That the Taliban would say this at some point was a foregone conclusion. Some may be surprised that it has happened this quickly, but that was to be expected as well. Islamic law regarding treaty-making with Infidels has been guiding the Taliban every step of the way, both in the peace negotiations and at present. One manual of Islamic law stipulates that there must be “some interest served in making a truce other than mere preservation of the status quo.” The only “interests that justify making a truce are such things as Muslim weakness because of lack of numbers or materiel…which the time of the truce would allow the Muslim forces to remedy…or the hope of an enemy becoming Muslim” (Reliance of the Traveller, o9.16). When the Muslims are no longer weak, they don’t need the truce anymore, and can break. Hence this threat that the truce is at its breaking point, as the Taliban in Afghanistan is gaining strength, not becoming weaker.
“Taliban warn peace deal with US near breaking point,” by Kathy Gannon, Associated Press, April 6, 2020:
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — The Taliban said their peace deal with the United States was nearing a breaking point, accusing Washington of violations that included drone attacks on civilians, while also chastising the Afghan government for delaying the release of 5,000 Taliban prisoners promised in the agreement.
The Taliban said they had restricted attacks against Afghan security forces to rural outposts, had not attacked international forces and had not attacked Afghan forces in cities or military installations. The Taliban said these limits on their attacks had not been specifically laid out in the agreement with the U.S. signed in February.
The Taliban’s statement issued Sunday warned of more violence if the U.S. and the Afghan government continue alleged violations of the deal.
U.S. military spokesman Col. Sonny Leggett in a tweet overnight denied the Taliban allegation, saying the U.S. forces in Afghanistan has “upheld and continues to uphold the military terms of the U.S.-TB (Taliban) agreement; any assertion otherwise is baseless.”
In his tweet, Leggett called for Taliban to reduce violence and said the U.S. military will continue to come to the aid of Afghanistan’s security forces if attacked, in line with the agreement.
Meanwhile, the militants said they had reduced their attacks compared to last year, but said continued violations would “create an atmosphere of mistrust that will not only damage the agreements, but also force mujaheddin to a similar response and will increase the level of fighting.”
The Taliban have accused the Afghan government of using “indefensible arguments” to explain the repeated delays in releasing a promised 5,000 Taliban prisoners in exchange for 1,000 government personnel. The Afghan government’s foot-dragging has also left Washington frustrated….
The U.S. and NATO have already begun to withdraw troops from Afghanistan. The full withdrawal is expected to be completed in 14 months and is tied to Taliban commitments to fight terrorist groups and help in the battle against the Islamic State group….
Frank Anderson says
Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics. Then there is muslim truth, which is that lying whenever advantage can be obtained is encouraged. The self-deception that any peace deal would be respected and lasting is reflective of a total ignorance of muslim teaching and history. It is clear that those who are conducting the negotiations, and advising the President either don’t know Islamic history and teaching, or they are lying through their teeth in their representations.
Remember Vietnam. When the North had been pounded into rubble by B-52 strikes they made a deal. The US exited with the promise to support South Vietnam. Then when the North invaded the Democrat Congress cut off funding for President Ford to carry out the promise, and the North took over, killing an estimated 2 million by execution and driving more out to sea as “boat people”. If anything, Communists have read muslim history and like the results.
Any deal that is too good to be true, probably is not true. A peace deal with the Taliban is just as fraudulent and delusional as any in history.
J D S says
One does not negotiate with the enemy because after negotiations, the enemy will still be the enemy. One eliminates the enemy. This is not a quote from anyone….THIS IS FACT!
Frank Anderson says
JDS, we agree.
David says
When the enemy is islam it is a necessity. Islam is ALWAYS the enemy. They would agree with that.
mortimer says
What ? Pious Muslims are seen BREAKING their contract with DIRTY KUFAAR ? What? AGAIN???
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4vIBijzg4w
Frank Anderson says
Mortimer, I could ask how many times in 1400 years have muslims broken peace treaties with kuffar; but the answer might be burdensome. (sarc). But the less burdensome way to ask is how many peace treaties have they kept?
In another story someone asked for the origin of the muslim teaching that once a muslim prays in a location it becomes muslim for all time thereafter. Can you help, please?
mortimer says
Frank, This is from Wiki: “According to the Muslim apocryphal treaty Pact of Umar, caliph Umar ibn al-Khattab came to Jerusalem in 637 after the conquest of Jerusalem and toured the city with Sophronius. During the tour of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, the time for prayer came, and despite Sophronius’s offer to Umar to pray inside the Church, Umar chose to pray outside. According to Islamic tradition, the caliph’s reason for declining to pray there was because in the future Muslims might say that Umar prayed here and use it as an excuse to build a mosque there. Therefore, Muslims are not allowed to build a mosque there. So appreciating the caliph’s intelligence he gave the keys of the church to him.[citation needed] Unable to refuse it the caliph gave it to a family of Muslims from Medina and asked them to open the church and close it; the keys of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre still remain with the Muslim family.”
The original text (of the above story) is apparently the apocryphal ‘Pact of Omar’ … It is Muslim propaganda written long after the fact. It is possible the story of Omar meeting the archbishop in Jerusalem never took place. The Muslims never built a mosque on the Holy Sepuchre, but Temple Mount was empty, so they built there. The dating of the so-called Al Aqsa mosque is some time after the conquest of Jerusalem. No one is sure what that date is. Mohammed was never in the Al Aqsa mosque and never on Temple Mount. The original Al Aqsa is on the outskirt of Petra, a more logical place for it to be. It was said to be next to a riverbed. The mosque in Jerusalem is NOT next to a riverbed.
Frank, most of the ‘explanatory’ stories about early Islam are riddled with inconsistencies, anomalies and they contradict other stories about the same events … so they are unreliable. Only archeology provides us with the facts about what really happened. Archeology shows the caliphates were all lying about the true facts. Islam developed over a period of 250 years and they PROJECTED whatever was convenient backwards in time and deleted accounts that differed. They could not keep their stories straight.
I doubt Omar was worked up about prayer in Jerusalem. The Arabs were still praying to the gods in PETRA at that time and all qiblas everywhere were pointed towards PETRA until 725AD. In conclusion, I think this is another example of Muslim supremacism, assumption, duplicity and invention. No story in Islam is straightforward, for there were so many inventive story-tellers, liars, propagandists and con artists, Mohammed being the first one.
Frank Anderson says
Mortimer, thank you. I will pass that along.
What about my first question: In 1400 years how many peace treaties have been kept longer than needed to accumulate sufficient strength to continue the war? I can think of 1, that between Israel and Egypt after Egypt attacked and Israel had the option of slaughtering the Egyptian army, but did not. Jordan has been fairly straight dealing with Israel for a long time. I suspect Israel dealing from a position of overwhelming strength has much to do (not everything) with the situation.
But, has any other peace treaty translated into the lasting end of war?
Do you remember the Second of 613 Good Deeds (Mitzvot)? It arises from the passage “It is not good for people to be alone”. I am performing that Good Deed (Mitzvah) by bringing 2 good people together for a good purpose (learning). Thank you.
mortimer says
Frank Anderson asked: “how many times have Muslims broken peace treaties?” Difficult to say. If 50 treaties were broken by Muslims every century, the total would be about 700. That’s a question for Robert Spencer and for Raymond Ibrahim. Both of those gentlemen have written books on the topic of jihad. Bill Warner has also inventoried all the Muslim battles in Europe (over 500). The treaties were broken on both sides because Muslim ‘treaties’ may have been more like ultimatums with intolerable conditions, such as the 100 blonde virgins demanded every year from the Gothic rulers of Spain to supply the harems of the Umayyads.
An Israeli historian will be able to answer how many treaties were broken in Israel alone in the 100 years since 1920. The Tripolitanians broke treaties with the fledgling United States.
Frank Anderson says
Mortimer. I agree that it is almost certain that countless treaties have been broken when they became inconvenient to muslims; but in comparison, the number of treaties they have respected with kuffar/infidel/non-believers should be small and manageable. The self-delusion of thinking that a peace treaty is anything more than a temporary “slowing” of war is not original with the US administration, past or present.
I have understood for most of my life that some subjects are not amenable to negotiation. I am far from being the “smartest person in the room”. What kind of geniuses are we letting lead us “down the garden path” of muslim lies? Thank you for your thoughts.
mortimer says
The first independent US government had the same problem. They handed BAKSHEESH to the emir of Tripolitania, but he always wanted more and broke his contract repeatedly.
The American ambassadors later discovered that the contract’s Arabic translation was different from the English original.
Adams and Jefferson were ‘shocked, shocked’.
ntesdorf says
Taliban reports that US and Afghan government are violating the peace deal are as likely to be true as were the German reports of Polish attacks on Germany that were the pretext for Germany launching the Second World War. Islam and Nazism are blood brothers.
Ratko Mladic says
These fuckers need wiping out quickly the time for speeches and idle gossip is over…fight fire with… extinguishers!
Jitendra Desai says
Trump thought he will win Nov elections on the strength of this piece of paper.Saddled with Corona pandemic he must be repenting this hasty decision.Expect more violence since the world is preoccupied with pandemic.
gravenimage says
Muslims are always violent–they don’t need the cover of a pandemic.
OLD GUY says
Taliban, yep you can believe those people, honesty ranks right up there with rape and murder.
gravenimage says
Taliban claims that US and Afghan government are violating peace deal, warns that it is at its breaking point
…………….
Ludicrous projection–but still entirely predictable.