Worldfocus

02/05/2010 :: 11:13:32 PM
kerry Masterson Says:

When deciding to make peace with the Taliban it is important to remember that the Saudi Arabian terrorists responsible for 911 attacks
trained in Afganistan;but, the key word is Saudi Arabian terrorists not islamic terrorists.

US Aid is already funding the Taliban to the tune of $150 million a year through contract kick-backs. Afgani sub-contractors add an additional 20% to the price of projects so that they can bribe the Taliban to leave there projects alone. There is even a Taliban Taxation office in Kubul to collect these kick-backs. Bring back the Taliban as long as the seek out and destroy the remaining Saudi Arabian insurgents in Afganistan– the same way we did in Iraq. Besides Bin Laden is more than likely tucked away at one his Families many palaces in Saudi Arabia– only making film and tapes when the CIA thinks its wise to do so. Like the tape that was released by Bin Ladin a few weeks before Obama got elected,,, more or less pro-security-pro-John McCain.

We need to do some power sharing, nation building, and reprogramming
the methods the Taliban use deal with women. The Taliban is already on out pay-roll, its time, we got a return on our investment.

01/26/2010 :: 01:58:46 PM
New Idea Says:

Nikos Retsos has some very good points that should open some shut eyes on the ground reality and the beating around the Bush

01/26/2010 :: 11:50:26 AM
TomVA Says:

Might as well. Nothing else is working. This way maybe we can just pay them off for the next 20 years to stop killing our boys. That is exactly the solution that Kharzai is looking for. Throw enough money at the problem and it will go away.

01/26/2010 :: 09:41:37 AM
MARNIE Says:

WHO is Acquieses-ing here ??
The Taliban must denounc [shake-off] their Taliban way’s & show that they can be fair-minded & Just to ALL PEOPLE. This gives me NO PEACE OF MIND ,is [now] the Taliban going to show they can govern with the ..mantle of peace ??
This could be devastating for women’s right ’s
….to hold office in gov’t. [shut out] schools
vote ? Will the Taliban lay down their swords &
and end their tyrnnical ways ?? Will they cut- ties with al-QAEDA ???????? OR WILL THEY JUST BRING IN MORE CHAOS ???

01/26/2010 :: 09:22:19 AM
Nikos Retsos Says:

Should the U.S. and its allies start engaging the Taliban in order to iron out a power sharing agreement? Absolutely! Can the U.S. and the Taliban trust each other? Absolutely not! Does the U.S. and Pakistan - the major players in the Afghan war - trust each other? Absolutely not! Can the virulent anti-U.S. hatred
of both Afghan and Pakistani populations be transformed into a welcome to the U.S. to be their new colonial master in Central Asia? Absolutely not!

In short, the effort is good, but it is coming too late. The U.S. has committed so many crimes in Afghanistan that reconciliation is simply impossible. George Bush sent the U.S. army in for revenge of the 9/11, and he bragged in front of the Congress in a nationally televised speech, in which he said; “We are not negotiating [with the Taliban]. Either you are with us, or you are against us. And those who are against us
will meet another fate [death].” Bush’s translation: We will kill anybody who doesn’t surrender, or oppose us. We have the power, and there is nothing to negotiate with the Afghans - except full submission to the U.S. forces! Eight years later, and with a quagmire in the Afghan war, Barack Obama still banks on George Bush’s dogma of military power by dispatching 30.000 more troops to scare the Taliban into submission.

Bush’s high military bravado policy and orders are still in effect under Barack Obama. For 9 years the U.S. forces arrested any suspected Taliban; kick them and humiliated them in public; stuffed them in Soviet era abandoned cargo containers where thousands died from heat and suffocation; bombed and demolished whole villages and killed thousands of innocent civilians, and busted doors of houses in the night on false information, and gunned down innocent women and children as recently as December 30, 2009 (AFP). The only thing that has changed in Afghanistan since the Bush’s years is the protest signs and chants in the anti-U.S. rallies. After the killing of 9 children in a night raid by U.S. Special forces, (Ibid) there was a massive protest by university students in Jalalabad who chanted “Death to Obama,” - while for the previous years the chanting was “Death to Bush, or Death to America.” Would those Afghans now accept a reconciliation which means “living under a U.S. puppet regime, with the U.S. having the final say - or must approve- anything that regime want to do? Absolutely not!

There is a false facade in the Afghanistan Conference in London. The conference is not to “iron out a power sharing agreement,” as it is advertised. It is about “how to win the Afghan war!” Gordon Brown talks about
the Taliban coming in and accepting the Constitution written by the U.S. and Great Britain, and enforced
by foreign armies, with Hamid Karzai as figurehead. And that thinking is quite preposterous because it is taking Afghanistan back to 1979, when the Soviet army controlled Afghanistan, had Babraq Karmal as figurehead president, had a Socialist constitution of the Afghan Republic, and asked the Mujaheddin to join the government for peace in the Republic! It will not happen, period!

The London Conference in Afghanistan will fail because the Afghans did not accept submission to foreign occupation and control of their country by the Soviet Union in 1979, nor will accept submission and occupation by the U.S. now. On U.S. behalf, Karzai is promising to load the Taliban with money, education, plum pensions for elders, etc., but the Taliban are products of Pakistan’s Madrassas which have a strict Islamic anti-corrupt code. In short, they won’t accept foreign occupation, and Karzai’s super corrupt regime, for a few dollars in their pockets.

The participants in the London Conference know very well that Taliban are
incorruptible, and, therefore, the conference has no chance of success whatsoever. But the Conference’s purpose is not really to find a solution for the Afghan war, but to project the Conferees as peacemakers - not as occupiers looking for ways to consolidate their occupation, which is the real purpose of the Conference. Chances of success in the London Conference? Zero!!!!!!!!! Nikos Retsos, retired professor

01/26/2010 :: 03:15:30 AM
B. Kelly Says:

The big challenge of course is to create a government that is accountable to the PEOPLE of Afghanistan, rather than one that would simply dominate them. The main seat of power should rest in the hands of the people, rather than in the government or a coalition of special interest groups. If I am not mistaken, I have heard recently that the Afghanistan governments’ military or “security forces” is now about 645,000 strong. That’s a pretty big force for a country of that size. I think it’s possible that the Afghan government could now turn into a full-blown dictatorship at some point in the future irregardless of who they accept into it or not. I actually wonder if it would have been better in the long run if the U.S. had simply allowed the Afghan people to bear arms like we are able to here in the U.S. and allowed them to defend their own homes and villages from any last remnants of the Taliban 7 years ago.

01/26/2010 :: 01:21:47 AM
Jacob Says:

Very uplifting. I hope it pulls through. Give peace a chance before resorting to violence, anything short of this is murder.

01/26/2010 :: 01:09:16 AM
Anthony Bush Says:

I think the U.S should listen to people like Ahned Kamal and Hassan Abbas i seen in interview 1/26/10 a.m. on world focus or you have to use extreme military action which may work or not.

01/26/2010 :: 01:01:15 AM
RAY Says:

NO! “WE DO NOT NEGOTIATE WITH CRIMINALS OR THE ENEMY” –Sound familiar? = President Reagan. If we choose to recognize the Taliban for something real, true, and of Value then we are VERY VERY wrong and we have Failed and have Buckled. We will fuel their cause and we will have to fight them again in the future when we are weaker and possibly here at HOME. The U.S. should not try to befriend these criminal deamons we use ALL means of MILITARY and Secret Intelligence to DESTROY them. Remember what Truman did? Today that would NOT be popular and if we had to fight ww-II again we might very well loose because we are so afraid of what other Countries think of us. If we NEVER went to the Iraq or Afghanastan the world would be complaining that we don’t care. Now that we are there they still complain and criticise us. Let’ just “DO IT” and FINISH IT ONCE AND FOR ALL.

01/25/2010 :: 11:48:38 PM
Zecharriah Erickson Says:

We have taken God out of all of our foundation in the U.S. The U.S. was buit upon the Holy Bible, and we now say they and we serve the same God? There is only one true God, and if we turn our backs on Israel then God will finish the U.S. We are letting go of what gave us true freedom.

01/25/2010 :: 11:17:03 PM
eric Says:

Sure, let’s engage the Taliban, and discuss a power sharing situation. Let’s also, engage drug kingpins in America and Mexico, and discuss power sharing arrangements.
As a matter of fact, let’s engage all criminals, on international, national, state, and local, levels, and discuss power sharing arrangements.
Obviously, we’ll never be able to stand firm, so let’s buckle. That’s a great idea.
This has been Eric, being sarcastic.

01/25/2010 :: 10:09:11 PM
Matthew Says:

Yes! The Taliban are human beings and they deserve a fair voice and influence, and they deserve not to be shot at and killed in their own country.

01/25/2010 :: 09:18:32 PM
MARNIE Says:

Taliban into the gov’t ? is like letting the FOX IN THE HEN HOUSE ?….IN AFFECT THAT EFFECT …would set back any progress for women,
[girl's]going to schools ? Little girls married
off. Harsh set of radical religious weight’s place on the women’s rights is most unfair &will suffocate any gain for the women, if the Taliban would come into the gov’t. DO YOU REALLY THINK
THAT THE TALIBAN IS THAT LEPARD WHO WILL CHANGE
HIS [THEIR]…..SPOTS ? !!

01/25/2010 :: 08:59:45 PM
Selly Love Says:

Is this for real? OK, bring in the Taliban. Then bring in Al Quaeda. And the Muslim Brotherhood. And Hamas and Hezbollah. And Hizbut-at Tahir. And those nice guys in Somalia and, of course, the regime in Khartoum.

Once we are all in a nice big tent, everyone will start to sing Kumbayaa, My Lord, Kumbayaa.

01/25/2010 :: 08:55:09 PM
HistoryBuff Says:

Sharing with the Taliban is like sharing Sudetenland, then Czechoslovakia, then Poland … with the Nazis.

Do we never learn from history?

01/25/2010 :: 08:51:16 PM
Smythie Says:

Yes, the US should bring in the Taliban. And then help burn down the girls’ schools, set up Al Quaeda camps, …

This appeasement would fit in with the current cave in to Iran.

The long term effects will be disastrous.

01/25/2010 :: 08:48:54 PM
Dron L Says:

It was striking that both Ahmad Kamal and Hassan Abbas had the same pro-Pakistani government view.

Then why bother to have both? World Focus seems to have the habit of getting pundits of the same stripe to support views that are generally antithetical to US interests.

01/25/2010 :: 08:19:51 PM
michael Says:

We need to just get out. We have completely screwed up this whole war from the begining. After 9/11 we should have finished off the threat in Afghanistan and working with Pakistan help to rebuild a better Afganistan. That would have given us a second chance with Afganistan.

01/25/2010 :: 07:53:10 PM
New Idea Says:

I have been advocating a regional nonmilitary solution in Pakistan and Afghanistan for over a year since Obama’s election. I am glad that the Defense secretary and the General are now coming around to that. I realize that it is now the 11th hour for shared administration by the Afghanistan Taliban and the Karzai government and by the Pakistani government and the Pakistani Taliban and it will be impossible to negotiate with the Taliban at this point who will see it as their victory. At this late stage it would be best to carve out from the lawless regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan a territory for the Taliban to be named Talibanistan or Pushtunistan. Such a homeland would have to be free of potential to export terrorism but provide a freedom of association with no foreign occupation by either the US or the neighboring countries. Such a homeland should be allowed to govern by itself without foreign interference but with the protection of all human rights. From a person who believes there is no military solution, I have to say it is too late for power sharing between mortal enemies and that a geographical separation or partition of the extremists from the moderates is the only viable path to future peace for all in the region.

01/25/2010 :: 07:43:45 PM
jim, chicago Says:

Absolutely not. To give the Taliban legitimacy would be to reintroduce the horrors that they committed in Afghanistan in the late 1990’s. One has only to google “Taliban Atrocity” and view some of the more than 1.1 Million postings to get an idea as to how oppressive they were during their reign of terror. To apply a famous Reagan quote to the issue of the Taliban - “Afghanistan wins, Taliban lose.”

Rebuilding efforts continue in Afghanistan. I have a close friend who is working with the government right now to develop their infrastructure.

Will it take a long time? Yes, especially when one has to deal with the Taliban and al-Qaeda coming in and trying to mess things up. The solution is not appeasement and containment; these animals do not understand diplomacy. Make it very difficult if not impossible for them to operate and recruit by helping the Afghani government get and stay on its feet. Once the population understands that it has options other than a return to a Medieval system of oppression, they will be less likely to give safe harbor to the terrorists.

Don’t sell the sacrifice of our brave men and women in uniform short. Finish the job and prosecute terrorist organizations wherever they may be, or terrorism will come back to our shores again.

01/25/2010 :: 07:39:39 PM
John V. Caola Says:

Yes! Good Idea. Its, about Time!

01/25/2010 :: 06:25:58 PM
Thomas Olbert Says:

Any power-sharing negotiation with the Taliban has to be prefaced with an agreement from the Taliban to disavow Al Queda and to respect internationally recognized standards of human rights in areas they control. On our side, we should commit to working with the Afghan people and their neighbors to develop economic alternatives that will ween the rural Afghani populations from the drug trade.

01/25/2010 :: 06:19:30 PM
kathleen reilly Says:

Yes, the Taliban should be brought in the negotiations. Diplomatic efforts, as opposed to military options should be the prime focus. Helping the Afghans build schools and create a strong economy and infrastructure to hold up their society and culture.

01/25/2010 :: 05:58:20 PM
Jamie Says:

I wish our president would listen to the US military leaders on the ground and act swiftly! Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and yes, Iran, are complex countries, most Americans will never understand.
The president of Afghanistan (with the financial aid of the US (our hard-earned dollars) and other allies), want to bring the “good” Taliban under their wing and provide jobs, education and funds, my first thought was, “What’s to say they won’t take the money and run back to the Taliban leaders?” One, how can we trust this president? He is less than honest, and has a drug-lord brother!
I wonder if, 8 years ago, we had engaged this method, instead of pouring trillions into these wars, with precious lives lost, it would have been the right decision.

01/25/2010 :: 03:41:59 PM
earle,florida Says:

First things first! The Taliban aren’t the al-Qaeda,…the very thought of bringing them on-board telegraphs too their leaders of past occupier’s via insurgents, the “Divide and Conquer”,a very old adage,and deceptive practice that the Taliban are much more advanced? Just ask General Petreus…who recently said publicly the al-Qaeda are no where to be found in the area of Afghanistan. Then where are they? Suprisingly their love of the “Poppy” ,now has also turned to “Cocaine” trafficking (a two-fer)throughout Western Africa,ie.)Niger,Senagal( incidently the “Haitian Slave Trade Route” before Haiti’s Independence in the 1800’s),Mali,Sierra Leone,Guinea Bissau,and Gambia to name a few. Where are the drugs going,and what contraband besides cash is being exchanged? The trade route is through the desolate areas of the Sahara,and onto Spain,…thus transitioning the rest of Europe via the French Connection! The cash paid by “South (we all know who they are;oh-yea, can somebody spell viva “Mexico”) America’s Bountiful Drug Cartel’s” too safely transport the make-me-happy-goody’s is in the $$$ billions. Now,…how much contraband can billions buy? How about the weapons(exchanging hands everyday for years right under the Border Police guarding El Paso,and the hundred miles of unguarded borders along America/Mexico) by United States weapon’s/arm’s/ munitions manufacturing industry’s (america’s warlord’s?)! But,and it’s a biggy… how about the throw-away planes (Boeing 727’s they burn to the ground once offloaded) being used to transport (”Mother’s Load”?) them,nice? So,…to get back to the original question of power sharing is for naught? Bring the troops home, and build out our pathetic infrastructure as a start. Stop worrying about Osama bin Laden,for he’s probably dead or living on a kidney-dialysis machine in Argentina?