Skip to comments.Karzai suspends talks with U.S. over Taliban agreement (US EXCLUDES Afghan Gov in talks w Taliban)
Posted on 06/19/2013 5:33:57 AM PDT by Innovative
"The Afghan president on Wednesday suspended talks with the United States on a new security deal to protest the way his government was being left out of initial peace negotiations with the Taliban meant to find a way to end the nearly 12-year war.
Karzai's statement followed an announcement Tuesday by the U.S. and the Taliban that they would pursue bilateral talks in Qatar before the Afghan government was brought in."
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
And now Obama is negotiating with the terrorists, behind the back of the legitimate Afghan government.
Note — the other article posted with a similar title is a DIFFERENT article, it’s from the WP and it OMITS the most important part, that the US is talking to the Taliban, EXCLUDING the Afghan gov — your Mainstream Media protecting Obama,again.
Karzai suspends security talks with U.S.; Taliban rockets kill 4 Americans
Obama is surrendering to the terrorists, you mean. That has been his objective all along.
Karzai certainly wasn’t great, but that’s because even before Obama, we allowed the Afghan government to be set up adhering to a sharia-based constitution. However, even this wasn’t radical enough for Obama, and he wants to go whole hog and show the jihadis how much he loves them - in Afghanistan and everywhere.
He regards them as the ultimate anti-Western and anti-American force, and this is the only principle that truly motivates him.
“And now Obama is negotiating with the terrorists, behind the back of the legitimate Afghan government.”
I’m thinking Big Media will trot out the story again of how Karzai’s hats are made, to disgust enough Americans into agreeing that the left’s god should toss Afghanistan to the wolves.
Afghanistan (Land of the Afghanis) was one place NONE of us would go to. It was just not open for tourists in any way, shape or form. It was totally inhospitable to all (ALL) things not archaic, medieval, useless and screwed up (technical term).
From what I read and saw it the middle east, Afghanistan made India and China look like Switzerland.
as usual, obama was very accurate. that did last a long time; less than a day.
0bama’s entire foreign policy is in utter shambles. We p.o. our allies and foes alike, throw anyone under the bus who have helped us in the past. There is no trust and the wolves sense (rightfully so) weakness.
And with Kerry and Hagel as the other two 0bama pointmen on the world stage, we literally have the 3 stooges. (no offense to Moe, Larry and Curly)
Obama did this on purpose. Just like he failed to get a SOFA with Iraq to have a residual force there, Obama is pissing off Karzai so he can use it as a pretext to pull out all US forces. Walking away will seal the fate of many of the Afgans who helped us.
Look, if the old USSR came to the United States in the 60’s...
and decided to ‘negotiate’ with Bill Ayers and the Weather Underground ... rather than President Johnson...
I’m sure we wouldn’t have objected./s
Since there's so little truth that comes through the filters of the MSM - and since we need information on that region - could you expand on your comment?
Richard Nixon negotiated with the commies in Vietnam and cut a deal with them pressuring the South Vietnamese government of the time (Nugyen Van Thieu and Nugyen Cao Key) to cave in.
After this is over hopefully for Karzai’s sake he’ll get asylum in the US when the Taliban wins just like Thieu and Ky got it when the Communists won in Vietnam in 197.5
Of course everyone knows that Karzai worked for the CIA, right?
it’s a 12 year war since we are fighting like we want to make it last, instead of overwhelming force against the enemy.....
Afghanistan was considered backward, extremely primitive and secretive. There were no tours there so folks who did go there went on their own, not an easy thing to do. I don't even think that they had an airline. Having an airline was considered a mark of advancement for a country.
Even Pakistan had an airline. It was called PIA, Pakistan International Airlines I think....lol,we used to say the OBVIOUS -- pain in the ....
What else? Not much to say. When I read or watch T.V. about Afghanistan I still cringe.
It is SUPPOSED to be pronounced Af-ran-in-stan, with the "r" in "ran" like a French "r"--very gutteral. I've never heard it pronounced here with anything like that. ..and who cares? :o) I don't. They can have their third world sewer.
They have NOTHING for us. If there HAD been anything, the USSR would not have given it up. We should never go near there.
Obama wants to cut and run before his term is up so he can claim that he got us out of 2 wars...
This isn't a ceasefire. It's talk and fight. I imagine we'll be stomping the crap out of them on the battlefield in order to pressure them to give us a deal such that we can wave around a piece of paper and say "peace with honor", before handing Afghanistan to the Taliban. Vietnam could have been salvaged if we had continued funding the South. The Democrats cut off funding to make sure the Commies won.
If we continue funding Afghanistan to the tune of a few billion dollars a year, the government should prevail, although I expect the insurgency to go on for decades, much as the Philippines and Thailand have been fighting Muslim insurgents for the last 100 years. If we cut them off, the government will fall almost immediately, because unlike Vietnam, the place is frankly a wasteland of arid deserts and mountains, and there's not enough there to pay for the cost of fighting off a Taliban funded by Pakistan and private donors in the Gulf states.
This sounds like the Vietnam tactic whereby a young communist activist named John Kerry met with the Vietcong in Paris and arranged for a diplomatic coup - a humiliating defeat for the US in Vietnam.
Obama is negotiating with the terrorists
In case anyone has forgotten, even the UN did not recongnize the Taliban years ago. They are THAT bad.
Iraq has a Shari-Constitution too. Both written or approved by the Bush Administration.
Obama is probably negotiating a cease fire on green on blue attacks, for the appearance of success, after doubling down on “nation building” -remember that Obama calls this “the good war”.
If Karzai is taking anti-depressants as has been speculated then he’s going to need them by the handful when Obama draws down forces.
They should hunt down what’s left of the Taliban leadership like the wolf pack that they are.
I dont think he really cares what anyone thinks or says other than his handlers.
I hear you. But I see no reason to send billions of dollars to this hellhole. We need to leave and then when it gets out of control dispatch drones. Don’t fix it. Just break it periodically when it severely threaten our interests. We cant get rid of radicals but we can make it difficult for them to grow and hurt us.
Negotiating with terrorists? At least nobama has the best SOS for the job. Kerry has experience in that.
Outside of its most northern border, Afghanistan is almost a no-man’s land. It is very landlocked by mountains and deserts, little or no major rivers, and a very poor road system. All of this creates an economic environment which makes traditional commerce almost impossible outside of the largest cities, leading to most of the country being very poor, isolated, tribal regions. Subsistence farming using terraced farms to capture runoff is the norm in most of the country. It is almost impossible for anyone to travel from a small village into a large town. You would need a rugged vehicle, provisions, jerrycans of gasoline, and weapons.
Drones require Pakistani bases and airspace. The ones we're using are easier to shoot down than WWII piston engine fighters. Bound as we are by human rights considerations, we can't kill 'em all. The fear is that leaving the Taliban to rule means another $100b attack like 9/11, against which a few billion a year is peanuts. At the same time, I can see at least one good reason to let the government fall. A second 9/11 attack on NYC might finally get the liberals riled up enough to let our guys take the gloves off.
Just like how Kissinger excluded the South Vietnamese from his secret negotiations with the North Vietnamese. Karzai is going to end up just like Thieu, or worse Diem.
“The fear is that leaving the Taliban to rule means another $100b attack like 9/11, against which a few billion a year is peanuts”
Any country in the world could have contained terrorists capable of hijacking airplanes and plowing them into buildings using box-cutters (at the time). It really was a simple terrorist act to implement. It didn’t require the taliban and afghanistan. Of course having that terrorist-friendly base helped. So we dont rebuild the nation. We just break it when it gets out of control. But more importantly we understand this is a worldwide problem and not fixate on afghanistan.
I do agree there are logistic issues to support drones. But we need that capability in many locations throuhout the world. I just think that is the future not ground troops and nation-building.
These attacks happen often yet the powers that be cannot even give the order to aggressively secure the perimeter of one of the biggest/important FOB in the theater (Bush and Obama).
McVeigh killed a couple of hundred people with a van full of fertilizer. A couple of 18-wheelers could probably kill more people than on 9/11, when parked up against the right structure. The way I see it, the reason they haven't done this kind of attack is because they don't want to deal with the resultant retaliation. But even deterrence fades. Once the Taliban regains its perch, it may fool itself into thinking that we won't return no matter what it does to us.
I know. That’s why all the Iraqis are busy killing each other even as we speak. Each faction wants to be the Muslim top dog. If it had been a secular government, things would be a lot different now.
Very much like Vietnam. We just walked away and turned over our allies to the tender mercies of the enemy.
A very slow and patient process, but an active process nonetheless. Taliban is winning this war anyway. Trillions wasted in resources on desolate regions with hardly anything to show for is embarrassing for a so called Super Power. Taliban sure as hell is not going away, so nothing to show for except a huge, extravagant, bloody transfer of wealth.
They're not. These wars take a while. India has been fighting in Kashmir for 24 years and lost 7000 troops/paramilitary cops killed. As long as there's funding, the Kashmiri insurgents will keep on fighting. The Philippines and Thailand have been fighting Muslim insurgencies off and on for 100 years. These things die with a whimper. I think we should depart Afghanistan but keep funding the government. Staying in Afghanistan means spending $100b a year. Subsidizing the Afghan government is only a few billion, enough to offset the money the Pakistanis are sending to the Taliban. I think of propping up Afghanistan as a cheap way of killing Muslim extremists, pitting our money against money from al Qaeda- and Taliban-sponsoring donors around the world.
Thanks for the information - I agree that we should never go there...
>>>>Afghanistan was closed, even more closed than China. We visited China back in 1981. We visited India too.
Afghanistan was considered backward, extremely primitive and secretive. There were no tours there so folks who did go there went on their own, not an easy thing to do. I don’t even think that they had an airline. Having an airline was considered a mark of advancement for a country.
Even Pakistan had an airline. It was called PIA, Pakistan International Airlines I think....lol,we used to say the OBVIOUS — pain in the ....
What else? Not much to say. When I read or watch T.V. about Afghanistan I still cringe.
It is SUPPOSED to be pronounced Af-ran-in-stan, with the “r” in “ran” like a French “r”—very gutteral. I’ve never heard it pronounced here with anything like that. ..and who cares? :o) I don’t. They can have their third world sewer. They have NOTHING for us. If there HAD been anything, the USSR would not have given it up. We should never go near there.<<<<
In fact Afghanistan wasn’t such a crappy place back when and it was developing pretty rapidly.
It had an airline, ‘Ariana’ if memory serves me well.
Afghanistan actually slided into barbarism in late 1980s, about time the USSR lost interest in propping a secular regime and withdrew troops.
So called Soviet-Afghan War was pretty similar to current events in Syria. Russians weren’t perfect but they certainly were a less evil side.
Right. We can’t ensure every low-life in the world is incapable of striking us. Not an easy issue. While I dont want to see the Taliban get back to their former strength i dont see how we sustain that hell-hole full of barbarians. What you say is true. We leave and they will grow stronger. Big problem.
Why would Karzai need to be involved? All he needs to know is what day is power handed over and when does his plane leave.
When fighting insurgents, victory is outlasting them. We don't have to be there to do the fighting, but as long as our enemies are killed and the guys we're backing don't lose, that's winning. It's a lot like Indian-fighting - our forebears fought the Indians for centuries, almost until the dawn of the 20th century, before armed clashes finally ended.
The Brits like to cite the Malayan Emergency (1945-1979) as an instance of a well-executed campaign where British troops showed our guys (later in Vietnam) how counter-insurgency ought to be done. In reality, British participation in the campaign (using a combo of British draftees and regular troops) as a primary combatant lasted 15 years, and British advisers stayed for another couple of decades, into the late 1970's, along with some amount of British military aid. All told, the counter-insurgency campaign lasted almost 35 years, until the Chinese Communists ended their funding, training and supply program for the Malayan Communist Party.
That's the nature of these things - they take decades of whack-a-mole until the dead-enders give up (usually when their funding dries up). For instance, the Colombians have been knocking off leftist guerrillas for almost 50 years, since 1964, and FARC is still alive and kicking.
The Northern Alliance held off the Taliban for close to a decade with token Indian and Russian support dwarfed by Pakistan's active sponsorship of the Taliban with ISI advisers and equipment. A few billion a year in annual US aid would come close to half the entire Pakistani military budget, which is mostly focused on buying equipment to fight India.
I have little doubt the Afghan government, which is dominated by Northern Alliance leaders, would crush the Taliban over time, as long as we're not too squeamish about the methods they use. They weren't bad at fighting - they were just overwhelmed by an opponent funded lavishly (in relative terms) by the Pakistanis, but as of 9/11/2001, they still held a sizable enclave in Afghanistan.
The Taliban are basically Pashtuns, whereas the government are basically non-Pashtuns who were persecuted during the Taliban's reign. And the Pashtuns are around 40% of the population, with Tajiks, Hazaras and Uzbeks each making up smaller percentages. The McCoy vs Hatfield aspect of things will keep the non-Pashtuns fighting the mainly-Pashtun Taliban even without our help. But with our help, they'll prevent the Taliban from coming to power.
Hell no. We need to make damn sure that doesn't happen. They should be paying us.
That's about as likely as us getting reparations from the Germans and the Japanese for WWII, let alone the return of the massive amounts of grants we sent in their direction in the post-war era. This is after the Germans and the Japanese killed 300K and 100K GI's respectively, during wars in which we spent 2x annual GDP fighting or roughly $32T, if we scale up to today's GDP.
My guess is that we'll pay in one way or another, either through financial aid to keep the Afghan government going, or economic damage after a series of devastating terror attacks stateside once the Taliban takes power and revives its relationship with al Qaeda, in addition to trillions spent on yet another punitive expedition in the region. The difference between Afghanistan and North Vietnam is that the Vietnamese communists never thought of attacking us on our soil. Like I said earlier, I think it's a reasonable political proposition, given that any terrorist attack stateside would be on mainly Democratic territory. The only problem is that as taxpayers, we will all incur tax liabilities from the trillions in war expenditures that follow such a terrorist attack.
Karzai isn’t great but on this one, I 100% agree with his decision. Imagine just completely bypassing a legitimate government over the enemy!
Oh wait! We’re talking about obama. Never mind!
If Clinton hasn’t forced Colombia to a “peace settlement” with FARC, which consisted of its handing over huge interior territories to the guerrillas, they’d be gone by now. After Clinton left office, fighting resumed in Colombia - or should I say continued, because the guerrillas had been attacking from their Clinton guaranteed safe havens all along. Finally the government was successful, since the guerrillas had no popular support and once the people felt safe, they resisted them and it was clear they were not going to make any headway.
The leaders were aged, most of the important ones had been killed, and all that was left were those colonies in the jungle, mostly made up of people kidnapped by FARC as children to be “guerrilla soldiers.” The latter are being resettled and reintegrated into normal life.
So without Clinton’s breath of air, the guerrillas would probably have been overcome at least 20 years earlier.
Incidentally, Obama has obviously been encouraging FARC, or what’s left of it, because suddenly a couple of new Marxist FARC leaders have emerged, demanding that they be allowed to participate in the political process...and that they be given large tracts of land again.
Normally, the leaders of reconciled groups - such as the paramilitaries that fought the guerrillas - are not allowed to be politically active, since Latin America has seen way too many people like Chavez, who had been imprisoned rather then killed after an earlier attempt at a Marxist takeover, released in a moment of foolish trust on the part of the government, and then came back to be a rabble rouser and eventually take over and destroy the legitimate government and economy of VZ.
And don’t forget the time when they had Chavez under arrest at the airport for his autogolpe, and he was released at the last moment, without any doubt by US intervention. Bush was president at that time, but State was full of its usual career leftists and Bush always did whatever they told him to do. Chavez went on to be the destabilizing, destructive dictator that he was, abundantly encouraged by Obama, and left behind a ruined country.
The US is playing its usual dishonorable part in giving air to these people, be they Marxist or Islamist, and turning over the populations that trusted us to a guerrilla that we have empowered.
Apparently there was enough backlash, so that:
Afghanistan peace talks: US-Taliban meeting in Qatar cancelled
“Repeated phone calls by John Kerry, the US secretary of state, appeared not to have mollified Karzai, who accused the Obama administration of duplicity. Irritated by a press conference in Qatar at which the Taliban attempted to portray themselves as a government in exile, Karzai suspended talks on a long-term security deal to keep US troops in Afghanistan after Nato leaves in 2014.
News on Tuesday that American diplomats would sit down with Taliban leaders the first direct talks since the US helped oust the group from power in 2001 prompted speculation that real progress towards a negotiated end to the war in Afghanistan might be in sight.
But while the Taliban hinted at meeting US demands of a break with al-Qaida saying Afghan soil should not be used to harm other countries there was only the barest of nods to Kabul’s request that they talk to the current administration and respect Afghanistan’s constitution. The group infuriated Karzai by displaying a white Taliban flag and repeatedly referring to the “Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan”, the name the group used when they ruled from Kabul.”
The whole idea for the US government to undermine the legitimate government of Afghanistan to negotiate with the terrorists (remember, the Taliban allowed Al Qaeda to plan and practice that 9-11 attacks) bypassing the legitimate gov of Afghanistan is a clear signal that the US (i.e. Obama government) supports the terrorists.
Apparently they finally figured it out that they shouldn’t support the terrorists quite so openly...
The handover of Afganistan to the Taliban has begun.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.