37 Burst results for "Taliban"

Fresh update on "taliban" discussed on John Howell

John Howell

00:35 min | 5 hrs ago

Fresh update on "taliban" discussed on John Howell

"Post encouraging looting downtown. Officers were dispatched. You are downtown area once we got word of the social media posts. 400 officers were dispatched to our downtown. Soon car caravans were headed into the loop. This was not an organized protest. Rather, this was an incident of pure criminality. This was an act of violence against our police officers and against our city, W. J. Hennigan. I've read a lot of his national security work. He's actually here in town, had an interview with the lower Lightfoot yesterday on the fifth floor of City Hall in her office. And essentially, she's doubling down on this narrative that this most definitely was a planned attack. In fact, she said, the looters I knew that the police staff will be lowest early Monday morning, and they used the event on the South side as a jumping off point, But they were ready to go at the best opportunity. And then, of course, they fomented the mayhem to cover their tracks. But I get the sense through these interviews since Monday that she's trying to deflect the blame. And as I'm going to bring up with a double D J Hannigan here in just minutes. She better She better arrange. And quickly, very public arrests and indictments before it happens again or she's gonna wear this, you know, back in May and I said the sun there a couple days ago, maybe even Monday. Um Tickets. That would be a couple days ago. I just checked the Galleria. I said, What happened May 31st basically in regards to the events of Minneapolis that happened nationwide. John and I don't hold. I don't hold her responsible for that reaction. Then necessarily, and they were caught flat footed by it should have been, but we were, but in this case we were not prepared. And in the next case, it'll be She'll have to own the entire deal. John Dempsey. Regina break in here. Yeah. Did you see John cast his column today? In the trip? I did not because my Tribune disappeared today. Oh, okay. Yes. Maybe somebody came and stole it before you could go out in your Tony soprano bathrobe and pick it up off the driveway. Well, my New York Times is out there. Okay, well, any what happened? The triple what You can't say CASS has a story about a man named de misc. Lomax, who was arrested for allegedly using a chunk of concrete to smash the Burberry store window. Two cops tried to arrest him. He allegedly grabbed another chunk and whipped it at the head of the Chicago police sergeant. They caught him. He was in court Monday. According to John Cast, I saw this. He was released on Bond. Yeah, $500 Bond, 500 Taliban Judge Mary Maru Vo, according to Caste, set his bail at 5000 And you only have to pay 10%. So the man walked out after allegedly using a chunk of concrete to hit a cop and to smash the window. You. Ah, you break curfew. You go to jail. You vandalize you go to jail. You loot you go to prison. You attack a cop. You go to president for a really long time and shame on the judge. You don't release those. I don't care what his prior record is. I don't care if he was abused as a child. I don't care. I have lost my Shiva. Get regarding the backstories of all these riders. A this point. Well, you know what? It was Shame on the judge for letting the gout I don't. I wasn't in court, but ordinarily, the prosecutor Would object to a bond that is too low. I get judge a lien on the judge's lean on the state's attorneys to essentially The assistant state's attorneys who are handling the case to baste, You know, they lean on the recommendations here. You throw a chunk of concrete of the cop said after they find you breaking a window and stealing. Out of some business yet that you don't get out of jail for that to go home and think about it. Finger plaint. No, you don't. No. Why don't you want to know? Since you mentioned the paper thing you want to know one of the great most economical jokes in comedy history. Tell me, okay? No, there's not one ounce of fat on this joke, okay? I read the Sunday paper because my neighbor got up late. I love it. I love it could even say it even cut out because I read the Sunday paper. My neighbor got out. Relate. Got a Rachel. Thank you. Yeah, You say it all right there in three seconds, And you could also test somebody sense of humor. I've actually told my wife that joke and she doesn't get it. Which really concerns me? Yeah. How about our young guys? You know, Steven Tyler. The guys were too young to remember when there was a paper paper, Would they get the joke? Coming up next, W. J. Hennigan had an exclusive interview with Mayor Lori Lightfoot. I think she's trying to deflect some of the blame because she is doubling down on the narrative will we'll discuss it with Mr Hannigan? He joins us next on Double D. L s Checking traffic.

W. J. Hennigan Lori Lightfoot Mr Hannigan John Lomax Judge Mary Maru Vo John Cast City Hall John Dempsey New York Times Steven Tyler Minneapolis Regina Taliban Cass Rachel President Trump Prosecutor Chicago
Taliban warn against attacks on freed prisoners going home

Larry Elder

00:35 sec | 1 d ago

Taliban warn against attacks on freed prisoners going home

"Ahead of an upcoming release of Taliban detainees. The insurgent group warns the government in Kabul against any attacks on those release. The Taliban says any such incidents would jeopardize the peace talks, adding that there count they've bean at least let me in the past several months instances when freed Taliban figures were killed, arrest and then some rearrested by government forces. Kabul officials, though deny unwarranted attacks on freed Taliban. The prisoner release his part of the deal the insurgents signed with us earlier this year. The final 400 Taliban prisoners remain in government

Taliban Kabul
Fresh update on "taliban" discussed on The DeMaio Report with Carl DeMaio and Lou Penrose

The DeMaio Report with Carl DeMaio and Lou Penrose

00:34 min | 3 hrs ago

Fresh update on "taliban" discussed on The DeMaio Report with Carl DeMaio and Lou Penrose

"Purpose and of mind because this is a serious moment for our nation. We're at one of those inflection points. You've heard me say that before in our history. A life changing election for this nation. The choice. The choice we make this November is going to decide the future of America for a very, very long time. And I had a great choice. Great opportunities. I had a great choice, but I have no doubt. That I picked the right person to join me as an ex vice president out of states of America and that Senator Kamala Harris when he said I had a great choice. I thought it was going to say, but I didn't say they had a great joys, but she turned me down. Her name is Michelle Obama had a great choice had a great choice, Applesauce and mashed potatoes and I don't have any more, and they won't let me eat anything any more stressful than that. By the way. He read from a Taliban prompter. Okay, just so you know. Hey, was able to deliver his lines because he had a teleprompter. When Joe Biden doesn't have a teleprompter, even sometimes, when he does have a teleprompter, oftentimes it kind of goes off the wheels. I think they were late because they literally were trying after he slept. They were literally trying To practice the speech and anyway, so hey also said I purchased with the serious seriousness of mind. We're still trying to figure out whether your minds all there, so you won't do the mental capacity test. That's why I said that. I'm I think that's why they put that out there on purpose. Those words were specific seriousness of mind, you know. My mental faculties are still here. S O. Biden also highlighted some poll tested items that they're going to try to highlight on Kamala Harris Audio 11. As attorney general largest state in the country. Com O took on the big.

Senator Kamala Harris Joe Biden Michelle Obama America Taliban Vice President Attorney
Afghan council frees Taliban prisoners to set up peace talks

Weekend Edition Sunday

00:16 sec | 3 d ago

Afghan council frees Taliban prisoners to set up peace talks

"Afghan assembly has paved the way for peace talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban, the council of Community leaders and politicians as approved the release of 400 Taliban prisoners. The final batch of Taliban detainees to be freed before peace talks can begin.

Taliban Afghan Government Council Of Community
Afghanistan to release 400 Taliban prisoners, says peace talks imminent

Weekend Edition Sunday

00:16 sec | 3 d ago

Afghanistan to release 400 Taliban prisoners, says peace talks imminent

"Traditional Afghan assembly has paved the way for peace talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban, the council of Community leaders and politicians as approved the release of 400 Taliban prisoners. The final batch of Taliban detainees to be freed before peace talks can

Taliban Afghan Government Council Of Community
Esper says US troop levels in Afghanistan to go below 5,000 by end of November

Kuhn's Cooking Hour

00:32 sec | 3 d ago

Esper says US troop levels in Afghanistan to go below 5,000 by end of November

"The Trump administration is also planning another Afghanistan troop drawdown on Tom Folding. The US will reduce the number of American troops in Afghanistan to less than 5000 by the end of November. That word from Defense Secretary Mark Esper in an interview one expert reaction. The question, then becomes Whether or not the United States can still fulfill that mission of train advise and says without reduced number That's hard to say, particularly in light of the ongoing conditions where we've seen expansion of Taliban attacks on Afghan forces. CBS News National security consultant Jeff

Afghanistan United States Tom Folding Mark Esper CBS Consultant Jeff
Afghanistan to release 400 Taliban prisoners, says peace talks imminent

Purity Products

00:07 sec | 3 d ago

Afghanistan to release 400 Taliban prisoners, says peace talks imminent

"Council voted to free 400 Taliban prisoners could be the next step in ongoing peace talks to end the long running war. You're

Taliban
Militants Attack Afghan Prison as Brief Cease-Fire Expires

Not Too Shabby

00:44 sec | Last week

Militants Attack Afghan Prison as Brief Cease-Fire Expires

"Of presence in Afghanistan are believed to be on the run after an attack by Islamic state militants on a prison in the eastern city of Jalalabad. Jail houses, eyes and Taliban militants. Ssekandi commander is our Afghanistan. Correspondent officials say More than 1000 inmate to hide escaped have now been recaptured, but hundreds of others remain missing. The attack began on Sunday with a suicide car bombing outside the gates of the prison. A number of gunmen then opened fire and made their way into the compound whilst others took up position in a nearby shopping plaza. The attack began on the last day of a three day cease fire between the Taliban and Afghan security forces. The Islamic State Group, however, were not part of that agreement.

Taliban Afghanistan Islamic State Group Commander Jalalabad
Trump says he did not ask Vladimir Putin about bounties on US troops

Morning News with Manda Factor and Gregg Hersholt

00:40 sec | Last week

Trump says he did not ask Vladimir Putin about bounties on US troops

"Reports that Russia might have been paying bounties for the Taliban to kill US troops in Afghanistan. President Trump admitted in a new interview with Axios that he never even raised the question In a call with Vladimir Putin last week, we discussed numbers things. We did not discuss that now and you never discussed it with him. I have never discussed it with him now. Trump also denied he'd heard anything about the bounties. Despite reports the Intel did. Take it into the president's daily brief. It never reached my desk. You know why? Because they didn't think intelligence. They didn't think it was really. It was in your life. They didn't think I was worthy every I wouldn't mind if it reached my desk. I would have done something about it. It never reached my desk. When

Vladimir Putin Donald Trump President Trump Axios Taliban Russia Intel Afghanistan
Russia Bounty Reports, U.S. Troop Movements Put Trump-Putin Relationship in Spotlight

KNX Evening News

06:02 min | 2 weeks ago

Russia Bounty Reports, U.S. Troop Movements Put Trump-Putin Relationship in Spotlight

"That he has never once broach the issue of Russia, placing bounties on the heads of American troops in Afghanistan with his counterpart Vladimir Putin. Then just hours later, he announces the complete withdrawal of U. S forces from Germany. And Hodges is a retired lieutenant general in the U. S Army and former commanding general for United States Army Europe based in Germany. Currently he is an analyst and scholar at the centre for European Policy Analysis. General. Thank you for joining us. Thanks for the privilege. So let's start with the last thing first. Which was the announcement from the White House about us troops out of Germany. Did that shock you? Well, it was a surprise when I heard it two months ago when it came out in a Wall Street Journal report that about 10,000 we're going to come out on days. Of course, it was also a shock to all of the U. S headquarters in Europe at the time, as well as our allies. On today. Of course, the number that we heard was closer to 12 hours. So they're apparently going to moves to other regions. What is the basis for having troops in these numbers in Germany in the first place? Once the original idea, and then how are the other countries there now reacting to this Well, keep in mind that the total number of Americans that are based in Germany's 34,000 That's about 12,000 Air Force in 22,000 army so That's probably about 1/3 of what could be seated in the Coliseum there in Los Angeles or some other major university stadium. It's not a lot of people, the primary function that they perform. Ah, commanding control, logistics, intelligence communications. Things that help the United States carry out our national security strategy in our defensive strategy in Europe, Africa in the Middle East, so anything, they're not. They're providing protection for Germany at all. They're there to give us Forward, basing that makes it easier for us to carry out our strategy. But am I correct general that the Russians were never exactly to put it mildly pleased that these air troops were in Germany and would be not at all disappointed that they're leaving. Well, no, This is just to the Kremlin because they've done nothing to change their behavior in a positive way. They still occupy Crimea illegally. They still are killing Ukrainian soldiers and done passed done Mass every week. Still occupied 20% of Georgia. They still support the Assad regime, which has generated millions of refugees and killed hundreds of thousands of their own people and their supporting general Haftar in Libya, which is going to generate another 1,000,000 refugees. Into Europe, so they've done nothing to change their behavior. And yet we reduce our capability and Germany by about 1/3 so to me that that again now We've had US troops in Germany since the end of World War two on some people have said. Well, why are they still there? The Cold War's over and I would say well because of US leadership and because of NATO. We've had no war in Europe for 71 years. I mean, that's actually since 1945. Don't do math in public 75 years. That's an incredible accomplishment. When you think of the history of Europe so Well, with the exception of the break up in Yugoslavia, all the nations of Europe that have found each other for centuries. Now, basically all of the same team in NATO What a huge benefit to the United States that are most important trading partner partner. The European Union is stable and secure, so this is for our benefit. Move on to the other part of this discussion. The time we have left the president not confronting Vladimir Putin about the bounties in the most recent phone call, they have, and then reportedly also other phone calls that they've had Knowing that everyone would be watching for this that people wanted something to be said. Yeah, I don't understand. Um, while the president is not more forceful and clear, because actually the acts of the department offense up until this terrible announcement today of the action Of this administration have actually increased in Europe. We have more troops in Germany today than we did under President Obama and everything that President Obama promised. Has been carried out by this administration. So there's a disconnect between what Is happening on the ground in Europe and in what the president says to be candid. I can't explain that when it comes to the reports of bounces, own troops head in Afghanistan. I was there for 15 months back in 2009 and 2010. As a brigadier general, I always assumed that the Russians wanted to see us fail to see us bleed because of our support for the mujahideen with the Soviet Union was in Afghanistan. But, um Wouldn't when the domain of Thailand from Pakistan into Afghanistan was cut off. The Russian's still allowed us to move supplies What we call the northern Supply line moving supply around. We were still able to move through Russia to get stuff in and out so they could have really hurt us if they want to. I suspect that this business about the bounty is probably at some local level some overeager person. I never thought the Taliban needed any motivation to kill Americans. The president could make this go away if he was much more clear about how he opposes the criminals. Technologists. Retired Lieutenant general US Army Former Commanding general for United States Army Europe Thanks the K Index in depth podcast you're going Get that for free

Europe Germany United States United States Army President Trump Vladimir Putin Afghanistan Russia Nato President Obama U. S Army Wall Street Journal U. S Analyst European Policy Analysis Taliban Hodges European Union
Trump Did Not Ask Putin About Russia's Bounties on U.S. Troops

World News Tonight with David Muir

02:10 min | 2 weeks ago

Trump Did Not Ask Putin About Russia's Bounties on U.S. Troops

"A new interview with the president after reports Russia allegedly paid bounties to the Taliban for the killing of US troops in Afghanistan. The president was asked about his recent call with Vladimir, Putin and whether the safety of our troops was brought up. Here's Terry Moran. Tonight after those reports that Russia been paying bounties to the Taliban to kill US troops in Afghanistan president trump admitting in an interview with Axios that he never even raised the matter in a call with Vladimir Putin last week we discussed numerous things we did not discuss that you'd never discussed it with I have never discussed with Trump also denied heard anything about the bounties despite reports. The Intel did make it into the President's daily brief. It never reached my desk. You know why? Because they didn't think it would intelligence they didn't think it was real. It was reason. They didn't think it was worthy every I wouldn't mind if it reached my desk I would have done something about it. It never reached my desk when asked about Russia supplying arms to the Taliban trump said, the US did the same thing in Afghanistan to well, we weapons when they were fighting Russia to you know when we were when they were fighting with the Taliban. Afghanistan's different Eero well, I'm just saying yes. We did that to the president also making a major strategic move in Europe withdrawing a third of US troops from Germany citing his longstanding gripe that Germany doesn't pay its fair share for defense in Europe. There was bipartisan condemnation of the president's move. Those American troops in Germany have been the cornerstone of US security in Europe for decades. Senator Mitt. Romney calling withdrawal a grave error and a slap in the face of friend and ally the Biden campaign blasted trump in a statement saying the withdraw does not reflect a thoughtful defense strategy. This is a gift to Vladimir Putin. David nearly of those twelve thousand troops being pulled out of Germany there'll be rotated to other parts of eastern. Europe the Pentagon Dell. Help deter Russian aggression but president trump made crystal clear. This is a lot more about punishing Germany then deterring Russia David all of this electioneering Terry Moran Thank you tonight

President Trump Taliban Vladimir Putin Russia United States Germany Afghanistan Europe Terry Moran Donald Trump Senator Mitt Intel David Dell Axios Romney Biden
Trump says he didn't discuss Russian bounties with Putin

WTOP 24 Hour News

00:39 sec | 2 weeks ago

Trump says he didn't discuss Russian bounties with Putin

"He did not pressure Russian leader Vladimir Putin on reports he's offered bounties on the heads of Americans killed in Afghanistan. The president tells Axios the notion that Russia would pay bounties to Taliban fighter. Is who killed Americans didn't come up last Thursday in his call with Vladimir Putin. I have never discussed it with him. Why not? Frankly, that's an issue that many people said was fakeness. Mr. Trump spokeswoman has sided dissenting views within the intelligence community. If it reached my desk, I would have done something about it. Sources say. The matter was included in the president's Daily brief A written summary of intelligence. Which Mr Trump insists he reads Stephen

Vladimir Putin Mr Trump President Trump Mr. Trump Taliban Axios Afghanistan Russia Stephen
Russian Intelligence Agencies Push Disinformation on Coronavirus Pandemic

Hey, It's Cory Hepola

00:22 sec | 2 weeks ago

Russian Intelligence Agencies Push Disinformation on Coronavirus Pandemic

"U. S officials say Russian intelligence officers air spreading disinformation about the pandemic through English language websites. Two Russians and military intelligence have been identified as responsible. President. Trump admitted today He's spoken with Russia's Vladimir Putin, but did not bring up the reports that Moscow offered Taliban bodies for attacks on Americans in Afghanistan.

Vladimir Putin Donald Trump Taliban President Trump Afghanistan Moscow Russia U. S
Trump says he never discussed alleged Russian bounties in calls with Putin

KRLD News, Weather and Traffic

00:10 sec | 2 weeks ago

Trump says he never discussed alleged Russian bounties in calls with Putin

"Trump admitted today He's spoken with Russia's Vladimir Putin, but did not bring up the reports that Moscow offered Taliban bounties for attacks on Americans in Afghanistan.

Donald Trump Russia Vladimir Putin Moscow Afghanistan
Trump says he didn't bring up bounties against US troops in recent call with Putin

KCBS Radio Morning News

00:39 sec | 2 weeks ago

Trump says he didn't bring up bounties against US troops in recent call with Putin

"Trump's acknowledged he's been in touch with Russia's leader, but is not brought up the reports that Moscow may have had a hand in trying to spark Taliban attacks on Americans in Afghanistan. The president says he didn't bring the matter to Vladimir Putin's attention because he simply doesn't believe that Russia offered bounties. If it were true, I'd be very angry about it. President spokesman Man has sided dissenting views within the intelligence community, suggesting that many analysts believe the reporting is true. When asked by Axios why he didn't press the matter with Putin. Mr. Trump pointed to the losses the Soviets suffered in Afghanistan in the 19 eighties. Well, we saw a light weapons when they were fighting Russia to Stephen Portnoy. CBS NEWS Washington In

Vladimir Putin Mr. Trump Russia Afghanistan President Trump Taliban Stephen Portnoy Axios Moscow CBS Washington
Taliban Call Cease-Fire In Afghanistan For Muslim Holiday

Marketplace

01:00 min | 2 weeks ago

Taliban Call Cease-Fire In Afghanistan For Muslim Holiday

"A rare cease fire in Afghanistan for an upcoming Muslim holiday on Twitter spokesman said The three day haul to fighting is meant to allow Afghans celebrate in peace. NPR's DEA Hadeed reports. A Taliban spokesman said the ceasefire with lost of the Muslim celebration of ideology It's the third cease fire that the Taliban have called over the past two years. Before then, they were exceedingly ray. The whole to fire seems intended to show Afghans that the insurgents is serious about upcoming negotiations with the Afghan government. Those negotiations, mentor in the conflict and give the Taliban a role in governing the country. In response, the Afghan president, Ashraf Honey said he'd soon release hundreds of Taliban prisoners. Their release is meant to proceed. The pace talks on the U. S is backing those talks, but they've made many liberal minded Afghans apprehensive. Because the Taliban say they'll impose strict Islamic law if they come back into power. D Hadid NPR NEWS ISLAMABAD Its

Taliban Afghanistan NPR Afghan Government Dea Hadeed Twitter Ashraf Honey Islamabad President Trump
Negotiations with Taliban slated to start in 'week's time,' Afghan government says

All of It

00:56 sec | 2 weeks ago

Negotiations with Taliban slated to start in 'week's time,' Afghan government says

"A rare cease fire in Afghanistan for an upcoming Muslim holiday spokesman saying on Twitter A three day halt of fighting is meant to allow Afghans is celebrating peace. Here's NPR's DEA Hadeed. Taliban spokesman said the cease fire would last for the Muslim celebration of idle at her. It's the third cease fire that the Taliban of cold over the past two years before then they were exceedingly ray. The whole two fire seems intended to show Afghans that the insurgents a serious about upcoming negotiations with the Afghan government, those negotiations mental in the conflict and give the Taliban a role in governing the country. In response, the Afghan president Assad of Honey said he'd soon release hundreds of Taliban prisoners. Their release is meant to proceed. The pace talks on the U. S. Is backing those talks, but they've made many liberal minded Afghans apprehensive. Because the Taliban say they'll impose strict Islamic law if they come back into power. NPR's see Hadid This's NPR

Taliban NPR Afghanistan Afghan Government DEA Twitter Assad President Trump Hadid Honey
Air strike in Afghanistan kills senior Taliban commanders, local media reports

Not Too Shabby

00:20 sec | 3 weeks ago

Air strike in Afghanistan kills senior Taliban commanders, local media reports

"In western Afghanistan say dozens of people have been killed and injured in an air strike in Herat province, targeting a celebration to welcome a Taliban commander recently released from jail. Civilians have thought to be among the dead. Peace talks between the government and the Taliban are supposed to begin this month, but they look to be delayed by the ongoing violence.

Taliban Herat Afghanistan Commander
White House Threatens Defense Bill Veto Over Confederate Base Names

Financial Issues with Dan Celia

01:08 min | 3 weeks ago

White House Threatens Defense Bill Veto Over Confederate Base Names

"Has approved its annual defense policy bill, including a provision to remove Confederate names from military bases. The National Defense Authorization Act was approved, setting up negotiations for the House and Senate on a final version of the bill that will be sent to President Trump. As a part of the bill Congress would allocate $740.5 billion to 3% pay raise for troops established a $3.6 billion fund for measures against China. And provide $1 billion to the Pentagon to assist with pandemic preparedness. It also calls for the production of a report on the threat of the Taliban and the impacts of withdrawing troops from Afghanistan. The version of the bill passed by the House also includes language requiring the Pentagon to rename bases and other military properties named after Confederate military officers within a year. The president tweeted last week that he would veto the bill if it included provisions to rename the basis. The White House said the president's advisers would recommend that he vetoed the bill setting serious concerns about various provisions included in the bill

Bill Congress President Trump Pentagon White House National Defense Taliban Senate Afghanistan China
US, UK & Canada Say Russia Is Hacking Virus Vaccine Trials

THE NEWS with Anthony Davis

02:06 min | 3 weeks ago

US, UK & Canada Say Russia Is Hacking Virus Vaccine Trials

"Western governments accused hackers believed to be part of Russian intelligence of trying to steal valuable private information about a corona virus vaccine on Thursday calling out the Kremlin in an unusually detailed public warning to scientists and medical companies. The alleged culprit is of a million photo. Intelligence agencies in the United States united. Kingdom and Canada alleged the Hacking Group A. Twenty nine also known as cozy bear and blamed for American election interference for years ago is attacking academic and pharmaceutical research institutions involved in covert nineteen vaccine development. The allegation hackers linked to a foreign government or attempting to Siphon secret medical research during the pandemic is not entirely new US officials as recently as Thursday have accused China of virtually identical conduct. But the latest public warning was startling for the detail at provided attributing the targeting by name to a particular hacking group and specifying the software vulnerabilities. The hackers have been exploiting also Russian cyber strike, a particular nerve in the US given the Kremlin sophisticated campaign to influence the two thousand sixteen presidential election. Russian President Vladimir Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov rejected the accusation, saying we don't have information about who may have hacked pharmaceutical companies and. And research centers in Britain, the persistent attacks seen as an effort to steal intellectual property rather than to disrupt research. The accusations commented a tenuous time for relations between Russia and both the US and UK. Besides political illwill, the trump administration is under pressure to confront Russia over intelligence information that Moscow offered bounties to Taliban fighters to attack allied fighters as well as interference with the upcoming. November election so far, trump has remained silent.

United States Russia Donald Trump Hacking Group Vladimir Putin Dmitry Peskov Taliban Moscow Canada President Trump Britain China UK
"taliban" Discussed on The Current

The Current

03:27 min | 2 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 | 5 months 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 WNYC 93.9 FM

WNYC 93.9 FM

04:05 min | 6 months ago

"taliban" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM

"Vegas the U. S. and the Taliban have agreed to sign a peace deal next week aimed at ending eighteen years of war in Afghanistan and bringing US troops home conclusion of an agreement would bring about an end to America's longest running conflict and fill fill one of president trump's campaign promises the planned signing was still depend on the success of a week long nation wide reduction in violence agreement the started midnight local time the weeklong effort succeeds a peace agreement will be signed in Doha later this month paving the way for the pullout of U. S. troops officials with the implanted based centers for disease control and prevention say Colbert nineteen that among you like disease caused by the corona virus could gain a foothold in the west for that reason they're working with different parts of the U. S. health care system to get prepared member station W. A. B. E. in Atlanta Sam waited as a story CDC officials say the new coronavirus hasn't started spreading widely from person to person in the U. S. though that could happen Nancy Messier is with the agency our goal continues to be following the introduction of the virus into the U. S. yes despite us more time to prepare our communities for more cases and possibly sustain sprint Messinian says the CDC is preparing the local public health agencies and hospitals to respond to spikes in covert nineteen cases she says the agency also wants to know what kinds of medical supplies might be available to address the U. S. outbreak in the event that happens missing a says schools and businesses might need to close to slow the spread of the disease for NPR news I'm Sam Whitehead in Atlanta Olympic organizers and Tokyo postpone training sessions are volunteers because of the virus outbreak in China officials say training has been put off until may about eighty thousand volunteers are needed at the twenty twenty games in the IOC because they're free work a key support to ensure the success of the Olympic Games court of wires worries weighed on Wall Street week send the Dow was down two hundred and twenty seven points today you're listening to NPR news in Washington and this is W. NYC I'm Jamie Floyd Mike Bloomberg's presidential campaign says three women who signed a nondisclosure agreements with his company will release them from the NDA's if they choose Fatima Chamakh works for Bloomberg's campaign and says the company has other NDAs but Bloomberg is only named in three given the conversation that we're having the allegations that are being lobbied on Mike and putting him in the same sentence of the Harvey Weinstein or Donald Trump I can't stress enough that it is it is offensive to a woman who has worked for him the announcement comes after senator Elizabeth Warren price Bloomberg to release former female employees who signed NDAs with his firm during Wednesday's democratic debate governor Cuomo's congestion pricing plan for New York City is being held up by the federal government Gothamist reporter Christopher robin says state lawmakers are also benefit benefiting from the stalemate the fact that the federal government is dragging its feet is bad for for commuters but also it gives state you know lawmakers cover to sort of stalling kick the can down the road even more than they already have robin says that many politicians are scared of being attached to the specific congestion pricing toll amounts before statewide elections the federal government fund some of the roads within the congestion pricing zone in mid town and that gives them final say on the plans and New Jersey is it Senate president says he wants to provide a dedicated source of funding for NJ transit by raising the state's corporate tax rate the cash strapped agency continues to struggle with delays staff shortages and train cancellations Sweeney says Steve Sweeney that is raising the business tax along with moving money from other sources will provide NJ transit with five hundred million dollars annually the Senate president's proposal would also prohibit the transfer of capital funds to operating expenses Sweeney says he'll seek a constitutional amendment to make sure the money isn't diverted from transit to other places tonight clear with.

Taliban
"taliban" Discussed on First Person

First Person

12:11 min | 6 months 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 | 6 months 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 | 6 months 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 | 6 months 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 | 1 year 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 | 1 year 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

04:52 min | 1 year ago

"taliban" Discussed on Today, Explained

"Right. Like, we're kind of sketching out like the first part adrift. Yes. Basically, the Taliban has agreed to this thing that we have been asking them forever. Which is to promise that they won't let groups like al-qaeda an ISIS operate from their territory safely. Right. So that's the whole reason we invaded Afghanistan. Right. Because they let Al Qaeda just like party in their territory plan attacks against us. They haven't wanted to do that for really long time. Some senior leaders have because they're like, yeah. Supporting al-qaeda and letting them hang out here pretty much. The worst thing we ever did. Strategically because you know, that brought down the might of US military on them when they did that. But some of the more like rank and file fighters, and the Taliban are probably a lot more sympathetic to some of those groups, and so there's been like kind of a rift within the leadership like well. We don't wanna totally agree to that with the US, but I guess the Taliban basically sees like that they can probably bring their fighters along at this point. That's like the basic framework right now is their chance that there's sort of a nudge, nudge, wink, wink, situation going on where it's like, let's just say, we'll police ISIS, whatever it is get the US out of here. And then we get to do whatever we want again. Yeah. So that's like a big question. Mark, right. How do you check that? Right. And what do you do if they go back on their word you just like reinvade Afghanistan? This isn't like nuclear inspections where you can send in like an international agency to verify nuclear storage facilities. Like, there's a lot of questions still to be worked out. So whether or not the United. Dates can guarantee anything the two things. They're they're talking about are the Taliban policing terrorism and the US Lieven. Yeah. But there are other things too that they haven't agreed to yet. Right. So the US also wants the Taliban to sit down face to face with the Afghan government in which so far the Taliban has flat refused to do ever. Because they don't recognize the legitimacy of that government. The Americans also want the Taliban to agree to a ceasefire. Could you guys maybe just stopped shooting and bombing each other the Taliban has so far refused to do that as well. Taliban officials have basically told reporters and diplomats look one of the reasons is if we let all of our fighters, go home and tell them to lay down arms stop fighting for a while we're worried that maybe if we have to start fighting again like they won't rarely we might lose. Attrition. People are gonna go back, home and get jobs. Right. But there seems to be a little bit of movement even. On those things. with all three of these major parties hoping to get a deal is it just super likely one happens. I mean, it's not super likely at all. It's definitely looking positive, right? Like, I'm a really big cynic when it comes to the conflict in Afghanistan ending. But this is really the closest we've gotten and because like you said all three sides actually have incentives to get this done the foundations or there that it could potentially turn out to be the actual Peacedale. Could potentially end the worn Afghantistan. Jen Williams is a foreign editor at thoughts. Coming up today. Explained a peace deal might bring some peace of mind to the United States but not necessarily Afghanistan. Josie and Johnny have a podcast, and it's called Josie and Johnny are having a baby with you Josie. And Johnny are two clueless comedians who are just learning as the go and the show follows them through. They're not totally planned pregnancy as they try to prepare for the birth of their first child, they covered the funny questions. They cover the serious questions, and they have their more experienced friends come on to help them with both. The first episode of the show is already live in it Josie and Johnny tried to answer the hard questions about one's dad persona. Also, Santa Claus and how to avoid repeating the same mistakes parents made it also features John Hodgman, you can find Josie and Johnny on Stitcher on apple podcasts on Spotify on overcast on pocket casts on Google podcasts. I just looked up a bunch of other podcast. Places. There's a bunch..

Taliban US Afghanistan Johnny al-qaeda Josie ISIS John Hodgman Afghan government Mark Spotify Google Jen Williams editor
"taliban" Discussed on Today, Explained

Today, Explained

03:57 min | 1 year 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 SOFREP Radio

SOFREP Radio

04:51 min | 1 year ago

"taliban" Discussed on SOFREP Radio

"You don't know who's who's who's who same for Iraq and same in all these wars. Now, the the, you know, I it would be it'd be really nice if if ISIS would wear uniforms, really appreciate that. So we could see who's a good guy bad guy. But that's just not the case. And I don't know how to prepare to fight that kind of enemy unless everyone receives, you know, special operation force training. Can we make the whole conventional military just be soft possible? Can we just have instead of having, you know, a select number of of of high operator high-speed individuals. Can that would be the only way to do it? I think if they were all high speed high up high functioning high operators, I know that's not possible. But that's probably the only way to do it. Right. Like how how do you do it? I have no idea I think special operations forces has not been such a great job with unconventional warfare. I mean, if they've done is really perfected the direct action counter terrorism aspects of their mission. But I think we just might in my opinion. I think we've kind of failed to deliver on the. Conventional warfare aspect of it. And I would make the point. I think this is interesting that from an American perspective, we would think, well, okay, we need to take our soldiers and give them some sort of unconventional warfare training increase their their schooling. And so forth. But the enemies were fighting ISIS or the Taliban or al-qaeda, whoever they they have pretty minimal training. It's like they just go and do it. Well, so it's a cultural issue. Here's the thing. And I call this. I call this the Kaiser so say principle, what do I mean by that in the movie, the unusual the usual suspects when they're telling the story of of how Kaiser Soza came to be. The the story goes that Kaiser sews a realized you don't need guns or money or or numbers. You just need to have the will do with other people won't. An ISIS has the will do things that people won't. And the thing is we and I mean, we say US forces NATO forces. Can't get in the mud and do the same things because we have. And I know this is this is probably a some people. True this naive thinking. But I have spent enough time down range to given this enough thought. You have to maintain some semblance of. Oh, I hate using this word, righteousness. Can't you know what? I mean. Like, you know, let's let's let's go back to the when these Soviets were were fighting in Afghanistan in in the eighties, and they were dropping toy bombs for kids to pick up because they knew that a blow off their arms now would take their parents out of the flight. We can't do that. We just can't we can't we can't we can't. And I can't give you a good enough. I can't give you a reason that is going to convince everyone I'm just gonna say you can't do it. Yeah. That's the thing that they're willing to do ISIS, Al Qaeda, Taliban, whatever whatever extremist group or our militants. You know, you're you're fighting. That's how they are able to compete and they also compete because. There was a story done years ago where they were comparing the amount of costs to send one US soldier keep one US soldier in theater for a year as opposed to one Taliban soldier and for for US soldiers like a million bucks a year, but for a Taliban fighter it's about two hundred and fifty bucks a year. And you know, these guys are running around in the mountains, flip flops and rusty K's. All you can stroll all the all the aerial bombardments J dams and whatnot at them. But they they know where the caves are. Yeah. The little Afghanistan, you know, the call in an airstrike, and they blow the shit out of some hilltop. And you're like, whoa. Look at that. They lit that hill up. And then ten minutes later, you're looking around. You're like I can't even tell where it is. They hit. The old saying goes, you know, the problem with with with with you know, blowing stuff up Afghanstan is it looks exactly the same afterwards is did beforehand like how do you? That's that's a huge challenge. You can't you can't even couldn't carpet bomb the place..

ISIS Taliban US Afghanistan Kaiser Soza Iraq NATO al-qaeda ten minutes
"taliban" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM

WNYC 93.9 FM

02:56 min | 2 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