39 Burst results for "Taliban"

Fresh update on "taliban" discussed on Coast to Coast AM with George Noory

Coast to Coast AM with George Noory

01:05 min | 29 min ago

Fresh update on "taliban" discussed on Coast to Coast AM with George Noory

"S Consumer Products Safety Commission said Saturday that it received reports of Children and a pet being pulled, pinned and trapped under the real ruler of the treadmill Pellet on said in a news release. The warning was inaccurate and misleading, and that there's no reason to stop using the treadmill as long as Children and pets are kept away from it. Plus. Florida Governor Rhonda Santis accuses the Writing administration of unnecessarily casting doubt on Johnson and Johnson's Corona virus Vaccine. Governor Ron the Sand is targeted the Centers for Disease Control, calling the government agency's handling of the Johnson and Johnson pause, horrific and problematic. The Biden administration on Tuesday ordered states to stop giving the single dose Johnson and Johnson vaccine after reports of six women developing severe blood clots. All the women were between the ages of 18 and 48 had the rare reaction within 6 to 13 days after Being vaccinated. One woman died. Scientists are investigating if the vaccine is at fault or some underlying condition. Even so, to Santa's warned, many have grown weary of the vaccine surgeon general. The vague Murthy assured the public the vaccine is safe boxes. Lauren Green reporting. Meanwhile, the future of Afghanistan is uncertain, with President Biden ordering out all U. S forces by September 11th of this year, President Biden says it's time for all forces to withdraw, bringing America's longest war to close the decision. Mom says the Afghan government continues to struggle to reach a long lasting peace deal with the Taliban. Secretary of state Antony Blinken says the U. S. Is not abandoning Afghanistan. Our security partnership will endure. There's strong bipartisan support for that commitment to the Afghan security forces. Some Republicans like Senator Lindsey Graham warned terrorist groups could regain a foothold once the US leads Afghanistan.

Lauren Green Tuesday S Consumer Products Safety Com Taliban September 11Th 48 Six Women Centers For Disease Control Senator Saturday One Woman Antony Blinken Murthy Santa U. S United States 18 Republicans Single Dose America
US Withdrawal From Afghanistan Could Risk Progress on Women's Rights

1A

02:07 min | 1 d ago

US Withdrawal From Afghanistan Could Risk Progress on Women's Rights

"Up on the world's biggest stories are international experts this week or Sean Carberry, who writes on foreign policy and a former NPR foreign correspondent based in Kabul. Paul Dano, Har Washington bureau chief for the BBC, and Nancy Yusef, a national security correspondent from the Wall Street Journal. And we're taking your comments. Sam was just tweeting President Biden is following through with the campaign promises of both Preceding administration's once supported by a majority of veterans, veteran families and the general public. We're tired of the costs born by our communities, no more funerals. We also got a comment about being concerned about women's rights in the country. Shawn, can I ask you about that? We've heard there's been a lot of conversation this week about how the U. S troop withdrawal will effect the role of women and women's rights in Afghanistan. Yes, And this is a difficult reality. Tol look at and you know, my argument has been that the United States did not go into Afghanistan in 2001 to create a democracy to build schools and to liberate women went in. To get Al Qaeda because of the 9 11 attacks. Now, over time, the mission expanded and turned into a giant nation building exercise and part of that has been championing the rights of women who are obviously you know, brutally treated under the Taliban. And the concern is legitimate that if things do slide into the hands of the Taliban that women will suffer, But this is sort of one of the cold. Hard realities of this situation is Are people saying that the U. S. Should send more troops into Afghanistan to protect women and democracy, which was never part of the mission. Or should the focus be strictly on counterterrorism? So it's a legitimate concern. It's an ugly reality that Things will likely get worse for for women going forward in Afghanistan. But I don't think the American people are going to support a mission and putting troops in harm's way, just

Sean Carberry Har Washington Nancy Yusef President Biden Paul Dano Afghanistan Kabul NPR The Wall Street Journal U. BBC TOL SAM Shawn Taliban Al Qaeda United States
Fresh update on "taliban" discussed on The Joe Pags Show

The Joe Pags Show

00:50 min | 7 hrs ago

Fresh update on "taliban" discussed on The Joe Pags Show

"Abiding administrations. They were to leave Afghanistan that we give the Taliban a date. It's gonna be September. 11 would leave on on the anniversary of the attacks of September 11th. Of course, the Taliban immediately said We won It's a victory for us. We made him leave. His thoughts were interesting on this your thoughts and that certainly welcomed as well Right now, a lot of people calling in about police shootings and so on Colorado. Paul, what's happening? Hi. Hey, Joe. I loved your discourse You just gave on the the common sense of what is going to take two. Turn this country around. Um may I just want to read Proverbs one verse two to know, wisdom and instruction to proceed. The words of understanding. To receive the instruction of wisdom, justice and judgment and equity to give subtlety to the simple and to the young man, knowledge and discretion. That's just three verses. I'm realizing that this is really the root. The crux of the problem that we're having in America today. We were not teaching God's word. We're not pass to get down into the generations like we need to be. And of course, that reflects back on the church, and I don't a point fingers and blame blame but Honestly, you know, this is really what's going on with. You know, I've been listening to your show for months now and And listening to the media and following things, and it just pulled down the lack of the structure of society with the authority, starting with God. Went down to the parents. The Children. You know this young guy you were talking about being out the middle of the night. Oh, my gosh. What was he doing out there? There's just no excuse for that. On dweeb. Got it? We've got to realize this in America and we've got to repent. We gotta turn around. Turn back to God. Because we can't expect him to bless our country if we won't That boy was no, no, I hear you know, I appreciate you, Paul. Thank you. I always appreciate you calling in the bottom line is we are based on Judeo Christian values and there is a push in this country, especially by the political left for the government to be our God. They really do want us to turn the government for everything. And you should seek a higher power that isn't the government. You should seek a higher power that isn't you know the mind Administration or your local or state or county government. You should seek a higher power that gives you the motivation and the guidance and The fulfillment that that you seek. The vast majority of us in this country are still Christian. Plenty of Jews. Plenty of Muslims, plenty of Buddhist, plenty Hindu but believe in something. Because if you don't the government will take that aspect out of it like the whole because of covert 19. You can't go to church thing That wasn't used about covert 19 that was about you need to turn to us for guidance. We're smarter than you and we're better than your God. I do believe that some people in government a lot of them on both sides of the aisle have that sort of God complex. But yeah, we are. We're moving slowly, but surely the values and the morals and the mores from our society that are based on Judeo Christian teachings. We need to go back to that without a doubt. Let me go back at it. Line one's gonna be Phil, Also in Colorado. Hi, Phil. Hey, Good. Good afternoon there, Joe. I was giving you a ring because I guess he regards policing and the use of Tasers and I was just curious because I've heard these things referred to in a number of different ways. I've heard that they're non lethal. I've heard that they're less than lethal or less lethal. I've also heard a lot of people have died from Tasers, so I'm just curious if there Is a Taser a lethal weapon. I'm going to say no, I don't. I've never heard of people dying from Tasers. I mean, maybe it's happened. I if they did, it had to be a heart attack or something that Taser itself wouldn't kill them because every police officer who can deploy a Taser has been taste in their training. Her correct. And so as far as folks die, you know a lot of times they will get paralyzed when they're hit with the Taser and the fall hit their head. They might be subject to a harder is mia or or something like that. And so they're not. You know, they don't draw blood and electrocute yet, But my my understanding is over. 1000 people have been killed by Tasers. By law. You're you're you're you're understanding is is great Phil, and I love you like a brother. But that doesn't tell me real research. It tells me a guy from from Colorado called in and said 1000 people died. I'd have to see some some studies on that and have to look it up myself. I'm not an expert on Tasers, but I'll tell you this. It's a lot less lethal than vente Glock 19 bullet coming into your side. Without a doubt. Quite a suppose that's fair. And then so I guess. Well, I guess that we disagree on the legality of Tasers and unless you this because you're your call is passive aggressive and I'm really good at sniffing out passive aggressive calls. Get to the point where you called him to say I'm going to tell the talk show host. What? Tell me what you what you called Well, shucks, I My point was, you know, I see this officer with Dante, right? They deployed a Taser. Apparently incentive, not deploying Taser that they did not deploy a Taser. She shot him by accident. The play I minus both. They deploy a Taser and instead shot them. Um, it was my view that both Tasers and firearms are lethal weapons. You put it there, not on someone you make him. You mean kill them with it? No, I Taser is is less than lethal. It is is used instead of the lethal weapon. So again, if you've got 1000 cases where people died, I'd like to see those cases why they died. What The cause of death was a Taser certainly is less than lethal. When it comes to a service pistol, Nobody can doubt that. That's that's fair. Alright, Phil. I appreciate you think Phil called him to tell me that you shouldn't be deploying Taser is either he wouldn't get right to the point. That's why I said you're being passive aggressive. I wasn't being mean to Phil. Phil called in for a purpose and wanted to talk around the bush until he sort of cornered me or something. Which is never gonna happen. Call in. Tell me what your call is about. I don't like Tasers. Paige's Here's why, and then we can have that discussion. Appreciate.

JOE Paul Taliban America Dante 1000 People 1000 Cases Phil Paige Afghanistan Colorado September. 11 Three Verses Both TWO Both Sides Tasers Taser September 11Th Today
Blinken in Afghanistan to Sell Biden Troop Withdrawal

The Ben & Skin Show

00:33 sec | 2 d ago

Blinken in Afghanistan to Sell Biden Troop Withdrawal

"Administration is defending the plan to pull out remaining troops from Afghanistan. Always after President Biden's announcement, Secretary of State Antony Blinken arrived in the Afghan capital Kabul, and he told Afghan President Ashraf Ghani that the U. S remains committed to Afghanistan. We have a partnership is changing in Georgia President Ghani said He respects the United States decision. There is huge uncertainty about what the withdrawal means for Afghanistan, including speculation the Taliban might return to power in

President Biden Secretary Of State Antony Blin Afghan President Ashraf Ghani Afghanistan President Ghani Kabul U. Georgia United States Taliban
Fresh update on "taliban" discussed on The Takeaway Weekend

The Takeaway Weekend

01:39 min | 9 hrs ago

Fresh update on "taliban" discussed on The Takeaway Weekend

"Court better in for eight years. I did two tours in Afghanistan. It almost doesn't feel real that we're pulling out. Finally. I didn't think I would live long enough to see it. I lost a lot of good friends over there. I'm just really happy that we're family pulling out. No. Conditions. Nothing because there there was nothing to win. Their joining me now is Leo Shane, deputy editor at the Military Times, and Tim Kudo, a Marine veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan. Thanks to you both for joining me. Thanks for the invite Tim. You wrote an op ed in The New York Times this week, referring to the withdrawal of American troops in Afghanistan by September, 11th and you said, quote. Although I have waited for this moment for a decade, it is impossible to feel relief. Tell us why. So I think Like many of the veterans of my generation we joined after 9 11 hoping to make a difference there. Whether it was to avenge the attacks on New York or whether it was to help the Afghan people who were suffering from the Taliban. Long before we got involved there, and I think of the many people that we sat under floors with over there, drinking chai and talking about peace and how we could achieve that in their village on the promises that we made to stay and remain and help them, and now we're leaving and we've broken all of those promises, and that's just not Something that I've done, but something that thousands and thousands of veterans did over the past 20 years there, but at the same time, I understand that it's not a war that we can win. Maybe it never was. I'm not sure about that. But We can't keep doing the same thing over there expecting a different result because it's just insanity. Leo U. S troops aren't being withdrawn, as says, Tim suggested because this war has really come to a neat ending. I mean, this is 20 year's on their veterans that served in Afghanistan or currently serving. And I'm sure for them. This doesn't feel like a Finnish toward this feels feels more like an unfinished towards that right. Alone a lot of conflicting opinions about about this withdrawal. A lot of the veterans who I've spoken with, sort of felt like this was the inevitable and that there wasn't going to be some sort of clean, mission accomplished Sort finale to this that it was gonna be a a separation under under questionable circumstances. So a lot of lot of veterans right now we're struggling with that. What does it mean? What does it mean to not have this war anymore? And to not have some of those Promises fulfilled, but also the feeling of fatigue. You know, a lot of lot of veterans I talked to feel like this war was forgotten 10 years ago by the American public, so if folks aren't you know, folks aren't paying attention. Why are wired troops over there? And why are they still Why are they still fighting? Why they still risking their lives? Tim? I want to dig into that point, because I think that I think, Leo, you're right. I mean, a lot of Americans, You know, we don't hear about the war in Afghanistan. We don't see it on television. We don't hear daily updates about what's happening there. We don't hear about the fatalities, whether they be Americans or Afghans, and so As someone who has served on Diz, a veteran. What does that do to the psychology of veterans and obviously you can't speak for all people, but Just in terms of what Leo's really pointing out there. This idea that this has been a for gotten war as well, not just the longest war, so I got back from Afghanistan and I believe it's 2011. And a few weeks after I returned, President Obama announced that they had killed somebody laden And so for me having just come back from a war that was very fresh in my mind to see people celebrating his death in front of the White House in front of ground zero while I was attending a memorial for the Marines who died in my unit. And seeing their families and interacting with them and seeing the grief that they left behind. There was just an absolute disconnect in that moment for me between the war that I had experienced and the war that Americans had a zoom Erica's an experienced and it continued. After that. I mean, I think we a lot of us thought that it would be over then at some point And 10. More years passed and you know for me during that time, the specific valley that I was located in fell to the Taliban and they destroyed the U. S military in the Afghan military had to go in and bomb the buildings that the government had been located in to destroy the Taliban and try and retake that area. So everything that we had 54 that men have died for was completely for nothing. And I think that It's been very, very difficult for veterans to have experienced that on their own, Tim That's a powerful statement that it was for nothing. I mean, it's absolutely true. I think you know, we we lost to the Taliban there, and we have known that that was coming for quite a while. And yet we continue to send people there to die for that. And I like to believe that maybe at some point way back when before Iraq happened that you know it was possible for us to have achieved victory there. But you can't change the past. So you just have to live with that. Leo in the terms of the folks that you speak to for military times. Is that a sentiment that a lot of them feel what Tim's sharing right now? It's definitely one of the conflicts and you know there wasn't there wasn't a pretty ending here. There wasn't clear finale and that's what folks are struggling with now. As as we're all looking at this news And beyond that clear ending. Is it also a question of what you know that they that they didn't sort of win or accomplish what they were there to do? Yeah, it is. It is that idea of what was the point? Why did we lose folks if we're walking away, and so many conditions haven't changed and You know what? Just just what was achieved. Their missed him said after the death of some bin Laden and the president reference that in his speech yesterday what what was the point of staying? What was the point of the additional money that was spent? What was the point of the additional sacrifice? And that's.

Tim Kudo Leo Shane Afghanistan Bin Laden LEO Yesterday New York September, 11Th TIM 2011 54 10 Years Ago Eight Years Thousands This Week 20 Year 9 11 Taliban Military Times Iraq
Boots off the Ground: Americas Afghanistan Drawdown

The Economist: The Intelligence

01:54 min | 2 d ago

Boots off the Ground: Americas Afghanistan Drawdown

"Twenty years since american forces entered afghanistan president joe biden has announced the withdrawal of all troops from the country. I'm now the fourth united states president to preside over american troop presence in afghanistan. I will not pass this responsibility onto a fifth. I concluded that it's time to end america's longest war. It's time for american troops to come home the pullout coincide with the anniversary of the september eleventh two thousand one terror attacks that prompted the american invasion we witnessed one of several. Us strikes just behind. The taliban frontlines targets powerfully included artillery and anti-aircraft units a decade ago at the height of the ensuing war. There were one hundred thousand american troops in the country. Now there are around to thousand. They have an outsized influence serving as an anchor for other international forces that have kept a fragile peace forces that will now also make the exit with the taliban increasing. Its pressure and it's violence analysts diplomats and mr biden's own generals advised against a complete drawdown. Nevertheless he's pressing ahead. We've known for sometime. That joe biden is a skeptic of america's involvement in afghanistan. Daniel knowles is an international correspondent for the economist in two thousand nine when he does newly become vice. President afghanistan was in trouble then and he was an advocate for withdrawing most of america's troops and just leaving a small force accounts terrorism and he lost that argument bracco bombers president putin an awful lot. More troops and as commander in chief. I have determined that it is in our vital national interest to send an additional thirty thousand. Us troops to afghanistan

Afghanistan Joe Biden United States Taliban Mr Biden Daniel Knowles Bracco Putin
Fresh update on "taliban" discussed on Larry Wilmore: Black on the Air

Larry Wilmore: Black on the Air

00:45 min | 9 hrs ago

Fresh update on "taliban" discussed on Larry Wilmore: Black on the Air

"We sat down. He was about to turn eighty. Wow so he's eighty now and he said Sponsors like i asked more artfully like. Why are you talking to me is the like about eighty s. The boyne finally ready to reflect on. What i've done was really like sweet hiding you. Will you chalk it up to mislead seiger allen he said about watching a show called was the Ninety thousands dollars that he was he was on ninety. thousand stars. deniro seventy through all these. Old actor's still there and in return Prosper acting coach. He said you know what i see. I see stateful survivors. A survive in some that. I guess i'm a survivor. I guess i just made it worked from job to job. In iran eighty years old survived it. Yeah taliban there's also the navigation.

Ninety. Thousand Stars Ninety Thousands Dollars Eighty Seventy Eighty Years Old Deniro About Eighty Seiger Allen
Biden on Afghanistan: 'Time to End America's Longest War'

AP News Radio

00:49 sec | 3 d ago

Biden on Afghanistan: 'Time to End America's Longest War'

"President Biden says it is time to end America's longest war U. S. forces went into Afghanistan after nine eleven and excerpts of the speech you'll give this afternoon the president will say the attacks cannot explain why American troops should stay there nearly twenty years later US officials say the president will announce his plan to pull the remaining twenty five hundred forces out by this September eleventh in his words it is time for American troops to come home that will set a firm end to two decades of war that killed more than twenty two hundred U. S. service members the president's decision will keep troops there four months longer than initially planned defying a may first withdrawal deadline under a trump administration peace deal with the Taliban Sager mag ani Washington

President Biden Afghanistan America U. S. Service Taliban Ani Washington
Cheney: Afghanistan Withdrawal is a 'Huge Propaganda Victory' for Terrorists

Bloomberg Markets

00:45 sec | 3 d ago

Cheney: Afghanistan Withdrawal is a 'Huge Propaganda Victory' for Terrorists

"Out against President Jo. Biden's plan to pull U. S forces out of Afghanistan by September. 11th. Liz Cheney chairs the House GOP conference Now I'm not sure why the White House has selected that date. I can tell you that that is a huge victory. Huge propaganda victory for the Taliban for Al Qaeda. The notion that on the day that they attacked us, we're gonna mark that anniversary by withdrawing our forces. Congresswoman Cheney says any withdrawals that isn't conditions based puts American security at risk. President Biden will say we can't continue the cycle of extending the U. S president's hoping to create ideal conditions for withdrawal. President Biden's announcement is set for two p.m. Wall Street time from the White House. Bloomberg Radio will carry it live. The Coast Guard is continuing an

President Jo Liz Cheney House Gop President Biden U. Congresswoman Cheney Biden Afghanistan White House Al Qaeda Taliban Bloomberg Radio Coast Guard
US Troops to Leave Afghanistan on 20th Anniversary of 9/11

Pod Save the World

02:22 min | 3 d ago

US Troops to Leave Afghanistan on 20th Anniversary of 9/11

"The washington post broke the news. That president biden plans to withdraw. Us troops from afghanistan by september eleventh. A twenty twenty one. That's the twentieth anniversary of the nine. Eleven attacks biden is expected to officially announce this news on wednesday fourteen. So the day this this episode comes out. There's currently between twenty five hundred thirty five hundred. Us troops in afghanistan. And there's up to seven thousand international mostly nato troops. It sounds like biden's team landed on this withdrawal date in this decision. Because they know they can't meet the may one us troop withdrawal deadline that was negotiated by trump. But these peace talks that they've been trying to push forward are still going nowhere so they seem to think that by announcing the eleventh date they can split the difference they can delay the withdrawal which at this point is probably logistically impossible but not provoked the taliban into resuming attacks on us forces. Ben i'm guessing that all these nato forces will come out shortly after the. Us forces do because they rely on us for a lot of logistical support. There was a line in this post story. That said that some. Us counterterrorism assets will be positioned outside of afghanistan to remain capable of striking extremist groups in the country. I assume that's talking about some sort of drone based nearby. I don't know so. I guess my reaction to this news is i am extremely worried about what happens after we withdraw. But that. I think this is the right decision. Like so i worry. The taliban could gain territory. I worry about the stability of the afghan government. but i've also seen no evidence that a continued. Us presence will help solve those problems. And i've seen some people argue that the us being there actually makes everything worse. Any thoughts from you on this policy decision or the symbolism of trying to tie this withdrawal deadline to the twentieth anniversary of nine eleven. Yeah i mean. I think first of all people in particular progressives should understand that this is like a really big and bold decision by joe biden. Yes trump's at the deadline but trump said it like as he was walking out the door and you did not remove all troops and. That's the huge step. The big step is to get to two zero troops so this is not just an extension of trump biden had to be the one to take that decision and i'm certain that the military was cautioning against it. I'm certain that people were warning probably correctly that there's all kinds of negative scenarios could play out.

President Biden United States Afghanistan Biden Nato The Washington Post Taliban Afghan Government BEN Joe Biden Donald Trump
Biden to withdraw US troops from Afghanistan by September 11.

THE NEWS with Anthony Davis

02:00 min | 3 d ago

Biden to withdraw US troops from Afghanistan by September 11.

"I'm anthony davis president. Joe biden plans to withdraw the remaining two. And a half thousand. Us troops from afghanistan by september eleven. Twenty years to the day off to the al qaeda attacks that triggered america's longest war. Us officials said yesterday disclosure of the plan came on the same day that the us intelligence community released a gloomy outlook for afghanistan. Forecasting low chances of a peace deal this year and warning that its government would struggle to hold the taliban insurgency at bay if the us led coalition withdraws support. Biden's decision. would miss say may first deadline for withdrawal agreed to with the taliban by his predecessor. Donald trump the insurgents had threatened to resume hostilities against foreign troops. If that deadline was missed but biden would still be setting near-term withdrawal date potentially allaying taliban concerns a senior biden. Administration officials said. The pull outs would begin before may first and could be complete well. Before the september eleven deadline significantly it would not be subject to further conditions including security all human rights. Us secretary of state anthony blinken and s. defense secretary. Lloyd austin are expected to discuss the decision with nato allies in brussels. Today biden's decision suggests he has concluded that the us military presence will no longer be decisive. Achieving a lasting peace in afghanistan a core pentagon assumption. That has long underpinned. American troop deployments joe biden's administration has told congress is proceeding with more than twenty three billion dollars in weapons sales to the united arab emirates including

United States Taliban Afghanistan Anthony Davis Biden Joe Biden Al Qaeda Donald Trump Anthony Blinken Lloyd Austin Nato Brussels Pentagon Congress United Arab Emirates
Biden to Withdraw Troops From Afghanistan by Sept 11

The World and Everything In It

01:02 min | 3 d ago

Biden to Withdraw Troops From Afghanistan by Sept 11

"President biden has decided to leave american troops in afghanistan beyond the may first deadline. That was the time line. The trump administration negotiated with the taliban but the president still intends to withdraw all american troops. This year white house press secretary. Jen psaki the president has been consistent in his view that there's not a military solution To afghanistan that we have been there for far too long that has been his view for some time. President biden's new goal is to pull. Us troops out of afghanistan before the twentieth anniversary of the september eleventh attacks and according to multiple reports the pull out will not be conditions based us. Troops will depart regardless of the situation on the ground. Those reports drew sharp criticism from senate minority leader. Mitch mcconnell a reckless would abandon our afghan regional. Our nato partners in a shared fight against terrorists that we've not yet one mcconnell and some other top republicans were also critical of former president. Trump's plans to pull. us troops out of afghanistan. This year

President Biden Afghanistan Jen Psaki Taliban White House Mitch Mcconnell United States Senate Nato Mcconnell Donald Trump
Biden to Withdraw All Troops From Afghanistan by September

John McCulloch

00:21 sec | 4 d ago

Biden to Withdraw All Troops From Afghanistan by September

"President Biden reportedly plans to withdraw all American troops in Afghanistan later this year. Several reports say will happen by the 20th anniversary of the September 11th terrorist attacks is decision means 3000 troops that were scheduled to come home by May 1st under former President Trump's plan. We'll stay a little longer. Now. The Taliban has threatened that the more violence of the US keeps troops in that country beyond the May

President Biden Afghanistan Donald Trump Taliban United States
Biden to withdraw all troops from Afghanistan by 9/11

Bloomberg Businessweek

00:19 sec | 4 d ago

Biden to withdraw all troops from Afghanistan by 9/11

"Will withdraw all troops from Afghanistan by September 11th the 20th anniversary that terrorist attacks on America that were coordinated from that country. Decision goes against a May 1st deadline for full withdrawal under a peace agreement The Trump Administration reached with the Taliban last year on

Afghanistan America Trump Administration Taliban
US to Withdraw All Troops From Afghanistan by Sept. 11

AP News Radio

00:54 sec | 4 d ago

US to Withdraw All Troops From Afghanistan by Sept. 11

"The Biden ministration is setting a new deadline for pulling all US troops out of Afghanistan the twentieth anniversary of the attacks on America U. S. officials say president Biden plans to withdraw the remaining twenty five hundred American forces by September eleventh that defies the may first deadline the trump administration agreed to a peace deal with the Taliban last year it's been increasingly clear president Biden would let that time line laps spokeswoman Jen Psaki says the president will announce his move tomorrow and while she's not saying what it will be notes the president believes there is no military solution in Afghanistan that we have been there for far too long but the delayed pullout risks Taliban retaliation against U. S. and Afghan forces possibly escalating what many call the endless war Sager mag ani Washington

President Biden Biden Jen Psaki Afghanistan United States Taliban Sager Ani Washington
US to leave troops in Afghanistan beyond May, 9/11 new goal

AP News Radio

00:39 sec | 4 d ago

US to leave troops in Afghanistan beyond May, 9/11 new goal

"The U. S. has a new goal for pulling all troops out of Afghanistan the trump administration had negotiated a deadline with the Taliban for withdrawing by may first a U. S. official says president Biden's decided to leave troops there beyond today and and has set a new date September eleventh the twentieth anniversary of the attacks that led to the U. S. entering Afghanistan the president's been hinting for weeks that he let the may first deadline lapse it's been clear for days that an orderly pull out of the twenty five hundred troops still in Afghanistan was unlikely Sager mag ani Washington

Trump Administration President Biden U. Afghanistan Taliban Ani Washington
Optimize Your Brain: Fighting Cognitive Decline With Nutrition & Lifestyle

The Rich Roll Podcast

08:17 min | 3 weeks ago

Optimize Your Brain: Fighting Cognitive Decline With Nutrition & Lifestyle

"What is it about age or maybe neurology that makes people set in their ways as they get older. It is a weird thing right. It really is more difficult to entertain new ideas. I think it varies from person to person but in my experience just comfort you know when once you set a path in. You're comfortable with it. Your brain doesn't really allow you to change that math. It's like walking on a snow track. It's so deeply set in the walls or sol-solid that it's difficult for you to actually make a new pathogens and it requires a lot of reflection and judgment and being okay to make mistakes and the discomfort in being uncomfortable the comfort in being uncomfortable. They can help you set noise but it does seem like that becomes much more of a challenge. It does it does We the whole idea of change is not normal. I'm talking about chronic change acute chain. We're good at it because an acute change we had to for millions of years. There's a tree there's a lion you know. Better make change in my decision making. I'm not going to go down. This stop long-term change were not designed for that were not our brains are not designed for long term change. That's a completely different mechanism. And and if we and if we don't address that i mean to be honest i know that it's not be recalled. Our political stances. Everything is around this concept of being with change. I always say about. Five percent of population is future seekers. Another ninety five percent is passed protectors And you have to be pass protector in many ways because protection has worked. Whatever has gotten you here as you depending on the past patterns right but all the change in society in the world around us is by those five percent. Whatever i'm using arbitrary number that are comfortable. This is weird. People comfortable with change with the unknown. The three hundred sixty degrees of are known. You're willing to go there and yet this house. that's comfortable you're willing to leave it to go to the next place. That's an unusual concept Were which comes with the frontal lobe but but That's why as we get older. We become more set on all the strings that connects us to the past. You want us. To sever sever sever suffers to go to a new path. That is unknown at a time. Where i'm already vulnerable. Yeah that's too much risk. Yeah yeah is there a genetic piece to that when you look at that five percent can you isolate out what it is that distinguishes them neurologically from very early. You can tell there. There's a genetic component environmental component that genetic anxiety is at the core of all this stuff or term that is like anxiety we using anxiety as a just as a word. That's as filler. But it's a little more than that. Our ability to deal with the world around us for the most part for at the beginning is genetically you can see children. We have two children both trust me. We're gonna talk about them. But they're very precocious. Yeah incredibly but the understatement of the century go ahead make very different very different. Alex is what you could see when you when you I'm not putting him down. Because this is not a weakness this is just our proclivities. We can change you when you put him on the sand when he was six months. Old us som- do this. He hated sand. Sofi would crawl to the ocean. Having right away. I mean that's a threat. Why are you not threatened. By very thing you're supposed to be threatened by north right so that threat aversion versus not the river part of it is intrinsically ingrained in us part of it is actually data shows part of. It's actually program how your mother reacts to anxiety provoking moments mother because the is there all the time wherever you're around the most and how they react know how they promote challenging situations and anxiety provok- situation how they react with it and how they deal with it is the forget about leadership masters. I got a phd. Forget about that ends and starts there. Yeah you create situations that are a little bit anxiety provoking. You fail nothing. My parents didn't react badly. You succeed great how you react. And how does micro environments of threat version threat response. Threat creation and response is the foundation of all leadership. Yeah i would think from an environmental perspective or i mean an evolutionary perspective that You know maintaining your membership in good standing with your community is paramount right. So if that community is welcoming to people who pushed the boundaries and try new things. That's one thing but if that sort of thinking outside the box is gonna alienate you than You there's gonna be some pushback right there's a disincentive. That's that's butting up against somebody's willingness to entertain new ideas or try new things always an and the culture that's been set in place that creates an aversion to change the language the micro languages that anything that somebody brings that his little threatening to the status quo. You have things out. This is a this is arrogant. The word arrogant to push away. People who have new ideas is universe. It's it's such a ubiquitous silencing technique and When you look at when you look at the main reason why people are not willing to change his the fear of being ostracized like you said. Nobody wants to get out of that comfortable zone. Because it's really difficult to be alone in your way of life in your new methodology in your new habits and that's that's the first step that people have to challenge themselves to take over right given that though it's interesting that most environments are not really that permissive when it comes to free thinking and creative expression and most are pretty regimented around. What's okay and what's not but it would. It would seem like we should be more encouraging to that permissive environments. And why is that. Why are we not able to make that more. The case as opposed to you know the slim five percent or whatever it is. Yeah well we have ghanistan and with taliban around us yet. That same mentality exists here in the medical community and by the way this is me not bashing dramatic medical community like part of the only the medical community here to know about just their mentality. that's all know. But but the stagnant comfort with the status quo. Right is the same thing. I mean the hallways of your limbic system are the same You might have put it better clothes and better beards and you know my beard was a little better here than that but if the mentality is i must maintain it's not always over. I must maintain the status. And i don't know even why because it makes me uncomfortable. It's a satan. yeah. I mean to In two thousand two before we met two months earlier. I'm an experimental therapeutics branch. That's as wonky as as experimental as it gets speaking with nobel prize winners two months later. I'm in afghanistan. Speaking with taliban leaders. Both places trying to bring change. And i can promise you. The the the language was much more sophisticated But the blockades same protection of the status quo. That's why i mean when we talk about. Dementia we talk about stroke. We talk about mental health. Even now that repetition of the same patterns over and over again. I'm now some other. Studies are starting with clinical trial with hundred people. Fifty people six. We're done. We know what works.

Foundation Of All Leadership Sofi Alex Paramount Taliban Afghanistan Dementia Stroke
U.S. defense chief visits Afghanistan as troop deadline looms

the NewsWorthy

00:53 sec | 3 weeks ago

U.S. defense chief visits Afghanistan as troop deadline looms

"The new. Us defense secretary made a surprise trip to afghanistan. It's his first trip to the home of america's longest war as pentagon chief and he met with the afghan president. The trip is happening as president biden faces an upcoming deadline to decide whether or not to withdraw. Us troops from the country by may i. That's the timeline. The trump administration had agreed on early last year deal with the taliban there in afghanistan and as part of that deal the us would withdraw troops from the country by may in exchange the taliban a militant group. They're in the country promised to do things like end attacks on afghan security forces in stop all support of terrorist groups at this point defense secretary. Lloyd austin will not say whether the taliban is keeping up their side of the deal but political reports he did say violence in the country is still too high and some top generals are warning that may first deadline would be too soon to send troops home.

President Biden United States Afghanistan Taliban Pentagon Lloyd Austin
Pentagon chief lands in Afghanistan ahead of troop withdrawal deadline

Raul Campos

00:53 sec | 3 weeks ago

Pentagon chief lands in Afghanistan ahead of troop withdrawal deadline

"Secretary Lloyd Austin is meeting with the president of Afghanistan. He arrived in Kabul today, marking his first trip to the country as Pentagon chief. NPR's D headed reports. Austin's visit comes amid uncertainty as to how long American forces will stay in the country. Defense Secretary Austin's unannounced visit was first reported by local media. He arrived in Kabul from India. He's expected to make senior officials including the Afghan president, Ashraf Honey. His visit comes days after President Biden said it would be tough to meet him a first deadline to withdraw troops from Afghanistan. US agreed to that deadline in a deal side with the Taliban lost February. But Biden said American forces wouldn't stay a lot longer. The Taliban, though, have warned of consequences if that deal isn't met. That could include renewed attacks on foreign forces. Indeed. NPR NEWS ISLAMABAD

Secretary Lloyd Austin Kabul Defense Secretary Austin Ashraf Honey Afghanistan President Biden NPR Pentagon Austin Taliban India Biden United States Islamabad
Determining when U. S troops

Morning Edition

01:18 min | Last month

Determining when U. S troops

"Says it will be tough for his administration to meet the May 1st deadline to withdraw all U. S troops from Afghanistan. Speaking to ABC is Good Morning America. Biden says he's still determining when U. S troops should depart. The deadline was set in talks last year with the Taliban, but peace talks between the militants and the Afghan government have since faltered. The National Weather Service is warning conditions are ripe for exceptionally damaging storms Today in the South Bill Bunting is chief of forecast operations with the National Weather Service's Storm Prediction Center. He says. People from Texas to Georgia need to be ready. We expect the storms to be that quite intense the potential for several long track intense tornadoes exists. So it's really critical that people prepare now before the storm's approach because they'll be fast moving. The threat will extend well after dark when it's hard to see the dangers, and so it's just really important that everybody's ready. Currently, there's a tornado warning in northeast Mississippi. Another storm system is hitting the Panhandle of Texas under Blizzard warning. Campaign to recall California Governor Gavin Newsom faces a deadline today, people must turn in the required number of petition signatures to force an election. Member station

U. Afghan Government National Weather Service Bill Bunting Biden Storm Prediction Center ABC Afghanistan Taliban America Texas Georgia Governor Gavin Newsom Mississippi California
expand-test

Morning Edition

00:59 min | Last month

expand-test

"That quite intense the potential for several long track intense tornadoes exists. So it's really critical that people prepare now before the storm's approach because they'll be fast moving. The threat will extend well after dark when it's hard to see the dangers, and so it's just really important that everybody's ready. Currently, there's a tornado warning in northeast Mississippi. Another storm system is hitting the Panhandle of Texas under Blizzard warning. Campaign to recall California Governor Gavin Newsom faces a deadline today, people must turn in the required number of petition signatures to force an election. Member station KQED Guy Maharani prepared this report. Supporters of the recall say they've collected the nearly 1.5 million voter signatures needed to force an election later this year. And on Tuesday, Newsome conceded his facing a serious challenge. Look, we're anticipating that they've got the signatures. The recall campaign has

Governor Gavin Newsom Guy Maharani Mississippi Texas California Newsome
Determining when U. S troops

Morning Edition

01:46 min | Last month

Determining when U. S troops

"About 150 miles south of Atlanta. Police say he is a suspect and shootings that one massage parlor in Cherokee County and at two in Atlanta, according to police surveillance video shows long at the Cherokee County spot where women were killed and another injured. Atlanta Police say there's a strong likelihood long is the suspect in the Atlantic killings after his car was spotted in the area of the other two spas where another four women were killed. Motive has not yet been determined for NPR news. I'm Millie Oppenheimer in Atlanta. President Biden says it will be tough for his administration to meet the May 1st deadline to withdraw all U. S troops from Afghanistan. Speaking to ABC is Good Morning America. Biden says he's still determining when U. S troops should depart. The deadline was set in talks last year with the Taliban, but peace talks between the militants and the Afghan government have since faltered. The National Weather Service is warning conditions are ripe for exceptionally damaging storms Today in the South Bill Bunting is chief of forecast operations with the National Weather Service's Storm Prediction Center. He says. People from Texas to Georgia need to be ready. We expect the storms to be that quite intense the potential for several long track intense tornadoes exists. So it's really critical that people prepare now before the storm's approach because they'll be fast moving. The threat will extend well after dark when it's hard to see the dangers, and so it's just really important that everybody's ready. Currently, there's a tornado warning in northeast Mississippi. Another storm system is hitting the Panhandle of Texas under Blizzard warning. Campaign to recall California Governor Gavin Newsom faces a deadline today, people

Atlanta Cherokee County Npr News Millie Oppenheimer President Biden U. Afghan Government National Weather Service Bill Bunting Atlantic Biden Storm Prediction Center ABC Afghanistan Taliban America Texas Georgia Mississippi
"taliban" Discussed on The Economist: The Intelligence

The Economist: The Intelligence

07:30 min | 10 months ago

"taliban" Discussed on The Economist: The Intelligence

"In Afghanistan there are some signs of progress towards longed for an elusive peace. The Afghan government and Taliban militants are set to begin peace talks in Qatar as early as this month. The way negotiations was paved in February when America and the Taliban signed a peace agreement with the goal of a near total withdrawal of American troops. Speaking at the Aspen Security Forum earlier this month. American General Kenneth F Mackenzie expressed cautious optimism. So I think the governor. Afghanistan is poised to begin those inter-afghan negotiations. That is going to be a key event. That's days in the future, and that's going to be a hinge moment. I think in the future of Afghanistan. But the agreement had some conditions that are still proving tricky. The difficulties of arisen really because the details of those conditions were vague, the original US steel. Ben Farmer writes about Afghanistan for the Economist. The first one was a prisoner swap, and the idea was the five Taliban prisoners who are currently held by the Afghan government would be released. In return the Taliban would free one thousand. Afghan government prisoners, those largely soldiers and policemen who held by the militants they have come. Governments have been very reluctant to release all of these prisoners and see some very big bargaining chip, and it doesn't see why it should give them all up in advance of the talks, and indeed from the original text of the Dale it wasn't clear that they did have to give them all up at once, but the Taliban of being unwilling to move on this and they've said the talks will not start until five. Thousand of them have been freed taken months months to resolve that. We quite close to that now i. think there's a few hundred left. I'm told to the difficulty is the deploy. A couple of hundred of those are really quite. Jehad has they've been convicted of some terrible crimes? An Afghan government really doesn't want to release them. Indeed, international community doesn't want them to be freed either. So that's the last stumbling points on those prisoners, but thanks necessarily a showstopper. and has been the only sticking point in the agreement. The other thing that's been difficult to get these talks underway is the Afghan government wanted a reduction in violence. They want the Taliban to show that they're serious. They're committed to talking rather than fighting. Taliban have not been that keen on doing that. Violence is their biggest leverage in this whole system. The Taliban were only at the negotiating table because they've conducted a very ruthless very bloody insurgency campaign, which has gone on for more than fifteen years now, but there was a breakthrough at the end of Ramadan one hundred ended last month, the number of attacks go down enough for the Afghan government to knowledge that adapted in made. So once we get these prisoners swapped. It looks like talks may well be able to begin. And how does all of this intersect with the the withdrawal of American troops? What's what has to happen? with the talks before US troops actually get out when America's signed the deal in Doha back in February. They said that they would. Out over the next fourteen months they've gone from about fourteen thousand troops to about eight and a half thousand. So really they've got nine and a half months to complete the rest of their withdrawal, but what the conditions are on what's in the deal a very very vague, so we don't know for example what the Americans will do. If talks break down, or if violence escalates, will a hold fan. Withdrawal will as needs being. We'll send more troops back. The presumption seems to be that if these talks go badly, Rome, or very very slowly than America will probably stop its troop withdrawal. But I think probably beyond the text of the deal, the biggest factor which will decide what the Americans do will be what happens in the American election. MR TRUMP is very very keen to get out of Afghanistan Tom. He's talked about getting out of these endless walls, and so if the Afghan withdrawal becomes an election issue and couldn't boil me say he's very keen to get out come once. May so I think the electoral calculus will have a huge effect mess? So, what is the the long term picture here? What does each side of this one in a long run? Well, we've been talking about an Afghan peace process for so long that you'd think that we knew what both sides wanted, but it's far from clear. Now gain to the Taliban I. They've let very loud about what they actually want. Our the country will be run. What vision for people's rights they They see and so on, and that's really a big worry for a lot of people who have terrible memories of how the Taliban governments and the nine hundred ninety s you recall is very strict Islamic government women were denied rights. They were denied education. They were denied a chance to work. A men were made to grow beards television. Television music things like that were outlawed so any since there's going to be a return to that would horrify lots of Afghans and lots of people in the international community. All the Taliban have said is they want to have a government which is founded on Islamic principles and they say that also people's rights will be protected, but under Islam and what about on the Afghan government side again? They've been very vague Ashraf Ghani the president. He gave a talk in Washington earlier this month. And he said that they Afghanistan is going to be a sovereign democratic united republic, but what that means in terms of the system of government is not clear, and both these things are going to be have to be hammered out over what I suspect will be months and months and months, and what is the relationship between the Afghan government and the Taliban and besides trying to play of hardball the relationship? Relationship is very very difficult. These archenemies deadly enemies. They are talking the moments, and they're both saying that they wished to talk, but then with the other hand they'll killing each other in very large numbers the even with reduction violence. We're still talking about potentially to hundreds of people dying every week. Even I mean you really are talking about a negotiation which is going on in the teeth of a pulling bloodshed. And the peace process itself. Is it likely to your mind to to to be aimed at real results, or do you think it's just kind of been hastily arranged to cover the fact that the the the Americans want out I think probably the answer is both I think that there is no doubt Mr. trump wants to leave is sort of railed against Barack. Obama's endless wars is complained that America has become the world's policeman and. And he really told his support base to one of his pledges that he will bring troops home from these endless wars, but at the same time I don't know anyone who thinks that there is a sensible alternative to the the Afghan situation which is not based on some kind of talks, so he may want to get out, but that doesn't mean the talks on genuine on on really seen as the only way to get outs. Ben Thank you very much for joining us? For a lot more analysis like this.

Taliban Afghan government Afghanistan America US Mr. trump General Kenneth F Mackenzie Aspen Security Forum Barack Qatar Ben Farmer Ashraf Ghani Jehad Doha Rome Washington president united republic
"taliban" Discussed on The Economist: The Intelligence

The Economist: The Intelligence

07:30 min | 10 months ago

"taliban" Discussed on The Economist: The Intelligence

"In Afghanistan there are some signs of progress towards longed for an elusive peace. The Afghan government and Taliban militants are set to begin peace talks in Qatar as early as this month. The way negotiations was paved in February when America and the Taliban signed a peace agreement with the goal of a near total withdrawal of American troops. Speaking at the Aspen Security Forum earlier this month. American General Kenneth F Mackenzie expressed cautious optimism. So I think the governor. Afghanistan is poised to begin those inter-afghan negotiations. That is going to be a key event. That's days in the future, and that's going to be a hinge moment. I think in the future of Afghanistan. But the agreement had some conditions that are still proving tricky. The difficulties of arisen really because the details of those conditions were vague, the original US steel. Ben Farmer writes about Afghanistan for the Economist. The first one was a prisoner swap, and the idea was the five Taliban prisoners who are currently held by the Afghan government would be released. In return the Taliban would free one thousand. Afghan government prisoners, those largely soldiers and policemen who held by the militants they have come. Governments have been very reluctant to release all of these prisoners and see some very big bargaining chip, and it doesn't see why it should give them all up in advance of the talks, and indeed from the original text of the Dale it wasn't clear that they did have to give them all up at once, but the Taliban of being unwilling to move on this and they've said the talks will not start until five. Thousand of them have been freed taken months months to resolve that. We quite close to that now i. think there's a few hundred left. I'm told to the difficulty is the deploy. A couple of hundred of those are really quite. Jehad has they've been convicted of some terrible crimes? An Afghan government really doesn't want to release them. Indeed, international community doesn't want them to be freed either. So that's the last stumbling points on those prisoners, but thanks necessarily a showstopper. and has been the only sticking point in the agreement. The other thing that's been difficult to get these talks underway is the Afghan government wanted a reduction in violence. They want the Taliban to show that they're serious. They're committed to talking rather than fighting. Taliban have not been that keen on doing that. Violence is their biggest leverage in this whole system. The Taliban were only at the negotiating table because they've conducted a very ruthless very bloody insurgency campaign, which has gone on for more than fifteen years now, but there was a breakthrough at the end of Ramadan one hundred ended last month, the number of attacks go down enough for the Afghan government to knowledge that adapted in made. So once we get these prisoners swapped. It looks like talks may well be able to begin. And how does all of this intersect with the the withdrawal of American troops? What's what has to happen? with the talks before US troops actually get out when America's signed the deal in Doha back in February. They said that they would. Out over the next fourteen months they've gone from about fourteen thousand troops to about eight and a half thousand. So really they've got nine and a half months to complete the rest of their withdrawal, but what the conditions are on what's in the deal a very very vague, so we don't know for example what the Americans will do. If talks break down, or if violence escalates, will a hold fan. Withdrawal will as needs being. We'll send more troops back. The presumption seems to be that if these talks go badly, Rome, or very very slowly than America will probably stop its troop withdrawal. But I think probably beyond the text of the deal, the biggest factor which will decide what the Americans do will be what happens in the American election. MR TRUMP is very very keen to get out of Afghanistan Tom. He's talked about getting out of these endless walls, and so if the Afghan withdrawal becomes an election issue and couldn't boil me say he's very keen to get out come once. May so I think the electoral calculus will have a huge effect mess? So, what is the the long term picture here? What does each side of this one in a long run? Well, we've been talking about an Afghan peace process for so long that you'd think that we knew what both sides wanted, but it's far from clear. Now gain to the Taliban I. They've let very loud about what they actually want. Our the country will be run. What vision for people's rights they They see and so on, and that's really a big worry for a lot of people who have terrible memories of how the Taliban governments and the nine hundred ninety s you recall is very strict Islamic government women were denied rights. They were denied education. They were denied a chance to work. A men were made to grow beards television. Television music things like that were outlawed so any since there's going to be a return to that would horrify lots of Afghans and lots of people in the international community. All the Taliban have said is they want to have a government which is founded on Islamic principles and they say that also people's rights will be protected, but under Islam and what about on the Afghan government side again? They've been very vague Ashraf Ghani the president. He gave a talk in Washington earlier this month. And he said that they Afghanistan is going to be a sovereign democratic united republic, but what that means in terms of the system of government is not clear, and both these things are going to be have to be hammered out over what I suspect will be months and months and months, and what is the relationship between the Afghan government and the Taliban and besides trying to play of hardball the relationship? Relationship is very very difficult. These archenemies deadly enemies. They are talking the moments, and they're both saying that they wished to talk, but then with the other hand they'll killing each other in very large numbers the even with reduction violence. We're still talking about potentially to hundreds of people dying every week. Even I mean you really are talking about a negotiation which is going on in the teeth of a pulling bloodshed. And the peace process itself. Is it likely to your mind to to to be aimed at real results, or do you think it's just kind of been hastily arranged to cover the fact that the the the Americans want out I think probably the answer is both I think that there is no doubt Mr. trump wants to leave is sort of railed against Barack. Obama's endless wars is complained that America has become the world's policeman and. And he really told his support base to one of his pledges that he will bring troops home from these endless wars, but at the same time I don't know anyone who thinks that there is a sensible alternative to the the Afghan situation which is not based on some kind of talks, so he may want to get out, but that doesn't mean the talks on genuine on on really seen as the only way to get outs. Ben Thank you very much for joining us? For a lot more analysis like this.

Taliban Afghan government Afghanistan America US Mr. trump General Kenneth F Mackenzie Aspen Security Forum Barack Qatar Ben Farmer Ashraf Ghani Jehad Doha Rome Washington president united republic
"taliban" Discussed on The Current

The Current

03:27 min | 11 months ago

"taliban" Discussed on The Current

"That is less well-known. It's when the Mujahedeen who were fighting against the Communist fighting against the Soviet Union actually took Kabul after the fall of the Soviet Union and they ended up tearing the city apart and I really terrible power struggle. One filmmaker was really able to document that and it's a real truth to power documentary. It took me a really long time to find out where DOT director lives, but it turned out in the end that he lived in Montreal where I live, so that was an incredible discovery. The story of these films is one thing the story of the film surviving the Taliban is something completely different. As I mentioned in the introduction, the Taliban made it its business to go and destroy culture to eliminate things that had found blasphemous. You would assume that these films would've been incinerated as part of that effort. How did they survive? Well fascinating story in. It's a theme that we see recurring history. That, even though there's different ideologies, people from different sides were able to cooperate over things that were essential to them. So what you see is that during the Taliban period, and it's right around the time when the put his hand were destroyed that same band of kind of radical radical brand of the Taliban came to the film archive to destroy the film. The archivists you were there actually hit the snow. And the reason that they knew to do that was because an Afghan Taliban official whose name is Alka? Nivea me let them know kind of tip them off that that the Taliban were coming until they were able to hide the films and what they did as an act of subterfuge with actually offered them films that were less valuable, and they burn those films and thought that they had destroyed Afghanistan film heritage, but which of course with was kept safe you you interview the Taliban official. Who decided to save these films? What did he tell you? What was it like to speak with him knowing? The risk that he took because he was told essentially bring it the films, and if you don't you know, you'll pay with your life. That's right. This is an ex. Taliban official now living in Kabul in relative obscurity, and he came forward to talk about this story, and the fascinating thing was that you offered to come to the archives. That's where he felt comfortable to come and talk, and when he arrived the archivist of today, and and all of the people working under the current government. They welcomed him with really open arms I mean he was embraced and really welcomed, and you can see that culturally you know. This is a man who is waiting a different aspect of being very conservative, very religious. And yet you know all of these film filmmakers architects, we're able to really really really give him a hero's welcome. And then he sat down and told his story on what he said among other things is that? It wasn't an official Taliban policy to burn the films. In fact, there was a band of radical who were doing this kind of i. kind of classic behavior of destroying anything that they considered to be idolatry right? I mean included the film's not. but because at the time had power, he was an official. He was able to to about early on what would be in it for him as an Afghan man to risk his life. Sure it might have been not official policy, but we know how severe the consequences would.

Taliban official Kabul Soviet Union Montreal DOT director Afghanistan Alka
"taliban" Discussed on Worldly

Worldly

06:08 min | 1 year ago

"taliban" Discussed on Worldly

"The Taliban has been pretty ruthless when it comes to the ISIS presence in their country right there has been a reason why I forget what the name I think. It was like say correspond province. Or something like that that Is this guy. Says Kay that they had been Trying to build up that it hadn't hadn't really taken a foothold or become a major player in the Afghan conflict. And it's not just that the coalition forces were against it it's that's Taliban aligned forces believed that they didn't want a more radical presence in their midst. They didn't want Isis there. They saw the threat to their control over power. I'm not saying they're altruistic and like concerned about there being international terrorism stronghold in Afghanistan. I mean come on but they do seem to see the presence of these other groups as threaten if you had been nearly destroyed by the US in two thousand one as a result of the nine eleven attacks. I think rationally not want to become a launching pad for international terrorism. We'll say quickly though and I agree to some degree with that analysis however it's important to actually understand who this isis in in Afghanistan really is for the most part a and part of it is they. I wasn't able to get a super strong foothold in part because the Taliban like you said it wasn't super excited about that but the problem here. Is that the mostly what we call Isis in Afghanistan now? It's essentially the Taliban factions of the Taliban who are far more radical who have splintered off and decided we're going to rebrand and then there's maybe like one or two guys from Syria that I sent to say. Hey we'll we'll keep the line open to the headquarters back home. And the reason I bring that up is it actually matters very seriously because the role that these groups that these splinter cell's at the far more radical elements of the Taliban can play as a spoiler and peace. Negotiations is is not zero. It's very serious. And so if for example the Taliban has now signed a peace agreement or are sort of a memo of understanding whatever. We're calling with the United States. That in and of itself is something that a lot of people who are far more radical far more extremist within the Taliban. Or on the fringes or splinters off are going to be very very very unhappy about and if they sit down now and start talking to the Afghan government which they have opposed for their whole existence. They were the Afghan government for a while they believe they are the legitimate rulers of Afghanistan. That's GONNA probably pissed some people off and the the likelihood that they could then you know. Further tempt to try to play spoilers and see further attacks that are you know. Questionable is the the Taliban. Is this isis and is this the Taliban not controlling ice? You know it gets really really messy. So that's kind of where I think. Trump's statement that they're going to be killing. The terrorist is a little too glib and simplistic for the reality on the ground. It's one of those situations where controller murky it's unclear who's affiliated with whom there's some degree of Pakistani influence over all it's a complex and very difficult to penetrate outsiders and analysts are sort of guessing based on publicly available information to try to make sense of what's going on It also does strike me that the incentives the Taliban and I think rightly wants the. Us gone because that will give them or bargaining leverage with the Afghan government. Then they will have an incentive to crack down on the more radical fringes. Or if there's some kind of attempt to play spoiler to conduct an attack during further peace negotiations to police their own people people who are broadly speaking on their side. I mean that that all depends on a certain set of assumptions about the Taliban leaderships mindset. Which is that they actually want the US out under negotiated terms rather than just you know. Fight it out until the. Us unilaterally withdraws but under those assumptions than trump's comments the general framework in theory behind the US approach here makes a lot more sense. And I think that's defensible. If not obviously craft yeah and and I agree with that. I made a little if he hand me down there. No I think you're right. I think the argument of whether or not this is truly negotiated terms on on both sides that the US and the Taliban have both come from a position of relatively equal power and are now negotiating the terms withdrawal or whether this is literally the Taliban fought it out until the US decided to withdraw. You can argue and we have a really smart piece on this site by a freelance writer. Who interviewed a lot of people on the ground in Afghanistan about what they think about the potential withdrawal of US troops and one person he spoke with said the US is negotiating the terms of surrender. Which is a very stark realization. Now whether or not you agree with that it's obviously you know very nuance but there is very much a perception that the US is just kind of throwing up. Its hands and walking away and trying to come up with the finished veneer of sure. There's a peace agreement. Everything's GonNa be okay now. We can finally get the hell out of. I want to take a short break now but when we come back. That's exactly the theme. I WANNA pick up. I WanNa talk about the big picture here. Starting with the sort of question that I think a lot of Americans have which is. Did we just lose to? We just agree that we've lost. Hello this is Jesse David Fox News senior editor at Volker podcast. Good one eight podcast about jokes. It's a podcast about well jokes. Every week I sit down with a comedian comedy writer or director of their jokes and figure out how it all came together. I don't sit down with a pen and pad and physically write down everything I just has not my style turns out comedians. Take jokes pretty seriously. I like all jokes. Okay that's what I do. That's what I live with is really nothing else I care about. It's all very revealing. What did you learn from this what was your takeaway on? Nothing guy. I'm not. I'm not sure Mar Person. Good one from Volturno box media podcast network. Subscribe for free on Apple podcasts. Or on your favorite podcasts. At home do not use the podcast. Apper.

Taliban United States Afghanistan Afghan government ISIS Trump Kay writer Volturno Apple Syria Jesse David Fox senior editor director
"taliban" Discussed on First Person

First Person

12:11 min | 1 year ago

"taliban" Discussed on First Person

"I've been asked to go back several times. Colin Powell called a couple of times and asked me to go back Gandhi. Rice also asked me to go back as ambassador to Pakistan and I was happy where I was and not inclined to return to government service in two thousand thirteen John Kerry called. He was then Secretary of State Secretary of state out of the blue and asked me to come back to succeed to the job that Dick Holbrooke had had and then mark Roseman succeeded him and then I was to succeed mark as the special representative for Afghanistan Pakistan. At that point I'd been out of the Government for eleven years and I knew that this was probably the last time any secretary of state was gonNA call and last opportunity for government service And so I. I thought it was an offer worth digging and I went back for about eighteen months. How did this situation changed on the ground? At that point Bush attitudes toward nation-building at changed by the second administration so he had been very opposed to it at taking minimus approach to it and had spared resources comprehensively first in Afghanistan then in Iraq and had same consequences in Iraq that has created a vacuum that at the opposition could fill and violent resistant movements emerged in both cases because of that vacuum but by a second term he had shifted and had embraced nation building in all but name with the author of a new convert And so you saw you know the surge in Iraq and a major commitment of economic resources and he would have liked to have done the same thing in Afghanistan but they frankly admitted they just didn't have the resources there just weren't enough troops to go around. There were so heavily committed in Iraq that Afghanistan still had to be a minimal commitment when Obama came in he had campaigned on a theme. That Afghanistan was the good war. Iraq had been a mistake. Afghanistan wasn't a mistake and so he was going to shift resources and he originally did that but he said a time limit to it. Is that a fairly short time limit to it. So he sent at one point up to one hundred thousand troops in Afghanistan but he gave them a deadline of a year or so to accomplish their mission and then he began withdrawing. What was that mission? Well the mission was to recover as much territory as possible push. Taleban back helped the Afghan government secure effective control of its territory and effective protection of its population. The twenty thirteen when you come in. We've begun drawing down and there were even talks of peace talks with Taiwan on well. The Obama Administration had moved toward peace talks with the Taliban beginning in two thousand ten and it had some secret contacts that Dick Holbrooke had been charged with. I don't think he conducted them as deputy did but he was. He was motor for this effort and he persuaded. Secretary State Clinton and Obama and they agreed and so there were initial secret contacts with the Taliban and they were trying to move toward a more form an open process and the obstacle became our insistence that the Afghan government needed to be included in talks. And the Taliban's resistance insistence that. No they would only talk to the United States not to the Afghan government and on that basis. The talks collapsed so a year later we got signals that the Taliban had altered its position and they were now prepared to talk to the states and to the Afghan government separately but coincidentally at the same time. And so we moved forward toward publicly acknowledged negotiations with the Taliban which we take place in Doha. Which of course is where they are taking place and that collapsed over a disagreement over how the Taleban name itself and what kind of flag would fly so talks. Broke up over that disagreement which I think was largely a fault of the Qatari mediators who were hosting and making arrangements for this office and I think they were inexperienced and gave the Taliban poor signals. I don't think it was necessarily Taleban effort to sabotage the effort. I think it was a genuine misunderstanding. Based on poor information delivered by the Qataris was there an interest by means Karzai to sit down with the Taliban. Yes what he didn't want was negotiation conducted exclusively by the United States but he had been pushing for peace talks with the Taliban even before the United States said embraced it. In fact back in two thousand to Mullah Omar had offered to surrender Karzai Many other Taliban notables senior people in their government had offered to surrender some of them did surrender and 'cause I was inclined to issue an amnesty United States block that and sent the Taliban officials who did surrender to Guantanamo to the US. Prison in Bagaram where they stayed for a number of years back in January we learned that the trump administration was thinking about peace talks with the Taliban about the full drawdown. You were among people who expressed concern about what it would look like if we fully pull out of Afghanistan why well I supported efforts for peace negotiations from the beginning I supported what Holbrooke was doing when it was still secret. I participated in a mission that went to Afghanistan and Pakistan and other places talked to the Taleban unofficially And we issued a report urging that the administration embrace peace talks which ultimately publicly did and of course I saw it to initiate talks in two thousand thirteen fourteen I was concerned about unilateral withdrawal or premature withdrawal. And I continue to be concerned. I've supported partial draw down in exchange for The opening of full negotiations between the Afghan government and the Taliban and I thought that was a price worth paying and worst doing but I do think that if the US leaves before the Afghan star talking to each other. They'll never start talking to each other if the US leaves after they start talking to each other but before they reach an agreement they'll never reach agreement and if we leave after they reach an agreement before they implement the agreement. They'll never implement the agreement because a major leverage that we have over the Taliban is our presence in our continued support. Does that mean civil war? I mean when you say they'll never reach an agreement doesn't mean more it means a more intense war and potentially a multisided war. I think what is principally concerned and most people who know a lot about Afghanistan is that you'll return to the disorder of early nineties phase in which the Taliban will be competing with our not with a constituted government. That's recognized internationally. But with several factions with the Northern Alliance with the Islamic state with regional warlords and that will promote much higher levels of violence in the ninety s you had seven eight million Afghans that had fled the country and that was a population of twenty five minutes. Now THIRTY MILLION. So if you had a comparable exodus you now have ten million. Afghan slating the country under those kinds of situations. And that's the concern of what would happen if the US just walked away from this and not just the US but they're also about four thousand non US NATO troops there. We've had now two administrations very committed to drawing down or or leaving Afghanistan altogether. Can you imagine a scenario where is simply a presence in Afghanistan open ended early? I can easily imagine it. Shot as if this is a issue that predominates in the American debate. It's not as if there's a strong constituency that's insisting that we withdraw you know. Afghanistan has very little support and very little opposition and the American body politic. It's just not high on the list. Not High endless principally because the commitment is very small and the casualties of very low the US military's losing farmer people in training accidents than it's losing combat in Afghanistan. Now every tragedy and. I'm not trying to belittle the casualties. We take but the Afghans are bearing the bulk of the consequences and far greater number of casualties. The real issue is cost it. It is a substantial commitment. It's about twenty billion dollars a year to sustain the effort and that's a significant cost. I mean it's in a half trillion dollar defense budget so it's not overwhelming but it's significant enough so that one would want to reduce it You know I've Long said that. The options in Afghanistan aren't winning or losing winning in military census. Probably NOT AN OPTION. The choices losing or not losing and losing as significant consequences for our credibility for the commitments. We've made for the role of women in society as one example for the health of the society in Afghanistan is a very different place than it was when we arrived in two thousand one longevity is up literacy is up standard of living up. It's a much more urban society It has a free press. It has vibrant television radio and written press network with lots of competition. All those things would be over. Could you imagine eighteen? Years ago that you'd be sitting here having this conversation about a peace process with the todd on that it would have taken this long or that. This is where we'd be. No I mean I. We made to May basic mistakes in two thousand one two thousand two one of which I spotted and opposed and yellow owner which is responsible for as anyone so the one mistake was that we thought a country that had no army. No police force could take care of its own security and so refused to deploy a peacekeeping force. We've refused to our troops to do any peacekeeping. We left security entirely to the Afghans. Who had no capability to provide it to the population? We also didn't understand. Although the Pakistani government had abandoned the Taliban government it had an abandoned the Taliban and that they were giving the Taliban refuge and an ability to rearm refinance recruit and project an urgency back into Afghanistan so I thought and most of us thought that the Taliban were a spent force they'd been overthrown so easily and so quickly they seem so discredited that we didn't think there was any life left and we were completely wrong and so that was the other mistake and the combination of those two mistakes. Why where where we are Ambassador Dobbins? Thank you for joining us today. My pleasure thanks for having me. That was a bathroom. James Dobbins a former Special Representative Jeff Coniston Pakistan now a senior fellow at the Rand Corporation. First person is produced by me. Sarah Wiedeman along with help. From Benjamin Solloway our editors Rob Sachs and our executive editor for news and PODCASTS. Is Dan Ephron? If you liked this episode who subscribe. We'll be back next Friday.

Afghanistan Taliban United States Afghan government Dick Holbrooke Government Iraq Obama Pakistan Colin Powell mark Roseman John Kerry Rice Obama Administration Ambassador Dobbins Bush Mullah Omar representative
"taliban" Discussed on FP's The Editor's Roundtable (The E.R.)

FP's The Editor's Roundtable (The E.R.)

12:04 min | 1 year ago

"taliban" Discussed on FP's The Editor's Roundtable (The E.R.)

"I've been asked to go back several times. Colin Powell called a couple of times and asked me to go back Gandhi. Rice also asked me to go back as ambassador to Pakistan and I was happy where I was and not inclined to return to government service in two thousand thirteen John Kerry called. He was then Secretary of State Secretary of state out of the blue and asked me to come back to succeed to the job that Dick Holbrooke had had and then Mark Roseman succeeded him and then I was to succeed mark as the Special Representative for Afghanistan Pakistan. At that point I'd been out of the Government for eleven years and I knew that this was probably the last time any secretary of state was gonNA call and last opportunity for government service And so I. I thought it was an offer worth digging and I went back for about eighteen months. How did this situation changed on the ground at that point Bush's attitudes toward nation-building at changed by the second administration so he had been very opposed to it at taking minimus approach to it and had spared resources comprehensively first in Afghanistan then in Iraq and had same consequences in Iraq that has created a vacuum that at the opposition could fill and violent resistant movements emerged in both cases because of that vacuum but by a second term he had shifted and had embraced nation building in all but name with the author of a new convert And so you saw you know the surge in Iraq and a major commitment of economic resources and he would have liked to have done the same thing in Afghanistan but they frankly admitted they just didn't have the resources there just weren't enough troops to go around. There were so heavily committed in Iraq that Afghanistan still had to be a minimal commitment when Obama came in he had campaigned on a theme. That Afghanistan was the good war. Iraq had been a mistake. Afghanistan wasn't a mistake and so he was going to shift resources and he originally did that but he said a time limit to it. Is that a fairly short time limit to it. So he sent at one point up to one hundred thousand troops in Afghanistan but he gave them a deadline of a year or so to accomplish their mission and then he began withdrawing. What was that mission? Well the mission was to recover as much territory as possible push. Taleban back helped the Afghan government secure effective control of its territory and effective protection of its population. The twenty thirteen when you come in. We've begun drawing down and there were even talks of peace talks with Taiwan on well. The Obama Administration had moved toward peace talks with the Taliban beginning in two thousand ten and it had some secret contacts that Dick Holbrooke had been charged with. I don't think he conducted them as deputy did but he was. He was motor for this effort and he persuaded. Secretary State Clinton and Obama and they agreed and so there were initial secret contacts with the Taliban and they were trying to move toward a more form an open process and the obstacle became our insistence that the Afghan government needed to be included in talks. And the Taliban's resistance insistence that. No they would only talk to the United States not to the Afghan government and on that basis. The talks collapsed so a year later we got signals that the Taliban had altered its position and they were now prepared to talk to the states and to the Afghan government separately but coincidentally at the same time. And so we moved forward toward publicly acknowledged negotiations with the Taliban which we take place in Doha. Which of course is where they are taking place and that collapsed over a disagreement over how the Taliban would name itself. And what kind of flag would fly so talks? Broke up over that disagreement which I think was largely a fault of the Qatari mediators who were hosting and making arrangements for this office and I think they were inexperienced and gave the Taliban poor signals. I don't think it was necessarily Taleban effort to sabotage the effort. I think it was a genuine misunderstanding. Based on poor information delivered by the Qataris was there an interest by means Karzai to sit down with the Taliban. Yes what he didn't want was negotiation conducted exclusively by the United States but he had been pushing for peace talks with the Taliban even before the United States said embraced it. In fact back in two thousand to Mullah Omar had offered to surrender Karzai Many other Taliban notables senior people in their government had offered to surrender some of them did surrender and 'cause I was inclined to issue an amnesty United States block that and sent the Taliban officials who did surrender to Guantanamo to the US. Prison in Bagaram where they stayed for a number of years back in January we learned that the trump administration was thinking about peace talks with the Taliban about the full drawdown. You were among people who expressed concern about what it would look like if we fully pull out of Afghanistan why well I supported efforts for peace negotiations from the beginning I supported what Holbrooke was doing when it was still secret. I participated in a mission that went to Afghanistan and Pakistan and other places talked to the Taleban unofficially And we issued a report urging that the administration embrace peace talks which ultimately publicly did and of course I saw it to initiate talks in two thousand thirteen fourteen I was concerned about unilateral withdrawal or premature withdrawal. And I continue to be concerned. I've supported partial draw down in exchange for The opening of full negotiations between the Afghan government and the Taliban and I thought that was a price worth paying and worst doing but I do think that if the US leaves before the Afghan star talking to each other. They'll never start talking to each other if the US leaves after they start talking to each other but before they reach an agreement they'll never reach agreement and if we leave after they reach an agreement before they implement the agreement. They'll never implement the agreement because a major leverage that we have over the Taliban is our presence in our continued support. Does that mean civil war? I mean when you say they'll never reach an agreement doesn't mean more it means a more intense war and potentially a multisided war. I think what is principally concerned and most people who know a lot about Afghanistan is that you'll return to the disorder of early nineties phase in which the Taliban will be competing with our not with a constituted government. That's recognized internationally. But with several factions with the Northern Alliance with the Islamic state with regional warlords and that will promote much higher levels of violence in the ninety s you had seven eight million Afghans that had fled the country and that was a population of twenty five minutes. Now THIRTY MILLION. So if you had a comparable exodus you now have ten million. Afghan slating the country under those kinds of situations. And that's the concern of what would happen if the US just walked away from this and not just the US but they're also about four thousand non US NATO troops there. We've had now two administrations very committed to drawing down or or leaving Afghanistan altogether. Can you imagine a scenario where is simply a presence in Afghanistan open ended early? I can easily imagine it. Shot as if this is a issue that predominates in the American debate. It's not as if there's a strong constituency that's insisting that we withdraw you know. Afghanistan has very little support and very little opposition and the American body politic. It's just not high on the list. Not High endless principally because the commitment is very small and the casualties of very low the US military's losing farmer people in training accidents than it's losing combat in Afghanistan. Now every tragedy and. I'm not trying to belittle the casualties. We take but the Afghans are bearing the bulk of the consequences and a greater number of casualties. The real issue is cost it. It is a substantial commitment. It's about twenty billion dollars a year to sustain the effort and that's a significant cost. I mean it's in a half trillion dollar defense budget so it's not overwhelming but it's significant enough so that one would want to reduce it You know I've Long said that. The options in Afghanistan aren't winning or losing winning in military census. Probably NOT AN OPTION. The choices losing or not losing and losing as significant consequences for our credibility for the commitments. We've made for the role of women in society as one example for the health of the society in Afghanistan is a very different place than it was when we arrived in two thousand one longevity is up literacy is up standard of living up. It's a much more urban society It has a free press. It has vibrant television radio and written press network with lots of competition. All those things would be over. Could you imagine eighteen? Years ago that you'd be sitting here having this conversation about a peace process with the todd on that it would have taken this long or that. This is where we'd be. No I mean I. We made to May basic mistakes in two thousand one two thousand two one of which I spotted and opposed and yellow owner which is responsible for as anyone so the one mistake was that we thought a country that had no army. No police force could take care of its own security and so refused to deploy a peacekeeping force. We've refused to our troops to do any peacekeeping. We left security entirely to the Afghans. Who had no capability to provide it to the population? We also didn't understand. Although the Pakistani government had abandoned the Taliban government it had an abandoned the Taliban and that they were giving the Taliban refuge and an ability to rearm refinance recruit and project an emergency back into Afghanistan so I thought and most of us thought that the Taliban were a spent force they'd been overthrown so easily and so quickly they seem so discredited that we didn't think there was any life left and we were completely wrong and so that was the other mistake and the combination of those two mistakes. Why where where we are Ambassador Dobbins? Thank you for joining us today. My pleasure thanks for having me. That was a bathroom. James Dobbins a former Special Representative Jeff Coniston Pakistan now a senior fellow at the Rand Corporation. First person is produced by me. Sarah Wiedeman along with help. From Benjamin Solloway our editors Rob Sachs and our executive editor for news and PODCASTS. Is Dan Ephron? If you liked this episode who subscribe. We'll be back next Friday.

Taliban Afghanistan United States Afghan government Dick Holbrooke Government Obama Pakistan Iraq Colin Powell Mark Roseman John Kerry Rice Obama Administration Ambassador Dobbins Bush Mullah Omar Representative
"taliban" Discussed on FP's The Editor's Roundtable (The E.R.)

FP's The Editor's Roundtable (The E.R.)

16:26 min | 1 year ago

"taliban" Discussed on FP's The Editor's Roundtable (The E.R.)

"Dobbins thank you for joining us. My pleasure I WANNA go back to when you first went into the region in two thousand one. Can you tell us hire? Simon came about well. It shame about a few weeks after nine eleven. The military campaign was making some progress and Colin Powell and president. Bush thought that the diplomatic campaign needed to catch up. And so I was asked to be the administration's on boy at that point to the Afghan opposition in order to pull them together. There were several strands of opposition. Who were competing with each other. And we want them to collaborate in forming a alternate of government to the Taliban and that was my original task and reminders. At that point there wasn't a clear leader. No I mean. There were several factions. There was the Northern Alliance. They had a leader President Rabbani. Who was the president of Afghanistan for them Although they had been chased out of Kabul and were defending a small sliver of Afghanistan from the Taliban at the time of nine eleven then there were other factions was faction that had taken refuge in Pakistan. And there were the royalists supporters of the former king who are another major faction in the opposition. And what was your role exactly. And where did you first go well? My role originally was to try to coalesce these strands of the opposition into a coherent alternative government and work with the UN that was going to host a conference among the elements of the opposition in order to get them to agree to form a government and also to agree on a way forward toward the constitution toward new elections toward a democratic Afghanistan. And so I travelled originally to Pakistan. Where much of the opposition had taken refuge Stopping on the way in Rome where the former king lived to talk to him and his advisors and then I went to Tashkent and there I met with the Foreign Minister of the Northern Alliance and then from there I went to Bagaram airbase just outside Kabul where I met with all of the Northern Alliance leadership and the results of that was that they all agreed to come to a conference that the UN would organize a week or so later in Bonn Germany. I then went to Germany where I worked with all of the Afghan elements the UN and other countries with an interest in Afghanistan. Mostly its neighbors to try to promote a consolidation of this group into a newer alternative to the Taliban remind us how the Taliban was perceived in the fall of two thousand one well after the Soviet Union had abandoned Afghanistan and then even later after it had cut off financial support Which was the result of the collapse of the Soviet Union the Soviet puppet government if you will the government they had installed eventually collapsed under the weight of the Mujahedeen opposition that had been fighting them throughout the Soviet occupation. That opposition wasn't united. The United States had pretty much abandoned interest in Afghanistan. At that point we closed our embassy. We had no representation in Afghanistan at turned to other issues so in the aftermath of the collapse of the pro Soviet government. The opposition fought for control of Afghanistan and several different factions emerged which were partially ethnically based. So you had to Northern Alliance which was todd. Who's Beck and Dari speaking Dari is a former Persian. The language of Iran and these are non-pashtoon ethnic groups that in total are about half the country and then the other half of the country are pashtoons and the Taliban was a posture of force That arose out of essentially out of re religious movements and Pakistan Talib's are religious scholars. That's what the word means. And they had come out of the religious institutions in Pakistan. They prevailed in the civil war which is very violent civil war more violent in many ways than conflict. That's now going on in Afghanistan as a result of both the Soviet invasion and the subsequent civil war Something like eight or nine million. Afghans fled the country which was about a third of the population and so the Taliban had emerged triumphant. The Northern Alliance was reduced to a sliver of the country and it was a a Muslim fundamentalist regime Women's place was in the home and covered whenever they left and we weren't permitted schooling or professional lives and There were other strictures. The population as a whole which was similarly draconian and so most of the world. Almost the entire world had failed. Refuse to recognize the Taleban legitimate government. I think only two or three countries Pakistan Saudi Arabia at recognized the Taliban arrested dot in two thousand one. The Bush administration actually cited women as one of the reasons to go into Afghanistan. They've sort of famously. Had Laura Bush the First Lady Give Radio Address where they talked about women's rights as being one reason that the United States was countering the time on well I think the justification for going into Afghanistan originally was nine eleven and The Bush administration gave the Taliban ultimatum that they would surrender bin Laden or else the US would take military action and the Taliban refused to surrender bin Laden. Who was at that point resident in Afghanistan and so the US invaded? I think The role of women and other things were also factors not so much an invading Afghanistan as in staying afterwards and trying to rebuild the country on a different model. So now you've gathered these various groups and you've gone to bond what happens in Bonn at Bonn the four factions that made up the principal strands of the opposition assembled. We were all in the same building. Large Conference Center out on the outskirts of the city. In addition to the twenty five or so representatives of these different groups you had the UN which was chairing the session. And then you had the countries with principal interest so you had Pakistan India Iran Russia the United States all had people. They're usually just one or two at the conference site itself. And the UN circulated an initial draft of a final document that would represent an agreement to form a government and interim government and a timetable for moving forward with drafting a constitution holding elections and moving towards a fully legitimate fully democratic government and that document was debated over it was supposed to be a week went overtime win about ten or eleven days and there were various hurtles various disagreements which had to be overcome over that process. Can you describe some of those hurdles? Well the royalist faction wanted the king to come back and they wanted a restoration of the monarchy and the other three factions were opposed at the Northern Alliance was the most important on the ground the US had essentially provided air cover alliance the US didn't put any ground troops in For most of the conflict it provided air support to the Northern Alliance in Northern Alliance had taken by the time. The conference convened but one of the cities of Afghanistan so it was effectively in control of the country and that gave it a lot of leverage and then other factions had other desert arrived so it was in part a contest between the Northern Alliance which had the guns in the control on the ground and everyone else who wanted to share of power and it was also a contest between royalists who wanted a monarchy and everybody else who wanted a republic when you emerge out of the Bonn Agreement after ten or eleven days would would you have in hand. Well you had the composition of the interim government so you had a chairman who would go on to be a president as a result of elections. But that wasn't certain or even Known at the time. And you had all ministers so You had a fully constituted government not a legislature not courts but ministries and you had a roadmap for the future steps which would lead to a constitutional government with appropriate protections An elected legislature and executive you wrote in your book that the Bush Administration did not seem particularly keen on nation-building Afghanistan. What did that look like? Well nation-building had taken off in the in the ninety s After the end of the Cold War so the US engaged in missions in Somalia which failed in Haiti and Bosnia and Kosovo which were relatively successful and the UN similarly had scaled up. Its peacekeeping efforts. So you had by the end of that period maybe twenty peacekeeping missions going on and the US had Forces in three different countries It was controversial. Republicans were an opposition. Job of the opposition is to oppose and they tended to oppose all of these missions one researcher or other and in the two thousand campaign between Bush and Gore. Bush took the position that nation building was an inappropriate activity for the United States and particularly for the American military and that he wasn't going to be done under his administration so when he found himself engaged in Afghanistan obviously highly unanticipated and faced with that kind of question. You know you've invaded the country. You now control it. What are you GONNA do? Initially chose to take a very different approach to nation building or a minimalist approach. What were the consequences of that minimalist? Approach Well Don. Rumsfeld explained by flooding Bosnia and Kosovo with military manpower and economic assistance. We turn those two societies into permanent wards of the international community. And we were going to avoid that in Afghanistan. By absolutely minimizing the commitment of military assets and economic assistance and so result was on the military side that that we deployed a force in Afghanistan in two thousand and two that was on a per capita basis that is compared to the size of the population fifty times smaller than the force. We deployed in Bosnia and Kosovo one of the things. I'm struck by that. You write in your book that you found the administration to leave you alone. More than the Clinton administration did for example when you're in the Balkans if they didn't check in in the same way. I think. They had already shifted their priorities and their their consideration and they were beginning to focus on Iraq and preparations for an invasion of Iraq. I think they're very eased of the overthrow of the Taliban created a deceptive impression that this was going to be pretty effortless and so they refuse to accept the calls from the UN and from cars. I who was then the chairman of the interim to deploy a UN peacekeeping force. They block that and they made a very minimal commitment to economic reconstruction Iran pledged a lot more money for reconstruction in Afghanistan. We did despite the fact that we had just overthrown government and imposed a new one respond to Iran proposing to help support Afghanistan row. Iran had been very helpful at the Bonn conference in Iran was strongly opposed Taliban. I it had almost gone to war with the Taliban over The Taliban's having killed several Iranian diplomats. And it was a lot of attention so they were very much on our side at that time and had been quite helpful and so we had no opposition to them providing assistance and their assistance was legitimate building roads and doing legitimate things with their money mostly on the areas that were neighbor to Iran and Iran was at that point hosting three million Afghan refugees. And they were eager for the refugees to go home and therefore they had an incentive to promote reconstruction in Afghanistan in early two thousand to president. Bush proposed a Marshall Plan. And he even use that phrase for Afghanistan. What happened with nothing It was you know follow through. It was a speechwriter. Contacted me and said would it be okay to proceed Marshall Plan I said yes that would be great assuming that if he proposed a Marshall plan would actually be new resources but it was a couple of years later that they began to scale up Assistance but by then they were so heavily committed in Iraq that it became impossible to duplicate the effort in Afghanistan that they were making Iraq. You leave this role in the spring of two thousand two and you retired right but you came back twenty thirteen. Yeah I mean I. I continue to be interested. I continued to write about nation building about Afghanistan Iraq and the earlier experiences that we'd had I'd also critical also of what we call collateral damage that is very high number of civilian deaths studio American bombings. Well early on In the first months there had been several large incidents where we had mistakenly bombed a wedding Group of elders who were traveling to couple for Karzai's inauguration and we had a default position which was deny I investigate later and so our commanders were flatly denying that these things had taken place then when they looked into it days or weeks later. They acknowledged that it had happened and I was very critical of that and suggested that we ought to reserve judgment until we investigated and that admitted when we made a mistake and obviously try to correct those mistakes. We you chastised no listened to yes but it took a couple of more spectacular incidents Until the behavior change. And how did that shift the way? The Afghan saw the US presence. I'm not sure it had a major impact it. It obviously had an impact over time and over time of course. The Taliban became more responsible for a larger number of civilian casualties and US. Nato or even Afghan National Forces but it had a cumulative impact over time now one of the things. We did at that time. We I propose that when we killed somebody by accident we ought to compensate the more compensate their family and there was an initial resistance to that and I was told it was impossible and lawyers. Pentagon assembled us that of lawyers to explain why it couldn't be done but again another major incident broke that damn and ever since we do have a policy of compensating innocent victims. You mean financially. Yes how did they determine? Well a little goes a long way Afghanistan so I think they have it arbitrary some several thousand dollars and by Afghan standards. I think it's fairly generous. So as we mentioned you had Retired I mean you've gone to work for the Rand Corporation where you currently are now. But you've left State Department. What brought you back in two thousand thirteen..

Afghanistan Taliban Northern Alliance United States Iran Laura Bush UN president Pakistan Iraq Bosnia Kosovo Soviet government Bonn Kabul Colin Powell
"taliban" Discussed on First Person

First Person

16:26 min | 1 year ago

"taliban" Discussed on First Person

"Dobbins thank you for joining us. My pleasure I WANNA go back to when you first went into the region in two thousand one. Can you tell us hire? Simon came about well. It shame about a few weeks after nine eleven. The military campaign was making some progress and Colin Powell and president. Bush thought that the diplomatic campaign needed to catch up. And so I was asked to be the administration's on boy at that point to the Afghan opposition in order to pull them together. There were several strands of opposition. Who were competing with each other. And we want them to collaborate in forming a alternate of government to the Taliban and that was my original task and reminders. At that point there wasn't a clear leader. No I mean. There were several factions. There was the Northern Alliance. They had a leader President Rabbani. Who was the president of Afghanistan for them Although they had been chased out of Kabul and were defending a small sliver of Afghanistan from the Taliban at the time of nine eleven then there were other factions was faction that had taken refuge in Pakistan. And there were the royalists supporters of the former king who are another major faction in the opposition. And what was your role exactly. And where did you first go well? My role originally was to try to coalesce these strands of the opposition into a coherent alternative government and work with the UN that was going to host a conference among the elements of the opposition in order to get them to agree to form a government and also to agree on a way forward toward the constitution toward new elections toward a democratic Afghanistan. And so I travelled originally to Pakistan. Where much of the opposition had taken refuge Stopping on the way in Rome where the former king lived to talk to him and his advisors and then I went to Tashkent and there I met with the Foreign Minister of the Northern Alliance and then from there I went to Bagaram airbase just outside Kabul where I met with all of the Northern Alliance leadership and the results of that was that they all agreed to come to a conference that the UN would organize a week or so later in Bonn Germany. I then went to Germany where I worked with all of the Afghan elements the UN and other countries with an interest in Afghanistan. Mostly its neighbors to try to promote a consolidation of this group into a newer alternative to the Taliban remind us how the Taliban was perceived in the fall of two thousand one well after the Soviet Union had abandoned Afghanistan and then even later after it had cut off financial support Which was the result of the collapse of the Soviet Union the Soviet puppet government if you will the government they had installed eventually collapsed under the weight of the Mujahedeen opposition that had been fighting them throughout the Soviet occupation. That opposition wasn't united. The United States had pretty much abandoned interest in Afghanistan. At that point we closed our embassy. We had no representation in Afghanistan at turned to other issues so in the aftermath of the collapse of the pro Soviet government. The opposition fought for control of Afghanistan and several different factions emerged which were partially ethnically based. So you had to Northern Alliance which was todd. Who's Beck and Dari speaking Dari is a former Persian. The language of Iran and these are non-pashtoon ethnic groups that in total are about half the country and then the other half of the country are pashtoons and the Taliban was a posture of force That arose out of essentially out of re religious movements and Pakistan Talib's are religious scholars. That's what the word means. And they had come out of the religious institutions in Pakistan. They prevailed in the civil war which is very violent civil war more violent in many ways than conflict. That's now going on in Afghanistan as a result of both the Soviet invasion and the subsequent civil war Something like eight or nine million. Afghans fled the country which was about a third of the population and so the Taliban had emerged triumphant. The Northern Alliance was reduced to a sliver of the country and it was a a Muslim fundamentalist regime Which women's place was in the home and covered whenever they left and we weren't permitted schooling or professional lives and There were other strictures. The population as a whole which was similarly draconian and so most of the world. Almost the entire world had failed. Refuse to recognize the Taleban legitimate government. I think only two or three countries Pakistan Saudi Arabia at recognized the Taliban arrested dot in two thousand one. The Bush administration actually cited women as one of the reasons to go into Afghanistan. They've sort of famously. Had Laura Bush the First Lady Give Radio Address where they talked about women's rights as being one reason that the United States was countering the time on well I think the justification for going into Afghanistan originally was nine eleven and The Bush administration gave the Taliban ultimatum that they would surrender bin Laden or else the US would take military action and the Taliban refused to surrender bin Laden. Who was at that point resident in Afghanistan and so the US invaded? I think The role of women and other things were also factors not so much an invading Afghanistan as in staying afterwards and trying to rebuild the country on a different model. So now you've gathered these various groups and you've gone to bond what happens in Bonn at Bonn the four factions that made up the principal strands of the opposition assembled. We were all in the same building. Large Conference Center out on the outskirts of the city. In addition to the twenty five or so representatives of these different groups you had the UN which was chairing the session. And then you had the countries with principal interest so you had Pakistan India Iran Russia the United States all had people. They're usually just one or two at the conference site itself. And the UN circulated an initial draft of a final document that would represent an agreement to form a government and interim government and a timetable for moving forward with drafting a constitution holding elections and moving towards a fully legitimate fully democratic government and that document was debated over it was supposed to be a week went overtime win about ten or eleven days and there were various hurtles various disagreements which had to be overcome over that process. Can you describe some of those hurdles? Well the royalist faction wanted the king to come back and they wanted a restoration of the monarchy and the other three factions were opposed at the Northern Alliance was the most important on the ground the US had essentially provided air cover alliance the US didn't put any ground troops in For most of the conflict it provided air support to the Northern Alliance in Northern Alliance had taken by the time. The conference convened but one of the cities of Afghanistan so it was effectively in control of the country and that gave it a lot of leverage and then other factions had other desert arrived so it was in part a contest between the Northern Alliance which had the guns in the control on the ground and everyone else who wanted to share of power and it was also a contest between royalists who wanted a monarchy and everybody else who wanted a republic when you emerge out of the Bonn Agreement after ten or eleven days would would you have in hand. Well you had the composition of the interim government so you had a chairman who would go on to be a president as a result of Elections. But that wasn't certain or even Known at the time. And you had all ministers so You had a fully constituted government not a legislature not courts but ministries and you had a roadmap for the future steps which would lead to a constitutional government with appropriate protections An elected legislature and executive you wrote in your book that the Bush Administration did not seem particularly keen on nation-building Afghanistan Afghanistan. What did that look like well? Nation-building had taken off in the in the ninety s After the end of the Cold War so the US engaged in missions in Somalia which failed in Haiti and Bosnia and Kosovo which were relatively successful and the UN similarly had scaled up. Its peacekeeping efforts. So you had by the end of that period maybe twenty peacekeeping missions going on and the US had Forces in three different countries It was controversial. Republicans were an opposition. Job of the opposition is to oppose and they tended to oppose all of these missions one researcher or other and in the two thousand campaign between Bush and Gore. Bush took the position that nation building was an inappropriate activity for the United States and particularly for the American military and that he wasn't going to be done under his administration so when he found himself engaged in Afghanistan obviously highly unanticipated and faced with that kind of question. You know you've invaded the country. You now control it. What are you GONNA do? Initially chose to take a very different approach to nation building or a minimalist approach. What were the consequences of that minimalist? Approach Well Don. Rumsfeld explained by flooding Bosnia and Kosovo with military manpower and economic assistance. We turn those two societies into permanent wards of the international community. And we were going to avoid that in Afghanistan. By absolutely minimizing the commitment of military assets and economic assistance and so result was on the military side that that we deployed a force in Afghanistan in two thousand and two that was on a per capita basis that is compared to the size of the population fifty times smaller than the force. We deployed in Bosnia and Kosovo one of the things. I'm struck by that. You write in your book that you found the administration to leave you alone. More than the Clinton administration did for example when you're in the Balkans if they didn't check in in the same way. I think. They had already shifted their priorities and their their consideration and they were beginning to focus on Iraq and preparations for an invasion of Iraq. I think they're very eased of the overthrow of the Taliban created a deceptive impression that this was going to be pretty effortless and so they refuse to accept the calls from the UN and from cars. I who was then the chairman of the interim to deploy a UN peacekeeping force. They block that and they made a very minimal commitment to economic reconstruction Iran pledged a lot more money for reconstruction in Afghanistan. We did despite the fact that we had just overthrown government and imposed a new one respond to Iran proposing to help support Afghanistan row. Iran had been very helpful at the Bonn conference in Iran was strongly opposed Taliban. I it had almost gone to war with the Taliban over The Taliban's having killed several Iranian diplomats. And it was a lot of attention so they were very much on our side at that time and had been quite helpful and so we had no opposition to them providing assistance and their assistance was legitimate building roads and doing legitimate things with their money mostly on the areas that were neighbor to Iran and Iran was at that point hosting three million Afghan refugees. And they were eager for the refugees to go home and therefore they had an incentive to promote reconstruction in Afghanistan in early two thousand to president. Bush proposed a Marshall Plan. And he even use that phrase for Afghanistan. What happened with nothing It was you know follow through. It was a speechwriter. Contacted me and said would it be okay to proceed Marshall Plan I said yes that would be great assuming that if he proposed a Marshall plan would actually be new resources but it was a couple of years later that they began to scale up Assistance but by then they were so heavily committed in Iraq that it became impossible to duplicate the effort in Afghanistan that they were making Iraq. You leave this role in the spring of two thousand two and you retired right but you came back twenty thirteen. Yeah I mean I. I continue to be interested. I continued to write about nation building about Afghanistan Iraq and the earlier experiences that we'd had I'd also critical also of what we call collateral damage that is very high number of civilian deaths studio American bombings. Well early on In the first months there had been several large incidents where we had mistakenly bombed a wedding Group of elders who were traveling to couple for Karzai's inauguration and we had a default position which was deny I investigate later and so our commanders were flatly denying that these things had taken place then when they looked into it days or weeks later. They acknowledged that it had happened and I was very critical of that and suggested that we ought to reserve judgment until we investigated and that admitted when we made a mistake and obviously try to correct those mistakes. We you chastised no listened to yes but it took a couple of more spectacular incidents Until the behavior change. And how did that shift the way? The Afghan saw the US presence. I'm not sure it had a major impact it. It obviously had an impact over time and over time of course. The Taliban became more responsible for a larger number of civilian casualties and US. Nato or even Afghan National Forces but it had a cumulative impact over time now one of the things. We did at that time. We I propose that when we killed somebody by accident we ought to compensate the more compensate their family and there was an initial resistance to that and I was told it was impossible and lawyers. Pentagon assembled us that of lawyers to explain why it couldn't be done but again another major incident broke that damn and ever since we do have a policy of compensating innocent victims. You mean financially. Yes how did they determine? Well goes a long way Afghanistan so I think they have it arbitrary some several thousand dollars and by Afghan standards. I think it's fairly generous. So as we mentioned you had Retired I mean you've gone to work for the Rand Corporation where you currently are now. But you've left State Department. What brought you back in two thousand thirteen..

Afghanistan Taliban Northern Alliance United States Iran Laura Bush UN president Pakistan Iraq Bosnia Kosovo Soviet government Bonn Kabul Colin Powell
"taliban" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show

The Charlie Kirk Show

06:15 min | 1 year ago

"taliban" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show

"Just days before the eighteenth anniversary verse three of nine eleven president trump cancels a secret meeting at Camp David with the Taliban and the media predictably hyperventilate meanwhile border apprehensions are down down at the US Mexico border. Thanks to wait for it. Mexico Google faces a new antitrust probe by fifty State Attorney Generals and Elizabeth Warren looks to bolster or establishment boniface by linking up with none other than failed presidential candidate. The person we're so happy is not present United States Crooked Hillary Clinton says Charlie Kerr her coast of the Charlie Kirk show your home for rational conservative libertarian thinking before we get started. Please give us those five star reviews press. Subscribe get a friend who the same leave. Leave your questions buckle up here. We Go Charlie..

Taliban Mexico Charlie Kirk Charlie Kerr US Hillary Clinton Elizabeth Warren trump Camp David president Google Attorney
"taliban" Discussed on The Michael Knowles Show

The Michael Knowles Show

01:40 min | 1 year ago

"taliban" Discussed on The Michael Knowles Show

"Dan We've come to this political solution even then it looks bad because you were inviting people who were responsible for nine eleven to US soil to the presidential retreat at Mrs as prestigious place as there is in the entire country just days before nine eleven. It just looks like a victory for them. It looks like they're gloating loading absolutely terrible and by the way the talks wouldn't have gone well. They wouldn't have gone well as president trump concludes in his tweets because there is no evidence whatsoever ever the Taliban can negotiate in good faith. They are demons. They are devils and they should all be wiped off of the Earth. Only God can judge but the United States can arrange the meeting eighty and we have done that with the Taliban we should do that with the Taliban. They do not have any redeeming qualities. I don't know how to put to appoint on on it. People don't know this though people don't know a lot about the Taliban. They know a lot about isis. They know a lot about al Qaeda isis spun off al-Qaeda al-Qaeda was harbored by the Taliban but I've found even even even in the nineteen years or eighteen years since the invasion of Afghanistan. People don't really know a lot about the Taliban itself who were the Taliban Taliban terrorist group the took over Afghanistan in the mid nineties after they took over everything got even worse. You'd think things couldn't get worse in Afghanistan. They did infant mortality. Taliban Afghanistan rose to the highest level in the world. A quarter of all Afghanis died before the age of five under the Taliban. They committed war crimes with impunity. They stole. UN FOOD SUPPLIES FOR UNINJURED ONE CASE THEY STILL UN food supplies from one hundred sixty thousand awesome hungry.

Taliban Taliban Taliban Afghanistan Dan president trump United States al-Qaeda eighteen years nineteen years
"taliban" Discussed on The Michael Knowles Show

The Michael Knowles Show

03:33 min | 1 year ago

"taliban" Discussed on The Michael Knowles Show

"K. S. all right now. We'll talk about less. That's important matters like negotiations with the Taliban Camp David the presidential retreat president trump. We got word a couple of days ago. Actually I think it was yesterday morning. The the story broke president trump cancelled what were secret talks planned with the Taliban just days before the eighteen th anniversary of nine eleven and he does deserve credit for cancelling selling those talks but he does deserve some criticism for planning the talks in the first place so what happened. President Trump tweeted about this he explained the entire situation relation he tweeted out quote unbeknownst to almost everyone the major Taliban leaders and separately the president Afghanistan were going to secretly early meet with me at Camp David on Sunday. They were coming to the United States tonight. Unfortunately in order to build false leverage they admitted to an attack in Kabul that killed one of our great great soldiers and eleven other people I immediately cancelled the meeting and called off peace negotiations nations. What kind of people would kill so many in order to seemingly strengthen their bargaining position they didn't they only made it worse if they cannot agree to a ceasefire during these very important peace talks and would even kill twelve innocent people than they probably don't have the power to negotiate a meaningful agreement anyway? That's the key and they probably don't have the power to negotiate a meaningful agreement anyway the concludes. How many more decades are they willing to fight. That's the question now now. Just this tweet shows you president trump's political acumen which is he is blaming a Taliban attack that killed one of our soldiers. It just happened last week. He's blaming that attack for calling off the peace negotiations. The Taliban have been killing our soldiers for twenty years. There's nothing new about this attack so the question is president trump responding to an attack or is he using the attack as an excuse to get out of the meetings. I think it's the latter I think it's pretty clear that it's the latter but I think it's wise for him to do that. It's a perfectly good way for him to get out of. Having these meetings the decision to disinvite them was a good meeting it shows was reportedly a divide in the trump administration between Mike Pompeo over at State Department and John Bolton. Who is the National Security Advisor. We'll get into that in in a second but we we shouldn't narrow in on why this was such a mistake in the first place why was such a mistake to invite them the Taliban Alabama or the worst people on Earth. They should all be put to death as quickly as possible every last one of them. The only way that I could get behind this meeting happening is is if trump invited them all into a room and then personally shift every single one of them they are little devils all of whom who should be executed by the United States of all of the bad actors in the world. The Taliban are probably the most unrepentant terrorists out there. They worked directly with Osama bin Lodden. They have the most direct connection of any group in the world to al Qaeda and to the nine eleven attacks most egregiously of all. These talks were scheduled just days before before the anniversary of nine eleven. It's almost cartoonish how bad the timing was this was politically potentially a disastrous situation even if the talks had gone well even even if they somehow got everyone in the room the president of of Afghanistan and the Taliban and the president of the United States and they said okay. We're going to stop the war in Afghanistan..

President Trump Taliban president United States Camp David Afghanistan Kabul Mike Pompeo K. S. National Security Advisor Alabama State Department John Bolton Osama twenty years
"taliban" Discussed on The Daily

The Daily

06:32 min | 1 year ago

"taliban" Discussed on The Daily

"Support for with all the i think he's like evenly split between people who like them's and people who don't michaels the stand in for the listener so like you have to indicate that he's there sometimes you don't want michael to say anything you wanna know that he's listening and so that's what's up with the homes and but mainly what we get is we love the show. We think it's valuable and it's important to us and so if that's you subscribe to the new york times because that's the thing the powers the show go to n._y. Times dot com slash subscribe so what is the tension in these negotiations museum. If both sides really wanna deal i think the most fundamental thing is that there is a deep level of mistrust is trust from both sides so one of the reasons why these negotiations have dragged on for so long is partially when you look at the history of eighteen years there are a bunch of other opportunities when the taliban reached out and wanted to negotiate a settlement to the war and the u._s. is basically said no and it kept growing more complicated so now the u._s. is initiating these talks taliban sitting down that history trees in the back of the taliban's mind saying how could we trust that. You're serious about a deal and that you're not using talks to undermine and end the same on the other hand for the american negotiators. The question is well. These are these are people who are allies of al-qaeda deesor people well who still carrying out suicide bombings these are the same people so that creates a lot of mistrust for the americans also the most fundamental thing is there's mistrust remote sites right and that means every word they're negotiating over everything is negotiated and parson discussed and reviewed and the way it happens is that they have the text of the agreement on the screen right and every time they go through a sentence and they agreed to it the color of that text changes i think from red to black <hes> but then somebody says something else the next day that sentence that they had agreed to change its color again it goes back red and it so so so it's that kind of environment of mistrust that makes this process so complicated and then their issues like when the u._s. asked the taliban to break away from terrorist groups like al-qaeda the taliban turn that into an emotional discussion and say what do you mean by the terrorists because for you could be terrorists for us. You could be terrorists. Let's discuss definition of what is terrorism so oh you're sitting around this table going at things like that for days for hours and sometimes he's negotiations go to two thirty in the morning. The senior laying out is is pretty stunning dynamics because when you think of the military power represented in that room the united states what its military is is and this kind of ragtag group of taliban fighters and what you're saying is for all intents and purposes the power dynamics here over the question of of afghanistan's future is equalized absolutely it's kind of emotional on both sides also when they walk into that room on the one hand you've got these taliban leaders back half of the delegation across from them spend you know at least a decade in prison chief. Negotiator spent ten years in pakistani prison. He was tortured. He's in bad shape than another five or six of them spend about a decade okayed in u._s. Detention in guantanamo across from them. You've got the chief american envoy thirty forty years of diplomatic experience. -perience is a former ambassador to the u._n. To iraq afghanistan next to him you know military generals in uniform who a lot of them rose rose through the ranks in this war you know got their stars. Who've lost friends who've lost colleagues in this war. Each one of them have served several tours of afghanistan and now sitting to negotiate the end of award they couldn't win. <hes> it is very clear they couldn't win and in the past few few weeks has kind of become clear that the military is dragging its feet partially concern about what threats might remain in afghanistan after a dealer taleban but it's actually partially emotional also that a deal would mean they lost this war. Would you use it earlier that this deal is just the first step that the u._s. taliban have to reach an agreement to end in this war before afghanistan as a country can start to figure out what's going to look like moving forward. How have the two sides been talking talking about that next. Step in these negotiations. How is the taliban been talking about it. They're very vague and i think deliberately deliberately vague. They say we want basic rights for women. According to islam we want freedom of press <music> as long as it's aligned with slavic values but the people contrast their statements to the way they actually exercised power.

taliban afghanistan new york times michael al-qaeda u._s guantanamo united states iraq thirty forty years eighteen years ten years one hand
"taliban" Discussed on Today, Explained

Today, Explained

03:34 min | 2 years ago

"taliban" Discussed on Today, Explained

"So now, the Taliban is back in this position of influence. How is it changed? Now over the past few decades, especially after two thousand five to LA Bonne has been steadily gaining military power so much ho the precipitated the surge during the Obama administration where some hundred thousand US forces another fifty thousand in the national coalition forces fighting the Taliban, but it's all bond managed to hunker down and survived and today, it is more powerful on the battlefield than it has been at any point in some they defeated by the United States at the point and controls large panchayat ghanistan of doesn't have formal the control, but it defacto control large parts of the southeast and the roll that it's instituting still very brutal rule, but it's often more. Predictable than the capricious brutality and corruption of the government powerbrokers associated vid how this deal change that status quo. What what could the country? Look like if the US is able to broker some kind of peace. Well, it's important to. Understand that the deal that's been announced this weekend. The core. Contours of the deal is really only deal between the Taliban and the US, but this expansion than the Taliban will then negotiate the government. The details of the deal yet remained to be seen. If that is a deal, the Taliban will clearly be asking for substantial power at the national level in the national government in couple. It will be asking for substantial sub-national level power. And it will be asking for changes the political order in Afghanistan that my mean, revising the gun constitution or the constitution is not provide. At least not only on in the deal. The Taleban will nonetheless won't much more. Rugged GIS, much more conservative rule. Been many fewer free. Rhythms for people. No, guaranteed freedoms the constitution on the kind of the best Sukhum stances think of the political social life in Iran. One model. Iran is Shia country, the Taliban are suing he's but fingle Betty religious. The rolled place or Saudi Arabia. Many of guns are frightened of that possibility advice still been tremendous religious oppression without basic onomic livelihoods being satisfied. So that are very many ways for the peace and peace deal to shape. How many of which are very unhappy? And that's really want. Ville determine the peace brings relief and stability and prosperity to have gone STAN or whether the piece that uses the violence and deaths, but sued leaves behind Betty difficult conditions for people. Vandevelde fell. Bob Brown focuses on international conflicts and security at the Brookings Institution..

Taliban United States LA Bonne Iran Saudi Arabia Obama administration Brookings Institution Afghanistan Betty Ville Bob Brown Vandevelde Sukhum
"taliban" Discussed on Today, Explained

Today, Explained

05:33 min | 2 years ago

"taliban" Discussed on Today, Explained

"Hi, I'm Sean Rama's firm. This is today. Explain to understand how huge it would be if the United States could broker some kind of peace in Afghanistan, you have to understand that the country's been in conflict for around forty years and the Taliban was born in the middle of that conflict. The telephone is a Sweeney of gun insurgency that has been fighting the United States since two thousand one vonda fell by Brown is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. It has its background in an origins in the nineteen eighty s of con- insurgency against the Soviet invasion of the country, the Taliban, some of the Hadena who were fighting the Soviets. They shared a common enemy with the United States. And both the Carter and Reagan administrations gave the mujahedeen three billion dollars military aid to fight the Soviets and in the nineteen nineties after the Soviets withdrew the country fell into civil war of with various parts of the country controlled by various CONMEBOL loads. The most militant extremists faction of the dean turned into the Taliban and from ninety four started fighting against the warlords against the various. Clans and tribes and factions and graduate to over the country. And what do they do once they take control of the country, the Taliban did the litter on its promise of bringing stability peace to large portions of the country by two thousand one the Taliban really ruled most of ghanistan the exception of. A small space in the north the Taliban did stop the corruption vity human rights abuses, rapes robberies of the various for lords. But they unleashed their own serious Eumenides violations and abuses. They really wanted to turn ghanistan into a ninth century like backward place. So women were tremendously restricted in their freedoms. They could not get chomps. They couldn't access healthcare. Been where stone for adultery for men. Many men but executed beheaded and apart from that the Taliban, but also inadequate in their administrative capacity and not just inadequate. They really wanted to turn ghanistan into backward place, and they actively went ahead and destroyed an investitures of economic activity and social government administration. And how and when does al-qaeda show up allocate them of emerged of some of the same fighters in this case foreign non Afghan fighters who were fighting the Soviet some bin Laden was one of the fortified fighting of ghanistan against the Soviet innovation. And it is in Afghanistan where he got to know the future leader of the Taliban, Omar, so particularly in the core group of fighters around him head lots of connections personal relationships with bin Laden when Kedah under bin Laden's leadership was looking for a place to have a safe haven for its operations. They show the for number of countries for a while they were in Sudan, ultimately, they got pushed out from Sudan and said that point in the mid ninety nineties where they set up camp in Afghanistan bid, the bowl calm and protection. Of Malamah, and it is out of ghanistan where al-qaeda playing major attacks major international terrorist attacks against US Cole against the USA embassies in Duns Aena in Kenya. And ultimately, of course, nine eleven. After nine eleven the United States requested that the Taliban hints overall, Kedah bin Laden and other al-qaeda members for prosecution in the US, the Taliban has been given the opportunity to surrender all the tourists and Afghantistan and to close down their camps and operations full warning has been given and time is running out tell about, of course, refused to do that and the United States invaded Afghanistan, but then metro peaks toppling the of gun Taliban regime, and by about late two thousand one only two thousand two the Taliban is really eliminated us a regime entity in of ghanistan. The United States than subsequently tries to build a functioning government in got any STAN and the beginning of that are significant hope among the compilation the much, but the government and much but to governance though, follow that is tremendous and Tuesday's them only on box the governance that then follows is troubled of the governance is pervaded by corruption abuses like of government capacity, and this provides foretell ground for the Taliban to entrench its emotional relation..

Taliban United States bin Laden ghanistan Afghanistan Sean Rama al-qaeda Sudan Brookings Institution senior fellow Duns Aena dean Kenya Kedah Carter Brown
"taliban" Discussed on Today, Explained

Today, Explained

03:57 min | 2 years ago

"taliban" Discussed on Today, Explained

"Jim williams. You're the co host of the worldly podcast vox, the United States. Wants a peace deal with the Tulla. Bon what's the deal? Yeah. So the US in the Taliban have tentatively agreed to the framework for a peace deal, which is a really big deal, and it could potentially lead to the end of US involvement in this almost two decade, long war. So this news feels sort of abrupt out of the blue. But I'm guessing it's probably less out of the blue than we think it is. How did how did we get here? I mean, it's a bit surprising. But we have this special on voi-. His basically entire job is to go and and work on this. Right. These negotiations. His name's Zalmay Khalilzad. He has been holding talks basically since this past July in Doha in Qatar. It's like this kind of neutral third party where we tend to meet with the Taliban. They have offices there. Yeah. Previous talks have broken down including one time when they flew Taliban flag. There and the Lear Afghantistan saw that and got really pissed off and ended talks a lot of Americans. Probably think of the Taliban is like this super crazy. Militant group that is like evil and bad and does really bad things. And yeah, they do, but they also have political offices, right? Like, they do have negotiators sit down and agitate and talk about like, let's work out a peace framework. So nobody really thought going into this that Khalilzad would be able to get them to this point, the US and the talented this point this quickly. Okay. So negotiations have been ongoing since July who's been involved? So there are three really main players here in the actual negotiations. NPR's talk the US. Okay. The Taliban for have the Afghan government, which the US supports the Taliban. Does not doesn't recognize it as legitimate government and has been fighting against it. So those are the three parties to the conflict, and so what's changed between these three primary parties recently that that's making this possible. Let's start with the US on the US side. You have Donald Trump who really really seriously like extra super duper wants to bring US troops home. Like, right. The second. Right. He has like a very clear incentive to want to figure out how to work with the Taliban come up with some kind of deal that basically gives them an excuse to be able to pull out right? Like, I'm done. I don't wanna be in this war forever. You know? It's like nickname the forever war for a good reason. On the other side, you have to tell them, right? They happen to control something like. Forty percent of the country. Now like really had a resurgence if power and reach basically since like all foreign combat troops pulled out around twenty fourteen. So we still have a lot of troops. There us the US and NATO countries. But they're in like these advisers, and so they are basically at their peak of their power now, they're really powerful, and they wanna use that leverage. Right. Like, look, we we basically run half this country. Right. Little less than that. So like you have to work with us now, which brings us to the third party, which is the Afghan government. They also would very much like to finish this and not like have to continue fighting Afghan forces are bearing the brunt of the casualties. Like, they're the ones who Afghan police, Afghan security forces, Afghan military, who are fighting the Taliban. They're the ones dying in large numbers. They have an incentive to finish this. They also know that the US really wants to pull out they're like, okay. The US is about to leave which means we're gonna lose. A lot of the support. And backing we better like figure out a way to sit down with the Taliban, and like salt this. All these kind of things come together at this point. Where like it's possible that the could actually be the basis for a peace deal to end this war. Do we know any of the details about what might be agreed upon yet? Yeah. So it's not like official deal yet. It's just like the framework for maybe eventually having a peace deal..

Taliban United States Afghan government Zalmay Khalilzad Donald Trump Tulla Jim williams NPR Doha Lear Afghantistan Qatar official NATO Forty percent two decade
"taliban" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM

WNYC 93.9 FM

02:56 min | 3 years ago

"taliban" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM

"We do know that since they morning then this morning at least i've gone air force has been attacking the taliban but this is an area full of people still a lot of people living there so will be difficult for the afghan and american forces to to push the taliban out fast enough and if it were to fool how significant is that one of the things that the taliban wants to do is to release prisoners what kinds of people are in those prisons important taliban fighters planners and i will they will have this also as you know important in terms of media headlines because we have to understand this is happening at the time when the taliban under pressure from the american aerial support given to the afghan special forces so the taliban really need to prove a point to say look we still not defin still not finished i will not be diminished by you know by the trump administration's new resilience the bbc's aaliyah atrophy joining us live from kabul on that fighting in western afghanistan you're listening to newshour from the bbc i'm racier akbal we are going to return now to our top story there are growing calls for an international inquiry into the killings on gaza's border on monday from the united nations the united kingdom and germany scores of palestinians were killed by israeli troops during a huge protest on monday the violence coincided with the us formerly moving its embassy to jerusalem breaking with decades of both american and international consensus i've been speaking to a resident of gaza abdelkarim alkaloid to is twenty two still studying he lives in the jabalia refugee camp in the southern gaza strip he told me why for the past few weeks he has been going to the border for two to three hours everyday will to my personal experience i have seen this as a way for palestinian to end the ongoing blockade on gaza and as the dream of many palestinian here especially with here in gaza have at least one million fuji living in the most concentrated camp if the world so it's a chance for them to attend to the lands to their properties that they have lift back in nineteen forty eight nine hundred forty eight is a long time before he was born what does this march of return mean to you personally to.

taliban afghanistan gaza united nations united kingdom kabul germany jerusalem jabalia three hours
"taliban" Discussed on Global News Podcast

Global News Podcast

02:02 min | 3 years ago

"taliban" Discussed on Global News Podcast

"When the outhustled president ghani's offer comes off to a particularly bloody few months civilian casualties have soared as the taliban have increasingly targeted towns and cities at taliban's spokesman said they were waiting for reaction from their leadership to the latest peace offer but an afghan mp fowzia koufi told the bbc that peace offers had been made before and that the taliban had not stopped though violence the taleban will not talk to a government that had this so fragile internally divided on is not able to have a consensus on peace we need to have a political consensus in ten that the un peace we need to have a unified definition of what do we mean by piece because there are a lot of political and ethnic groups in afghanistan who believe that present them unease generous offer for taleban is actually meant to marginalize other groups in afghanistan download as army is from the bbc pashtu language service that broke costs to afghanistan he spoke to a media some petra the conflict is in a stalemate no side is winning the taliban have tried their best to capture measures cities although they control the a huge part of the country and the americans are now on government have been trying to defeat the taliban and expelled them from the territories so reach out under their control and they have also fade so no side is winning so date is that he is and that he has offered peace talks but is important to know that he has made similar offers in the past is the taleban they are refusing to talk to the of one government they insist that we want to talk but we want to talk to the us government this seed the americans as the main activity enough wanna son nardov on government they said they in the initial stage we will talk to the americans and the main point.

president ghani taliban fowzia koufi bbc un afghanistan us