Afstan: A Globe and Mail editorial gets it right

Unlike the madly spinning, Harper=Bush, supposed reporters, the editorial writers have their brains in gear. A post by Terry Glavin:

"It is important to be clear on what Brigadier Mark Carleton-Smith said."

Mark C.

Update: Graeme Smith of the Globe is still on Harper=Bush in a story Oct. 8 at least it's at the end of the piece:

...Like his U.S. counterparts, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper has often said negotiations must be handled by the Afghan government, despite calls from some Taliban or ex-Taliban figures, such as Mullah Zaeef, for direct involvement by the international military forces. Speaking with reporters this week, Mr. Harper also repeated a caveat he has used in the past, saying talks can happen “provided these people are willing to participate in the democratic and constitutional process.”

U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates used a similar phrase this week, endorsing a reconciliation process with “people who are willing to work with the Afghan government.”..

"Despite"!?! What the...Look, our major effort is to strengthen the Afghan government. Foreigners doing any politically significant freelance talking--as opposed to, say, unofficial contacts at the local level--to the Taliban simply undercuts that effort.

Meanwhile, this is how Thomas Walkom of the Toronto Star concludes a column Oct. 8:

No wonder we're now trying for a negotiated way out of this mess. Let's just hope that the Taliban aren't as obdurate as we were.

So I guess the Taliban may be more level-headed and reasonable than our side.