Talking peace with the Taliban

[wyly]

It's not historical precedent that wins wars, it's countries with the will to win, thats what wins wars...had we followed historical precedent Vimy would still be in german hands...

WW1 was not historical precedent for Afghanistan, this a guerrilla warfare similar to Vietnam not WW1...unless Nato plans to widen the war and invade Pakistan and exterminate the Pashtun there is no winning a war vs religious ideology, even General McChrystal realizes that...

I hope your counting the majority of Canadians in that blood thristy crowd you talk about...and war isn't Hollywood....if there been more coverage on the Afghan people and the day to day fight they contend with , i think most Canadians would still be in favor of destroying the Taliban and thier cronies....

the majority of Canadians don't want our troops in Afghanistan... war has become hollywood it's all nice a clean when viewed on TV like a drama and the rightwing war fans can sit back in the comfort of their homes getting wood watching the evening news...

and the majority of Canadians don't care one way or the other about the Taliban, they're not to our liking but there are many countries with equally if not more disgusting organizations and no one is advocating we save those countries as well, it's not our problem we don't care enough to change it...

[wyly]

I agree that it should be the main objective, but the root causes for why they want to do that have yet to be explored.

go talk to some Muslims I have, many of them... it's the cause that unites them all across ethnic, sectarian and national lines....

it all starts with Israel and the persecution of the Palestinians...the west led by the USA launched a religious war against the muslims with the creation of Israel...

[eyeball]

The Taliban allowed bin Laden and al-Qaeda to operate and organize in Afghanistan. Without this explicit support, al-Qaeda could never have organized the attacks in September 2001 or its other attacks elsewhere in the world.

In a world of satellite phones and the Internet? Anyone could have organized this from anywhere in the world and still could.

[Guest TrueMetis]

WW1 was not historical precedent for Afghanistan, this a guerrilla warfare similar to Vietnam not WW1...unless Nato plans to widen the war and invade Pakistan and exterminate the Pashtun there is no winning a war vs religious ideology, even General McChrystal realizes that...

Stop with the bullshit Vietnam/Afghanistan comparison they are not the same.

[naomiglover]

go talk to some Muslims I have, many of them... it's the cause that unites them all across ethnic, sectarian and national lines....

it all starts with Israel and the persecution of the Palestinians...the west led by the USA launched a religious war against the muslims with the creation of Israel...

You are right that the situation between Israel and the Palestinians is a central reason in the conflicts we see today. However, it's not just Muslims who are against the occupation. Many non-Muslims, including Europeans and even Jews/Israelis who are against the illegal occupation.

[naomiglover]

We are in Afghanistan simply to ensure that it does not provide a place for Islamic terrorists to organize and attack tall buildings in the West and kill Westerners.

Terrorists don't need a country to organize terrorist attacks.

[wyly]

Stop with the bullshit Vietnam/Afghanistan comparison they are not the same.

you're right the Taliban are doing fine without military aid from the chinese and russians and the cause is different religion vs politics, mountains vs jungle...otherwise it's the same

[bloodyminded]

you're right the Taliban are doing fine without military aid from the chinese and russians and the cause is different religion vs politics, mountains vs jungle...otherwise it's the same

I agree there are big differences. However, it is not "religion vs. politics." The taliban are far more motivated by politics than by religion.

[Guest American Woman]

The taliban are far more motivated by politics than by religion.

Religion is the Taliban's politics.

[bloodyminded]

Religion is the Taliban's politics.

Not really. They have changed many of their "Fundamental Precepts in Accordance With the Will Of Allah" as their fortunes have changed, and as practical political circumstances have dictated. There are now Taliban-run areas in which they support girls's schools: not that they like the idea (I don't believe that); but because where their support is weak, they need to be more expansive.

They also support parts of the opium trade (other parts being run by our gangster warlord fundamentalist misogynist killer allies, the Northern Alliance, whom we're laughingly informed are the "good guys"). Earlier, The Taliban banned poppy growing on religious grounds.

Now they don't.

They are opportunists. Political opportunists. Religion is part of their politics, at least as much as the other way around. It can shift with the prevailing winds.

[Guest American Woman]

Not really. They have changed many of their "Fundamental Precepts in Accordance With the Will Of Allah" as their fortunes have changed, and as practical political circumstances have dictated. There are now Taliban-run areas in which they support girls's schools: not that they like the idea (I don't believe that); but because where their support is weak, they need to be more expansive.

I haven't seen any indication that the Taliban has changed their policy regarding girls attending school. The fact that they "don't like the idea," even according to you, seems to support the idea that their views/politics haven't changed. Most likely they are biding their time in areas where they don't have the support in hopes that they will some day again have the support/power to carry out their wishes.

They also support parts of the opium trade (other parts being run by our gangster warlord fundamentalist misogynist killer allies, the Northern Alliance, whom we're laughingly informed are the "good guys"). Earlier, The Taliban banned poppy growing on religious grounds.

Now they don't.

They support it now because it funds their jihad: ...in Afghanistan, the global-leader in opium production, the radical-Islamist Taliban became drug-dependant after being driven from power in 2001 during opening days of Operation Enduring Freedom. link

Taliban insurgents are forcing farmers in Farah Province, southern Afghanistan, to grow opium poppies and are imposing a hefty tax on yields, some farmers and provincial officials told IRIN.

“The Taliban told me to grow poppies or I would be punished,” said Abdul Sattar, a farmer in the Poshtroad District, southwestern Farah Province.

“They say by growing opium [poppies] we are actually demonstrating our support for `jihad’ against the Americans,” said Abdul Majid, another farmer. link

[Sir Bandelot]

There are now Taliban-run areas in which they support girls's schools: not that they like the idea (I don't believe that); but because where their support is weak, they need to be more expansive.

Earlier, The Taliban banned poppy growing on religious grounds.

Now they don't.

They are opportunists. Political opportunists. Religion is part of their politics, at least as much as the other way around. It can shift with the prevailing winds.

I see. So they're kind of like the CPC

[Born Free]

We have to do this.

We are not in Afghanistan to protect women's right, to promote democracy, to dig wells, build schools or to make Afghanistan a civilized country.

We are in Afghanistan simply to ensure that it does not provide a place for Islamic terrorists to organize and attack tall buildings in the West and kill Westerners.

That's it.

That just about sums it up I'd say...

[DrGreenthumb]

Not really. They have changed many of their "Fundamental Precepts in Accordance With the Will Of Allah" as their fortunes have changed, and as practical political circumstances have dictated. There are now Taliban-run areas in which they support girls's schools: not that they like the idea (I don't believe that); but because where their support is weak, they need to be more expansive.

They also support parts of the opium trade (other parts being run by our gangster warlord fundamentalist misogynist killer allies, the Northern Alliance, whom we're laughingly informed are the "good guys"). Earlier, The Taliban banned poppy growing on religious grounds.

Now they don't.

They are opportunists. Political opportunists. Religion is part of their politics, at least as much as the other way around. It can shift with the prevailing winds.

So you are saying the taliban are a lot like the Harper Conservatives? Glad you have finally seen the light. Hope you won't be voting for Harper's Christian taliban in the next election.

Seems like once again, Jack Layton and the NDP had the forsight and the common sense to determine this course of action years ago. How many Canadian and Afghani lives could have been spared if people had listened to Jack Layton in the first place?

[Guest American Woman]

We are not in Afghanistan to protect women's right, to promote democracy, to dig wells, build schools or to make Afghanistan a civilized country.

We are in Afghanistan simply to ensure that it does not provide a place for Islamic terrorists to organize and attack tall buildings in the West and kill Westerners.

That's it.

We didn't go to Afghanistan for any of those altruistic reasons, we went to ensure that it does not provide a place for Islamic terrorists to train, as you said, but that doesn't mean we have a single purpose for being there now that we are there.

The purpose for going may be singular, but the goals once there aren't necessarily singular; They're two different issues, and I'd say making Afghanistan a better place is most definitely a goal.

Edited January 31, 2010 by American Woman

[Sir Bandelot]

NATO forces must ensure that any regime in Afghanistan (or in any other country) does not provide a safe haven for terrorists to organize attacks against the West.

Here's the insidious question- at what cost. If a small group of extremists is deeply entrenched or hidden in a larger society of non-threatening people, do we carpet bomb the areas where we think their hideouts are? Or would that simply exacerbate the situation, giving our enemies the moral high ground amongst the muslim people, somewhat like fanning the flames makes the fire get worse? This sounds something like kiling flies with a shotgun, and accitdently shooting your friend right in the face. Now who would be dumb enough to be so fixated on their small target, as to shoot their freind innocently standing by? Not all friends will be so forgiving.

It takes cunning and intelligence to find terrorists.

Harper (and the Liberals) have consistently said that Canadian troops will leave Afghanistan in 2011. This in effect is an ultimatum to our NATO partners. If you look at a map of Afghanistan, Canada has taken on the toughest part of the fight for the past 8 or so years. Our troops have done their share, and more.

Yet it seems to me, even though I never supported the war, that to leave before the job is done would tarnish our achievements there. Whatever that was...

I would have preferred that Harper et al had said, we will be re-assigned in our role there. Let someone else take the lead, while Canada takes on a more defensive and rebuilding infrastructure type of role. I don't know if this will be the case. But when I hear this kind of talk from our government, I CAN ONLY CONCLUDE THAT THEY DO NOT REALLY BELIEVE IN THIS WAR, that they think its a useless endeavour and don't care about the final outcome. And their actions over the years in supporting the troops, in providing appropriate logistics, also supports this notion.

[Born Free]

We didn't go to Afghanistan for any of those altruistic reasons, we went to ensure that it does not provide a place for Islamic terrorists to train, as you said, but that doesn't mean we have a single purpose for being there now that we are there.

The purpose for going may be singular, but the goals once there aren't necessarily singular; They're two different issues, and I'd say making Afghanistan a better place is most definitely a goal.

Better is a relative term. Afghanistan is a sink hole consisting of uneducated and murderous tribal factions. Its now a bottomless pit absorbing countless amounts of yours and our money. It would be much cheaper and safer for all to get the Hell out and pay the Taliban to keep the wannabe terrorists from setting up camp as they had in the past.

[DogOnPorch]

Better is a relative term. Afghanistan is a sink hole consisting of uneducated and murderous tribal factions. Its now a bottomless pit absorbing countless amounts of yours and our money. It would be much cheaper and safer for all to get the Hell out and pay the Taliban to keep the wannabe terrorists from setting up camp as they had in the past.

Worked with Hitler, afterall.

[Born Free]

Worked with Hitler, afterall.

Explain...

[DogOnPorch]

Explain...

Appeasement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_Agreement

[eyeball]

Explain...

Appeasement is what we did with the commies so we could defeat the nazis. Enemy of our enemies and all that...

The fact we then appeased a bunch of radical Islamists so we could defeat the commies is besides the point. Press it of course and you automatically become an appeasnik.

Hope that helps.

[Born Free]

Appeasement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_Agreement

Its not about appeasment. There is no reason to remain in Afghanistan. They are a tribal culture and will never be democratized.

The US exited Vietnam but not for reasons of appeasment. We all exited Somalia but not for reasons of appeasment. Common sense dictated those actions.

Common sense and a sense of history should tell you that leaving Afghanistan sooner rather than later makes perfect sense. Karzai surely has stashed away enough of our money in his personal bank account in Switzerland to rebuild Afghanistan on his own.

Let me suggest to you that the only appeasment I see here is appeasing me by stopping our tax dollars from being dumped into that giant toilet bowl in Kabul.

[Born Free]

Appeasement is what we did with the commies so we could defeat the nazis. Enemy of our enemies and all that...

The fact we then appeased a bunch of radical Islamists so we could defeat the commies is besides the point. Press it of course and you automatically become an appeasnik.

Hope that helps.

I saw his comments being directed more toward the infamous Chaimberlan story. I was hoping he would elaborate but it seems he was just being obtuse. However, your comments are not lost on me.

As far as the radical Islamist bit goes....were I an Afghani, the mere presence of foreign soldiers who dont speak my language, occupying my land and killing a lot of civilians just might make me a radical too.

[bloodyminded]

I haven't seen any indication that the Taliban has changed their policy regarding girls attending school. The fact that they "don't like the idea," even according to you, seems to support the idea that their views/politics haven't changed. Most likely they are biding their time in areas where they don't have the support in hopes that they will some day again have the support/power to carry out their wishes.

They support it now because it funds their jihad: ...in Afghanistan, the global-leader in opium production, the radical-Islamist Taliban became drug-dependant after being driven from power in 2001 during opening days of Operation Enduring Freedom. link

Taliban insurgents are forcing farmers in Farah Province, southern Afghanistan, to grow opium poppies and are imposing a hefty tax on yields, some farmers and provincial officials told IRIN.

“The Taliban told me to grow poppies or I would be punished,” said Abdul Sattar, a farmer in the Poshtroad District, southwestern Farah Province.

“They say by growing opium [poppies] we are actually demonstrating our support for `jihad’ against the Americans,” said Abdul Majid, another farmer. link

I'm in agreement with you. I didn't say they had changed their opinions, just that they are political oppoprtunists.

And if they really believed--I mean deep in their spiritual hearts--that growing opium were an affront to God, then they simply couldn't do it. The purity of faith wouldn't allow any means to an end.

That's why I said politics are more important to them than religion. Power is more important to them than God.

[bloodyminded]

So you are saying the taliban are a lot like the Harper Conservatives? Glad you have finally seen the light. Hope you won't be voting for Harper's Christian taliban in the next election.

Seems like once again, Jack Layton and the NDP had the forsight and the common sense to determine this course of action years ago. How many Canadian and Afghani lives could have been spared if people had listened to Jack Layton in the first place?

Well, I certainly don't think the Harper Conservatives are like the Taliban.

However, you may have misread me somewhere along the way, since you here imply that I have shown support for PM Harper.

For the record, I have never voted for him, and never would vote for him. Last election, I voted NDP.