| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
A What Are We Fighting For Update: "Afghan president offers Taliban a role in governing country," by Nick Meo in the Telegraph, October 11 (thanks to Jeffrey Imm):
President Hamid Karzai has offered Taliban leaders the possibility of positions in his government if they agree to a peace deal which could bring fighting to an end.The offer was made through his brother Qayoun at a secret meeting in Saudi Arabia of which Britain was aware.
Britain has been encouraging the Kabul government to talk to its Taliban enemies for more than two years and the Americans are thought to be coming round to the idea of a deal which would end the costly war in Afghanistan.
But The Sunday Telegraph has learned that the allies would insist that the Taliban would have to split with al-Qaeda and provide information on international terrorists in Pakistan and Afghanistan as the price of a deal....
Posted by Robert at October 13, 2008 4:38 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
Why do I believe that the U.S. State Department is behind this?
The whole action does not make sense and is negative to our cause.....that is why the State Department is probably behind this.
Posted by: alaskan1000![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at October 13, 2008 4:49 PM
A place at the table will not end the fighting. The Taliban will cause "peace" by killing everyone around it and then breaking the table.
He needs to read his book.
Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at October 13, 2008 4:53 PM
"Why do I believe that the U.S. State Department is behind this?"
Good question. What is Condi Rice planning on doing next year? It's been seven years and suddenly there is a mad rush to end the Afghan war?
One word needs to be eliminated from the American political lexicon: LEGACY.
If presidents thought less about their own place in history and more about the country they spent a lot of time and money (usually) to lead, there might be fewer 'hail Mary' passes in the last year of a term.
Let's have an end to feverish meetings to broker a deal, ANY DEAL, within six months of a presidential election.
Posted by: PMK at October 13, 2008 5:28 PM
But The Sunday Telegraph has learned that the allies would insist that the Taliban would have to split with al-Qaeda...
......................................
I don't want to minimize the danger of Al-Qaeda, but this is ridiculous--in many ways "Al-Qaeda" has become so synonymous with "Jihadi", it is as if no other Islamic group was carrying out Jihad--like, well, the Taliban.
I ask again--what sort of deal can the Afghan government make with the Taliban, a group responsible for instituting perhaps the most savage form of Shari'ah in modern history? This was the group that pushed women into not just hijab or chadors, but full burkhas, the group that staged mass public stonings in the Kabul soccer stadium.
And the Taliban was at one time in full control of Afghanistan. What makes Karzai think that they are going to make a lasting deal with a "hypocrite" such as himself?
Posted by: gravenimage at October 13, 2008 11:51 PM
Maybe they could recruit some 'community organizers'..............
Posted by: lafn at October 14, 2008 1:47 AM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)