Skip Nav
Surprising Qualities of Your Zodiac Sign That You Don't Already Know
15 Unique Ways You and Your SO Can Celebrate Your Anniversary
34 of the Most Romantic Films on Netflix This Month

US to Consider Political Party For the Taliban — Victory?

If you live in a democracy, you must accept that ideologies you disagree with often get represented in government. This may soon happen in Afghanistan. The outgoing US ambassador to Afghanistan thinks that establishing a stable government in that country might require inviting the Taliban to the election-happy party of democracy.

Ambassador Wood maintains that the Taliban should never be part of a power sharing arrangement; however, if the insurgency ends there will surely be some sort of agreement. He says: "There is room for discussions on the formation of political parties, (or) running . . . for elections."

Perhaps some of the less radical forces within the Taliban might need to participate in Afghanistan's democracy if there is to be true stability. Do you think it could work?


Join The Conversation
UnDave35 UnDave35 8 years
Is Iraq a democracy? Yes. Were they a democracy before we went in? No. Did we, in essence, force democracy down their throats? Yes. Will they be better off now that everyone has a voice? Yes.
ashopaholic ashopaholic 8 years
Ummm, Iraq? your point????
UnDave35 UnDave35 8 years
"The Taliban of yesteryear was clearly a puppet government" I always thought the Taliban was an extremist sect of Mulsim, who wanted to convert the world to Muslim at the point of a sword.
hypnoticmix hypnoticmix 8 years
I say yes if lives were given to preserve democracy than to say no would have those lives be given in vein. The Taliban of yesteryear was clearly a puppet government influenced in every way by other forces. If they want to be part of a Democracy and if the people want to elect them then let it be if it is by the people choice.
UnDave35 UnDave35 8 years
"Assuming they follow the overall bylaws of their nations constitution..." That's a big assumption. I think they should be asked to follow the overall bylaws first, for decades, and then let's talk about representation.
zeze zeze 8 years
Assuming they follow the overall bylaws of their nations constitution, I would say there isn't much we can do about it. Democracy, like freedom, comes with the good and the bad - you can't allow something only because you like it,
UnDave35 UnDave35 8 years
"It's interesting though that we think we can just go in and force a country to democratize," Ummm, Iraq?
ashopaholic ashopaholic 8 years
The Taliban still have a stronghold in Afghanistan, and the ppl there feel that the are occupied, so it looks like the Taliban will maintain its presence. It's interesting though that we think we can just go in and force a country to democratize, if one looks at the history of the rise of democracy, one can seen a middle class in a necessity. However since we are there, and looking at history, in the case of Cambodia, the Khmer Rouge was apart of an agreement to democratize the country. If the Taliban is willing to sit on the table with the other parties, and work with them, then it should be okay. But I do not think the situation is "ripe" for this type of agreement to take place.
tiggles101 tiggles101 8 years
I doubt they would adhere to a democratic government, or understand what it is. I say no way.
Ginger Ginger 8 years
There are laws against killing people, inciting violence, some hate speech, that apply to everyone. As the KKK likes to point out: the Ku Klux Klan is a US Supreme Court recognized and protected Christian Organization in multiple Supreme Court decisions, and has received a Charter from US Congress. There was no policy to ignore the lynchings and other violent crimes of the KKKs heyday, it was an unspoken practice because some of the law enforcers in those regions shared the beliefs of the KKK so they personally chose to look away. There have since been old cases brought to trial, decades later, with convictions. Even at the time of the civil rights workers murders in Mississippi, the state wouldn't put them on trial so the federal gov had to. Edgar Ray Killen was finally put on trial more than 40 years after the murders. Murder doesn't have a statue of limitations.
clarabelle98 clarabelle98 8 years
Well, yes technically you are correct. I'm referring to the times when they burned black people at the stake or killed them just for the color of their skin. Now, admittedly I don't know ALL the details, having never had anything to do with the Klan myself, however I do know that the murders and burnings were "ignored". It's illegal now in the sense that while the group may be able to gather and discuss how angry they are, they can't go out and kill just for the sake of killing anymore.
CaterpillarGirl CaterpillarGirl 8 years
Clarabelle, the KKK isnt illegal.
stephley stephley 8 years
I'm not sure in the end, we'll decide what the Taliban gets in Afghanistan unless we're willing to stay there for decades to hold them in check.
clarabelle98 clarabelle98 8 years
I would say it's not going to matter if they have that or not. The Taliban is going to try and push their agenda no matter what, so why give them a platform to speak from? In my understanding (and correct me here if I'm wrong) they are an extremist group intent on elimination of those that believe differently. Or, if not elimination, at the very least total indoctrination. Isn't that why the US made the Ku Klux Klan illegal? As it should be? We wouldn't give THEM a vote in the democracy, so why give it to the Taliban?
UnDave35 UnDave35 8 years
My concern is that the Taliban isn't willing to compromise, and they use violence to get their way. That isn't compatable with a democracy, where compromise is the key.
Megan Couto Becomes First Woman to Captain the Queen's Guard
Who Is Nabra Hassanen?
Prince Philip Over the Years
Funny #ThingsThatLeaveBritainReeling Tweets
From Our Partners
Latest Love
All the Latest From Ryan Reynolds