Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 19 Jun '13 20:10
    After all the shady deals between George W Bush and Haliburton
    among others, is it now time for Hamid Karzai to flee from Afghanistan?

    Karzai is in power only because it suited Bush to have him there
    and they promised to help him rule Afghanistan and help him defeat
    the Taliban.

    But now the US and NATO have agreed to leave Afghanistan
    and the Taliban are still there. They have not been defeated.
    Indeed the US are talking about having peace discussions with
    the Taliban.

    If the Taliban win major concessions in these peace talks then
    Hamid Karzai may pack his bags and run.

    If this happens will he seek asylum in the USA? Would the USA accept him?

    I am certain that Karzai will be killed if he remains.
    He will be seen by the Taliban as a puppet of America
    and his life won't be worth the price of a loaf of bread.

    The USA are pragmatic and will deal with whoever is left in charge.
  2. 19 Jun '13 20:13 / 1 edit
    I agree. Why hang around in that country? I'm sure that he's got a ton of money, why not move and disappear? Great advice. You should see if Karzai will give you a job.
  3. 19 Jun '13 23:20
    Originally posted by Eladar
    I agree. Why hang around in that country? I'm sure that he's got a ton of money, why not move and disappear? Great advice. You should see if Karzai will give you a job.
    If the Taliban get a foothold on the power ladder again
    then Karzai won't be around too long to hand out any jobs.
  4. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    19 Jun '13 23:41
    http://news.yahoo.com/taliban-beheads-two-boys-southern-afghanistan-150548483.html

    KANDAHAR, Afghanistan (Reuters) - Taliban fighters beheaded two boys aged 10 and 16 as a warning to villagers not to cooperate with the Afghan government, local officials said.

    The boys, named Khan and Hameedullah, had travelled to Afghan army and police checkpoints near their home in the southern province of Kandahar, scrounging for leftover food to bring to their families, the officials said.

    "The boys were on their way back ... when they were stopped by Taliban insurgents who beheaded them," the chief of Zhari district, Jamal Agha, told Reuters. "Both of them were innocent children and had nothing to do with government or foreigners."

    The militants have beheaded dozens of people in the last two years, accusing them of aiding the government and its foreign backers led by the United States.

    A Taliban spokesman, Qari Yousuf Ahmadi, said the group was not involved in the boys' killings.

    The Kandahar governor's spokesman, Javid Faisal, said the incident occurred on Sunday. Several hours later their bodies and severed heads were left in their village, he said.

    Kandahar is the birthplace of the Taliban and one of Afghanistan's most restive provinces.

    In July last year in the same district, a 16-year-old boy accused by the Taliban of spying for the government was beheaded and skinned. The next month, a girl aged six and a boy of 12 were kidnapped and beheaded in separate incidents in Kandahar and the east of the country.

    Such incidents highlight the difficulty that Taliban leaders have in enforcing discipline across an estimated 20,000 fighters spread from Afghanistan to Pakistan.

    The leadership is trying to improve the group's image in case it wants to push forward tentative reconciliation steps and perhaps even enter mainstream politics. But some militant units have proved hard to control, roaming the countryside and killing or maiming those they deem immoral.

    The beheading occurred the day before seven Taliban insurgents including suicide bombers attacked country's international airport in the capital, Kabul.

    Also on Monday, six insurgents with suicide vests and heavy guns attacked a government compound in the provincial center of Zabul, wounding at least 18 people.

    Concerns are mounting over how the 352,000-strong Afghan security forces will cope with an intensifying Taliban insurgency once most foreign troops leave by the end of next year.
  5. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    19 Jun '13 23:48
    Originally posted by johnnylongwoody
    After all the shady deals between George W Bush and Haliburton
    among others, is it now time for Hamid Karzai to flee from Afghanistan?

    Karzai is in power only because it suited Bush to have him there
    and they promised to help him rule Afghanistan and help him defeat
    the Taliban.

    But now the US and NATO have agreed to leave Afghanistan
    and t ...[text shortened]... rice of a loaf of bread.

    The USA are pragmatic and will deal with whoever is left in charge.
    Who cares what happens to Karzai? If he's smart he'll wind up with a nice villa on the Rivera. The US should have given up on the remaking Afghanistan into a nice Western-type, capitalist, liberal, "democracy" a long time ago.
  6. 20 Jun '13 00:02
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Who cares what happens to Karzai? If he's smart he'll wind up with a nice villa on the Rivera. The US should have given up on the remaking Afghanistan into a nice Western-type, capitalist, liberal, "democracy" a long time ago.
    It never ought to have been a goal in the first place.
  7. 28 Jun '13 23:23
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/28/talks-taliban-british-officer-afghanistan

    "'We should have talked to the Taliban' says top British officer in Afghanistan"
    --Emma Graham-Harrison (28 June 2013)

    British General Nick Carter believes that the Western powers could have
    reached a negotiated settlement with more 'moderate' Taliban leaders
    about a decade ago. But at that time the NATO-led coalition expected
    to win a decisive military victory, putting an end to the Taliban.
  8. 28 Jun '13 23:45
    http:///www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/28/failed-states-western-myth-us-interests

    "Failed states are a western myth: The concept of the failed state is
    meaningless. It was invented as a rationale to impose US interests on
    less powerful nations."
    --Elliott Ross (28 June 2013, 'The Guardian'
  9. 29 Jun '13 02:33 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by normbenign
    It never ought to have been a goal in the first place.
    Who says it was ever a goal? This spreading democacy crap is just pure demagoguery.
  10. 29 Jun '13 03:36
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Who cares what happens to Karzai? If he's smart he'll wind up with a nice villa on the Rivera. The US should have given up on the remaking Afghanistan into a nice Western-type, capitalist, liberal, "democracy" a long time ago.
    More like the taliban worked out a deal with the CIA concerning opium exports.