I had read a piece on getting the ex-Afghan King to be leader once again, now I read this. Keeping the fundamentalists Taliban to still play a roll, is to me like not getting rid of all the hornets in a hive.

Sunday, September 30 9:38 PM SGT

Ex-Afghan King told US delegation Taliban have a role to play

ROME, Sept 30 (AFP) - The former King of Afghanistan has told a delegation of US congressmen that the fundamentalists Taliban could still play a role in a future coalition government in the country.

"He's left the door open at some point in time that even the Taliban, if it had a role to play, could be part of some eventual coalition government," said Republican Curt Weldon, chairman of the Armed Services Military Readiness subcommittee.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2001

Answers

Sounds like more of the same mistakes again. If he *was* King, why did he get tossed out? Maybe he was no good as a King. Maybe the people hated him. Surely they didn't love and support him. So why would anyone give a rats a** what this guy has to say? He's a failure. Are we going to support another failure as head of another country, like we did with the Shah of Iran? Look what *that* got us.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2001

I do know that the Taliban represents the rural parts of Afghanistan. The country people like the way the Taliban operates; it's the cities where the Taliban are hated. Perhaps that's what the king has in mind, splitting up the government that way. Afghanistan, apparently, has always been boiling over with tribal rivalries and cultural clashes. One thing is for sure, the US CANNOT be an occupying force. I don't know what the US plans to do but whatever it is, I don't think it will be on the lines of past overseas endeavors.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2001

Old Git, you have a lot more confidence in the final "wisdom" of what our government will do, than I do. It was only ten years ago that we had our Desert Storm war, and solution. What was the solution? Well, to leave old Sadam in power. Whack his troops, but leave him in charge. Really, does that sound like a smart move? And who *was* the President during that particular Middle East showdown? I think things are far more complicated and convoluted than we even dare guess. I also think the complications have more to do with power and wealth than with freedom, and those are age old ingredients in every war.

-- Anonymous, September 30, 2001