Hmmm that sounds quite familiar. He probably wants to impose the Islamic "Utopia" that was in place before 2001. I rather wait and see if the surge can contain the insurgency so we could hopefully negotiate from a position of strength.
Of course, if they break that promise, then what? We mobilize and invade again? Unlikely. Otherwise, I'd be happy with it.
This is a good offer. Very threatening to those who want war. It will be interesting to see when if ever it makes it to the mainstream media. I have been seeing this story for awhile.
Clearly this offer was made in anticipation of the Afghanistan surge and tells me the Taliban are feeling uneasy. At the moment I'm not sure what to make of it as the biggest problem to me seems like verification. How do we know the Taliban won't just let Al Qaeda back in after we leave? The other problem that I see is that for bad that the Karzai government is I'm sure many Afghans don't want to return to the days of the Taliban. Us leaving will complete wipeout any progress the Afghans have made. With all of that though I wouldn't dismiss this offer out of hand but start looking for ways to negotiate with the Taliban and see if there is any possibility to bring them into Afghan democracy.
I think the most useful part of the offer is to use it to motivate Karzai. If the US leaves it as an open possibility, it puts pressure on Karzai to make progress, clean up corruption, stop rigging elections, etc.
In times of conflict, when the enemy (particularly one like the Taliban) indicates a willingness to talk, there are two reasons they do so: 1. They need to play for time. 2. They are in serious trouble. Under neither scenario should we even think about negotiating with them. As far as I'm concerned, I smell weakness, which means for now no talking and wiping them out. And then there's the problem on how such an agreement could be enforced. It wouldn't be that hard for the Taliban to have a couple hundred terrorists infiltrate their borders, and if they break the agreement, then what? We go to war again, only with less fortitude.
This isn't about weakness. Americans are growing tired of the Afgan war. We went in there to get rid of Al Qaeda, not destroy the Taliban. The Taliban is forcing the Americans hand on the issue.
The Taliban is part of the problem. Negoiating with the Taliban is like appeasing Nazi Germany. It's like if Hitler offered to end the war if the U.S. just didn't meddle in the affairs of the areas it had conquered.
America is tired of the Afghan war, but if the Taliban smelled victory and American withdrawal, they would simply keep up the war and gamble on the Americans continuing to grow tired and more willing to pull out. The fact that they are negotiating means they are just as pressured, if not more so, than the United States.
So should I post, "I told you so" now, or wait awhile? Under the right conditions, the Taliban is no threat to the USA. If you people want to keep fighting the Taliban because you don't like them, fine. Just don't keep bringing up the canard of national security or calling it "The War on Terror". If you want to go to war to kill all the dicks in the world, or all the vandals in the world, or all the mean people in the world, be honest and call it the War on Vandalism or the War on @ssholes or the War on Mean People. Even still, we are going to be essentially forced to declare war on the majority of the countries in the world if we aren't going to be arbitrary in declaring the beneficiaries of our new-found global benevolence. I personally don't think it is a war we can win, but who knows? If you guys all are happy with doubling the effective income tax rate, maybe we can make a go of it. But if that is our new plan, maybe we should shift our focus to some of the bigger @ssholes, like the ones in Sudan who are actually practicing genocide or any of the places that practice honor killings or female genital mutilation and work our way to some of the lesser countries, like Afghanistan where the @ssholes just want to tell everybody to not listen to music. And if we start killing off and invading large portions of the world's societies, do we not become @ssholes ourselves? In that instance, are we compelled to kill ourselves in the Global War on @ssholes?
This is great logic! Perhaps Japan should have used it when the allies issued the Potsdam Declaration. Clearly, Japan had the USA just as pressured as they were, if not more so! The poor fools gave up right when they were about to achieve a great victory!
The fact is, this war has already happened. Withdrawal now will just signify complete and utter failure on both counts, national security (which probably is already a fail) and the stability of Afghanistan (which is still in the balance). Basically, let's be honest, almost nobody here gives a s*** about Afghan lives. Even the right to (American) lifers out here, however rare they may be around here. But, America f**** this up. And as a great power, she owes Afghanistan more then a hasty retreat. Yes, this is idealistic. But it was ideals that built America and it was ideals that led the world to respect her as a great power. Champion of human rights? Advancer of freedom and etc.? Anyways, if you're going to parody this, at least use truthful labels. War on Genocide for example. I wish there were more of those. Might have saved a couple of thousand of people by now, but of course why bother wasting American resources for Hazara allies, Tutsi children and etc.?
Except given a choice the afgans will pick the taliban over the US backed govt. It is a corrupt govt we have put in place. Unless the US wants to go Genghis khan on the afgan people the chance of victory is low.
Huh? Japan tried to negotiate towards the end of the war, as they were obviously pressured by American military might. Or if you're thinking about America, America is a special case, as it's a country that has a really.... bizarre understanding of foreign relations. Honestly? I wouldn't have a problem with doing that. But you are right in that as long as the United States is obsessed with its nation-building and somehow trying to build a democratic nation amongst what is not even a country, but rather an amalagation of several barbaric tribes, we'll never win. The Afghans won't necessarily pick the Taliban over an American-backed government, especially given the record of Taliban brutality. They simply need to be persuaded into accepting one, and the best option is to simply create a stable government, not a democratic one.
Your right! This could be the start of a domino effect for Communism in South East Asia! Er... I mean... "Afghanistan" is an illusion dreamed up by the British and Russian Empires. It only exists on maps. Your core assumption that anybody has enough might to force the creation a stable unified state in Afghanistan is bunk. We've been banging our head against a brick wall for a decade. No matter how much you claim we are right on the verge of breaking through, all we are doing is bloodying our foreheads. We are Don Quixote tilting at windmills.
