Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

What is the difference between Abdul Ghani Baradar and Julian Assange? The difference is that they are both enemies of the U.S., but Baradar we negotiate with while Assange we torture. (so says a retired U.S. Lt. Colonel) 

, 

Apparently, Baradar can be forgiven for his offenses, but Assange cannot. 

Baradar is the leader of the Taliban, and he is now sitting at negotiations with U.S. reps, looking to end the war and return the Taliban to power in Afghanistan.

Meanwhile, Assange is sitting in a British jail awaiting extradition to the U.S. and is, reportedly, being tortured. You need to read this: 

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/05/karen-kwiatkowski/pray-and-weep/ 

It's an extreme difference, don't you think? So, what did each of them do? Well, the Taliban is accused of killing people- not as many as the U.S. has killed- not even close. But, they have targeted and killed U.S. soldiers and Afghan government soldiers and officials in Afghanistan, and they continue to do so, although they deny ever targeting civilians and point to many civilian killings by the U.S., including women and children. Meanwhile, Assange hasn't killed anybody. But, he did report on killings, civilian killings, by the U.S. in Iraq. 

But, here is the point: right now, at this moment, the U.S. is seeking assurances from Baradar that the Taliban won't let terrorist groups operate in Afghanistan, that they won't do as they previously did, letting Osama bin laden have safe haven in their country. But, why don't they make the same offer to Assange? If he gives assurances that he won't divulge any more U.S. government secrets, are they going to let him go? 

Not a chance. Assange is probably facing life imprisonment. And it probably will involve very harsh treatment and conditions, especially if Karen Kwiatkowski is right that U.S. interrogators are already torturing him at a British prison. 

So, how can the U.S. negotiate with the leader of a militant group that the U.S., until recently, said was terrorist? Bush and Obama both frequently referred to the Taliban as terrorist, and Trump did too, until recently.  Now, he just refers to them as "the other side." 

So, this is an about-face for the U.S. government, and apparently, it was ordered by Trump. And there is a precedent for it: the Paris Peace Accords, which began in 1968 and were signed in 1973, which ended U.S. military involvement in Vietnam and essentially turned the country over to the North Vietnamese.

But, this time, we are seeking a merger between the Taliban and the current Afghan government, but the chances of it are worse than that the North Vietnamese government were going to merge with the South. 

So, what is likely to happen? What is likely to happen is that the Afghanistan War is going to end like the Vietnam War, with the U.S. losing. We have never admitted losing the Vietnam War, but does anybody doubt that we did? And I don't think the U.S. government under Trump minds losing, so long as they don't have to admit it. The only question is: how many more years will have to go by and how many more people will have to die before we get the hell out of there?