Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, leader of the Taliban delegation, and Zalmay Khalilzad, U.S. envoy for peace in Afghanistan, shake hands after signing an agreement between members of Afghanistan's Taliban and the U.S. in Doha, Qatar, Feb. 29, 2020.
NBC News: U.S. has persuasive intel Taliban do not intend to abide by terms of peace deal, officials say
"They have no intention of abiding by their agreement," one official said. Trump said Friday, "Countries have to take care of themselves."
WASHINGTON — The U.S. government has collected persuasive intelligence that the Taliban do not intend to honor the promises they have made in the recently signed deal with the United States, three American officials tell NBC News, undercutting what has been days of hopeful talk by President Donald Trump and his top aides.
"They have no intention of abiding by their agreement," said one official briefed on the intelligence, which two others described as explicit evidence shedding light on the Taliban's intentions.
Trump himself acknowledged that reality in extraordinary comments Friday, saying the Taliban could "possibly" overrun the Afghan government after U.S. troops withdraw.
Read more ....
Update #1: Report: US Intelligence Says Taliban Plan to Break Peace Deal -- VOA
Update #2: US intel indicates Taliban does not plan to honor deal: report -- The Hill
WNU Editor: I am not surprised by this assessment. I have always believed the Taliban were always focused on getting the U.S. to leave so that they could then focus 100% on the Kabul government. Even President Trump has already voiced on what he thinks will happen next .... Trump says Taliban could possibly overrun Afghan government (Military Times). In the meantime, the first US soldiers are now leaving .... US begins troop withdrawal from Afghanistan, official says (AP).
21 comments:
We do not believe intel
,,,
Afganistan. Still unconquered. The power of will proves unassailable.
Afghanistan conquered by
The Persians
Alexander
Kushans
Turks
Arabs
and many others.
The Russians would have won except that China, Pakistan, Britain, US, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Gulf States,...
The next time we will not stop the Russians, but let them love you looooooong time.
No need for "intel" -- just read a history book.
"The Persians
Alexander
Kushans
Turks
Arabs
and many others"
But not Britain nor the USA keeping in mind of course that the latter of which was only fighting half of the Afghans. Didn't go so well in Vietnam either.
Vietnam was an American screw up as is Afghanistan, albeit one committed by a Democratic President, the other a Republican President. In other words, when it comes to screwing up criminal wars it is an American President issue.
Iran. Another American President screw up. In that respect you should keep the CIA's admission in mind. All else falls out of that issue.
Oh your country as oil? Sounds like to me it needs some freedom.
Keep i mind that Iraq had an active WMD program. What other reason to delay inspectors at site after site?
There was the truck convoy and airlift to Syria ahead of the ground war.
As to Vietnam why should Catholic and Buddhist Vietnamese be forced to accept communism? So you can feel jolly about yourself?
"What other reason to delay inspectors at site after site?
Because they didn't have an active WMD program and believed that the threat thereof gave them some power whereas if inspectors were to find no such program they would lose that power.
Face it, there was no reason to invade Iraq whatsoever and it was a criminal war propagated by the world's school yard bully. The military does not make the US "great", just dangerous.
So you haven't commented yet on my post where I said that unlike Bush, a Republican President who invaded Afghanistan illegally and got america into a disastrous illegal war to capture Bin Laden but failed and miserably so, Obama, a Democratic President, got Bin laden without invading Pakistan.
Do you always avoid the obvious when it shows Democratic Presidents are better than Republican ones?
"Because they didn't have an active WMD program and believed that the threat thereof gave them some power whereas if inspectors were to find no such program they would lose that power."
That makes it on them.
Besides the Iraqis evacuated their WMDS to Syria ahead of the invasion.
"So you haven't commented yet on my post, where I said that unlike Bush, a Republican President who invaded Afghanistan"
The Taliban refused to extradite Bin Laden. That alone was casus belli. Hypothetically, if the US harbored a group that brought down 4 office towers in Toronto and killed thousands of Canadians, would not the Canadian PM ask for them to be extradited?
If they were not extradited, would not the Canadian PM go to the UN and ask for a war to be declared. I mean I hope the Canadians would not do nothing and let such a group more time to plan more attacks to kill more Canadians unmolested. I would hope that people like you would not curl up like a dog and...
I suppose half a comment, albeit inane, is better than no comment at all.
In that respect you are improving, albeit slightly.
I don't have to respond to every paragraph or statement you write, when you 'statement' is fluff.
You refuted not one thing.
True but you did respond if only in a hugely unintelligent manner. So what you are saying is that you agree with the rest of my question/comment because you are unable to create some derogatory but otherwise meaningless response you let it go?
"True, but ..."
What is unintelligent is your response posts, Bob.
You have not refuted that if as terrorists group killed 3,000 Canadians in an attack with Toronto, you response would be to ouroboros.
"your response" not "you response"
You are evading yet again. I imagine responding, intelligently and honestly would be very difficult for you but give it a try. You can do it you try.
Bob,
If you do not believe that Bin Laden declaring War on the US on the August 23, 1996,
being given sanctuary in Afghanistan by the Taliban in ~ June 1996,
The Taliban and AL Qaeda working hand in glove, Brigade 055,
and Bin Laden launching an attack (HQ) from Afghanistan 2001
If you do not see the Taliban as complicit and guilty then you are an fuck ass.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/fuckass
Noun
fuckass (plural fuckasses)
(vulgar, derogatory) A despicable person.
All the twisted logic promoted by global research or the Guardian notwithstanding
Something for you to think about while you tool around Ireland pretending you are an English squire.
Anon 5:57
That tirade still doesn't answer the question.
My post actually did. It named 5 facts. The 1st 4 were in chronological order. The last fact appropriately labeled you.
You answered a question that wasn't asked. Try answering the question. I you need to have it repeated, i.e., you are unable to locate it in the above posts let me know and I'll find it for you.
Post a Comment