Skyrad 0 #1 March 29, 2009 Quote Sunday, March 29, 2009 KABUL: Afghan President Hamid Karzai called here on Saturday on the United Nations to remove from its blacklist the names of Taliban leaders, who are not part of al-Qaeda, as a first step towards peace talks. Karzai hailed Washington’s new strategy for the “war on terror” in Afghanistan and Pakistan, including its mention of reconciliation with certain militants. “While we are speaking about the peace process with the Taliban, we must also make sure to provide the right environment for such a peace process,” Karzai said. “Right environment means first of all looking at the list that is with the United Nations and removing names that are not part of al-Qaeda, that are not part of the terrorist networks,” he said. “Those names must be removed from the list.” Karzai, however, dodged questions about whether he wanted Taliban supreme leader Mulla Omar, among those scratched from the list. http://thenews.jang.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=21214 Forgive the 'good' Taliban? Is this a sensible move to split the enemy or a move towards apeasment?When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #2 March 30, 2009 Would you support the lifting of the ban on the Taliban who aren't 'in' AQ'?When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #3 March 30, 2009 They shouldn't be on no damned list ... they should be in the ground - YO!!- Sir Yes Sir (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
likearock 2 #4 March 30, 2009 QuoteWould you support the lifting of the ban on the Taliban who aren't 'in' AQ'? Depends. Do they still support the absolute subjugation of women? Would they allow girls to get an education? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DougH 270 #5 March 30, 2009 Quote Would they allow girls to get an education? Haven't they continued to burn down girl's schools in Pakistan and Afghanistan?"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #6 March 30, 2009 QuoteQuoteWould you support the lifting of the ban on the Taliban who aren't 'in' AQ'? Depends. Do they still support the absolute subjugation of women? Would they allow girls to get an education? Bear in mind, this isn't a "Western nations ban"; it's a United Nations ban. Must the policy of the UN -an international body - necessarily be consistent with Western-style normative values? Because if so, by that metric, Saudi Arabia goes on the list. At which point, eventually, the price of jump tickets goes through the roof. And the USA, for example, already has a policy not to let that happen. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #7 March 30, 2009 QuoteQuoteWould you support the lifting of the ban on the Taliban who aren't 'in' AQ'? Depends. Do they still support the absolute subjugation of women? Would they allow girls to get an education? Of course not. These guys are twisted extremists. Personally I'd only agree to this if I thought it might weaken them so they can be destroyed. I don't think that would happen and so I'm totally opposed to such a move. Dialogue is one thing appeasement is quite another. How the hell would one be able to tell if they are pro AQ or not? At the end of the day its just semantics anyway. One is a Islamist terrorist extremist who wants to start the Umma in Afghanistan and the other is a Islamist terrorist extremist who wants a bigger Umma. Twisted terrorist extremists are twisted terrorist extremists its just the extent of their immediate ambition that differs.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #8 March 30, 2009 QuoteQuoteWould you support the lifting of the ban on the Taliban who aren't 'in' AQ'? Depends. Do they still support the absolute subjugation of women? Would they allow girls to get an education? I find those stances very repugnant, but I fail to see how they present security issues for other UN members.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
likearock 2 #9 March 31, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteWould you support the lifting of the ban on the Taliban who aren't 'in' AQ'? Depends. Do they still support the absolute subjugation of women? Would they allow girls to get an education? I find those stances very repugnant, but I fail to see how they present security issues for other UN members. Perhaps not in the classic sense of security. Then again would you like to be the one to break it to all those Afghani women who have been studying to be doctors and teachers for the past 8 years? Tough luck toots, you can put that burka back on. Is that what we've been fighting and dying for? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
redlegphi 0 #10 March 31, 2009 I think you're overestimating the amount of freedom women currently have in Afghanistan. Sure, they can legally go to school. However, if doing so is going to result in you being disowned by your family (at a minimum) and possibly stoned by a gang of thugs, then freedoms guaranteed by law don't amount to a whole lot practically. Also, being married off at 14 and having a litter of babies by the time you're 18 makes it difficult to get started on that doctorate. To get back on topic, I think lifting the ban could go a long way towards separating the people who want to kills us from the people who would just really like us to leave their country. Very similar to how we got the local Sunnis on our side in Iraq and then turned them on AQ. If we really want to make social improvements in Afghanistan, we have to get the war finished off first. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
likearock 2 #11 March 31, 2009 QuoteI think you're overestimating the amount of freedom women currently have in Afghanistan. Sure, they can legally go to school. However, if doing so is going to result in you being disowned by your family (at a minimum) and possibly stoned by a gang of thugs, then freedoms guaranteed by law don't amount to a whole lot practically. Also, being married off at 14 and having a litter of babies by the time you're 18 makes it difficult to get started on that doctorate. Just because you've read about a few incidents like those you've described, it's by no means a universal experience across Afghanistan. Sure, there will be some rural and tribal areas where that is the case. However, as with many other parts of the world, the more heavily populated urban areas tend to be significantly more tolerant. Unless it's not already clear, we're not just talking now about the UN security question but about the wider question of whether the US should strike a deal with the "moderate" Taliban. Like I said, if you want to be the one to tell those women who have experienced the freedom of not just getting an education, but of simply being able to leave her home without a male escort, you be my guest. But it would be a huge betrayal of our commitment to that country. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
redlegphi 0 #12 March 31, 2009 I didn't read about it. I lived there for a year. The "freedoms" you're describing don't exist practically for the vast majority of Afghan women. The police department I was training had 800 officers. One was a woman. She wasn't allowed to wear a uniform and could pretty much never leave the headquarters building. And that was in an area with almost no Taliban influence. The south and east of the country are heavily Taliban influenced, meaning a woman would have to be damn near insane to do anything other than get married at 14 and start pumping out babies. I didn't spend a lot of time in Kabul, so Kabul may be different, though Kabul makes up less than 10% of the nation's total population. What happens in Kabul is the exception, not the rule. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #13 March 31, 2009 QuoteIf we really want to make social improvements in Afghanistan, we have to get the war finished off first. Many of the problems we've had in Iraq and Afghanistan have resulted from trying to view those as two separate, sequential steps. If we really want to finish off the war, we have to make social improvements. The R in SSTR is arguably the most important aspect of all if we are to be successful.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #14 March 31, 2009 QuotePerhaps not in the classic sense of security. Then again would you like to be the one to break it to all those Afghani women who have been studying to be doctors and teachers for the past 8 years? Tough luck toots, you can put that burka back on. A simple solution would be to offer them an opportunity to emigrate to the US. QuoteIs that what we've been fighting and dying for? I had thought that our soldiers were fighting and dying for our security--generally to protect us from the attacks of terrorists or foreign nationals. That is pretty much the purpose of our defense establishment. Sending them out to engage in social engineering in other countries? Pretty non-essential, in my opinion. I don't like their system. I wouldn't want to live in their system. But it is not my right to simply re-arrange the world to my tastes at the point of a gun.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #15 March 31, 2009 QuoteI don't like their system. I wouldn't want to live in their system. But it is not my right to simply re-arrange the world to my tastes at the point of a gun. We should have thought about that before we threw our support behind the mujahideen "freedom fighters" During the Reagan & Bush I administrations.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
redlegphi 0 #16 March 31, 2009 Quote If we really want to finish off the war, we have to make social improvements. The R in SSTR is arguably the most important aspect of all if we are to be successful. While the social improvements are obviously an important part of any counter-insurgency, you have to make sure that they're social improvements that the people want. For example, we might view eradicating the opium fields of Afghanistan as a "social improvement". The Afghans would view it as robbing them of their livelihood and would flood to the Taliban side of the fight. Similarly, while we view making education and opportunities available to more women to be a good thing, many Afghan men do not, and could view it as yet another reason to join in the fight to eject us from the country. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 426 #17 March 31, 2009 shhhhhhh...it's part of the "big picture". Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #18 March 31, 2009 QuoteQuote If we really want to finish off the war, we have to make social improvements. The R in SSTR is arguably the most important aspect of all if we are to be successful. While the social improvements are obviously an important part of any counter-insurgency, you have to make sure that they're social improvements that the people want. For example, we might view eradicating the opium fields of Afghanistan as a "social improvement". The Afghans would view it as robbing them of their livelihood and would flood to the Taliban side of the fight. Similarly, while we view making education and opportunities available to more women to be a good thing, many Afghan men do not, and could view it as yet another reason to join in the fight to eject us from the country. I don't disagree. I just wanted to point out that SSTR cannot be looked at as sequential steps. They must be understood to be a holistic interaction from the very beginning when war is being planned if success is to be expected. The problem with considering things like eradicating the opium fields as a social improvement is that it won't be perceived that way by the locals, and it is from their perspective that we need to consider things. They live where the war is at.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
likearock 2 #19 April 1, 2009 Quote QuoteIs that what we've been fighting and dying for? I had thought that our soldiers were fighting and dying for our security--generally to protect us from the attacks of terrorists or foreign nationals. That is pretty much the purpose of our defense establishment. Sending them out to engage in social engineering in other countries? Pretty non-essential, in my opinion. Clearly, the reason we entered Afghanistan in 2001 had very little if anything to do with social engineering and I would never advocate starting a war for that purpose. However, regardless of why we went there, our presence brought about a significant increase in the right of Afghani women to live what we would consider normal lives: the ability to leave the house without a male escort, the chance to go to school, the right to hold a job. Even as bad as things were for the female officer that redlegphi trained, at least she had a job, something that would be impossible under the Taliban. Effectively, we gave these women a taste of freedom when they've been used to living pretty much like slaves for a long time. Perhaps we will end up abandoning them to their past for our own expediency, but there's no way I would ever feel good about that choice. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #20 April 2, 2009 QuoteForgive the 'good' Taliban? Is this a sensible move to split the enemy or a move towards apeasment? It's my observation that some sort of reconciliation effort with some elements of the Afghan Taliban -- NOT Mullah Omar and NOT the Pakistan Taliban, e.g., Baitullah Mehsud -- is emerging as a policy question of "how" not "should" in the US. Defense of the legal order is superseding defense of territory as the central objective of security policy. Reconciling civil-based law with religious-based law (Shari'a) is a very different fight than stopping tanks passing through the Fulda Gap and different than counter-terrorism operations. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon 379 #21 April 2, 2009 The CBC is reporting that the Afghan government has passed a law that enforces Taliban-favored restrictions on women: "The new Afghan family law would reportedly make it illegal for women to refuse their husbands sex, leave the house without their permission or have custody of children." http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/04/01/harper-interview.html I haven't seen this reported in the American press yet, although I haven't looked extensively. However a quick Google search revealed pages of Canadian and European news sources and various blogs covering it, but nothing in the US news outlets. I wonder why? Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #22 April 2, 2009 It has been reported. Think I heard it first reported on NPR on Monday (?). Fox News from Tuesday: U.N. Says Afghan President Signs Law Legalizing Rape in Marriage Believe it was first widely reported in the UK, tho', e.g., Guardian: Pressure on Hamid Karzai to scrap Afghan women's law Independent: Afghan leader accused of bid to 'legalise rape' Google News results do appear to support your observation that there is more reporting and comment in Canadian media and press. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
