Quote Originally Posted by Gandalf View Post
The reason is another strategic point of influence. [B}If America wanted Bin Laden they had the opportunity to hand over evidence to the Taliban who were willing to negotiate[/B]. They dismissed it and instead invaded. Is it really a sensible strategy to invade an entire nation in the hunt for a handful of wanted men? Most of the time negotiation would suffice and eventually you saw a different method for getting rid of Bin Laden anyway. Invading a country to capture a few terrorists is insane. If there are other motives then it starts to make more sense.
Hey more faux global strategy by Miles. Anyway, the Taliban being predominantly Pashtuns follow a moral code called Pashtunwali. UBL and AQ had asked for hospitality and asylum years before. The Pashtun's code means they could never ever hand over AQ. The Taliban's responses on negotiations is classic middle-eastern/sw asia. They are always willing to talk and "god willing" anything is possible. They will shake your hand and nod but if you hear "god willing" or in'shaa Allah your are probably just being placated particularly if the conversation is held in a group. Now the strict ethical code would probably been enough but to make sure AQ was sound and safe UBL and his senior advisors married into Mullah Omars family. To top it all off AQ successfully assassinated Ahmad Shah Massoud, Mullah Omar's biggest enemy and last hold out from Taliban rule the day before 9/11. The Afghan conflict could have been handled much better but the Taliban was never going to hand over UBL.