All of which shows utter ignorance of Taliban beliefs and history.
"Moderate Taliban" is an oxymoron, like referring to a lighter shade of black. The Taliban are defined by their extremism. Afghan Foreign Minister Rangin Dadfar Spanta, responding to Beck, said "I do not think there is a moderate and non-moderate Taliban. This distinction was invented by somebody who knows nothing about Afghanistan." Agreeing was none other than Mullah Abdul Salam Zaeef, the former Taliban regime ambassador to Islamabad now under house arrest in Kabul. "There is no separation between Taliban as moderate, hardliner or others," he says.
Then how about simply negotiating with the Taliban period?
To know anything about how this small subset of one ethnic group (the Pashtun) that itself comprises a minority Afghanis conquered 90 percent of the entire country is to know the Taliban didnt do it with military acumen. Most Taliban training, then and now, is religious.
They succeeded through two means: bribes (hence their self-perceived need for Osama bin Laden and his huge purse even in the face of an American attack) and through negotiations. After their initial defeat, the British understood this and used it to essentially control the country.
Negotiation is part and parcel to a warlord society, wherein battles are expensive but talk is cheap. The Taliban negotiate with dual purposes, either to bring over a new warlord whom they keep loyal through payments or to get his followers to lay down their arms and then slaughter them.
Negotiating with the Taliban is like going to dinner with Hannibal Lector. You cannot gain. Musharraf found that out himself just last year when he negotiated