Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why we should take Osama's olive branch ,It's the first step in winning the peace
SFGate ^ | 01/29/06 | John Arquilla

Posted on 01/29/2006 9:15:24 AM PST by Pikamax

Osama bin Laden's offer of a truce has sunk from sight without leaving a ripple, but it should have made waves.

When the audiotaped proposal was made 10 days ago, the White House dismissed it out of hand. That was a politically logical move, given the need to appear tough on terror at all times. An image of strength and determination may be particularly important in the months ahead because Republican Party leaders have put security issues at the heart of their 2006 congressional election campaign strategy.

But there are reasons why bin Laden's overture should be carefully weighed and thoughtfully debated.

The moral imperative that should drive us is a sincere desire to end the long suffering of the people of Iraq and Afghanistan. Official figures suggest that 30,000 innocent noncombatants have been killed since March 2003 in Iraq alone. Many respected sources believe that this figure is grossly underestimated.

So if bin Laden were to call off his dogs of war, it would be a very good thing, saving lives by removing major elements in the insurgencies in both countries. Such al Qaeda withdrawals would sharply reduce the need for our forces to remain in these sad lands.

(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: alqaeda; binladen; leftistsucker; nevillechamberlain; obl; olivebranch; peaceinourtime; truce
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-75 next last
John Arquilla is professor of defense analysis at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey. The views expressed are his alone. Contact us at insight@sfchronicle.com.
1 posted on 01/29/2006 9:15:27 AM PST by Pikamax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Pikamax
Thank you for that trenchant analysis, Mr. Chamberlain. Now go to hell.

-ccm

2 posted on 01/29/2006 9:16:17 AM PST by ccmay (Too much Law; not enough Order)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

We should be grateful this idiot is not part of the Administration.

(Save this comment for the 2008 campaign.)


3 posted on 01/29/2006 9:17:39 AM PST by aculeus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax
John Arquilla, grade A brainfart.

Sure, John, negotiate with terrorists...great idea. You go first. (These were the first people to generate hatred for anyone talking to the Iranians who could help free hostages.)

4 posted on 01/29/2006 9:17:46 AM PST by Recovering_Democrat ((I am SO glad to no longer be associated with the party of Dependence on Government!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax
So if bin Laden were to call off his dogs of war, it would be a very good thing

And if my aunt had any balls, she'd be my uncle.

5 posted on 01/29/2006 9:18:04 AM PST by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

John Boy voted for Kerry, right?


6 posted on 01/29/2006 9:18:15 AM PST by mtbopfuyn (Legality does not dictate morality... Lavin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

John Arquilla is professor of defense analysis at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey.

7 posted on 01/29/2006 9:18:41 AM PST by zarf (It's time for a college football playoff system.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ccmay

This man, like so many educated people, fails to understand the nature of evil.

Or the concept of jihad - rightly or wrongly- as interpreted by wahabbism.


8 posted on 01/29/2006 9:18:49 AM PST by DesignerChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax
That would mean terrorism won !
9 posted on 01/29/2006 9:19:08 AM PST by Steveone (Liberalism is a brain tumor!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax
The moral imperative that should drive us is a sincere desire to end the long suffering of the people of Iraq and Afghanistan. Official figures suggest that 30,000 innocent noncombatants have been killed since March 2003 in Iraq alone.

No sir, the moral imperative is to stand firm against and seek to destroy evil.

OBL is an evil man.

Seeking to make truce with evil is moral weakness and human fallacy.

10 posted on 01/29/2006 9:19:20 AM PST by A message
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

Im surprised it took the appeasers this long to crawl out


11 posted on 01/29/2006 9:19:34 AM PST by mylife (The roar of the masses could be farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

Excuse me, Mr. Arquilla? Just how do we negotiate a peace deal with a dead terrorist? *Smirk*


12 posted on 01/29/2006 9:20:02 AM PST by Diana in Wisconsin (Save The Earth. It's The Only Planet With Chocolate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax
No way... some pansy-ass metro-sexual punk from LA-LA-Land wants to take it anally from Osama.

Shock I am... SHOCKED I SAY!!!
13 posted on 01/29/2006 9:20:07 AM PST by FreedomNeocon (I'm in no Al-Samood for this Shi'ite.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax
Sorry hard to write with tears of laughter .... what a colossal idiot (no offense to idiots).
14 posted on 01/29/2006 9:20:12 AM PST by svcw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

Someone is off of their meds.


15 posted on 01/29/2006 9:20:15 AM PST by Radix (Welcome home 3 ID!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aculeus
We should be grateful this idiot is not part of the Administration.

But I have no doubt the next democrat president will pick an idiot of like mind to be the next secretary of state.

16 posted on 01/29/2006 9:20:59 AM PST by demkicker (democrats and terrorists are familiar bedfellows)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

We pretty much had a truce with him before 9/11. He'd attack us. We wouldn't respond.

He'd like that again.

John Arquilla is a fool.


17 posted on 01/29/2006 9:21:30 AM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

Better yet, we should surrender and put our heads on the chopping block to be beheaded, as Islam requires of infidels who don't embrace the death cult.


18 posted on 01/29/2006 9:22:15 AM PST by tomahawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax; rmlew; Clemenza

Peace in our time!
19 posted on 01/29/2006 9:22:49 AM PST by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

Let's put another Clinton back in the White House to show how we prefer inaction to terrorism.


20 posted on 01/29/2006 9:23:00 AM PST by CROSSHIGHWAYMAN (expell the fat arrogant carcasses of Congress)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DesignerChick

Exactly.


21 posted on 01/29/2006 9:23:30 AM PST by BenLurkin (O beautiful for patriot dream - that sees beyond the years)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

Bin Laden's offer is a clear signal that he
acknowledges a buttocks whipping.

This so-called military expert doesn't
seem to realize that you don't offer
a truce when you're winning.

Away with the offer. Continue to hunt
down the son of a camel and bomb the
enemy when we get the chance.

(I have not served. My tagline honors my son and my cousin.)


22 posted on 01/29/2006 9:23:43 AM PST by righttackle44 (The most dangerous weapon in the world is a Marine with his rifle and the American people behind him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax
John Arquilla is professor of defense analysis at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey.

Somebody please fire this clown.
23 posted on 01/29/2006 9:24:35 AM PST by DarkSavant ("Life is hilariously cruel" - Bender)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
We pretty much had a truce with him before 9/11. He'd attack us. We wouldn't respond.

Is there a comprehensive list of terrorist attacks(pre 9/11)?

24 posted on 01/29/2006 9:25:16 AM PST by ozoneliar ("The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants" -T.J.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

John's never watched any professional wrestling. When the bad guy offers to shake the good guy's hand, he's only doing it so he can throw a sucker punch.

Our counter-terrorism guys shuld be forced to watch a compilation of Ed "the Sheik" Farhat's matches from the 60's and 70's at Detroit's Cobo arena. That guy displayed the terrorist mind set long before Osama came along.


25 posted on 01/29/2006 9:25:30 AM PST by Skip Ripley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax
But there are reasons why bin Laden's overture should be carefully weighed and thoughtfully debated.

Yeah, but not serious ones.

26 posted on 01/29/2006 9:25:30 AM PST by mhking (Tell me what you don't like about yourself...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

Anyone who even begins to believe that someone on the other side of this thing would tell the truth is even too dumb to have a "brain fart".


27 posted on 01/29/2006 9:26:26 AM PST by Emmett McCarthy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax
In Islamic jurisdiction, it became a legal precedent which states that you are only allowed to make peace for a maximum of 10 years. Secondly, at the first instance that you are able, you must renew the jihad [thus breaking the "peace" agreement]...

Enough said.

28 posted on 01/29/2006 9:27:16 AM PST by wildehunt (I told them they'd need horses...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax
When the audiotaped proposal was made 10 days ago, the White House dismissed it out of hand. That was a politically logical move, given the need to appear tough on terror at all times.

'Appearances' have nothing whatsoever to do with it. If one commits onself to combat, the ultimate objective is, as it ought to be, the elimination of the enemy's ability to make war. One does not request a truce from a position of strength. Al-Q is on the run. Now is the time to pile on- not allow them to regroup, retrench and gather strenth for another attack on this country. 'Olive branch' my fanny.

I would expect somebody teaching at the Naval Postgrad school to know better.

29 posted on 01/29/2006 9:29:12 AM PST by Riley ("What color is the boathouse at Hereford?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

We were "winning the peace" on the morning of 09-11-01. To most human beings, FREEDOM trumps "peace."


30 posted on 01/29/2006 9:29:43 AM PST by FlingWingFlyer (We did not lose in Vietnam. We left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ccmay

Yes, his offer of truce was conditional. It was based on meeting all his demands and paying extortion, simply put.

I think bin Laden can shove his truce.


31 posted on 01/29/2006 9:30:22 AM PST by BlackjackPershing ("Americans should select and prefer Christians as their rulers." John Jay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

I have a peace branch for Osama, it is high and sturdy, and comes complete with a rope and a noose.


32 posted on 01/29/2006 9:30:58 AM PST by ARCADIA (Abuse of power comes as no surprise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

I read the title, scratched my head, saw the source, and it all became clear.

And we wonder who buys those lemons sitting on used car lots.


33 posted on 01/29/2006 9:31:03 AM PST by Fruitbat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

How can you tell a Muslim is not telling the truth?

His lips are moving.


34 posted on 01/29/2006 9:31:39 AM PST by PeteB570 (NRA life member and I vote)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

THis man purposefully embraced a widely known mistranslation to the furtherance of goals so vile, it can only be described as treason.

He demands the death of Americans on American soil be considered morally superior to the death of Americans Coaliation country citizens, Afghanis and Iraqis in Afghan and Iraq.

Professor Arquilla should have his position at the Monterey School eliminated, he should be given no severance package, and his pension should be requisitioned. All of his security clearances should be removed, and his ability to communicate with Naval officers halted by court order on basis of treason.

THIS MAN KNOWS THAT AL JEZEERA MISTRANSLATED OSAMA'S MESSAGE .


35 posted on 01/29/2006 9:31:49 AM PST by JerseyHighlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax
"The moral imperative that should drive us is a sincere desire to end the long suffering of the people of Iraq and Afghanistan."

This is the only statement in his article that is even close to being correct. However, what he fails to understand is that the only way the "long suffering of the people of Iraq and Afghanistan" can finally end is when all the terrorists are killed.

The false basis of his article is that we are not fighting this war base upon any moral imperative. We are fighting this war to destroy the terrorists so no more Americans have to die. Its really not a very hard concept to understand.
36 posted on 01/29/2006 9:32:18 AM PST by ops33 (Retired USAF Senior Master Sergeant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

Rule of thumb: Anytime muslim combatants offer a truce, it's part of their military strategy just like their religion is part of their politics.


37 posted on 01/29/2006 9:33:41 AM PST by Fruitbat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wildehunt

I thought it was only 10 minutes


38 posted on 01/29/2006 9:34:42 AM PST by Stayingawayfromthedarkside (The stink you smell are the liberals fuming after Ann speaks!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax; All
John Arquilla is professor of defense analysis at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey.

Not the first strange noise from that place.

39 posted on 01/29/2006 9:35:06 AM PST by dighton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax
If this is the guy training our military, then I fear for us. He is advocating an Oslo solution for the War on Terror. He is advocating that we let Bin Ladin be the new Arafat.

Thanks, genius. A decade of Oslo got us a lot of dead Israelis, and a lot of dead arab teenagers. And, in the end, Hamas.

So if bin Laden were to call off his dogs of war... Such al Qaeda withdrawals would sharply reduce the need for our forces to remain in these sad lands.

Is he serious? Seriously, this guy needs to find a new line of work, we can't have him teaching military officers if we are going to have any hope.

Ending the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq would reduce the huge strain imposed on the U.S. military, tying it down and seriously impairing its ability to respond swiftly to new crises, such as those that might arise on the Korean peninsula or elsewhere.

"Reduce the strain"? Reduce the strain by building it bigger and better, not by abandoning the field. The military is not a social program, or an ornament which must not be taken down off the shelf for fear of getting it dusty. It is there to be used, and if it is getting beaten up by use, then fix it, build it stronger so it can take the pounding. But you have to know that if the marines are taking a pounding, their enemies are dying in droves.

If Bin Ladin is asking for a truce, it is because he has tired of living on the run, he has seen what happened to Saddam and his sons, he sees that he is losing control of the movement he helped to build. He wants to come above ground, where he can have more direct communications and influence, and so he can get a bath and a hot cup of coffee.

If he's asking for a break, I think that means we're winning.

40 posted on 01/29/2006 9:35:59 AM PST by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

First step in insuring massive civilian casualties ala The Battle of Britain, the invasion of Poland, et al.


41 posted on 01/29/2006 9:36:13 AM PST by TASMANIANRED (The Internet is the samizdat of liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

Mr. Arquilla has never heard the word 'hudna' before?


42 posted on 01/29/2006 9:38:51 AM PST by DCMB (Bless GWB and all our troops)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax
The way I understood it, here were the truce terms offered:

* The U.S. to withdraw from and abandon operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
* Al-Qaeda to reestablish control in Iraq and Afghanistan.
* In exchange for the above two points, Al-Qaeda will agree to halt all of its nonexistent attacks on American soil, and halt planning of future hypothetical attacks of same.
* This truce is to last until Al-Qaeda has rebuilt its infrastructure in Iraq and Afghanistan.
* Upon expiration as per the point above, Al-Qaeda may resume planning and executing attacks on American targets, and...um, the U.S. would have to retake Iraq and Afghanistan if they wanted to reestablish a presence there.

Sounds like a fair deal to me. We should thank our lucky stars that Al-Qaeda is in such a bad position that they have to offer such generous terms of surrender to us. /sarc

43 posted on 01/29/2006 9:42:40 AM PST by Antonello (Oh my God, don't shoot the banana!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

Send Jimmy Carter to negotiate with Osama. He would kidnap Carter and we would know Osama is not sincere.Its a win-win situation.


44 posted on 01/29/2006 9:43:02 AM PST by raj bhatia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

Does he mean like the peace that was offered to the Palis? It worked so well! *now removing tongue from cheek*


45 posted on 01/29/2006 9:44:45 AM PST by DJ MacWoW (If you think you know what's coming next....You don't know Jack.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

46 posted on 01/29/2006 9:45:10 AM PST by doug from upland (NEW YORK TIMES -- traitorous b*st*rds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

nuts


47 posted on 01/29/2006 9:46:05 AM PST by LauraJean (sometimes I win sometimes I donate to the equine benevolent society)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: raj bhatia
Send Jimmy Carter to negotiate with Osama. He would kidnap Carter and we would know Osama is not sincere.Its a win-win situation.

Actually this sounds more like a job for a former swift boat commander. Know of any laying around that might like to see us negotiate with terrorists?

48 posted on 01/29/2006 9:46:23 AM PST by Antonello (Oh my God, don't shoot the banana!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

I agree. We should take his olive branch, shove it up his a$$ and parade his impaled, rotting carcass around in front of Al-Jazeera


49 posted on 01/29/2006 9:46:28 AM PST by RouxStir (Peaceful muslim...The Ultimate Oxymoron!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax

Geez....Osama didn't offer to withdraw his forces!
He offered a truce if WE withdrew and let al Qaeda "rebuild" Iraq AND Afghanistan.

"Professor of Defense Analysis" my a##. And on the military payroll to boot.


50 posted on 01/29/2006 9:47:02 AM PST by silverleaf (Fasten your seat belts- it's going to be a BUMPY ride.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-75 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson