• Pakistan and Taliban in peace talks
    21 replies, posted
[B]Pakistan Taliban's deputy Mohammad admits peace talk[/B] [release][img]http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/57247000/jpg/_57247559_85156160.jpg[/img][img]http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/57247000/jpg/_57247097_pak_n_304x171.jpg[/img] The Pakistan Taliban is in peace talks with the country's government, the group's deputy commander has said. Maulvi Faqir Mohammad said the focus was on the Bajaur tribal area bordering Afghanistan, and that if successful, talks could be extended to other areas. He said 145 Taliban prisoners had been freed as a goodwill gesture and the authorities wanted a ceasefire. It is the first time a top Taliban commander has confirmed negotiations. There has been no government comment. "Our talks are going in the right direction," Reuters news agency quotes Mr Mohammad as saying. The BBC's Orla Guerin in Pakistan's capital, Islamabad, says that in the past such negotiations have backfired allowing the militants time to re-group. There are also doubts about whether or not any possible peace treaty would be observed by all of the factions in the Pakistan Taliban, which is an increasingly fractured alliance, she says. In October, Pakistan's Interior Minister Rehman Malik said talks would only be held if the group disarmed. The Pakistani army has conducted a series of offensives against strongholds of the Pakistani Taliban, or Tehrik-e-Taliban, along the mountainous border with Afghanistan. But it has failed to curtail the activities of the group, which has ties to al-Qaeda. Militants in Pakistan have carried out a series of devastating suicide bombings and other attacks across the country since 2007 in an attempt to overthrow the US-backed government.[/release] [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-16124625[/url]
If history is of any indication as to what will come out of this, "we want peace" translates into "give us a minute to reload and regroup".
[QUOTE=Zero-Point;33659272]If history is of any indication as to what will come out of this, "we want peace" translates into "give us a minute to reload and regroup".[/QUOTE] Your name fits perfectly.
[quote]Pakistan Taliban's deputy Mohammad admits peace talk[/quote] Which Mohammad?
[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;33659416]Which Mohammad?[/QUOTE] That one. :v:
any mohammad
[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;33659416]Which Mohammad?[/QUOTE] All of them.
"dearest taliban leaders, take this nuclear warhead as a sign of our undying gratitude for this new era of peace"
Pakistan. Follow what Sri Lanka did and FINISH THEM OFF FOR GOOD! Sri Lanka did not give the LTTE anytime for a ceasefire and thus causing them to wipe off for good.
What a joke.
While traditionally I would be all for a diplomatic solution, I fear that Zero point is correct in that the Taliban are not interested in long term peace. They are a group of religious extremists, and no matter how hard you might try to reason with them, it just isn't going to work out in the end.
[QUOTE=GunFox;33666857]While traditionally I would be all for a diplomatic solution, I fear that Zero point is correct in that the Taliban are not interested in long term peace. They are a group of religious extremists, and no matter how hard you might try to reason with them, it just isn't going to work out in the end.[/QUOTE] Well the Afghan government pays Taliban pensions to stop being Taliban and return to civilian life. I think in the West there is a huge tendency to claim that all Taliban are these religious extremists they would give their life for the cause. For the most part the older population (who have seen the hypocrisy of the upper echelon of the Taliban) is less about strict politics and more about preserving what they consider their way of life and their country. There's a lot more leeway with that population.
[QUOTE=Zero-Point;33659272]If history is of any indication as to what will come out of this, "we want peace" translates into "give us a minute to reload and regroup".[/QUOTE] [IMG]http://www.facepunch.com/image.php?u=56318&dateline=1257484708[/IMG] Did you hear that scoob?
[QUOTE=Contag;33667456]Well the Afghan government pays Taliban pensions to stop being Taliban and return to civilian life. I think in the West there is a huge tendency to claim that all Taliban are these religious extremists they would give their life for the cause. For the most part the older population (who have seen the hypocrisy of the upper echelon of the Taliban) is less about strict politics and more about preserving what they consider their way of life and their country. There's a lot more leeway with that population.[/QUOTE] I was thinking more along the lines of past behavior being the most reliable indicator of future behavior. It wouldn't be a first for the Taliban to agree to a ceasefire, exploit it, then go back on it when it suits them.
[QUOTE=JaegerMonster;33671701]I was thinking more along the lines of past behavior being the most reliable indicator of future behavior. It wouldn't be a first for the Taliban to agree to a ceasefire, exploit it, then go back on it when it suits them.[/QUOTE] It doesn't help that the Taliban isn't a rigid group with strict enforcement. It'd be a bit like Obama signing a treaty that says Americans will never do anything illegal again.
I doubt will see the day the where the Taliban will just give up and have peace. Without going into a rather lengthy explanation; the people in Taliban won't give up as long as there may be a change in their ancient ways and tradition of doing things. Because of this developing countries and the Taliban just won't get along.
I have always ever did this tactic in all the Total War games. Fight a war - start to lose - PEACE! PLEASE! - rebuild armies - reinvade and try again Should make a Taliban: Total War :v:
Peace talks? With Taliban? What a joke, they're just going to regroup and kill more people, Pakistan is retarded if they really think they will have peace with religious extremists. Oh well, we should just leave the whole middle east alone and see what happens.
The good news is the peace talks will be successful, the bad news is that they had them so they could team up against us.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;33671974]I have always ever did this tactic in all the Total War games. Fight a war - start to lose - PEACE! PLEASE! - rebuild armies - reinvade and try again Should make a Taliban: Total War :v:[/QUOTE] You joke, but a total war game set in modern times vs insurgent forces has the potential to be fucking amazing. Both with the player as the insurgents and as the invading force. Though I would avoid the middle east (too politically charged to avoid flak in the press) and aim probably for Eastern Europe. Interesting terrain and better access to iconic Russian hardware. I really thought they wimped out when they went back to Shogun instead of pushing into wars with really interesting tactics. Total war with off map artillery and close air support would be cool as hell.
[QUOTE=GunFox;33666857]While traditionally I would be all for a diplomatic solution, I fear that Zero point is correct in that the Taliban are not interested in long term peace. They are a group of religious extremists, and no matter how hard you might try to reason with them, it just isn't going to work out in the end.[/QUOTE] Do you honestly think religious extremism is the main motivation behind most of the Taliban's actions? I don't know about you, but if some foreign nation was running around and bombing everthing carelessly in my country, I'd probably get [I]a little[/I] angry. The Taliban would probably have way less influence if the U.S. didn't give the population so many reasons to join or support them. I don't think the U.S. is deliberately doing things like [URL="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/yemen/7806882/US-cluster-bombs-killed-35-women-and-children.html"]this[/URL], [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0"]this[/URL], or [URL="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/23/us-soldier-admits-killing-afghans"]this[/URL] , but isn't it irrational to believe you can have a military presence on that scale without doing shit like that? The Taliban utilize geurilla tactics heavily. Every time a Taliban soldier is killed, another three will come in his place. Just killing everyone in sight is definitely [I]not[/I] the solution to the problem; if you want to diminish the Taliban, you have to win the hearts of the people. And frankly, the U.S. has not been doing a very good job at that.
[QUOTE=The Epidemic;33676525]Do you honestly think religious extremism is the main motivation behind most of the Taliban's actions? I don't know about you, but if some foreign nation was running around and bombing everthing carelessly in my country, I'd probably get [I]a little[/I] angry. The Taliban would probably have way less influence if the U.S. didn't give the population so many reasons to join or support them. I don't think the U.S. is deliberately doing things like [URL="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/yemen/7806882/US-cluster-bombs-killed-35-women-and-children.html"]this[/URL], [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0"]this[/URL], or [URL="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/23/us-soldier-admits-killing-afghans"]this[/URL] , but isn't it irrational to believe you can have a military presence on that scale without doing shit like that? The Taliban utilize geurilla tactics heavily. Every time a Taliban soldier is killed, another three will come in his place. Just killing everyone in sight is definitely [I]not[/I] the solution to the problem; if you want to diminish the Taliban, you have to win the hearts of the people. And frankly, the U.S. has not been doing a very good job at that.[/QUOTE] Except ISAF's plan has [B]never[/B] been wipe out every Taliban. It's been capture/kill high value targets that put a considerable dent in Taliban operations, while providing reconstructing and mentoring programs for the ANA. The focus has ALWAYS been the ANA. The goal is to get the Afghani military to a point where it can handle it's own domestic problems, so that when ISAF forces finally pull out, they are capable of dealing with the Taliban themselves. This is not Iraq with the people taking up arms against foreign invaders, the Taliban are not freedom fighters, they do not have a great deal of support among the Afghani people (Kind of hard when you force farmers to give you shelter and threaten them or rape their daughters as a form a punishment for cooperation with foreigners). You can blow up ISAF fuck ups all you want, but the fact remains 70%+ of civilian casualties still come from Taliban. Again, the goal was never to "kill everyone". Fighting Guerillas/counter insurgency operations are painstakingly slow in progress and always messy due to the nature of it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.