Cal Thomas: Dealing with the Taliban devil |
Featured Commentary

Cal Thomas: Dealing with the Taliban devil

Cal Thomas
Afghan Presidential Spokesman Sediq Seddqi gives a press conference in Kabul, Afghanistan, Sept. 8. Seddqi spoke to reporters hours after President Trump, in a series of tweets, announced that he had canceled a secret meeting at Camp David with Taliban and Afghan leaders.

PARIS — President Trump was right to cancel a “secret” meeting with leaders of the Taliban and the Afghan government following two bomb attacks by the terrorist group that killed 10 civilians, an American soldier and a Romanian service member in heavily fortified Kabul.

The president is eager to fulfill a desire to withdraw remaining American forces in what has been one of America’s longest wars. Who isn’t?

Unfortunately, terrorism does not fall under a single umbrella. It is not just al-Qaida, though all Islamist terrorist groups appear to have the same objective: Kill Americans, weaken the United States, subjugate women, eliminate Israel and impose its version of sharia law across the globe.

The prospect of a peace agreement would normally be cause for celebration, except in this case U.S. negotiators don’t appear to know who and what they are dealing with. As he ended American involvement in the Vietnam War with the Paris Peace Accords, President Nixon declared “peace with honor.” It wasn’t long before the communist North’s takeover of South Vietnam and their murder of “collaborators.”

A premature U.S. pullout from Afghanistan will fulfill the late Osama bin Laden’s prophecy, which he based on America’s Vietnam experience, that the U.S. has no staying power and all the terrorists have to do is wait us out.

A Taliban spokesman confirmed this in a statement to the London Times, declaring the group’s unwillingness to even agree to a cease fire, much less a peace deal. “It is not possible for us,” he said. “We will fight. We have fought for 18 years and we will fight for a hundred years. We will continue our ‘jihad.’ ”

There is something else the secular West doesn’t, or worse, refuses to understand. As with some liberal Western leaders who thought promises from communists could be believed, radical Islamists are taught to lie to “infidels,” if it advances the cause of Islam.

From Raymond Ibrahim, writing for Middle East Forum, the Philadelphia-based conservative think tank, “According to Sharia (law), in certain situations, deception — also known as ‘taqiyya,’ based on Quranic terminology — is not only permitted but sometimes obligatory. For instance, contrary to early Christian history, Muslims who must choose between either recanting Islam or being put to death are not only permitted to lie by pretending to have apostatised, but many jurists have decreed that, according to Quran 4:29, Muslims are obligated to lie in such instances.”

The Taliban leadership can be counted on to say to the West whatever it takes to regain power and to possibly again create a haven for terrorists to plot their next attack on the United States.

There is no reform movement among the Taliban, so why doubt the group will return to practicing their interpretation of Islamic law should they have the opportunity?

One hopes the U.S. will not consider anything resembling unilateral withdrawal, which is not the way to end a war; victory is.

The “war on terrorism” is unique because it is based on religious extremism and its accompanying ideology and a willingness — even eagerness — to die for their cause and their god. Should a peace deal eventually be reached without protections that preserve U.S. interests (and American lives), it will only ensure more trouble for the years ahead.

Cal Thomas is a syndicated columnist.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.