Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Taliban Peace Talks

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Taliban Peace Talks

    Article.

    Comments?

  • #2
    Re: Taliban Peace Talks

    That's not how it works. The one who finds the article is supposed to post the first comments, so we can all make fun of you *cough* er...agree with you.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Taliban Peace Talks

      I don't understand why the US feels it must "rebuild" or "stabilize" Afghanistan. The US should keep some people there whom are focused on finding Bin Laden (who's probably not in Afghanistan anyway) and pull everyone else out.

      If anything crazy ever happens again there, the US will have virtually unlimited license to do whatever it feels necessary. If the Taliban return to power, the US can return as well. But until then, US interests are not served by maintaining an exposed and active presence.
      A policy of freedom for the individual is the only truly progressive policy. -F.A. Hayek

      "$250,000 a year won't get me to Central Park West."

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Taliban Peace Talks

        Originally posted by Nikolas View Post
        I don't understand why the US feels it must "rebuild" or "stabilize" Afghanistan. The US should keep some people there whom are focused on finding Bin Laden (who's probably not in Afghanistan anyway) and pull everyone else out.

        If anything crazy ever happens again there, the US will have virtually unlimited license to do whatever it feels necessary. If the Taliban return to power, the US can return as well. But until then, US interests are not served by maintaining an exposed and active presence.
        Because if you leave it unstabilized history will most likely just repeat itself. The next time around you will have even less support since they will probably just view the americans as temporary again. A similar example would be Iraq. If we would have continued and finished the job during the first Gulf War there wouldnt have been much if any opposition other than the remaining military. Many Iraqi's expected us to finish the job and spoke out against Saddam.........when we stopped and didnt finish guess what happend to those people?
        __________________
        |TG|||---DoRo---||

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Taliban Peace Talks

          What does instability have to do with anything? Afghanistan wasn't unstable in mid 2001. Nor is Saudi Arabia, where the hijackers and Bin Laden came from.

          History repeating itself would consist of a country knowingly and publicly giving protection to terrorists in exchange for money. That's not going to happen again, because both they and everyone else knows that the US will be justified in taking whatever action it feels necessary should such a relationship be uncovered.

          Since the government of Afghanistan no longer protects terrorists, our job is done there.
          A policy of freedom for the individual is the only truly progressive policy. -F.A. Hayek

          "$250,000 a year won't get me to Central Park West."

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Taliban Peace Talks

            Originally posted by Nikolas View Post
            What does instability have to do with anything? Afghanistan wasn't unstable in mid 2001.

            Since the government of Afghanistan no longer protects terrorists, our job is done there.
            Huh? Afghanistan is a primary example of a failed state (as in unstable, without a controlling government) dating back to at least the mid 1970's when the U.S. and Soviet Union turned it into a proxy war battleground following a failed civil war. It was this instability that allowed the Taliban, a brutally fundamentalist party, to take some degree of control because it was better than the alternative of all-out tribal warfare. The Taliban didn't really bother anyone (except perhaps Pakistan and non-fundamentalist tribal governments) until Bin Laden started up under their 'protection' in the late 90's. Interestingly the Taliban didn't want anything to do with him until he became such a celebrity in the radical Islamic world (and a criminal in the Judeo-Christian world).

            The U.S.-backed government in Afghanistan no longer protects terrorists, but they are not firmly in power. The Taliban still controls a significant amount of territory, and harbors terrorists within it. Our job - to defeat those who directly attacked us in 2001 - is not done at all.

            Now, to the subject of the thread - there are no Taliban peace talks - just some supporters. This AP news bulletin is merely reporting that Karzai 'welcomes' Obama's support for Karzai's 2005 reconciliation commission that to this day has failed to rein in (or even loosen) the Taliban's grip on Afghanistan. Why have '7,700 low-level Taliban and other militants' signed up? Because they fear for their life or have nothing left to lose - it's widely known that the Taliban fills their ranks with forced conscripts - fight or we'll kill you. Given the chance, I'd bet many of these poor souls would run into the arms of a government, even if it wasn't really in control.

            As the article says, Taliban leadership has rejected all negotiation until international forces (mostly U.S.) withdraw. That isn't going to happen. It's clear that Obama is going to use whatever tools are at his disposal - money, negotiations, and force. He should. The job isn't just unfinished, it's hardly even started.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Taliban Peace Talks

              Right, Afghanistan was unstable before the Taliban came to power. They stabilized the country. They brought order.
              A policy of freedom for the individual is the only truly progressive policy. -F.A. Hayek

              "$250,000 a year won't get me to Central Park West."

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Taliban Peace Talks

                Your right they did stabilize it, It also harbored terrorist that targeted America.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Taliban Peace Talks

                  Originally posted by Nikolas View Post
                  Right, Afghanistan was unstable before the Taliban came to power. They stabilized the country. They brought order.
                  I see your point, and I agree, though one is forced (in my opinion) to account for the fact that there are many degrees of difference between a country that is stabilized by a government and country stabilized by a militia. To enough of a degree to say it is actually not very stable at all.

                  Either way, there are no peace talks.

                  Comment

                  Connect

                  Collapse

                  TeamSpeak 3 Server

                  Collapse

                  Advertisement

                  Collapse

                  Twitter Feed

                  Collapse

                  Working...
                  X