Heavy fighting erupts among anti-Taliban tribal leaders

Pakistan News Service (PNS) ^ | 12/8/2001 | Pakistani News Service (PNS)

[Smogger]

Kabul, Dec 08 (PNS): Heavy fighting has erupted in a power struggle among anti-Taliban tribal leaders in the eastern Paktia province of Afghanistan, AIP reported Friday.

AIP said fighting in the provincial capital of Gardez was ignited by the supporters of Pacha Gul Zadran in a bid to occupy important positions in the shura, the post-Taliban administrative council established in the province.

Zadran was a member of the Rome group that represented the supporters of ex-king Zahir shah at the Bonn conference, which produced a power-sharing agreement among the competing afghan factions on Wednesday.

AIP said the fighting in Gardez is the first violence to break out between members of the newly-established interim government, agreed to in Bonn and to be installed in Kabul on December 22. Though the Bonn agreement envisages a multi-national security force for Kabul, the united nations will take time to assemble it. Gardez is situated 125 kilometres south of Kabul.

[Smogger]

I tend to agree. The Paks want a friendly government between them and the Iranians so they can get back to Kowtowing to the Chinese in exchange for nukes and harassing the Indians.

I am sure that they don't to share a border with a chaotic state run by no one and engaged in a another long lasting civil war.

[Cicero]

Are we surprised? We should try to set up something stable before we leave, but it's really up to them to settle their affairs, as long as they keep the violence confined to their own country. The days of colonial intervention are gone, and there's simply no reason why we should stay there and try to tell them what to do.

At most, we can tell them what not to do: "Don't tread on me!"

[blutobob]

What do we expect in the land of poppies and heroin? These guys are just like the Mafia, I suspect. It's all about controlling the drug supply. The warlords are godfathers and there will always be war in a land where cooperation is not profitable.

[Torie]

The place seems rather short of Jeffersons, Washingtons, Franklins, Madisons, Hamiltons, and Adamses.

[pt17]

The warlords are godfathers and there will always be war in a land where cooperation is not profitable.

Seems reasonable, based on historical propensity.

[The KG9 Kid]

"... I can't recall any Freepers demanding "a lasting democratic government between tribal warlords". Can you post a link to that?"

Feel free to read through this thread:

Hundreds of Pakistanis believed massacred / Alliance shoots troops Taliban left behind

... Particularly my reply here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/569676/posts?page=98#98

It only gets better from there. Inquire within if you'd like more.

[Eternal_Bear]

It's been like this for thousands of years. This is why the Brits never annexed Afghanistan to the Raj. Kill Osama. Get out.

[lavaroise]

What do they mean by heavy fighting? How many dead? It sounds quieter than LA to me.

[Campion]

The Taliban had the support of the people because despite their repressive behavior at least you didn't have to worry about getting robbed and killed in your own home by your own government.

If you were Pashtun and supported the Taliban. If you were a Hazara, the Taliban were delighted skip the robbery and go right to the rape and killing.

If you don't believe me, go to yahoo and query on "human rights," Taliban, and Hazara.

[meducksguy]

KEEP IT COOL USA. We finish our business then leave the MESS to the UN. Months from now the USA will be ho hum there and the UN will be hated. How sweet it is

[codeword]

I am beginning to think that only party that could rule in Afghanistan is another group as repressive as the Taliban. It seems like you have to govern there with an iron fist.

That's what Dostoyevski thought about Russia. Solzhenitsyn sometimes talks that way, too. As if the temperament of the people requires an authoritarian government to keep everything from going completely nuts. Maybe this is right. A sad fact if it is true.

[No Truce With Kings]

I am sure that they don't to share a border with a chaotic state run by no one and engaged in a another long lasting civil war.

Actually, they prefer that to a stable state run by an anti-Pakistani government. They read the N.A. as anti-Pak. They prefer chaos to the N.A., because chaos gives them another chance to impose a puppet government in Afghanistan. If it takes a long-lasting civil war, so what? It ain't their country. Better the Afghans suffer chaos than have an anti-Pakistani government.

[sugar_puddin]

Let's airdrop peanut butter and pop-tarts between two opposing sides and watch the fun begin! (Grin)

LOL! You meanie. 8-)

[HAL9000]

Thanks for the link, but I didn't see any serious discussion about imposing "a lasting democratic government between tribal warlords" in Afghanistan. That doesn't seem like an accurate characterization of the argument. The debate I saw was about establishing a stable, pro-Western government there.

I think it's nearly unamimous that a Western-style democracy in Afghanistan is not one of our objectives. But we will not tolerate another regime in Afghanistan that threatens the national interests of the United States.

We are going to finish the job and ensure that the regime that replaces the Taliban is not a threat to the U.S. It doesn't make any sense for the U.S. to go to war to remove the Taliban, but allow something equally menacing to take their place.

[butter pecan fan]

All you Freepers that demanded that we get into a political boondoggle in Afghanistan in trying to form a lasting democratic government between tribal warlords -- thereby 'draining the swamp' -- can apologize now to the rest of us that knew better.

I can't recall any Freepers demanding "a lasting democratic government between tribal warlords". Can you post a link to that?

I think the demands were actually that we get into a political boondoggle.

Gotta read carefully... 8-)

[Jhensy]

If it's from Pakistan News Service or The Guardian (or most British sources, for that matter), you can be sure that the truth is exactly opposite of what they're reporting.

[American Soldier]

That may seem an attractive option, but the only problem is that if they have two brain cells to rub together they have already anticipated your line of thinking. Many are playing possum.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

What a place!

To find all articles tagged or indexed using taliban_list

Click here: taliban_list