and al qaeda families have intermarried. the idea we re going to with one conclusion on this. the idea we can afford to lose to the taliban, which christine is right to call savages and allow that to happen to afghanistan and then think that will not help al qaeda and will not endanger pakistan, i just think is incorrect. but you are using a word there that i don ting it s fair to put in her mouth which is to lose. she said they re not the same enemy as al qaeda. even general petraeus has basically said very overtly, negotiating with the taliban and reaching an understanding with them is the only way to end this successfully. this is a very important point. eliot, this is a very important point you are making. there s no question and i talked to commanders when i was in afghanistan about this that there were the taliban is a network itself. and there are elements within the taliban that are probably not that ideological. and if they see the taliban over all losing, they will de
as for the taliban and al qaeda. the taliban lost power because it would not break with al qaeda back in 2001. and i would argue, and i have great respect for christine, but i would argue that the evidence suggests that if anything, the taliban and al qaeda have become more closely interconnected over the years since they have become more ideologically close. they have become operationally entwined. their finances are entwined. a lot of the money that goes to the taliban comes from the gulf and saudi arabia through al qaeda. even their families have become intertwined. over almost ten years, taliban and al qaeda families have intermarried. the idea we re going to with one conclusion on this. the idea we can afford to lose to the taliban, which christine is right to call savages and allow that to happen to afghanistan and then think that will not help al qaeda and will not endanger pakistan, i just think is incorrect. but you are using a word there that i don ting it s fair to put i