US to ask Taliban for peace

RedRalph

Deity
Joined
Jun 12, 2007
Messages
20,708
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8478076.stm

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.

"I'd like everybody to walk out of London with a renewed commitment, and that commitment is to the right outcome for the Afghan people," Gen McChrystal told the Financial Times.

He said the arrival of the extra 30,000 US troops pledged by President Obama and the additional 7,000 troops promised by other Nato countries should deliver "very demonstrably positive" progress in 2010.

But he warned that the level of Taliban violence could increase sharply this year.

The Taliban wanted to create the perception that Afghanistan was on fire, and that President Karzai and his Western allies could not cope, Gen McChrystal said.

However, if the new US-led strategy was successful, the militants "could look desperate" in a year's time, he said.

"I think they will look like an entity that will be struggling for its own legitimacy... I think they will be on the defensive militarily, not wiped out."

On the issue of reconciliation, Gen McChrystal said: "I believe that a political solution to all conflicts is the inevitable outcome. And it's the right outcome."

Asked if he thought senior Taliban could have a role in a future Afghan government, he said: "I think any Afghans can play a role if they focus on the future, and not the past.

"As a soldier, my personal feeling is that there's been enough fighting," Gen McChrystal added.

In an interview with the New York Times, United Nations special representative Kai Eide called for some senior Taliban leaders to be removed from a UN list of terrorists, as a prelude to direct talks.

"If you want relevant results, then you have to talk to the relevant person in authority," Mr Eide said. "I think the time has come to do it."

President Karzai recently told the BBC that he planned to introduce a scheme to attract Taliban fighters back to normal life by offering money and jobs.

He said he would offer to pay and resettle Taliban fighters to come over to his side.

Mr Karzai said he hoped to win backing for his plan from the US and UK at the London conference.

What do you think of this? Good idea? The only option? What does it mean for the people of Afghanistan?
 
It's an interesting thought. If this could end up like the Northern Irish conflict it's an improvement at least.

I hate the Taliban immensely, I think their positions are vile and inhumane and I dislike their way of implementing them even more. However, the Taliban are going to stick around, and if they can be marginalised through something like this, all the better.
 
Trust that it takes a general to point out that military conflicts end with political solutions.;)
 
It's an interesting thought. If this could end up like the Northern Irish conflict it's an improvement at least.

I hate the Taliban immensely, I think their positions are vile and inhumane and I dislike their way of implementing them even more. However, the Taliban are going to stick around, and if they can be marginalised through something like this, all the better.

Well I hear North Ireland is starting to smoke again.
 
We should kill as many of the most fanatic Taliban as possible, then bring the remaining moderates to the table for involvement in the Afghan government.

This has always been the plan, and always will be. We know that we cannot "kill them all".

Do you ever believe we could "kill them all"?



Is that the counter-argument you are looking for? No taliban in government... kill them ALL !!11!! ?
 
Is that the counter-argument you are looking for? No taliban in government... kill them ALL !!11!! ?
You mean as the GWB administration did in Iraq by banning any Baathists from taking part in the government?

If this actually becomes policy, it is going to come as quite a disappointment to all those who have tried to paint the Taliban as being evil incarnate.
 
Yes, banning bathists (for a period of time) is definately the same as "kill them all". :rollie eyes:


The Taliban is evil incarnate. The most dispicable pieces of garbage on earth, with few and rare exceptions (exceptions being the rare organization that is actually worse). But hey, if that is what Afghanistan is stuck with because some voodoo from 1400 years ago rules the country... well, there is only so much we can do about it.
 
We should kill as many of the most fanatic Taliban as possible, then bring the remaining moderates to the table for involvement in the Afghan government.

This has always been the plan, and always will be. We know that we cannot "kill them all".

Do you ever believe we could "kill them all"?



Is that the counter-argument you are looking for? No taliban in government... kill them ALL !!11!! ?

Isn't that generally your attitude towards non liberal dmeocracies?
 
My attitude is regime change. Only direct and impending threats to public safety and human rights should be killed. The more moderate elements of our enemy must be dealt with politically, of course. I've never ascribed to "kill them all"; that's nonsensical.
 
I don't think AlQ is active in Afghanistan. They definately no longer have large-scale training camps in service there. They moved to Pakistan and are being corralled and defeated even as we speak.
 
I don't think AlQ is active in Afghanistan. They definately no longer have large-scale training camps in service there. They moved to Pakistan and are being corralled and defeated even as we speak.

[citation needed]
 
Wasn't it in the news recently that they estimate there are just around 100 Al-Q in afghanistan?
Anyway Al-Q is a global network and can most likely never be defeated through killing and capturing. The current hotspots are Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia.

What I think is probably the most beneficial developement in destroying Al-Qaeda is that Islamic scholars have become much more critical of them than before (even extremist ones) due to the tactics they have been using in afghanistan and most importantly, Iraq (inciting civil war by bombing civilians).
 
Back
Top Bottom