"What People Don’t Understand About the Bergdahl Deal"

[merrily]

39. Actually, people who are truly not interested in arguing don't argue.

They don't say they are not interested in arguing, then proceed to repeat arguments they made in a prior post and then add a bunch of pointless makeweights. If you really mean, you don't want me to reply, too bad. And one almost sure way to get me not to reply to you is for your to stop arguing with me.

I've already responded to your point about the bogus official designation. I see no reason to repeat myself and that point, even if you saw fit to repeat yourself.

That we considered the Taliban allies decades ago is also bogus--as well as totally irrelevant and downright silly.

At the same time that we considered the Taliban our allies, we considered Bin Laden our ally as well. He later became US public enemy #1, as well as terrorist #1, and he now sleeps with the fishes. Germany, Japan and Italy were our bitterest enemies WWII and are now our allies. That's how global politics goes; and none of it has a thing to do with whether the Taliban are terrorists or with the Bergdahl exchange.

You can put boogie man Reagan away as well. Once both Obama and Hillary named him as one of their ten most admired US Presidents in all of US history, waving him around lost its potency. And he, too, has nothing to do with whether the Taliban are terrorists.

Point is, the Taliban fit the US definition of terrorists and then some; Anyone who denies that is a liar. And anyone who denies it in some totally unnecessary attempt to justify the Bergdahl exchange is, IMO, an especially cynical liar.

The truth is that we have negotiated with terrorists before this, the Taliban are terrorists, we did negotiate with them and that was the right thing for us to do in this instance.