Article

2009-02-19 India-Pakistan

US privately backs Pakistan's 'Sharia law for peace' deal with Taliban

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2009-02-19 00:00|| || Front Page|| [3 views ] Top

#1 On Tuesday night however, US officials in Islamabad privately backed the deal as an attempt to drive a wedge between Swat's Taliban, which is focused on its demand for Sharia law, and the al-Qaeda-linked Taliban led by Baitullah Mehsud, the notorious commander who controls much of North and South Waziristan and other tribal areas along the Afghan border.

Hokay. The Swat Talibs want Sharia law imposed and the al-Q Talibs want...something else entirely, such as...oddly, the article doesn't seem to be very curious as to the alky's ultimate goal. Nor, sadly, is the current Administration.

Funny, that.

Posted by Seafarious 2009-02-19 00:16|| 2009-02-19 00:16|| Front Page Top

#2 Irrespective of AQ - Taliban links, if the Pashtun want Sharia law then why should we care? I certainly don't.

Posted by phil_b 2009-02-19 00:51|| 2009-02-19 00:51|| Front Page Top

#3 Because it's not just about "Napoleonic Code vs. Common Law." It's also a system of taxation, and if the Taliban/Al Qaeda are running _courts_ (which they will, since to them _sharia_ means they get to decide what sharia means and who's good and who's bad), it's probably also a system of conscription.

Posted by Thing From Snowy Mountain 2009-02-19 01:00|| 2009-02-19 01:00|| Front Page Top

#4 But does it feel GOOD?

Posted by newc">newc 2009-02-19 02:38|| 2009-02-19 02:38|| Front Page Top

#5 Unnamed American officials of unknown rank have privately backed shariah while under influence of unknown quantities of alcohol and other unknown substances.

Posted by JFM">JFM 2009-02-19 04:51|| 2009-02-19 04:51|| Front Page Top

#6 This may be a good step to solving our dilemma in Afghanistan. Afghanistan is a logistically untenable position. We need to declare victory and withdraw. The only thing we really care about in Afghanistan is that al-Qaeda doesn't use it as a base to reform. If the Taliban promise to do that and follow through, I'm willing to let them hang on in Afghanistan.

We worked with Stalin to defeat Hitler. That didn't work well for the Russian people, but they chose to stay under the yoke, we didn't impose it. Likewise, if the indigenous peoples of the region want to throw off the Taliban, fine, lwt's help. But let's deal with whomever can keep al-Q out.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2009-02-19 07:14|| 2009-02-19 07:14|| Front Page Top

#7 "Nation building" is a US State Department con job. Kill them that needs kill'n, treat the wounded and scram! If they give us trouble in the future... go back and kill them again.

Posted by Besoeker 2009-02-19 07:34|| 2009-02-19 07:34|| Front Page Top

#8 Let the barbarian death cult have its stupid little valley. Then, if anyone tries to get in or out......shoot them.

Posted by AlanC 2009-02-19 08:59|| 2009-02-19 08:59|| Front Page Top

#9 I figure they'l be killing each other again in about two weeks when they figure out that one or the other is Not Muslim Enough.

Posted by tu3031 2009-02-19 09:21|| 2009-02-19 09:21|| Front Page Top

#10 The problem is they won't be satisfied with Swat. It won't be long before they start agitating for more liebensraum...or in support of the poor people next door who also want to share in the benefits of sharia...just like the Paks themselves do in Kashmir. Whatever you give them will never be enough.

Posted by Ebbang Uluque6305 2009-02-19 12:19|| 2009-02-19 12:19|| Front Page Top

#11 Ebbang hits it out of the park. Also when it comes down to it, think about the poor women and other humans living under Sharia. For shame.

Posted by Icerigger">Icerigger 2009-02-19 12:40|| 2009-02-19 12:40|| Front Page Top

#12 Phil B said: Irrespective of AQ - Taliban links, if the Pashtun want Sharia law then why should we care? I certainly don't.

We should care because Sharia wants to own all of us. Sharia is serenely (or more correctly, malevolently) indifferent to the desires of any group or individual.

Posted by Seafarious 2009-02-19 13:30|| 2009-02-19 13:30|| Front Page Top

#13 "All I want is Czechoslovakia."--Adolf Hitler

"All we want is Sharia in Swat." --Taliban

Posted by mom">mom 2009-02-19 14:02|| 2009-02-19 14:02|| Front Page Top

#14 If the Taliban promise to do that and follow through, I'm willing to let them hang on in Afghanistan.

Because the Taliban never, ever lie. Not even when one group of Taliban is working to steal control from another group of Taliban.

But this is about Pakistan, not Afghanistan. For the moment, however distasteful, it is an internal matter for yet another Pakistani government consenting to surrender another portion of the country to another branch of the ISI-created Taliban monster. At this rate, soon enough what is now Pakistan will be merely a conglomerate of Taliban principalities, much too busy fighting one another to send their sons into Afghanistan.

If the locals don't like it, they're going to have to band together to fight back, which doesn't seem to be a Pakistani skill.

Posted by trailing wife">trailing wife 2009-02-19 14:24|| 2009-02-19 14:24|| Front Page Top

#15 Sharia encompasses jihad. Stupid move.

Posted by Hupise Brown8031 2009-02-19 16:29|| 2009-02-19 16:29|| Front Page Top

23:05 Frank G
22:50 Alaska Paul
22:48 Mike N.
22:41 badanov
22:37 Icerigger
22:37 badanov
22:19 Barbara Skolaut
21:46 Woozle Elmeter 2700
21:35 Woozle Elmeter 2700
21:26 Thing From Snowy Mountain
21:16 Procopius2k
21:12 Procopius2k
20:45 Omoter Speaking for Boskone7794
20:41 Woozle Elmeter 2700
20:40 Rednek Jim
20:36 Rednek Jim
20:33 Rednek Jim
20:32 Frank G
20:31 Rednek Jim
20:17 JosephMendiola
20:12 JosephMendiola
20:08 JosephMendiola
20:07 Rednek Jim
20:05 JosephMendiola