IRA decided to get out of the terrorist business not long after 9-11 didn’t they? I have always thought they did that in order to not be sought out as the Islamo fascist murders were about to be sought out.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>