Taliban leader willing to talk peace

[Topaz]

Mullah Mohammed Omar says he's willing to talk peace. I hope if he is really serious that nothing derails the peace talks and that these people can live in a country without fear of a bomb dropping down on them and our people won't have to walk down the road of death. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/afghanistan/article7100889.ece

[Shady]

Of course he's willing to talk peace now. He's getting his ass kicked. Not only is he feeling the heat from NATO forces in Afghanistan, but Pakistan is also pushing back. Soon there isn't going to be anywhere to run to.

[BubberMiley]

I agree. Finally there's progress being made after years of irresponsible neglect by the previous administration after the Iraq invasion.

[Bonam]

Why talk peace with the Taliban? They may be willing, seeing as how they are being crushed, but we shouldn't be.

[Shady]

Why talk peace with the Taliban? They may be willing, seeing as how they are being crushed, but we shouldn't be.

I completely agree. The only peace he deserves is from a noose or a gun.

[Guest American Woman]

Why talk peace with the Taliban?

I think that's an interesting question because it's not really the Taliban that we went to war with, but rather al Qaeda. So if the Taliban want us all to pull out of Afghanistan as part of the peace process, and al Qaeda is still at large there and not making any movements towards peace, have we accomplished what we set out to accomplish regarding terrorism?

[Bonam]

I think that's an interesting question because it's not really the Taliban that we went to war with, but rather al Qaeda. So if the Taliban want us all to pull out of Afghanistan as part of the peace process, and al Qaeda is still at large there and not making any movements towards peace, have we accomplished what we set out to accomplish regarding terrorism?

Obviously not.

Not to mention that we simply cannot trust the Taliban to abide by any peace agreement it might make. The moment we left they would try to re-impose their tyranny. There are only two options in Afghanistan: accept defeat and leave, or utterly eradicate the Taliban.

[bush_cheney2004]

....So if the Taliban want us all to pull out of Afghanistan as part of the peace process, and al Qaeda is still at large there and not making any movements towards peace, have we accomplished what we set out to accomplish regarding terrorism?

Moreover...the very same critics of US policy in Afghanistan (i.e. lack of support after the Soviets left), now want to do exactly the same thing.

[nicky10013]

Obviously not.

Not to mention that we simply cannot trust the Taliban to abide by any peace agreement it might make. The moment we left they would try to re-impose their tyranny. There are only two options in Afghanistan: accept defeat and leave, or utterly eradicate the Taliban.

To think the eradication of the taliban is possible is a ludicrous notion at best. I've said it before and I'll say it again, this war needs to be fought with money. THe better off these people are, the further the taliban and ordinary afghans will drift apart.

[SAK]

No Problem has ever been solved through Wars.Talking is the best solution of any problem.Let be talk with Taliban and share with them the ruling power by handing over only the Ministry of "Education and religouse affairs".

[Sir Bandelot]

To all you spin-meisters and deluded ones who proclaim victory is at hand, completely without substantiation. I wish you were right, but based on recent admissions by President Obama and General McChrystal, I doubt this announcement has anything to do with major "kicking ass" on our part. These folks have just come out and said, we can't win this way.

[bush_cheney2004]

To all you spin-meisters and deluded ones who proclaim victory is at hand, completely without substantiation. I wish you were right, but based on recent admissions by President Obama and General McChrystal, I doubt this announcement has anything to do with major "kicking ass" on our part. These folks have just come out and said, we can't win this way.

Nothing new in this "revelation" because the ultimate solution was never going to be realized through military power alone. However, military action is good motivation to move towards the necessary political solution. It has always been thus.

Edited April 19, 2010 by bush_cheney2004

[dizzy]

To think the eradication of the taliban is possible is a ludicrous notion at best. I've said it before and I'll say it again, this war needs to be fought with money. THe better off these people are, the further the taliban and ordinary afghans will drift apart.

Agreed. And proper economic development will require a cease fire.

Afghanistan's main goods are agricultural. There are regional markets for their goods, but they require safe passage along well maintained roads.

[Shady]

No Problem has ever been solved through Wars.

That makes for a nice bumper sticker. But it's completely false.

[wyly]

To think the eradication of the taliban is possible is a ludicrous notion at best. I've said it before and I'll say it again, this war needs to be fought with money. THe better off these people are, the further the taliban and ordinary afghans will drift apart.

...I don't know if that's true, Iran is well off but it still has an extreme government equal to the Taliban...but they cannot be defeated so it's best to negotiate with them, we can't afford to stay there forever and they can it's an unwinnable war...

[wyly]

To all you spin-meisters and deluded ones who proclaim victory is at hand, completely without substantiation. I wish you were right, but based on recent admissions by President Obama and General McChrystal, I doubt this announcement has anything to do with major "kicking ass" on our part. These folks have just come out and said, we can't win this way.

..which is what "taliban" Jack Layton was saying years ago...

[M.Dancer]

..which is what "taliban" Jack Layton was saying years ago...

Layton made the claim that the war could not be won is still incorrect. The correct version is that the war cannot be won by warfare alone. For that matter, the peace cannot be won be peace alone.

We are only providing the Taliban with the motivation to talk....same as we provided the Italians...

[nicky10013]

...I don't know if that's true, Iran is well off but it still has an extreme government equal to the Taliban...but they cannot be defeated so it's best to negotiate with them, we can't afford to stay there forever and they can it's an unwinnable war...

Iran is better off but look at the state of society there today. There have been gigantic protests since the fraudulent election last June. They've diminished in frequency but the size and ferocity of them have remained relatively consistent. Democratization isn't a clean and neat process. It's hazardous, brutal and there are real chances of catastrophic failure. Essentially, in order to democratize, modern states have to rip themselves down and build new, transparent institutions. There is a great likelyhood that new institutions will be just as authoritarian as the last ones.

However, that doesn't mean we shouldn't be helping out either. I think people mistakenly look at what the state might be doing (EG the Iranian Government, Chinese Communist Party) yet give no credence to what the people themselves are doing. In our context that's perfectly natural. We have a legitimate state and we give focus to it because it's an accepted actor within our society. Authoritarian states are horribly illegitimate and will always act to defend themselves with force if absolutely necessary. So, in essence, what these governments do is no surprise at all. No, what we need to do is to study the underground political organizations springing up in these states. For, it isn't what the government does that decides democracy, but the people. In the end, massive protests in Iran and China bode well for potential democratic development.

To egg that on, we need to be opening up relations with these countries. The worst thing we can do, especially for Iran, is to isolate them. When you do that, you punish the people and not the government. They have nothing else to rely upon than radical governance and it also essentially legitimizes anti-western propaganda. All they're told is America hates you, so when America shuts down trade and the standard of living drops, they say gee, the guys running the place are right.

The problem with Afghanistan is the back breaking poverty. We at least need to get them to that level where they actually earn enough so they can stop worrying about how to feed their kids and themselves and start worrying about their freedom.

Edited April 19, 2010 by nicky10013

[myata]

Moreover...the very same critics of US policy in Afghanistan (i.e. lack of support after the Soviets left), now want to do exactly the same thing.

And for some (yet unknown or unexplained reason), the only way we can "support" democratic developments in those strange and remote lands (inspired by projection of our military might) would be by propping corrupt, selfish, vote rigging, bizzarely behaving semi or even fully developed dictators ( examples are too numerous to list here).

So far, I'm at loss to explain this mystery. But I feel that it's got something to do with "do as I say...".

[Guest American Woman]

Obviously not.

Not to mention that we simply cannot trust the Taliban to abide by any peace agreement it might make. The moment we left they would try to re-impose their tyranny. There are only two options in Afghanistan: accept defeat and leave, or utterly eradicate the Taliban.

I don't think we can trust the Taliban. What's to stop them from doing whatever they want once we pull out? Furthermore, while this willingness to talk peace sounds good on the surface, it's like I said; we went to war against al Qaeda, so to be at peace with the Taliban while nothing's changed with al Qaeda will just put us back at square one.

[ToadBrother]

No Problem has ever been solved through Wars.

I think that's quite debatable. Nazism was solved with a war. French dominance of Europe was solved with a war. Japanese Imperialism was solved with a war.

[ToadBrother]

Why talk peace with the Taliban? They may be willing, seeing as how they are being crushed, but we shouldn't be.

It's fundamentally a political question. If the Taliban represent some reasonably large fraction of Afghanis, it will ultimately prove almost possible not to incorporate them somehow into the system. Otherwise it will remain an insurgency/insurrection for a long time to come. If they're not representative in that fashion, as seems to be the case across the border in the Swat Valley (where the locals, even those who tend to be more conservative and traditionalist reject the Taliban ideologies and methods), then coming to compromise may only embolden them.

[Muddy]

Sure we can talk ,but keep our powder dry. NATO has done a much better job than the Russians did in their dust up in Afganistan. NATO has been trying to build infrastructure but the Taliban insists on tearing it down or preventing it from being built. But I certainly think we should talk to the Taliban when they produce a white flag and smashed AK47`s to show good will.

Did someone say they should be allowed to run education? Ugh! Does anyone remember the acid in little girls faces for just attending school?

[Guest TrueMetis]

No Problem has ever been solved through Wars.Talking is the best solution of any problem.Let be talk with Taliban and share with them the ruling power by handing over only the Ministry of "Education and religouse affairs".

Most big problems throughout history have been solved by wars. It wasn't until one side had gotten it's ass kicked or both side fought to a standstill that they started talking.

Edited April 20, 2010 by TrueMetis

[nicky10013]

Most big problems throughout history have been solved by wars. It wasn't until one side had gotten it's ass kick or both side fought to a standstill that they started talking.

Wars may "solve problems" in the current terms but they often create new and more difficult problems down the line.