Trump’s Secret Meeting With the Taliban

by Jack

“President Donald Trump said Saturday that Taliban leaders were to travel to the US for secret peace talks this weekend but that the meeting has been canceled and he’s called off peace talks with the militant group entirely.

Trump tweeted that he scrapped the meeting after the Taliban took credit for an attack in Kabul, Afghanistan, that killed a dozen people, including an American soldier.

Inviting Taliban leaders onto American soil is an unprecedented move and a significant development in America’s longest running war just days from the anniversary of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.”

Surely there must have been better places where they could have accomplished the same thing and yet not be so controversial?

What’s your opinion, am I wrong or was this okay to invite the Taliban to America right before 9/11?    I’ve heard a lot of anger expressed over this move, but I really want to hear what you think.

 

 

 

 

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Trump’s Secret Meeting With the Taliban

  1. Peggy says:

    I don’t have a problem with the meeting at Camp David. Carter and others have used it for similar meetings. Obama had the Muslim Brotherhood to the White House.

    I do have a problem with the meeting being held just days before the 9/11 anniversary. Someone had their head in the sand to pick the date.

    • Chris says:

      Fair points in that last paragraph, Peggy. Do you have a link to an article about Obama meeting with the Muslim Brotherhood in the White House? I know they met with each other, but I haven’t found info about them meeting at that location. I do think the Taliban is quite a bit worse than the Brotherhood, but neither are considered terrorist groups by the US government (which surprised me—I thought the Taliban was).

  2. Harold says:

    Japan and Germany are current allies, they also caused terrorism here and abroad, should we prevent them from being here on any given date?

    The taliban jihadist are here already in sleeper cells, what’s the difference if a few more (that we have identified) come here to discuss a peace accord.

    For our Presidents part the USA may be the only safe haven to hold such a summit.

    How the taliban jihadist get here is the problem, how they fit into their society here is a problem as well, because no one in their society (as far as we hear about) discloses their intentions or where abouts.
    How do we get the peace loving among their population to understand by withholding valuable information instead of coming forward to report possible terrorism is the problem.

    Once we develop a non porous border, by any means possible to provide a layer of protection for America’s legal population then maybe we can discuss location of meetings.

    I view the outrage of this meeting as nothing more than hate filled liberals just employing a Alinsky tactic to create more havoc and distrust toward Trump. I do believe it is his desire to develop a layer of protection for all Americans through this meeting, also there is the hope it may the catalyst to end to the rest of the global problem created by jihadist terrorism.

    I do think that the meeting cancelation (possible reset) is a message to the taliban that they need to stop their murderous tactics, before we stop hunting them.

    • Chris says:

      Japan and Germany are current allies, they also caused terrorism here and abroad, should we prevent them from being here on any given date?

      Honest question: did this really sound like a good analogy when you typed it? Japan and Germany’s last acts of aggression were both over 70 years ago, and they have been considered allies since. The Taliban is currently attacking Americans by the president’s own admission. Why would you think this a useful comparison?


      How the taliban jihadist get here is the problem, how they fit into their society here is a problem as well, because no one in their society (as far as we hear about) discloses their intentions or where abouts.
      How do we get the peace loving among their population to understand by withholding valuable information instead of coming forward to report possible terrorism is the problem.

      What in the world are you talking about? The “peace-loving among” the population of…the “Taliban jihadists?” There is no such thing. Are you conflating peace-loving Muslims—of which there are millions, a few of which I count as my friends—with the Taliban? Why would you do that?

      • Harold says:

        Chris is at it again, seemingly vacant of any social courtesies. I clearly have a right to my opinion, but you being the liberal a$$ of posters here, are always looking for ways to undermine others views. Once more your ideolog advocacy is obvious, as well as concurrently replete with negativity.

        Yes , I do like my analogy, I felt it appropriate that time can heal tensions. So I care what you think, why?

        I also believe the Muslim people in America need to do more (than what’s being reported) to help identify and turn in those jihadist sleepers within their community.

        Yes there are many Muslim peace practitioners that have come to America for a better and safer life, however part of that privilege is to stand up and help protect America from those who would do us harm.
        I could have constructed the phrase “peace loving muslim society” however I didn’t, which is unimportant to me that you could not interpret it. Also, I can’t stop you from trying to twist that into a conflating statement, However, I will point out you would be in error, again.

        • Chris says:

          Pointing out that your arguments are bad in a venue such as this is not socially discourteous, Harold. Evaluating arguments is literally the purpose of such venues. I am sorry you don’t seem to be able to handle this. That is a problem with the weakness of your arguments, not with me for pointing them out. For example, I already addressed your “time healing tensions” argument; Japan and Germany last attacked decades ago, whereas the Taliban attacked very recently even according to Trump, so your analogy does not apply. How was that not clear the first time?

  3. More Common Sense says:

    NOT FOR POSTING:

    Is there a size limit on posts? My posts are being reject and have been for weeks. My most recent one is today. It is only 586 words long but only these short posts get through.

    • Peggy says:

      I too have had trouble posting at times and there appears to be no rhyme or reason why one is rejects and another isn’t. I’ve learned to copy everything before submitting.

      • More Common Sense says:

        I get the error “The connection was reset”.

      • Post Scripts says:

        On behalf of the ER, who pays for this 3rd world software, I sincerely apologize. However, it is beyond my control to fix and apparently beyond the control of the ER’s IT guy too. It is a horrible product that I can not recommend to anyone for any price. The paper is struggling to stay afloat, so new software is highly unlikely. Worse yet, new legislation could well be the last nail in the coffin. See story on front page.

  4. Soaps says:

    We have more than enough anti-American terrorists here already, including several who have infiltrated our Congress. We don’t need to invite more. If Trump really wants what would amount to a fruitless meeting, he can pick a neutral spot, somewhere outside the USA.
    By the way, the war in Afghanistan is not our longest running war. Technically, we are still at war with North Korea. There has never been a surrender, peace treaty, or total destruction of the enemy. There has been a cease-fire agreement, which North Korea has violated hundreds of times. I know. I was there and saw US soldiers killed by the NK.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *