July 24, 2005


Taliban recruiting children in desperation (Associated Press, July 24, 2005)

Fierce fighting in recent months has devastated the ranks of the Taliban, prompting the rebels to recruit children and force some families to provide one son to fight with them, a US commander said.

Hitler got that desperate at the end too.

Posted by Orrin Judd at July 24, 2005 11:42 AM

When the so-called 'Palestinians' did this during the early 90s, the MSM painted the children as heroic. We'll see the same here.

Posted by: bart at July 24, 2005 1:12 PM

. . . and still using them!

Posted by: obc at July 24, 2005 9:27 PM

Even Rumsfeld said (probably 18 months ago) that it all came down to the madrassas.

Posted by: jim hamlen at July 24, 2005 10:43 PM


Which are bought and paid for by... Saudi Arabia. Whose teachers are trained in... Saudi Arabia. Who books and equipment are provided by ...Saudi Arabia.

And Saudi Arabia is our ally in the WOT, precisely why?

Posted by: bart at July 25, 2005 6:38 AM

Because they'll be key in undoing Wahhabism.

Posted by: oj at July 25, 2005 8:02 AM

Saudi Arabia is Wahhabism. Without Wahhabism there is no basis for the continued rule by the crime family known as the 'Saudi Royal Family.'

What are they going to do? Become Methodists?

Posted by: bart at July 25, 2005 8:54 AM

Henry didn't have much trouble Reforming while he ruled.

Posted by: oj at July 25, 2005 8:59 AM

Good King Henry's England hardly defined itself as being in the forefront of an effort to convert everyone else in the world to its brand of thinking, nor did he have thousands and thousands of agents provocateurs living in cities all over the world waiting to commit crimes against innocent civilians all in the name of his rule.

By contrast, the Saudis do.

Posted by: bart at July 25, 2005 9:22 AM

As you rightly point out, they're more interested in their own power. That power depends on thwarting their own accidental creation.

Posted by: oj at July 25, 2005 9:33 AM


Can the Saudis be at the same time corpulent, corrupt, decadent, inefficient, drunk, and marginalized, while also conniving, manipulative, and ubiquitious? I'm confused. And are they funding the attacks within their own country?

Or are these just like the battles between the five families in NY?

Posted by: jim hamlen at July 25, 2005 9:37 AM


It all depends. The Tsar was a nitwit, but his secret police were very efficient.

The Saudi 'royal family' does not actually believe the snake oil that they peddle to the masses. That is just sop to keep the grex venalium happy. It's all about power to them. Terrorist attacks in Saudi probably have more to do with factionalism among the 'royals' than anything else.

Posted by: bart at July 25, 2005 12:28 PM