• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
r
IE
^
.
11
"^
V
^
« » »
»
J
(T
WtLtfp^h-lfa
faO
f\fV3&^.l>
}?
H
l^'V/Fi/
PW-
**V"
r^
in
1-
i
i
3
j
/
<s
.5
c-
0
>
-->
 
Military is out of the calculation
Not
a silver bullet
Not
a
policyEasiest thing to doStand
off
Really matterTLAM not an option, never going to get actual intelligence
 
Your approach to the Taliban. How are you going to put coercive diplomacy to work for
you?
State department is carrying on diplomacy, threatening
follow
through. But there is no
plan
inplaceas towhatwe aregoingto do. We arejust sitting around waitingforactionable intelligence.Whatabout a sustained, unilateral campaign at times and place of our choosing?
We've
had the Embassy attacks,
we've
had the Cole attack, we've had the millennium, peopletrying to get into the country to attack
us.
Why
aren't
we
following
through on this.
Did
youhave high rankingUSmilitary
officers
inthese meetings withtheTaliban?Would it have mattered?When you issued these ultimatums to the Taliban, did you have an interagency
decision
that
the ultimatum would be backed up with military
force?Did
you have actual intelligence against the Taliban? Did you have targets that youcould have taken out?Was the military married up with diplomacy?We were doing diplomatic steps, but military was not really part of our coercivediplomacy campaignDon't issue ultimatums unlessyouintendto
follow
throughonthem.
Can't
have a
pol
mil plan unless the military is involved.The Cole attack was an attack on the U.S.Are you able to respond to something that occurred two months previously?Politically, can you do this?
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...