Taliban "Want an Afghanistan That Is Inclusive for All," Says British Chief of Defence Staff


The Independent (UK) reports, with video. The interviewer interrupted, asking "Except women?" Gen. Sir Nick Carter responded:

We have to wait and see. I don't know what they mean ….

I think you have to listen to what they are saying at the moment…. I do think that they have changed and I think they recognize that over the course of the last twenty years Afghanistan has evolved. They recognize the fundamental role women that have played in that evolution.

And yes, they at the moment will undoubtedly say that they want to respect women's rights under Islamic law and that will be a Sharia law, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they won't allow them to be involved in government, and in education, and in medicine, and those things that they need them to be involved in. So I think we have to be patient; we have to give them the space to show how they are going to step up to the plate.

I've got to say that I'm extremely skeptical as to these hopes, and especially as to the overarching summary—again, that the Taliban "want an Afghanistan that is inclusive for all." (See, e.g., here and here and here.) But I suppose we have no choice now but to see what happens.

NEXT: Short Circuit: A Roundup of Recent Federal Court Decisions

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Lol. Just. Lol.

    1. Biden, dumbest and most treasonous President ever. Impeach now. He is a servant of Iran and of the Chinese Commie Party, the big winners from his decision.

      The Taliban is not even real. It is a concoction of the Paki intelligence service and of the Paki oligarchs. If we are going to kill people, start with the Paki oligarchs and their entire families. To deter.

      1. Good job, feminist skanks. You elected Biden. This is the biggest catastrophe for women in the past 80 years. Now, go to 6th grade, get shot in the face if you are a girl. If you are 12, you will be a sex slave to a stinky 60 year old Taliban. They do not even use toilet paper.

        1. The Ivy indoctrinated scum behind this decision, including the Ivy indoctrinated scum running the No Fighting military, must be fired on the spot. They are traitors.

          1. Next for the traitor, Biden, the surrender of Taiwan.

            Next for the traitor, Biden, a major terror attack on the USA.

            Next, the arrests of the internal traitors begin, with an hour's trial, and summary executions in the court basement, around 25000 elite Ivy indoctrinated oligarchs, and their servants in the lawyer profession.

            1. Insane incel rant.

            2. He'll be out of office in January. Say hello to President Harris

              1. You have to love that BillyG can read Behar's rant about summarily executing tens of thousands of Americans and his only reply is: 'eh, Biden will be out and Harris in soon.'

                This is the American Right right now, folks.

  2. The old saying is
    "if you believe that, I have a bridge..."

  3. "We have to wait and see. I don't know what they mean..."

    I know what they mean.

    1. Oh my lol. Forget democracy and "women politicians." If they don't kill Christians and gays, that would be good.

      1. I'm not sure Western governments care about Christians, I'm not really sure they can distinguish between religious Christians and the Taliban.

  4. I wonder at what point these "true believers" are engaging in pure theater as opposed to actually thinking these things....They just can't still believe this stuff, right?......right?......

    One thing that surprised me about the undoing of the Afghan government was how heavily invested at the bureaucracy level the United States backed assets were at implementing a radical feminist agenda for the last ten years. In one weekend, the Taliban swoop in and essentially undo all of that "progress". (Literally overnight, women go from wearing normal western clothing in Kabul to being jammed in houses with burqas.) That really must be hard for the "true believers" to swallow. So much so, that they are just now in pure denial.

    1. I should have read this comment and said "yep, +1" before I made a similar one down thread.

    2. Yeah, it's the feminists to blame for the Taliban...

      Show us where the mean ladies hurt you, Jimmy.

      1. I certainly am not blaming feminists, but what was the US Embassy thinking flying the LGBT flag celebrating pride week/month?

        They really showed the Taliban, I hope the the Taliban doesn't go out there way to show them back. I'm all for demonstrating core American values but it does no good needlessly antagonizing the people you should know are going to be running things n a few short months.

        1. The feminists elected Biden. They are 100% responsible for this unmitigated catastrophe for women and for girls.

        2. They were providing support for LGBT Afghans and/or extolling our values to our allies. We shouldn't bow to fascists because we think it will antagonize them.

          1. Sure. We can just give up a country to the fascists when they decide they have had enough of your "progressive values". Sounds so much better.

            Or maybe you are the one who is the actual fascist for jamming your authoritarian identity politics down an unwilling society's throat? How about them apples?

  5. "that will be a Sharia law, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they won't allow them to be involved in government, and in education, and in medicine, and those things that they need them to be involved in."

    This guy is "chief of defence staff," and he's high.

    1. He needs a catchy hashtag like "#BringBackOurGirls".

  6. Gen. Sir Nick Carter =- PEBKAC

  7. I thought General Willey in this country was a fool but this is something else.

    1. Though I too think he's an idiot, he is sending the 2nd Para out proactively to bring Her Majesty's subjects to safety, as well as any other EU cits found and some Afghans.

      That's much better than what our Eunuchs' are doing

      1. He may be an idiot, but then perhaps he may not be being entirely sincere. He may feel that while 2 Para is engaged in the tricky business of trying to exfiltrate British civilians from a city in Taliban hands, it might not be conducive to the success of that mission aggressively and officiously to poke sticks in Taliban eyes, at this particular juncture.

        The Taliban appears to be not completely decided about what to do about foreigners trying to leave Kabul. Perhaps helping them make their mind up quickly, in a direction not necessarily advantageous to the interests of the would be escapees, is better avoided at this point.

  8. On another note, it looks pretty clear at this point Biden is no longer with it. He has probably progressed beyond the "good day, bad day" stage of mental decline and just now every day is a bad one. That means his handlers can no longer cover for him by selecting convenient press dates, venues and/or doping him up. Even the drive by media can't run this ruse any longer.

    The decision is going to be to either 25th Amendment him or maybe he will voluntarily resign. I would say either in inevitable in the near future.

    1. A common theory is that's why the lefty press has turned on him, instead of propping him up, like they have thus far.

    2. "it looks pretty clear *at this point* Biden is no longer with it"

      This might have a bit more credibility if you hadn't been making the same claim here for more than a year.

      1. Given the events of the last week, it's the charitable position.

        1. Queenie thinks dementia doesn't get worse over time.

        2. Really? Evidence?

      2. You think it happened all the sudden?

        1. I think the same people have been saying Biden is demented for over a year now. It's plainly partisan driven and it's gone beyond crying wolf at this point, it's crying Leviathan.

    3. I have a question for all of you 25A lawyers. Let us assume that Joe voluntarily invokes the 25th (because Jill convinces him it's for his own good, and so steps aside but not down, and the VP becomes the acting. Does that imply that while she acts as President, she is no longer the presiding office of the Senate, because of separation of powers principle?

      1. I think that's the reasonable interpretation, but that the courts would defer to the Senate on the question, meaning she'd get to have her cake and eat it, too. And vote as a tie breaker on confirming her replacement.

        Assuming they don't hold the vote at 3:30AM without advance notice, of course, which I wouldn't bet on.

        1. Projection is a hell of drug and extremists are junkies...

        2. "And vote as a tie breaker on confirming her replacement."

          Nothing in 25A supports this conclusion.

          If Biden does not resign in this dream but only steps aside, she would be Acting President, but there would not be a new VP because the office is not vacant.

          1. She would appoint one, right (like Rockefeller)?

            1. No, Queen Cretin.

              There is no vacancy, she is Vice President acting as president. If Joe would send the required written declaration that he is ready to reclaim his powers, it happens automatically and she is just VP again.

              Try reading the 25A, its short and pretty clear. Or you can continue to ask dumb questions.

              1. My guess is that Anathema is going to pick door #2.

        3. They would not defer to the Senate, she can't legally be both president and VP.

          1. There's also this option, if you play the game how we do in Texas, that if 50 Republicans walk out, leaving only 50 members present, that's not a quorum, because a quorum takes an actual majority of the members, and the VP, for that purpose is not a member.

            1. That doesn't work in Washington. Once everybody present is on your side, you just go ahead and do things by voice votes, and never take a roll call to establish the absence of a quorum.

              Per the enrolled bill doctrine, the courts will flatly refuse to look at any evidence that a quorum wasn't present, up to and including affidavits from a majority of the members that they were somewhere else at the time.

              The quorum clause is routinely violated, and has been for decades.

      2. Does that imply that while she acts as President, she is no longer the presiding office of the Senate, because of separation of powers principle?

        I think it's a bit more than an implication :

        "The Senate shall choose their other officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the office of President of the United States."

        The last thirteen words are otiose, unless the VP exercising the office of President disqualifies the VP from continuing to act as President of the Senate.

  9. I would suggest that Sir Carter volunteer his daughter or granddaughter to spend time in Kabul right now as a test that the Taliban will be on their good behaviour towards women.

    1. You mean you wish him to tell somebody else what to do? (I note you did not tell him what to, only suggest it.) That is enslavement.

      A better solution is for him to start transitioning so he can be the test subject himself.

  10. Just hilarious. Babylon Bee and the Onion just can't compete with reality any more.

  11. But I suppose we have no choice now but to see what happens.

    "Now?" Assuming that just staying in there forever propping up a kleptocracy government and Potemkin defense force is not an option, just what other option were you thinking of?

  12. It's so hard for some people to fathom, but the whole Afghan puppet regime we propped up for 20 years folded like a cheap house of cards because, essentially, the populace at large rejected the values being imposed on them.

    Pride flags at the embassy over Kabul in June? Not so smooth a move.

    1. so much for those State Department "country specialists" ???

    2. Sure, it was the pride flags, not things like all the things the DoD was lying about.

    3. No they didn't reject the values. They don't want corruption and dictatorship.

      They knew it was pointless as they, like much of the world, live in eternally weak economies with officials from president to dog catcher and DMV waiting for kickbacks to permit anything to get done.

      And the neck slicing knives were rolling back in.

  13. What a relief, it is not only US politicians that l lie through their teeth.

  14. From what I understand the Taliban don't want an inclusive Afghanistan, they want to keep some of the foreign aid money coming that they think will be somewhat conditioned on that kind of thing.

    But hey, like Russia, if they just oppress gays and women enough and flatter the next GOP President many conservatives will probably love them too (some are already starting!).

  15. Must be the UK equivalent of General 'I want to understand White Rage' Milley who's pretty good at cracking the whip on phantom drunken MAGA 'insurrectionists' on social media but not all that great on handling actual rebels in the battlefield.

    1. Yeah, I wonder why he doesn't want to understand what pisses of people of other colors?

      1. Could it be that people of a certain color might have more power and relevant history of abuse of other colors?

        1. Not sure how you quantify that. All colors have abused people in history. And of course, I suppose if you compare things like that on the basis of color, you can also compare scientific progress on the basis of color.

          I mean, look how much science and technological advancement, and wealth creation in general, has taken place during the period that CRT nutjobs are saying that white people have marginalized people of color. Everyone in the world is better off!

          But fortunately that's a stupid way to look at the world.

          1. "All colors have abused people in history."

            That's pretty obtuse, we're talking the US Joint Chief and so the relevant history is one of white supremacy.

            "look how much science and technological advancement, and wealth creation in general"

            You mean like during the same period that those doing the advancement and creation were...actively and violently keeping other colors from doing so?

            "I guess you could complain because *I* was standing on you all this time, but then you'd have to notice how *I* picked all these apples we can now eat while I was there!"

            1. "You mean like during the same period that those doing the advancement and creation were…actively and violently keeping other colors from doing so?"

              What were people doing before that?

              1. Why does that matter?

                I mean, if you want to argue 'well, before you stood on my back to rake in all these apples we can both now enjoy, Henry would literally jump and down on Bob while Bob was lying supine, which was worse for Bob and got both of them less apples than we now have' that hardly justifies my standing on your back to get them (and it most certainly doesn't allow me to point to my apple gathering prowess *relative to yours [which I was inhibiting the entire time!]* as such).

      2. Well, "people of other colors" don't seem to be eager to overthrow the American government, for one...

        1. No, they want to burn it all down.

          1. The government of...Portland?

  16. Some of this newfound skepticism concerning superstitious, misogynistic, poorly educated, rural, gay-bashing, backward losers at this White, male, movement conservative blog is surprising -- and, I am confident, quite hollow.

  17. Defense secretary admits Americans are being beaten on the way to Kabul airport.

    Glad that the Taliban have turned over a new leaf. And that Democrats are into human rights. Or something.

    1. That can't be. Biden says no one is having trouble reaching the airport.

      1. " Biden says no one is having trouble reaching the airport."

        Austin contradicted him barely an hour later.

        To be fair, those TV Land reruns Joe mainly watches don't contain much current info.

        1. And the defense dept also contradicted Biden about al Qaeda in Afghanistan. smh.

    2. Girls have been hanged for going to school.

  18. The general is an idiot.

  19. "We want to be inclusive of *all* bearded Pashtun fundamentalist Muslims!"

    1. "Muslim men, did we specify they have to be men?"

  20. So what do you propose? Fight another endless war (not you, of course, but other young men)?

    1. What I propose is that people stop lying, and stop excusing utter incompetence.

      Can we try that for a while?

  21. This is a pretty bad thing to gloat about, but the VC comentariat is more partisan than human these days.

    1. Interesting admission, member of the VC Commentariat.

    2. "This is a pretty bad thing to gloat about"

      Which "thing" would that be?

      That the British military is just as f'ed up as ours is?

      We're not gloating, we're mocking.

      Every left wing creature who spent the last four years cheering whenever the Trump Admin was blocked at doing something, or failed when trying to do something, is advised to STFU about the rest of us returning the favor now.

      Every left wing creature who could not care less about the lower income / lower skilled Americans being screwed over by the Democrats' support for illegal aliens invaded our country is invited to STFU about people being "more partisan than human".

      Because there's not a shred of humanity, or human decency, on the Left. And there hasn't been any for a long time now.

  22. The only reason to return to Afghanistan would be, not to fix their society, but to stop anti-American terrorism.

    If we undertook to fix every other country, we'd run out of money and of young (wo)men in doing so.

  23. Indigenous people of color expel Western colonist occupiers. But, it will result in women losing rights. That must be one heck of a moral conundrum for the libbies....

    1. They'll avoid any moral conundrums by comparing their domestic political opponents to the Taliban.

  24. Should I be happy, or sad, that the British Chief of Defence Staff is just as much of a moron as the iditos running the US military, State Dept, etc?

  25. It depends on what “all” means.

    After all, the Old South preached against narrow-minded intolerance. It wanted a Union that was inclusive for all. Including slaveholders.

Please to post comments