To the Editor:
Whilst I agree that cooperative action is the best solution to solving many problems, the circumstances leading up to them are just as critical as to what comes out. In regards to the 25 January 2010 article ("U.N. Aide Seeks Revision of Terrorist List for Talks"), it is uncertain how letting some of the men off the terrorist "blacklist is beneficial to U.N./Taliban peace negotiations. It is a huge risk for the U.N. to clear some Taliban leaders from the list because the potential costs outweigh the benefits. There is absolutely no certainty that the Taliban will even honor their word to begin talking with U.N. officials, let alone come to a peaceful agreement. If anything, more attacks are likely, as a perceived demonstration of Taliban power over U.N. forces. After President Barrack Obama's December 2009 announcement to increase troops by 30,000, the Taliban responded in saying they would also continue to fight stronger. Under these premises, it is more likely that those taken off the "blacklist" will rejoin their compatriots and continue to fight. It is understandable that the U.N. needs to find other ways to try and end the conflicts, but I do not think that giving the Taliban back some of their possible terrorism resources is the best solution nor end anything any sooner.
Kellye T.
Greeley, Colo. 29 Jan. 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Kellye T.-
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. I think that taking Taliban members off of the blacklist is merely a slap on the wrist. However, I would like to see more alternatives to war proposed by the United Nations and by our own government. What are we going to do to end the war? We should propose such things as cutting off important economic resources that are needed by the Taliban or by fighting the weapons they are using instead of the members themselves. Though this is only a temporary solution, it may be one that buys the government more strategy time.