This, by the way, is the same paper that refused to publish an op-ed by John McCain replying to Obama before the election.
The New York Times is getting flack for publishing an op-ed by Sirajuddin Haqqani titled, “What We, the Taliban, Want”, in which he claims, “We did not choose our war with the foreign coalition led by the United States. We were forced to defend ourselves.”
The criticism has focused on Haqqani as a Taliban leader.
Which goes to show how little anyone seems to remember about the war in Afghanistan despite all the time and lives that we spent fighting it.
Yes, Sirajuddin Haqqani has a leadership role in the Taliban. Much more significantly, he's the head of the Haqqani Network, a terrorist outlet of the Taliban interlinked with Al Qaeda.
It was the Haqqani Network that served as the interface with Al Qaeda, back to the early days of Osama bin Laden's involvement in Afghanistan, and whose tactics most closely resembled those of Al Qaeda, and which was funded by the same people as Al Qaeda.
The Haqqani Network is as close as any part of the Taliban get to Al Qaeda and the global network of Islamic terrorism.
That, and not merely the Taliban leadership badge is what makes the Times' decision to print an op-ed by Sirajuddin Haqqani claiming that they were attacked by us.
FYI, we could have taken out Sirajuddin Haqqani a number of times, but the Obama administration was busy winning hearts and minds.
Now there's no reason to expect anything else from the nest of terror supporters that make up the New York Times.
But this is a reminder that we should not be negotiating or signing agreements with terrorists. We should get out of Afghanistan, do as much damage on the way out as we can, and end this. But instead the predictably folly of empowering the Taliban will be played out.
No comments:
Post a Comment