Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Poll Analyses
Share on Facebook 10 Share on Twitter Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
OpEdNews Op Eds    H3'ed 3/4/20

Yes, Trump Should Talk With The Taliban

By       (Page 1 of 1 pages) (View How Many People Read This)   2 comments
Author 76576
Follow Me on Twitter     Message Thomas Knapp

Afghan graveyard
Afghan graveyard
(Image by The U.S. Army)
  Details   DMCA

On March 3, US president Donald Trump spoke (via telephone) with Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, chief of the Taliban's Doha diplomatic office and signer, on behalf of his organization, of the recently concluded Afghanistan "peace deal."

"The direct contact between an American president and a top Taliban leader would once have been unthinkable," writes Michael Crowley at the New York Times. Why? Crowley doesn't elaborate, but in my opinion the claim of unthinkability goes a long way toward explaining why the US government spent nearly two decades unsuccessfully attempting to wrest control of Afghanistan from the Taliban before coming to its senses -- in the person of Donald Trump -- and seeking to bring the folly begun by George W. Bush and continued by Barack Obama to an end.

It was, in a word, "unthinkable," for the longest time, that a bunch of Central Asian hillbillies might successfully resist the will of Washington for five times as long as Robert E. Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia did. It was "unthinkable" that US forces better armed, better trained, and more lavishly funded than those who landed at Normandy or took Okinawa could possibly be brought low by light infantry with no air force, no artillery, and no safe logistical haven, wielding weapons scavenged from a war which ended 30 years ago. But that's what happened.

When a war ends, it's reasonable to expect that the losing regime's head of state will talk to and treat with whomever the winning team designates as its representative, if that's what the winning team demands. The word isn't being openly used by either side, but let's call it what it is: Surrender. The US government has surrendered in Afghanistan. No, not unconditionally. But it has surrendered nonetheless. And that's a good thing.

The war became obviously doomed to go down as a fiasco within weeks of the US invasion, when the Bush administration stopped pretending the US presence was about liquidating al Qaeda and started in with a bunch of "nation-building" nonsense. Eighteen years -- not to mention several thousand American and more than 100,000 Afghan deaths -- later, the Taliban controls more of the country than it did those few weeks after the invasion. The US was never going to win the war.

The only question was how long the US would spend losing the war before admitting it had lost the war. That question has now been answered: Eighteen years, four months, and 25 days. If part of the price of extricating the US armed forces from the Afghan quagmire is a phone call between the losing side's president and the winning side's chosen representative, that's not just "thinkable," it's a price we should all applaud Trump for paying.

 

Well Said 1  
Rate It | View Ratings

Thomas Knapp Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Thomas L. Knapp is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.


Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Follow Me on Twitter     Writers Guidelines
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEdNews Newsletter
Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Hypocrisy Alert: Republicans Agreed with Ocasio-Cortez Until About One Minute Ago

Finally, Evidence of Russian Election Meddling ... Oh, Wait

Chickenhawk Donald: A Complete and Total Disgrace

The Nunes Memo Only Partially "Vindicates" Trump, But it Fully Indicts the FBI and the FISA Court

Aircraft Carriers: Give Truman and Ford a Burial at Sea

Political Parties Should Say What They Mean. The Libertarian Party Does.

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

2 people are discussing this page, with 2 comments


Carol Jackson

Become a Fan
Author 61962
(Member since Mar 25, 2011), 2 fans, 845 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Not paid member and Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Not paid member and Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

  New Content

What were these wars about anyway? Oh yeah, business. The business of America is business, and war is the biggest business on the planet.

Submitted on Thursday, Mar 5, 2020 at 3:38:10 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help

911TRUTH

Become a Fan
Author 15356
(Member since Apr 29, 2008), 26 fans, 2989 comments (How many times has this commenter been recommended?)
Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

  New Content

The Taliban aren't stupid. They know what they're dealing with, a pathologically lying con man who cares about nothing but himself and how any deal with them will benefit him, personally.

They are playing him like a Stradivarius.

Submitted on Thursday, Mar 5, 2020 at 4:20:15 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
  Recommend  (0+)
Help

 
Want to post your own comment on this Article? Post Comment