Taliban- Just misunderstood?

Jlane5516 · Tue Nov 24, 2009 9:37 pm

The Taliban- reviled by many. I read a TIME article recently on the Taliban and I began wondering... Is it possible to make a complete reform for the Taliban? Think about it, many of the troops have some sort of military training, a developed hierarchy, and adequate arms. With some simple training, public backing, and the necessary funds, they could become a (strict democracy? new word)?

Chris OConnor · Wed Nov 25, 2009 2:33 pm

Not as long as they believe everyone that isn't a follower of Mohammad is an infidel deserving to be slaughtered without mercy.

Jlane5516 · Wed Nov 25, 2009 3:14 pm

The upper echelons of the Taliban are the extremists in my opinion. If put into the same situation, where I had a child, a wife, I would take the opportunity to join the "strong" side. Farmers, lawyers, doctors, and many others being what we would call good people have joined. It is simply a matter of circumstance, nothing more. Karzai has previous warlords in his council who were at one time radical Muslims.

etudiant · Wed Nov 25, 2009 4:22 pm

I think that problems arise when a sizable portion of a country is uneducated and invested in a kind of medieval lifestyle based on the very scanty knowledge of the world they have. This is a problem today in more than one country. I believe the Taliban at the core are fearful people who cannot leave ignorance and superstition behind them, and expand their awareness of the larger world of knowledge beyond their narrow base. Afghanistan also has a long warrior tradition, which compounds things, as it places violence out front as a solution to what is not understood or is outside of a narrow comfort zone.

It is doubtless true that many average people just go along with things to the extent that they have to. Most people are not radical or particularly violent without provocation.

But it took us in the west a long time to evolve out of the value systems of the middle ages (a work not yet complete, if we are to believe the postings of some of our religious colleagues). Afghanistan is likely to take a while yet, and my guess is that US and NATO forces are not going to stick around for that kind of timeframe. That means some sort of deal with the Taliban, even if many in the country have to hold their noses.

weaver · Mon Nov 30, 2009 4:23 pm

Have you read The Kite Runner? The Taliban's concept of where women should be deligated to in their society is disgusting, too say the least.

Weaver

DWill · Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:38 am

I haven't had time to read it, but David Rohde's 5-part piece in the NY Times about his 7 months of captivity by the Taliban might help us to assess if there are any prospects for accommodation. It is notable that Rohde was held in Pakistan, not Afghanistan. We knew how entrenched the Taliban were in Afghanistan, of course, but perhaps didn't know as certainly that this was the case in a large area of Pakistan, too. Rohde gives this as a summary of his experience:

"Over those months, I came to a simple realization. After seven years of reporting in the region, I did not fully understand how extreme many of the Taliban had become. Before the kidnapping, I viewed the organization as a form of “Al Qaeda lite,” a religiously motivated movement primarily focused on controlling Afghanistan.

Living side by side with the Haqqanis’ followers, I learned that the goal of the hard-line Taliban was far more ambitious. Contact with foreign militants in the tribal areas appeared to have deeply affected many young Taliban fighters. They wanted to create a fundamentalist Islamic emirate with Al Qaeda that spanned the Muslim world."

But also this: "...I also saw how some of the consequences of Washington’s antiterrorism policies had galvanized the Taliban."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/18/world ... stage.html

weaver · Tue Dec 01, 2009 8:04 pm

Appreciate your sharing the NY Times article---sorry I missed that. Especially interesting hearing an on-the-ground report.
weaver

DWill · Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:41 pm

Rohde and his Aghan journalist friend made an attempt to escape that they really didn't expect to succeed, and got lucky. They were also lucky, of course, not to have been killed by their captors. The series of articles gave me a better appreciation of the obstacles we face on this night of Obama's announcement of a "surge" in Afghanistan. What are we going to do about the Pakistani tribal areas? From Rodhe's article, it appears to be much more than a matter of "working with" Pakistan's government. Pakistan has to decide which side it's on. As for the possibility of working with the Taliban in any way, I suppose that we should always try to exploit any divisions within the Taliban that we may see. That is smart warfare. Rodhe makes the point that the Taliban is not in fact a tight association but a designation for Afghans who want an Islamic state. That's scary enough in itself, but it does suggest some variation in the degree of fanaticism. Rodhe didn't come away from his experience believing that Islam itself is fundamentally a problem, as many now in the West do believe. He doesn't think Muslims are our enemies, though one might think he'd have a reason to.

weaver · Wed Dec 02, 2009 3:53 pm

Tried to repsond earlier but computer server went on a holiday.

Glad to hear the reporters escaped----can you imagine being in that kind of situation!
The border between Pakistan and Afghanistan is so porous. On the plus side, it allows refugees from Afghanistan to cross over but then so can the extreme fundamentalists.
Agree that US needs to know where Pakistan stands or we'll be in another murky event.
We did fund the mUJAhadin (spelling?) because they were against the Russians, and then ta dah, they became the Taliban. Seems like we go in circles.
Here's an idea. Why don't we just send $$ to the tribal chiefs. Would save lives. Do you think that's too naive?

weaver

Jlane5516 · Wed Dec 02, 2009 11:50 pm

It depends upon the Chief. As I said Karzai has members of his council that were at one time Warlord/Chief extremists. I am sure money was involved. The Mujahideen were given arms by the US as you said to combat Russia, after Russia pulled out the various Warlords fought during the Afghan Civil War for leadership/religious reasons.

weaver · Thu Dec 03, 2009 10:40 am

You seem well read on this topic.
What do you think US policy should be, in other words the most advantagous way to go?

Weaver

Jlane5516 · Thu Dec 03, 2009 4:09 pm

Fund the peons of the Taliban-but instead of pulling out we should look to make lasting economic reforms within the country. As Estudiant said a majority of the population are illiterate, they are ignorant. We need to make lasting school systems.

weaver · Thu Dec 03, 2009 4:23 pm

Would you have a military presence building schools or an organization more like the Peace Corp?

An aside---are you in Florida like email suggests. If so then I'm jealous. It's getting colder here everyday. The only good thing about the snow is having the bears stay in the woods and not on our back porch.

Weaver

Chris OConnor · Fri Dec 04, 2009 3:38 am

Weaver, why not fill out your profile and tell us your gender and where you're from?

I'm in FL too and we have our air conditioning on right now. :shock:

weaver · Fri Dec 04, 2009 12:31 pm

Air conditioning?! Why don't you just say in a sing song voice, "Nah, nah, nah, nah, nah,":)
Like: Ithaca
Vegetarian recipes
Designing gardens
Leaving old counselling life behind
Wegmans

Dislike: People who think all of NY is like Manhatten
Hamburger Helper
Coyotes keeping us awake at night yipping
Reality t,v shows

Forum rules

Taliban- Just misunderstood? Tweet This Topic

Who is online

Chat Room Always Open!