US commander signals peace talks with Taliban

[Sclamoz]

Nato's top commander in Afghanistan has said increased troop levels could bring a negotiated peace with the Taliban.

US Gen Stanley McChrystal told the UK's Financial Times newspaper that there had been "enough fighting".

He said a political solution in all conflicts was "inevitable". His remarks came as the top UN envoy in Kabul said it was time to talk to the militants.

Afghan and Pakistani leaders are in Turkey to discuss tackling the Taliban-led insurgency in their countries.

This is the fourth such meeting initiated by Turkey, which has offered to broker talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban.

Both Afghan President Hamid Karzai and his Pakistani counterpart, Asif Ali Zardari, will attend an international conference on Afghanistan in London on Thursday.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8478076.stm

I guess this response could be from the Taliban spokesperson?

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...ban-says-Colonel-Imam/articleshow/5502334.cms

 

[shiner]

Negotiate with the Taliban? Seriously?

Dear Taliban,

Stop being so mean or we will continue to fight a half assed war against you.

Signed, NATO


I'm sure that will work.

 

[Zebo]

Why not? We are already paying off Iraq militias not to attack us so we can call it a win and slip out like cowards. And Karzais brother who also happens to be biggest drug lord in Afghanistan. I would not be surprised if we don't start cutting checks to AQ soon. We have no will to fight hope y'all remember that next time cheer-leading starts for next war.

 

[Moonbeam]

WE are all the same. We will be negotiating with ourselves for the benefit of ourselves. Blessed are the peace makers.

 

[JS80]

WE are all the same. We will be negotiating with ourselves for the benefit of ourselves. Blessed are the peace makers.

Peacemakers are suckers. They always get eaten in the end.

 

[Dari]

This will never work. They smell blood and will go in for the kill.

 

[chucky2]

Between this and Obama's withdrawl timeline, that'll be it for any type of local support, save for the locals that have been F'd over by the Taliban and have so much hatred, they don't care what we do either way.

Next time we ask people to stand with us, this is what they'll remember.

Super.

Chuck

 

[Moonbeam]

Peacemakers are suckers. They always get eaten in the end.

You always see in others what you are yourself.

 

[JS80]

You always see in others what you are yourself.

So many meaningless words.

 

[Dari]

You always see in others what you are yourself.

Please. When was the last time the Afghan people surrendered? They have been fighting world powers for over 2000 years and they've won every single time. With a record like that, why stop now?

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

This will never work. They smell blood and will go in for the kill.

LOL

Since the war was given up on in '03 i kinda wonder who we are supposed to fight here now?

Not even ground targeting anymore, stupid fucking predator drones hitting local buildings where someone at some time was reported to have been.

Pull the troops out, there is nothing left to do here.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Please. When was the last time the Afghan people surrendered? They have been fighting world powers for over 2000 years and they've won every single time. With a record like that, why stop now?

Wow, you're really fucked up in your head aren't you?

The "afghan people" have never won and the only chance they ever had, in a war where they DID do their part, the US fucked up so bad that it will be used as one of five things that should NEVER be done in warfare.

You don't fucking surrender and pull out when you are about to go for the kill with exact locations and overwhelming firepower that can be directed in such a way that civ casualties can be kept under 5%. The situation was bloody unheard off and squandered because it would have ended the war and we just couldn't have that.

 

[Lemon law]

All in all, quite a number prominent people have been advocating Taliban Nato talks for years. Including Hamid Karzai, US ambassadors, and British and US generals. And the Saudis, as I recall tried to broker such talks a number of years ago. And it was the Taliban who basically refused then.

But IMHO, it was a giant mistake to lump the Taliban and Al-Quida together after 911, but when Nato started a shoot on sight policy for the Taliban, its somewhat understandable that the homegrown movement is equally anti Nato and now totally violent.

But we also have to understand, what the Taliban was then and what it is now are two almost totally different things, if nothing else, because its leadership and membership is totally different.

At one time, Mullah Omar may have been the spiritual leader of the Taliban, but now that many new members have been added who had no previous use for Taliban dogma and still do not, I very much doubt that Mullah Omar is any longer a unifying figure or the only go to guy in such negotiations.

To get more specific on new elements in a changing Taliban, we should note many former militants active against the Russians, Tribal leaders on both sides of the border not formerly favored by the old Taliban, and worse yet many war lords, drug dealers, and corrupt Afghan government officials who want to enjoy the fruits of corruption without excess risky violence. And as Obama discovered in early 2009, the areas of Afghanistan that had the least violence had already been quietly rolled up in such a new Taliban type coalition of you scratch my back and I will scratch yours.

As for Al-Quida, I very much doubt its all that effective, and such a Taliban negotiation strategy could drive a wedge between Al-Quida and the new Taliban if Nato can convince the new Taliban they are a liability.

As for any such new Taliban future in Afghanistan, I have to remain optimistic that the Taliban can't last all that long. Mere modernity and economic development are the cures and universal panacea for such reactionary movements. And if Nato, through such negotiations can achieve a large reduction in violence like in Iraq, time, economic development, and the inevitable pace of modernity can achieve a much improved Afghanistan long term even though the short term will not be pretty.

Because the other alternative is Nato coming up with the 600,000 plus troops to win on Nato terms. Since the 600,000 troops is unlikely, all we have proved is that Nato can't win with the troop numbers we are willing to come up with.

And we also have to realize that the Taliban came to power initially on a platform of corruption fighting. And to some extent, female rights and human rights may be negotiable in exchange for power sharing.

But none of that is now known and won't be until negotiations start. But right now, Nato is in a mess in Afghanistan and is probably worse off than when they started in
late 2001.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

You always see in others what you are yourself.

What he is himself? I don't see the words "fucking coward wise and beautiful woman" in his words?

 

[Dari]

Wow, you're really fucked up in your head aren't you?

The "afghan people" have never won and the only chance they ever had, in a war where they DID do their part, the US fucked up so bad that it will be used as one of five things that should NEVER be done in warfare.

You don't fucking surrender and pull out when you are about to go for the kill with exact locations and overwhelming firepower that can be directed in such a way that civ casualties can be kept under 5%. The situation was bloody unheard off and squandered because it would have ended the war and we just couldn't have that.

Never won? You British, always twisting history to suit your inferiority complex...

 

[JS80]

Never won? You British, always twisting history to suit your inferiority complex...

Hey, but he speaks with an eeenglish accent through his crooked teeth and drinks tea. He's way more enlightened than the rest of us.

 

[Jaskalas]

We've proven ourselves incapable of doing what we'd like to do and so now it falls to doing things we'd like NOT to do. Did I mention I don't like the idea?

 

[StageLeft]

Wow, you're really fucked up in your head aren't you?

The "afghan people" have never won and the only chance they ever had, in a war where they DID do their part, the US fucked up so bad that it will be used as one of five things that should NEVER be done in warfare.

You don't fucking surrender and pull out when you are about to go for the kill with exact locations and overwhelming firepower that can be directed in such a way that civ casualties can be kept under 5%. The situation was bloody unheard off and squandered because it would have ended the war and we just couldn't have that.

How much of your opinion is based on demonstrable fact? I see you write this elsewhere about the pull out. It may be true but I'd like to read more. My assumption is that the US simply had the hubris to think Afghanistan was going so well it could open up another front as opposed to a willful stalemale in afghanitsan.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

All in all, quite a number prominent people have been advocating Taliban Nato talks for years. Including Hamid Karzai, US ambassadors, and British and US generals.

Son, you are not any of those things and except for Karzai (and for good reasons, his brothers crops have been taking quite a hit from Taliban fires) no sane man has advocated that and most certainly no general, neither American and most certainly (and this i am willing to bet £1000k on) British.

Take your bullshit and keep it where it belongs, in your head of delusions.

IF you know ANYTHING about the Taliban it is that they don't negotiate, they don't mind dying, they will rather be dead as martyrs than to negotiate with satan.

The only good Taliban is a dead Taliban, it remains true no matter what you think or feel. Trust me, they would see you dead before accepting you as a friend, in fact, they would die before they did that and they would take pleasure in torturing everyone you care about before just to show you how seriously they take their faith.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

How much of your opinion is based on demonstrable fact? I see you write this elsewhere about the pull out. It may be true but I'd like to read more. My assumption is that the US simply had the hubris to think Afghanistan was going so well it could open up another front as opposed to a willful stalemale in afghanitsan.

100%, look up troop movements, pretty much ALL troops were concentrated in one area at one time, ALL air support had direct hits directed from three units on ground, we had them and let them go.

There is NO doubt in my mind that the troop removal was done in such a hurry because the war was about to end. (at the time TFB was first directive on site)

There alternative would be that leaders actually thought that leaving the enemy to regroup and retain old standpoints while allowed free movement all over the nation and free spread while invading and unstabilizing another nation to allow for them to spread would be a good idea for anything but the result that entailed.

Not even *i* think the US, UK and NATO leaders are THAT incompetent. This was a calculated situation, there is no other explanation.

I know for a fact that the backinfo was positive on the situation until something changed, for us on the ground at the time it seemed fucked up and there were several units that had to be talked out of continuing the missions on ground, one Brit (task force blue) and more than one US. Kinda like an Okinawa situation there where they couldn't believe the orders given.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Well John they might negotiate while they buy time to rebuild and prepare for other attacks. Trickery isn't something they are above. Attending talks in good faith?

Nope, I don't buy it.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Well John they might negotiate while they buy time to rebuild and prepare for other attacks. Trickery isn't something they are above. Attending talks in good faith?

Nope, I don't buy it.

No one buys it except Lemon Law, he's been advocating negotiations with the Taliban for years.

If i have a chance i'll send them to hell, as many as i can but the hope of doing something that could help anything is long gone now.

I knew that a long time ago but at that time i at least tried to be hopeful, now, i'll do my job to the best of my ability but i have no illusions that it will make one iota of difference anymore.

 

[Lemon law]

JOS, here is a link to show the Brits are aboard the negotiation bandwagon too.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/oct2008/afgh-o15.shtml

Are you willing to pay the thousand pounds you owe me by paypal?

But what is it with you JOS, on one hand you now advocate cutting and running which would hand Afghanistan to the Taliban, yet you refuse to consider trying to salvage anything out of the mess Nato with a military only strategy made out of Afghanistan.
Clearly what you used to advocate totally flopped, and now you seeming stand for?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

For your next trick , maybe you can re fight the American revolutionary war and come up with a better pro British outcome. And be equally credible in all those woulda coulda shouda if they just listened to you in the first place.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

JOS, here is a link to show the Brits are aboard the negotiation bandwagon too.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/oct2008/afgh-o15.shtml

Are you willing to pay the thousand pounds you owe me by paypal?

But what is it with you JOS, on one hand you now advocate cutting and running which would hand Afghanistan to the Taliban, yet you refuse to consider trying to salvage anything out of the mess Nato with a military only strategy made out of Afghanistan.
Clearly what you used to advocate totally flopped, and now you seeming stand for?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

For your next trick , maybe you can re fight the American revolutionary war and come up with a better pro British outcome. And be equally credible in all those woulda coulda shouda if they just listened to you in the first place.

You go find me an actual statement, i am not one to go back on my words so it would be well worth it for you to do so.

Imagine being locked in a room with a complete psycho that has demonstarted and continually demonstrates that he will rather die than live, now be in that situation througout three wars for a total of more than 13 years, when you're done you won't have to ask me about things that you will know and that no one can explain to you.

What is there to salvage? We surrendered in '03, the rest is just a play so that politicians can do their shit and trumph each other regarding how "tough on security" they are.

The worst part is that people like YOU and Patranus swallow it, both of you are equally fucked in the head and naive.

Yes, cut and run, that is what you do when you don't have the support to do what needs to be done, don't get me wrong, i could lead the TFB on a mission with the help of US Airforce to a very successful mission here, along with the four others we have dealt with it could mean the end of all resistance, the problem would be that when we are done, 80% of all civilian population would be wiped out, i can stomach that, i have no problems with it what so ever.

Can you stomach that? Of course not, because when it all comes around you are sitting a thousand miles away comfy in your chair trying to be smart about things that i do every day.

I'd trade places with you any day of the week now, there was a time when i wouldn't have but now... This is useless bullsheit "the new surge"... fuck obama.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

For your next trick , maybe you can re fight the American revolutionary war and come up with a better pro British outcome. And be equally credible in all those woulda coulda shouda if they just listened to you in the first place.

I think a better analogy would be Chamberlain negotiating with Hitler with the benefit of our hindsight. Sure it can be done, but only an idiot would believe in good faith. Well, Hitler was a kinder, gentler Taliban.