Freed US reporter says he underestimated Taliban

[maddezmom]

Source: AFP

WASHINGTON — A New York Times reporter kidnapped by the Taliban in 2008 and held for seven months in Pakistan said late Saturday he had underestimated Taliban's extremism and the strength of its supporters in Pakistan.

"Over those months, I came to a simple realization," the reporter, David Rohde, wrote about his ordeal. "After seven years of reporting in the region, I did not fully understand how extreme many of the Taliban had become."

He said that before the kidnapping, he viewed the organization as a form of "Al-Qaeda lite," a religiously motivated movement primarily focused on controlling Afghanistan.

But after spending time in captivity, he said he had realized that the goal of the hard-line Taliban was far more ambitious.

"They wanted to create a fundamentalist Islamic emirate with Al-Qaeda that spanned the Muslim world," the writer noted.



Read more: http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jgvQygeGMBysviMWUUcBwtL_8BLA

---

7 Months, 10 Days in Captivity
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/18/world/asia/18hostage.html?hp

[Hello_Kitty]

1. Shit.

But why wouldn't they want to expand their ideology? People who are that drunk with authority and extremism aren't usually content to confine it to their own little community.

Edit to add: I'm not pretending to know what the appropriate response is, nor am I advocating for increasing our military involvement there.

[Swagman]

2. true...remind you of anyone ?

[dipsydoodle]

7. Yes

Usual pot / kettle.

[geckosfeet]

11. They learned from the best.

[tblue37]

22. Sort of like the world-spanning empire the ideologues in

PNAC keep trying to establish. All drunk with power & extremism yahoos always want to rule the world. They think it's their inherent right.

[Mari333]

3. well, our policies arent helping

if anything, our policies recruit people more and more each day whilst we continue as we have for decades to stick our noses into other people's countries and kill their people.

[shadowknows69]

18. Bingo. We threw gasoline on fire we started to try to put it out.

[aquart]

4. Seven years of reporting and NOTHING had penetrated?

That's great reporting, ain't it?

[tazkcmo]

9. Exactly what I was thinking.

Spent seven years covering the issue and was still clueless? This reporter should be in Congress!

[ro1942]

24. Great comment,thanks

[mwb970]

10. That's what struck me as well.

It seems idiotic to say "I studied this situation for seven years and still missed what was right in front of my face". Isn't that tantamount to announcing "I suck as a reporter"?

:shrug:

[Ian David]

12. Maybe he was sent there to cover the human interest angle?

You know, something like "The Taliban's Network of Dog Lovers" or "Family Recipes of The Taliban."

[shadowknows69]

19. Maybe he was handed some talking points to repeat when he writes?

ETA: changed because it struck me, duh, he is the press.

[aquart]

34. That would be the 65% full unemployment angle.

And then there's the 25% underemployment angle. (I've got a friend there who IS doing the "human interest" angle.)

[aquart]

33. Yes.

[Taverner]

26. Well its not exactly like the Taliban has an embassy in Kabul...

[opihimoimoi]

5. The Christian Taliban Group in America mirrors their goals....

[radhika]

6. Yes, they are equally extreme and dangerous n/t

[Xenotime]

39. Are they on a watch list too?

[Psephos]

35. Yep, just went to a Baptist stoning of three adulterous women in Busch Stadium.

Kinda messy, but those ho's needed to understand what that business about turn the other cheek actually means.

Heard they're going to be hanging some gay teenagers from a crane in between the monster truck races on Halloween.

BTW, can you believe the nerve of them to charge six bucks for a friggin' Pepsi?

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

42. Unfortunately

your post is going to go over and lot of heads on this thread.

[WriteDown]

44. Forget the pepsi...

7$ for a hotdog? Seriously?

[Psephos]

54. And it's not even a Hebrew National

which kind of says it all.

(I would like to point out that the Hebrew National dog is no longer made in Brooklyn...or even Indianapolis...but in our own beloved Michigan town of Quincy. I guess Hebrew National DOES answer to a higher authority after all. lol)

[leftynyc]

40. Horseshit

Do let me know when they start beating women for showing some ankle, or kill the gays with the government standing by. Those that compare our fundies with their are nothing but lazy thinkers.

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

43. Exactly. Nice Put.

[fascisthunter]

50. they do all those things

just differently... I think the comparison is a good one.

[Algorem]

8. what kind of freaking moe ron?

[Vinnie From Indy]

13. Sounds like another Judith Miller to me

This reporter is simply amping up the fear of the Taliban. Specifically, the reporter is amping up fear that the Taliban will start attacking the West all over the planet and not just in Afghanistan. It seem to me that this story could very easily be designed to counter recent debates about leaving Afghanistan to the Taliban and focusing on Al Queda. It could also be true that this reporter, after seven years of reporting in the area, is a bit slow.

[Overseas]

16. Me too.

Awfully convenient, as more of us are wanting President Obama to withdraw and not become more embroiled in the "Graveyard of Empires."

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

46. Is he correct in his assessment?

After all, the Taliban have shown a desire to conquer large swaths of Pakistan, so we all know this idea that they're Afghan nationalists who are only interested in driving the U.S. out is a joke.

[Overseas]

52. The Taliban may have amped up in response to the Christian crusading in our military.

The Taliban may have pumped up their aspirations after seeing the Christianized elements of the US military acting like they were on some kind of crusade.

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2009/05/0082488 This is a link to Jeff Sharlet's article in Harper's called "Jesus Killed Mohammed: The Crusade for a Christian Military," and here is an excerpt.

When Barack Obama moved into the Oval Office in January, he inherited a military not just drained by a two-front war overseas but fighting a third battle on the home front, a subtle civil war over its own soul. On one side are the majority of military personnel, professionals who regardless of their faith or lack thereof simply want to get their jobs done; on the other is a small but powerful movement of Christian soldiers concentrated in the officer corps. There’s Major General Johnny A. Weida, who as commandant at the Air Force Academy made its National Day of Prayer services exclusively Christian, and also created a code for evangelical cadets: whenever Weida said, “Airpower,” they were to respond “Rock Sir!”—a reference to Matthew 7:25. (The general told them that when non-evangelical cadets asked about the mysterious call-and-response, they should share the gospel.) There’s Major General Robert Caslen—commander of the 25th Infantry Division, a.k.a. “Tropic Lightning”—who in 2007 was found by a Pentagon inspector general’s report to have violated military ethics by appearing in uniform, along with six other senior Pentagon officers, in a video for the Christian Embassy, a fundamentalist ministry to Washington elites. There’s Lieutenant General Robert Van Antwerp, the Army chief of engineers, who has also lent his uniform to the Christian cause, both in a Trinity Broadcasting Network tribute to Christian soldiers called Red, White, and Blue Spectacular and at a 2003 Billy Graham rally—televised around the world on the Armed Forces Network—at which he declared the baptisms of 700 soldiers under his command evidence of the Lord’s plan to “raise up a godly army.”

What men such as these have fomented is a quiet coup within the armed forces: not of generals encroaching on civilian rule but of religious authority displacing the military’s once staunchly secular code. Not a conspiracy but a cultural transformation, achieved gradually through promotions and prayer meetings, with personal faith replacing protocol according to the best intentions of commanders who conflate God with country. They see themselves not as subversives but as spiritual warriors—“ambassadors for Christ in uniform,” according to Officers’ Christian Fellowship; “government paid missionaries,” according to Campus Crusade’s Military Ministry.

Please support the group opposing these crusaders, The Military Religious Freedom Foundation
http://www.militaryreligiousfreedom.org/

[shadowknows69]

20. +1. Just indicated same thing up thread

[EFerrari]

21. Yep. "I thought the Taliban was just a bunch of rubes but they're AL QAIDA!

THEY WANT TO TAKE OVER YOUR LAWN!"

[Psephos]

36. I've given it a lot of thought, but I still can't figure out why he might be saying that.

There's got to be SOME reason.

In no way could his actual experiences and first-hand observations as a Taliban kidnap victim have anything to do with it. Unh-uh.

Obviously, it has something to do with a hidden political agenda. Must be some PNAC money involved, too. That, PLUS, as you mentioned, he's a little retarded.

A retarded fear-mongering sub-rosa politico.

BINGO!

[EFerrari]

37. He sounds like he works for the Pentagon or for CIA.

More likely, the Pentagon. What he says sounds just like one of their canned routines -- like the stuff the retired generals said on cable in the run up to the Iraq war -- the generals who turned out to be working for the Pentagram in the media.

:shrug:

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

41. Or Maybe Because...

it's true? The Taliban HAVE been presented as al-Qaeda lite, as less threatening and less eager to spread their ideology around the globe through violence. You can see evidence of people who still believe that each and every day on this board. "Oh, they're just nationalists...", "Oh, they're only fighting because we've bombed their family members..." etc. etc.

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

45. Ok, but is he correct...? That's the real question here.

We know the Taliban won't be content to focus simply on Afghanistan.

[Psephos]

49. Insight comes not from having all the answers, but asking the right questions.

Which you did.

[flyarm]

14. isn't it funny we always get some bullshit like this when our dear leaders plan on acceleration of

troops deployments and keeping war going? Coincidence..i hardly think so. MORE LIKE PROPAGANDA TOOLS AND MANIPULATION OF THE AMERICAN MINDLESS!

[EFerrari]

23. This reporter sure does seem to get himself kidnapped a lot.

"Mr. Rohde was the first Western journalist to travel into Bosnian Serb territory to search for evidence of mass graves. Shortly after returning from the site, where he had photographed human bones near an earthen dam and secured incontrovertible evidence of the genocide, Mr. Rohde was detained by Serb authorities. He was imprisoned for 10 days in harsh conditions, interrogated relentlessly and accused of being a spy for the Muslims in Bosnia. After an international campaign involving reporters and non-governmental experts throughout the world, the Serbian authorities released Mr. Rohde and he returned to the United States."

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/r/david_rohde/index.html?inline=nyt-per

He must be a very enterprising young man.

[flyarm]

31. ahhh great catch!!!!!!!! I knew it stunk to high heaven!!!!!! thanks!! n/t

[keopeli]

15. Timing, circumstances, very suspicious. I would take this with a big grain of salt.

Why was he released now after 7 mos?

Why is he reporting in writing immeditely after release? Have we seen this from other hostages recently released?

Why, after 7 years, is his story now so drastically different?

Is it possible there was a quid pro quo for his release? Just being the devil's advocate here. With so much money and influence involved, many parties are interested in keeping our military presence in the Afghanistan region, if not growing it. Might his release have been based on a quid pro quo of releasing a certain story?

What about brain washing? 7 mos is a long time. And do his particular captors represent the Taliban at large?

I'm very suspicious of this type of article AND of the NY Times (any media, for that matter)

We would need much more than a recently released hostage's account of the Taliban's plan for Regional dominance to plan our military strategy. I feel for the guy, I really do. But, I don't trust a single account of his that tells a story we've not heard told anywhere else at a time that seems awfully convenient for certain parties of interest.

peace

[Overseas]

17. The Taliban may have amped up in response to the Christian crusading in our military.

The Taliban may have pumped up their aspirations after seeing the Christianized elements of the US military acting like they were on some kind of crusade.

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2009/05/0082488 This is a link to Jeff Sharlet's article in Harper's called "Jesus Killed Mohammed: The Crusade for a Christian Military," and here is an excerpt.

When Barack Obama moved into the Oval Office in January, he inherited a military not just drained by a two-front war overseas but fighting a third battle on the home front, a subtle civil war over its own soul. On one side are the majority of military personnel, professionals who regardless of their faith or lack thereof simply want to get their jobs done; on the other is a small but powerful movement of Christian soldiers concentrated in the officer corps. There’s Major General Johnny A. Weida, who as commandant at the Air Force Academy made its National Day of Prayer services exclusively Christian, and also created a code for evangelical cadets: whenever Weida said, “Airpower,” they were to respond “Rock Sir!”—a reference to Matthew 7:25. (The general told them that when non-evangelical cadets asked about the mysterious call-and-response, they should share the gospel.) There’s Major General Robert Caslen—commander of the 25th Infantry Division, a.k.a. “Tropic Lightning”—who in 2007 was found by a Pentagon inspector general’s report to have violated military ethics by appearing in uniform, along with six other senior Pentagon officers, in a video for the Christian Embassy, a fundamentalist ministry to Washington elites. There’s Lieutenant General Robert Van Antwerp, the Army chief of engineers, who has also lent his uniform to the Christian cause, both in a Trinity Broadcasting Network tribute to Christian soldiers called Red, White, and Blue Spectacular and at a 2003 Billy Graham rally—televised around the world on the Armed Forces Network—at which he declared the baptisms of 700 soldiers under his command evidence of the Lord’s plan to “raise up a godly army.”

What men such as these have fomented is a quiet coup within the armed forces: not of generals encroaching on civilian rule but of religious authority displacing the military’s once staunchly secular code. Not a conspiracy but a cultural transformation, achieved gradually through promotions and prayer meetings, with personal faith replacing protocol according to the best intentions of commanders who conflate God with country. They see themselves not as subversives but as spiritual warriors—“ambassadors for Christ in uniform,” according to Officers’ Christian Fellowship; “government paid missionaries,” according to Campus Crusade’s Military Ministry.

Please support the group opposing these crusaders, The Military Religious Freedom Foundation
http://www.militaryreligiousfreedom.org/

[Peace Patriot]

25. And the U.S. should stop this caliphate thing because...?

Perhaps I should give this question a little more nuance...

And the U.S. should stop this caliphate-creation thing by slaughtering a million innocent Iraqis, and weekly slaughtering dozens more innocent Afghanis...because?

More nuance yet: And the U.S. thinks it can stop this Taliban-Al Q wet dream by the on-going slaughter, torture and occupation of two Islamic countries...because?

Um, because this idea has been so successful in the past?

Putting the question aside of an Islamic caliphate being any goddamned business of ours, how is slaughtering hundreds of thousands of innocent people, torturing prisoners and occupying countries with demoralized 'cannon fodder' who really, really don't want to be there, going to prevent unity in the Islamic world and its on-rush into fundamentalism?

I just thought I'd put these questions out there because so few people seem to question the basic premises of US policy, including our FAILING war profiteer economy.

Is it not possible that an Islamic caliphate--which is only an Islamic warrior fantasy, at this point--might advance world peace, rather than disrupt it?

I'm thinking of JFK's desire for a world at peace, in which capitalism and communism compete without war (which I recently read about, in James Douglass' book, "JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters"). In other words, when the corpo/fascist rulers of the US identify and demonize an "enemy"--communism in the 1950s through 1980s, and Islamic fundamentalism and caliphatish dreams now--and proceed with threats and saber-rattling, they upfront prevent a peaceful accommodation, and drive the "enemy" to militarism. It's as if our society was so traumatized by Hitler's evil that it can't imagine a rival--a competitor--that is less than the Devil itself and therefore must be annihilated. Post-Stalinist Russia was by no means "the Devil itself"--something that JFK came to understand, and why he opened backchannels to Krushchev (and to Castro) (--to get around the CIA and the MIC), with the aim of nuclear disarmament, world peace and fair competition. (And that is why he died and why it matters--according to Douglass.)

There is really no reason to believe that an Islamic caliphate--even a fundamentalist one--would be any threat to us, and even if it could conceivably become one, the threat is so remote, so dependent on what will necessarily be a century or more of development, that it is an unreal, futurist imagining. The Islamic world is VERY POOR--very uneducated, very undeveloped--not to mention very fractious. They have centuries of work to do, on the most basic kinds of infrastructure, manufacturing and cooperation, to be anywhere near capable of a war with the "west." And there is no certainty whatever that they would want war with the "west." There is nothing worse--more depressive, more destructive-- and more counterproductive than 21st century warfare! And if we would stop stealing their resources, installing tyrants over them, and making war on them, they would likely cease having a fanatical faction that simply wants to punish us with completely counterproductive terrorist acts.

How about working toward an accommodating, cooperative, peaceful world, in which everyone may prosper, instead of aiming--with our horrid war machine--straight into that Hell, and in the meantime destroying our own society with militarism and war profiteering?

Just a question: Where is U.S. creation and demonization of this new "enemy" heading? And could it head somewhere else--some better place--say a world without war?

[IndianaGreen]

29. ...because Jesus wants us to wage war for the cross

Who put the peace option off the table in regards to Afghanistan?

Hint: the person that put single payer off the table.

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

48. What Would "Peace" in Afghanistan Look Like

at this point?

[daleo]

32. A very thoughtful post

We do have alternative ways of organizing societies presented to us as dire existential threats. It is rare that they really are. Our own behavior tends to feed into a vicious circle of distrust, fear and hatred in this regard. To a large extent, we create our own threats. Occasionally, the imagined threats become real, as in 911.

Some elements in our society benefit by this dynamic.

[Kolesar]

38. Put that post in your DU journal

thoughtful indeed

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

47. Pipedream

Is the likely result of a caliphate being established in Afghanistan peace, accomodation, and cooperation? Or is the likely result the training, arming, and funding of extremist groups throughout the entire region (as the Taliban and al-Qaeda's track records show)? I'd be a lot more apt to accept your reasoning if we didn't already have some knowledge about how this is likely to play out.

[andym]

27. Remember the Bush-Gore debate when Bush came out against "nation-building"

If anything showed the overall stupidity of Bush and his team before the 2000 election, it was this stance against nation-building.

In the case of Afghanistan, the Taliban might have really been "defeated," if economic and social stability could have been established there. Instead, the US overcommitted its resources to an unnecessary war in Iraq, which eventually has created a serious real problem in Afghanistan. Afghanistan needed more nation-building than it needed drone attacks, now there will be a price to pay. The enmity of the now ambitious Taliban for the US is such that no good will come of it.

[BOG PERSON]

28. "The moral is to the physical as three to one"

[UndertheOcean]

30. Old news , All of this can be found in the Quran and the Hadith

but people tend to refuse to do anything that requires reading.

[fascisthunter]

51. oh goodey... see, we have a justifiable reason

:crazy:

We have our own religiously whacko bunch right here in the us of a.... just a different flavor.

[moondust]

53. Essentially what Richard Engel of NBC has said.

On the interview circuit a few weeks ago he told somebody (Charlie Rose?) that the Taliban are now virtually indistinguishable from al Qaeda, that they have global ambitions and are not just the local yokels hosting international terrorists they were sort of perceived to be. I was skeptical about Engel's description but this guy kinda seems to confirm it. Or maybe the two of them have been comparing notes and making up stories together...

:shrug: