It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Taliban ready to talk with US

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Taliban ready to talk with US


www.cnn.com

The Afghan Taliban are prepared to open an "office outside the country for talks with foreigners," a purported spokesman for the movement said in a statement released Tuesday.
The statement could signal the Taliban's public willingness to talk to the United States for the first time.
Calling himself "Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan spokesman," Zabiullah Mujaheed said the Taliban has a "preliminary agreement with Qatar and other respective sides."
The Taliban are asking for the release of prisoners from the United States detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in exchange for opening
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.bbc.co.uk




posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 09:39 AM
link   
Wow your asking us to release your buddies from prison so you can open an office to talk with us. Sounds like rubbish to me. I suspect some hidden agendas here. Maybe turn over their buddies for some intel or something along those lines. But seriously, you're a group of internationally wanted terrorists and now you want to talk? How many Afghan and Iraqi families have been destroyed by suicide bombings because of them, and now they want to .... talk? Bro I think the Americans and Germany will "talk" but i'm sure the Arabs don't care to exchange words right around now.

www.cnn.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by ZeroUnlmtd


But seriously, you're a group of internationally wanted terrorists and now you want to talk? How many Afghan and Iraqi families have been destroyed by suicide bombings because of them, and now they want to .... talk?



Little change --> ..how many Afghan and Iraqi families have been destroyed by Nato bombings ?



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 09:45 AM
link   
reply to post by ZeroUnlmtd
 


I suppose the question is really how many of the detainees at Guantanamo are actually terrorists as opposed to local Afghans paid to fight the West - an important distinction in my mind.

However, still very interesting news. Peace processes have to start somewhere and this seems to be as good an opportunity as any.....



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flavian
reply to post by ZeroUnlmtd
 


I suppose the question is really how many of the detainees at Guantanamo are actually terrorists as opposed to local Afghans paid to fight the West - an important distinction in my mind.

However, still very interesting news. Peace processes have to start somewhere and this seems to be as good an opportunity as any.....


seems more like the last desperate act of a terrorist organization who's main funding is thought to be Iran, who are now sanctioned with dirt currency. Seems like you would want to quit while you're ahead in my opinion.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 10:01 AM
link   
reply to post by ZeroUnlmtd
 


They are only called terrorists because they used the only means at their disposal to fight an enemy.

Killing civillians is a mainstay of modern warfare and has been done since at least WW1 by all sides involved.

Peaceful talks are better then more people being slaughtered.

You may be all P.O'ed about things like 9/11 but that's war my friends. it's not fair and it hurts.

This is good news and Hatred over tit for tat actions during a war is pointless and will only cause more anger, hatred, violence and death.

If you want to take the, well they done this and that, tack then your the terrorist because your attitude will only serve to cause more terror.

And if we really want to apply the term 'Terrorist' to any one,... well, anyone remember "Shock and Awe"?
Anyone seen the damage done by the modern western military machine as compared to the 'Terrorists;?

I'm not particulary frightened of terrorists but the U.S military scares the hell out of me.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 10:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by ZeroUnlmtd
you're a group of internationally wanted terrorists and now you want to talk? How many Afghan and Iraqi families have been destroyed by suicide bombings because of them, and now they want to

Not terrorists, actually allies, trained by the CIA and MI6 in the early 80's up against the Russians (source Wikipedia).

The Taliban were labeled 'war heros' and 'freedom fighters' in 1987 by all western media outlets when the Russians retreated.

The terrorists have killed no where near what the americans have killed in Iraq.
Shock-an-Awe: 15k dead as US hits ministry buildings, a.k.a suburbia.
10 years of sanctions from 1991 at moderate death rate (source W.H.O) of 5k/month. Many children never reached the age of 2-2.5 yo. Approx 500k-600k children dead.
Amnesty Internation estimate 1M Iraqi's dead from 1991 to present.
DU covering Iraq and contaminating water table will pretty much wipe out Iraq in 10-20 years with cancer.

If you don't believe me, take a look for yourself. Just do a google search for DU + Iraq + pictures or
www.rense.com...



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rapha

Originally posted by ZeroUnlmtd
you're a group of internationally wanted terrorists and now you want to talk? How many Afghan and Iraqi families have been destroyed by suicide bombings because of them, and now they want to

Not terrorists, actually allies, trained by the CIA and MI6 in the early 80's up against the Russians (source Wikipedia).

The Taliban were labeled 'war heros' and 'freedom fighters' in 1987 by all western media outlets when the Russians retreated.

The terrorists have killed no where near what the americans have killed in Iraq.
Shock-an-Awe: 15k dead as US hits ministry buildings, a.k.a suburbia.
10 years of sanctions from 1991 at moderate death rate (source W.H.O) of 5k/month. Many children never reached the age of 2-2.5 yo. Approx 500k-600k children dead.
Amnesty Internation estimate 1M Iraqi's dead from 1991 to present.
DU covering Iraq and contaminating water table will pretty much wipe out Iraq in 10-20 years with cancer.

If you don't believe me, take a look for yourself. Just do a google search for DU + Iraq + pictures or
www.rense.com...


never said i didn't believe you, in fact my post says the americans and germans will talk, but i doubt the arab world is enthusiastic about it.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by ZeroUnlmtd
 


Hang on a sec, why are the Taliban a terrorist organisation? They only carry out acts within Afghanistan and they are Afghans. Surely, if anything, we should deem them as freedom fighters?

I do not like what the Taliban stand for but they used to run the country (very badly), therefore there is no possible way they could be a terrorist organisation. That would be like calling the Republicans under Bush a terrorist organisation.

The Taliban are not Al Quaeda (who are terrorists). Many people that fight for the Taliban are local farmers who can't get onto their fields to tend their crops, etc. They are offered very good (by Afghan standards) money to take up arms against an invading force - that is not terrorism.

I have read many reports that show the Taliban are totally fed up with Al Quaeda and want them out of the country. If these talks can help this to happen then the conflict in Afghanistan could be over far sooner than anyone had thought possible......
edit on 3-1-2012 by Flavian because: spelling



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 10:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Rapha
 


Slight twisting of the truth there - the CIA trained Afghans were mainly members of what became the Northern Alliance after the Soviet Afghan War. And they fought the Taliban!



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 10:19 AM
link   
Talking to terrorists is the only way forward if you want to end the fighting both sides have to sit down and talk. Just look at how this has worked in Northern Ireland the decrease in violence since the good Friday agreement has been astonishing however more can always be done yet it has to start with meaningful dialogue.

I have read that the Afghan government have been in talks with the Taliban however these talks have been troublesome as the violence on both sides continues. I have also read press reports alleging that diplomats from the Foreign and common wealth office have been in talks with the Taliban with support of SIS however these by in large are unconfirmed. Given Brittan’s previous dealings with terrorism and their understanding of how talking to terrorists can be an effective solution to halting the violence one can assume that these reports may have some credibility. It is not surprising therefore that America would also be seeking to do the same, if only not to be left out of the talks. The news that the Taliban are prepared to enter negotiations with America is only a positive step forward in peace for Afghanistan. However before this can happen all sides must renounce violence and maintain a ceasefire to enable negotiations. As Brittan’s history with Northern Irish groups has shown this path is not an easy one, full of step backs but also full of promising steps forward and this news may be the first promising step forward.

While it is true that for many the only solution for the problem the Taliban present is the total destruction of the group, this is not feasible nor is it strategically or economically viable. Any talks with the Taliban will be fraught with difficulties however talking is always a better option than shooting and blowing each other up.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Rapha
 





Not terrorists, actually allies, trained by the CIA and MI6 in the early 80's up against the Russians (source Wikipedia).

The Taliban were labeled 'war heros' and 'freedom fighters' in 1987 by all western media outlets when the Russians retreated.


Well considering that the Taliban never existed until 1994 I fail to see how any of what you have said could have been remotely possible. How could the media have praised a group in 1987 that didn’t exist until 1994. I know ATS gets really rather wacky at times but unless the Taliban have developed a secret time travel weapon I can only conclude that what you have wrote is entirely wrong.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 10:32 AM
link   
Knowing the Taliban, it is prolly some kind of a trap. I mean would you really trust a group like the Taliabn to hold a actual respected meeting? I sure as hell wouldn't it would be some kind of a set up or trap. Thats just IMHO. Their "talks" will prolly shred blood. I don't trust them and there is no reason for me to.

-SAP-
edit on 3-1-2012 by SloAnPainful because: typos noticed in reply quote




posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by SloAnPainful
Knowing the Taliban, it is prolly some kind of a trap. I mean would you really trust a group like the Taliabn to hold a actual respected meeting? I sure as hell wouldn't it would be some kind of a set up or trap. Thats just IMHO. THere "talks" will prolly shred blood. I don't trust them and there is no reason for me to.

-SAP-

couldn't of said it better myself.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 11:27 AM
link   
There comes a point when peace is more important than pride. If there is any chance of peace that could come of this, I say we sit down and try to reach that peace. Enough people have died throughout these 10 years. Enough blood has been shed. Enough of our freedom has been stripped from us here on American soil.

I am curious though, didnt Joe Biden recently say that the Taliban isnt our enemy? We've never been at war with East Asia it seems.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 11:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Tesclo
 


no doubt, cept tell that to the Taliban



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 11:40 AM
link   
Joke.
(Sometimes they speak louder than the truth)

What's the difference between a terrorist and an islamic fundamentalist that wants to talk?

The Islamic fundamentalist who wants to talk is reloading.






posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by ZeroUnlmtd
 


um you know NATO have been talking to taliban already at least in certain areas of Afghanistan. But Taliban have so far refused to open "official top level talks" despite NATO asking them to for about 4 years.

Their attitude was always. " The Americans have the watches but we have the time" In other words they know sooner or later foreigners will be desperate to withdraw from Afghanistan. They weren't bothered about having serious talks, they can wait until everyone leaves.

The question is what have NATO promised them for actually opening this office and beginning dialogue publicly. My guess is

1. immunity from any sort of punishment for taliban leaders & fighters.
2. The ability for taliban leaders to participate in afghan elections.

That would suit the Taliban as they are Pashtun which also happens to be the largest ethnic group in Afghanistan (40%+). Give it a few years Taliban will be back in government even if its a coalition

edit on 3-1-2012 by yeti101 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by ZeroUnlmtd
 


All I picture is some guy in a suit in an insane asylum talking to himself.

am I pretty close though?



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by Rapha
 

Well considering that the Taliban never existed until 1994 I fail to see how any of what you have said could have been remotely possible. How could the media have praised a group in 1987 that didn’t exist until 1994. I know ATS gets really rather wacky at times but unless the Taliban have developed a secret time travel weapon I can only conclude that what you have wrote is entirely wrong.

Ok My mistake. I just checked the wikipedia and oops, what a screw up. Thanks.

Aaahh, but then again; is it not a fact that NATO troops are actually recovering a Stargate previously not found by the Russians. The same sort of stargate (Seagate - Camelot) off the Yemen coast which is why the navy pays the local fisherman (pirates) to be bad so that only the military can see the U.F.O's gating in to our world !!!!! O.o



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join