Google+
Close

The Corner

The one and only.

Obama Sweetens Pot for Taliban with Gitmo Prisoner Exchange Offer



Text  



The totally-bereft-of-any-Islamist-influence-whatsoever Obama administration certainly can do it all: Negotiating with terrorists (you invite more terrorism when you show the terrorists that it works), hostage exchanges with terrorists (you invite more hostage-taking when you show the hostage-takers that it works), even sweetening a pot you should never have entered in the first place (the terrorists become even more demanding once you show them you are desperate). Yes, the president has reportedly improved the offer he initially made in begging the Taliban terrorist organization to please, please come to the table to negotiate with the hapless Karzai regime.

Not to make any actual concessions, mind you. We’re willing to spring these anti-American jihadists violent extremists from Gitmo if the Taliban will just come and chat. And now, since he’s already playing this dangerously naive game anyway, Obama has apparently even offered to release the Gitmo gang before the terrorists release our POW if that’s what it takes to entice the Taliban to talk to us Karzai. 

For his part, Karzai has taken time out from pardoning imprisoned rape victims who agree to marry their rapists to urge Taliban leader Mullah Omar to run for president of Afghanistan’s “Islamic democracy.” This makes sense. As I’ve previously pointed out, the Taliban could easily restore their repressive regime without having to change a comma of the Constitution that the totally-bereft-of-any-Islamist-influence-whatsoever Bush State Department wrote for Afghanistan. That Constitution establishes Islam as the state religion and installs sharia as fundamental law. Under it, besides imprisonment of rape victims for engaging in extramarital sex, at least two men have already been subjected to capital trials for apostasy from Islam (they were quietly whisked out of the country before we could be further humiliated by the execution of death sentences). 

So we’ve kept our troops in Afghanistan for eleven years after routing al Qaeda — eleven years of prohibitive rules of engagement that often prevented them from defending themselves, eleven years of being killed by the “friendly” forces they thought they were training — so that at the end we could negotiate the return of the Taliban, the prevention of whose return was our main reason for staying eleven years? Just want to make sure I have that straight.



Text  


Sign up for free NRO e-mails today:

Subscribe to National Review