What's new

Pentagon says Taliban attacks increased following signing of agreement with US

PeaceGen

BANNED
Joined
Jun 2, 2012
Messages
3,889
Reaction score
0
Country
Netherlands
Location
Netherlands
Pentagon says Taliban attacks increased following signing of agreement with US - CNN
  1. Pentagon says Taliban attacks increased following signing of agreement with US CNN
  2. US warns Taliban to curb attacks after exit deal calls for 80% cut to violence The Guardian
  3. Taliban step up attacks on Afghan forces since signing U.S. deal: data Reuters
  4. Taliban, U.S. Engage in Twitter Spat Amid Rise in Afghanistan Violence The New York Times
  5. Watchdog group says U.S. not releasing data on Taliban attacks AOL
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Local : 2020-05-01(Friday) 19:54:46
Found via nicer.app/news

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/05/01/politics/taliban-attacks-us-afghanistan/index.html
Pentagon says Taliban attacks increased following signing of agreement with US
By Ryan Browne, CNN
Updated 1749 GMT (0149 HKT) May 1, 2020
Bombing in Afghanistan kills three after Trump admin signs landmark peace deal with Taliban 02:17
(CNN)In the month following the signing of the Trump administration's peace deal with the Taliban, the insurgent group increased its attacks on America's Afghan allies to higher than usual levels, according to data provided to the Pentagon's Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction.

"The signing of the U.S.-Taliban agreement followed a successful week-long 'reduction in violence' by U.S., Coalition, Afghan government, and Taliban forces. However, immediately afterwards, the Taliban increased its attacks on Afghan security forces," John Sopko, the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, wrote in his introduction to the SIGAR quarterly report.
The US-led international military operation in Afghanistan told the inspector general that from March 1 -- 31, "the Taliban refrained from attacks against Coalition Forces; however they increased attacks against (Afghan National Defense and Security Forces) to levels above seasonal norms."
"Although not all such attacks are expressly prohibited by the text, U.S. officials had said they expected the level of violence to remain low after the agreement came into effect," Sopko said.
The coalition is no longer releasing data on the number of Taliban initiated attacks, citing the sensitivity of the ongoing negotiations with the Taliban.
Resolute Support told the inspector general that the data "are now a critical part of deliberative interagency discussions regarding ongoing political negotiations between the U.S. and the Taliban."
The Department of Defense said in a statement Friday that it "has not classified the data," saying "it will be releasable to the public when no longer integral to these deliberations, or the deliberations are concluded."
"The U.S., NATO and our international partners have been clear that the Taliban's level of violence against the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces is unacceptably high," Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Thomas Campbell told CNN.
Pentagon spokesman Jonathan Hoffman said Friday that the Pentagon and State Department are pushing diplomatic solutions to lessen the attacks.
"I don't want to say just because you are not seeing an increased military response to it, it doesn't mean we are not pulling other levers in an effort to get that number down," Hoffman told CNN during a news conference Friday.
However, in March Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told reporters that the Taliban had "committed to reducing violence; they have largely done that."
The UN assistance mission in Afghanistan issued a report last month that found the number of civilians killed by the Taliban increased in the weeks following their signing of the agreement with the US government.
In late February, the US and Taliban signed a historic agreement, setting into motion the possibility of ending America's nearly two decades long involvement in the war.
The "Agreement for Bringing Peace to Afghanistan" outlined a series of commitments from the US and the Taliban related to troop levels, counterterrorism, and the intra-Afghan dialogue aimed at bringing about "a permanent and comprehensive ceasefire."
The agreement laid out a 14-month timetable for the withdrawal of US military forces, its allies and coalition partners.
CNN reported on Thursday that the US now has fewer than 10,000 US troops in Afghanistan and is ahead of schedule on its commitment to drawdown troops.
The Pentagon has declined to discuss US troop levels in Afghanistan and several aspects of the US-Taliban agreement have not been released to the public.
The US has until mid-July to fulfill its pledge to reduce troops to 8,600, from the total 12,000 to 13,000 in the country earlier this year.
Hoffman said that the Pentagon has not sought to adjust those withdrawal plans in response to the increased Taliban attacks.
However, some initial deadlines on diplomacy laid out in the US-Taliban agreement have come and gone.
Intra-Afghan negotiations have not begun and the effort to release as many as 5,000 Taliban prisoners has not been successfully completed.
The US has been at war in Afghanistan since 2001. The signed agreement in February came after more than a year of on and off negotiations with the Taliban.
This story has been updated to include reaction from the Pentagon.
CNN's Jennifer Hansler, Kylie Atwood and Veronica Stracqualursi contributed to this report.

clearly the Taliban need to do a better job at controlling their troops, and their ambitions.

it would be extremely foolish for them to believe that they've defeated the US or the moderates in their own country.

even if they'd refrain from terror strikes for a while, to let the US actually leave, and then to resume their terror ways, the west would be back in their region in short order..
 
.
They offered talks to the Kabul regime, the regime refuses to cooperate. How is it Taliban's fault?
 
. .
They offered talks to the Kabul regime, the regime refuses to cooperate. How is it Taliban's fault?
The Taliban could have made unreasonable demands up front in the back channels of the negotiations?
 
.
The Taliban could have made unreasonable demands up front in the back channels of the negotiations?

How is the release of prisoners in exchange for theirs an unreasonable demand.

Hasn't the Taliban upheld their end of the deal with the Americans.
 
. .
Pentagon says Taliban attacks increased following signing of agreement with US - CNN
  1. Pentagon says Taliban attacks increased following signing of agreement with US CNN
  2. US warns Taliban to curb attacks after exit deal calls for 80% cut to violence The Guardian
  3. Taliban step up attacks on Afghan forces since signing U.S. deal: data Reuters
  4. Taliban, U.S. Engage in Twitter Spat Amid Rise in Afghanistan Violence The New York Times
  5. Watchdog group says U.S. not releasing data on Taliban attacks AOL
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Local : 2020-05-01(Friday) 19:54:46
Found via nicer.app/news

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/05/01/politics/taliban-attacks-us-afghanistan/index.html


clearly the Taliban need to do a better job at controlling their troops, and their ambitions.

it would be extremely foolish for them to believe that they've defeated the US or the moderates in their own country.

even if they'd refrain from terror strikes for a while, to let the US actually leave, and then to resume their terror ways, the west would be back in their region in short order..
Hahaha...the ground realities are very different to your perceptions. America and NATO are defeated just like the Warsaw pack before
 
.
How is the release of prisoners in exchange for theirs an unreasonable demand.

Hasn't the Taliban upheld their end of the deal with the Americans.

The Taliban have shown only a willingness to abandon their terroristic ways for a while so far.

By suggesting talks can only continue when the prisoners are exchanged, the Taliban gains too much of an advantage in future negotiations. They try to get all they can while the political weather is good, but they don't realize that this is not an athletic sprint in an athletic competition, it's a daily jog in the morning for good health throughout the rest of your lives.

Hahaha...the ground realities are very different to your perceptions. America and NATO are defeated just like the Warsaw pack before

Well from what i see from way over here, NATO will remain in Afghanistan for the foreseeable future with a significant force and the full cooperation of the Kabul government.

The days for the Taliban to dictate how life should be spent, even in Afghanistan itself, are over, i think.
 
.
Pentagon says Taliban attacks increased following signing of agreement with US - CNN
  1. Pentagon says Taliban attacks increased following signing of agreement with US CNN
  2. US warns Taliban to curb attacks after exit deal calls for 80% cut to violence The Guardian
  3. Taliban step up attacks on Afghan forces since signing U.S. deal: data Reuters
  4. Taliban, U.S. Engage in Twitter Spat Amid Rise in Afghanistan Violence The New York Times
  5. Watchdog group says U.S. not releasing data on Taliban attacks AOL
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Local : 2020-05-01(Friday) 19:54:46
Found via nicer.app/news

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/05/01/politics/taliban-attacks-us-afghanistan/index.html

clearly the Taliban need to do a better job at controlling their troops, and their ambitions.

it would be extremely foolish for them to believe that they've defeated the US or the moderates in their own country.

even if they'd refrain from terror strikes for a while, to let the US actually leave, and then to resume their terror ways, the west would be back in their region in short order..

Extreme pressure of taliban against US. LMAO
 
.
With the tempo of hostilities growing at rapid pace between China and America, the last thing American deep state would do is to linger on in Afghan quick sand, on one pretext or another. Things may actually get out Pakistan hands if Taliban get lucrative "offers" from other powers to keep America engage in Afghan mess for foreseeable future.

American generals/pantagon/Langley need to keep their gob shut and get the hell out of Afghanistan pronto before things even get out their own hands as well.
 
.
With the tempo of hostilities growing at rapid pace between China and America, the last thing American deep state would do is to linger on in Afghan quick sand, on one pretext or another. Things may actually get out Pakistan hands if Taliban get lucrative "offers" from other powers to keep America engage in Afghan mess for foreseeable future.

American generals/pantagon/Langley need to keep their gob shut and get the hell out of Afghanistan pronto before things even get out their own hands as well.
Pakistan government and army are working with China together on Afghanistan issues. There is no way China will disregard Pakistan interest and fund the militants.
No worries, bro.
 
.
Pakistan government and army are working with China together on Afghanistan issues. There is no way China will disregard Pakistan interest and fund the militants.
No worries, bro.


Pakistan main interests is that yanks leave Afghanistan so we can skin alive the Indians and others who have been using American presence and blessings to spread terrorism in Pakistan since 9/11. America provide the cover and shoulder to hostile entities like India to play their dirty games against Pakistan. If American deep state is not willing to leave Afghanistan under one pretext or another, despite the peace deal with Taliban, then I don't think Pakistan will have any issues for other powers to fund and support Taliban to drill the yank's behind.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom