tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9560953.post7024875862017867385..comments2023-12-31T19:34:14.853-05:00Comments on Dymaxion World: Talking: Bad idea, or worst idea?johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09690430991814528863noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9560953.post-2241886760684838772007-05-28T12:18:00.000-04:002007-05-28T12:18:00.000-04:00I don't find the idea terrifying. But I am in the...I don't find the idea terrifying. But I am in the "you're being naive camp" about negotiations.<BR/><BR/>a) There's no central org. to negotiate with.<BR/>b) They ain't interested in negotiating.<BR/><BR/>I think (and Olaf can chime in if I misrepresent this), our "fear" is a implicit assumption that we must adopt a unilateral cease-fire or otherwise cease offensive operations on our side before negotiating. <BR/><BR/>If that assumption is wrong, then yeah, go ahead and negotiate with whomever shows up at the table. I won't put too much faith in anything being achieved, but I'm willing to admit I could be wrong.<BR/><BR/>Its a problem with the simplistic nature of the poll against the complex situation that is Afghanistan. You could ask instead "Do you support ending hostilities in Afghanistan?"<BR/><BR/>100% of us would say yes, the smart ones would add "but how?"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9560953.post-78111490372693896402007-05-27T23:20:00.000-04:002007-05-27T23:20:00.000-04:00Canadians are smarter than the generals. Or better...Canadians are smarter than the generals. Or better informed, perhaps.<BR/>If you are having a War, then the basic idea is that, eventually, you want the war to end. Unless you intend to kill every last member of the opposition, then some kind of discussion must take place to figure out what the end of a war will consist of. <BR/>Unlike the Bush administration, who doesn't have any idea of what the end of the Iraq war will look like; never have. They don't care. They expected Christ to show up by now and save them the trouble of negotiating what to do with all those maimed orphans and starving women left without a coherent infrastructure to find out what happened to their homes and families.<BR/>(was that one sentence?)<BR/>Regardless of the horrific view of the Taliban, supporting negotiations with 'the enemy' is simple logic. Agreeing with what the negotiators work out is another story....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9560953.post-22519736730199294792007-05-26T01:34:00.000-04:002007-05-26T01:34:00.000-04:00Oh, and I'll be working Saturday so apologies if I...Oh, and I'll be working Saturday so apologies if I don't jump right on your comments.johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09690430991814528863noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9560953.post-21426786968205530532007-05-26T01:28:00.000-04:002007-05-26T01:28:00.000-04:00I certainly abbreviated your argument, but I don't...I certainly abbreviated your argument, but I don't think I imputed anything to your post that isn't there. Please, if you think I've unfairly imagined something let me know. I'm crazy for the fairness!<BR/><BR/>Oh, and your post links approvingly to people far more condescending than yourself, including Antonio and the sometimes-sane-but-not-about-Afghanistan Andrew Coyne, so you've got to take that in to account.<BR/><BR/>About this, though, in your post:<BR/><BR/>"Negotiations are considered to be inherently good, and thus mistakenly assumed to be inherently wise or likely to succeed."<BR/><BR/>This is where I think you get in to trouble. Nobody can say that most Canadians assume negotiations would succeed, because there's simply no polling done on that kind of detail. We don't know why, exactly, most Canadians currently support negotiations. I suspect that most Canadians are tiring of Afghanistan and are trying to create an exit strategy, despite our leaders. But that's probably as much my wishful thinking as anything else. See the problems with all this?johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09690430991814528863noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9560953.post-4173601228974513522007-05-25T19:36:00.000-04:002007-05-25T19:36:00.000-04:00John,I haven't closely read your post here (I'm in...John,<BR/><BR/>I haven't closely read your post here (I'm in a hurry, and will tomorrow), however I think you're misrepresenting my opinion quite a bit from what I have read. Check my comments to my post and it clarifies things a bit. To summarize: I don't care if people (Karzai or NATO) want to negotiate with the Taliban, I wish good luck to them. I also think that negotiations are an important step after certain groups have already indicated a willingness to recognize the authority of the Afghan government. What bothers me is when people present the idea as if it will be a panacea for peace without suggesting what compromises they expect from the Taliban. They often do so condescendingly, which irritates me a great deal, because I'm skeptical of the value of negotiations with the more obstinate Talibani sects. <BR/><BR/>Anyways, I'll check back tomorrow and elaborate further, but if you read the comments to my post, you'll see you've missed my point by a ways. I know you used the disclaimer "basically", but you've simplified my point beyond all recognition.Olafhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12434267803807108634noreply@blogger.com