Pashtun Community | Pashtuns | Pashto |
World's Largest Online Pashtun Community

Go Back   Pashtun Community | Pashtuns | Pashto | > Politics & Current Affairs > Political Talk - سياسي خبرې
Reload this Page Pakistan
User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
(#101)
Old
Azmal Azmal is offline
PF Frequent visitor
Azmal is an unknown quantity at this point
 
Posts: 388
Thanks: 46
Thanked 125 Times in 89 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Join Date: Jul 2010
Default 03-23-2011, 08:13 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by roadrunner View Post
Taliban are a symptom of Afghanistan. The Afghan-Soviet war, the radicalization, what to do with all those radicals who only knew militancy. Pakistan just stamped the name Taliban onto these individuals.

I wish they'd unbrainwash themselves, but it will take a while. In the meantime, they're too much of a popular movement within Afghanistan to ignore. Reconciliation is the only answer, plus lots of funding for development.

Popular movement? Then why Taliban are against election?....lets us assume for sake of argument there is a culture/religious ideology behind the terrorist like Taleban movement…that sustains them. Then the question arises where does the motivation for that ideology comes from? … Deobandi School of Thought? and many others of the type, Paki state-funded Mufties, and Paki State sponsored Mullahs? Where this religious ideology comes from? Do you know that all these are not indigenous to the Pashtons at all? Pashtons being a proud nation/ethnicity with history going back thousand of years do not need a religious identity. In other words the use of religion as a means for acquiring political power either in Afghanistan or in Pakistan. In fact the crisis of identity is with the Panjabi state Pakistan..which needs religion to bind it together in the absence of any meaningful contract between the various groups for a collective well being of all its citizens. You remove that religious motivation and preach secularism for a while…and the phenomena of Talebanisation will recede automatically ..because it is superfluous, imposed and NOT indigenous to the Pashton culture which offers a much better alternative identity.
Fact of matter is that terrorist like Taleban were not a force/movement until they were given a political agenda, to control Afghanistan and marginalize the Pasthon nationalists in the context of Pak-Afghan relations. Which means that there is nothing culture/religious about the Taleban, its the political agenda behind that facade which needs to be addressed / neutralized if there has to be a long lasting solution to the problem.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Azmal For This Useful Post:
Espresso (03-25-2011)
(#102)
Old
roadrunner
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)
Tagged: Thread(s)
Default 03-23-2011, 08:48 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Timbaktu View Post
I know this is not adressed to me but one thing you are forgetting is the the strategic depth in KP was to pakistan's benifit. The pakistani establishment earned billions of $ from that period and maybe even their nuclear capability was part of the deal. Afghanistan has arguably gained nothing and has been fragmented and ethnic groups fighting each other supported by opposing countries.
All I hear are these hypotheses. If I were to start a rumour that Karzai is in reality Chairman Mao with a face disguise, then I could say like you that Karzai is Chairman Mao, but what evidence is there to justify this? None.

In the same way, I would ask you to provide evidence that being allowed nuclear weapons was part of this deal.

Dollars were given to the Pakistani establishment, and they probably pocketed it instead of building madrassas like they were supposed to. Any South Asian or Central Asian establishment would have done the same.

I can tell you what Pakistan did get out of it. It wasn't money or being able to go nuclear. It was to prevent the Soviet Union from threatening it.

LIKEWISE, should India invade Pakistan, Afghanistan would play strategic depth because it is in Afghanistan's interest to do so.

Explain what the difference between Pakistan playing strategic depth for Afghanistan during the Afghan-Soviet war, and Afghanistan playing strategic depth for Pakistan in the event of an Indian invasion would be?

Quote:
so no I wouldn't call that hypocracy,
What is the difference then?

Quote:
Its not as if Pakistan can always dictate what it wants, the pakistani elite will sell their mothers and daughters if they can gain money and power from it, same is true of Afghan elites and corrupt leaders.

The matter is really simple as long as there is pakistan, it will keep playing this strategic depth game in Afghanistan, As Afghans our priority is to work for the intrest of Afghanistan and if that means the destruction of Pakistan then so be it, The pakistani establishment has done exactly that. It has destroyed Afghanistan for its own survival and games with India. Our turn will come inshallah.
You really don't understand what I'm saying to you.

Strategic depth is a tactic that contributed substantially to the outcome of the Soviet-Afghan war.

It is in Afghanistan's interest to have Pakistan's KPW playing startegic depth for it. It is in Pakistan's military interest to have eastern Afghanistan support it in the event of an occupation. I will get onto the destruction of Afghanistan a little later, since again I see very little evidence for the assertions here.
Reply With Quote
(#103)
Old
roadrunner
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)
Tagged: Thread(s)
Default 03-23-2011, 09:15 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Admin Khan View Post
No. Pakistan used it's own land to make sure it gains influence over Pakistan. Afghanistan had no proper government. Nor were Afghans smart enough to know what's going on. Pakistan trained them[willingly] and sent them off to fight. It's not like Pakistan did Afghanistan a favor. Pakistan found herself a 5th province. A province that was backwards, and had one of the worlds lowest literacy rate. Training Mujahdeen[with Pakistanis free-will]was a golden opportunity for their own strategic depth. So in other words, training Afghans in Pashtunkhwa was part of Pakistans strategic depth, not Afghanistan. And if you want proof for this, just look at the outcome of the war. Pakistan made billions, Pakistan got US aircraft, and it was the Pashtuns who suffered on both sides of the war. Pakistan gained the most out of the civil war. She found herself a destabilized, Pakistan dependent Afghanistan. You being a Thinktank, I don't even think I have to make you understand how beneficial the war that Afghans fought was for Pakistan.
From what I understood of this, you are saying that Pakistan allowed the Afghan mujahideen bases in Pakistan during the Afghan_Soviet war (strategic depth for Afghanistan) because it was part of a long term, rather devious, ploy to make Afghanistan subservient to it.

I'm sorry, but this is total paranoia not based in any fact.

Tell me what the plan was. How was Pakistan going to control anyone? Would Dostum be loyal to anyone. Dostum would switch sides in the blink of an eye to whoever was winning. How would Pakistan exert control over any of these warlords?

Quote:
Pakistan did the opposite. Pakistan funded, and supported the Mujahadeen for her own benefit. And that outcome shows us what Pakistan's intentions were. Afghanistan served as a proxy for Pakistan, and even as we speak, Pakistan is continuing it's dirty game. That's not what Afghans want Roadrunner, let's be a bit more realistic.
Pakistan involved itself in Afghanistan for its own interests. I've read some internet Pakistanis talk about how Pakistan did it for Afghanistan, which is completely nonsense. Pakistan provided strategic depth for Afghanistan for its own interests. That is what every nation in the world does, or should do. It looks after its interests.

The Afghan mujahideen did not have to use Pakistani territory. But they did. Because it was in their interests to do so.

Quote:
You still didn't answer me very basic, yet elementary question.

Do you support the Taliban? What do you think of the Taliban? I want a very basic answer.
Ideologically, definitely not. I'm anti war. Do you believe that the Taliban can be ignored for the moment as part of the Afghan government, or they're too powerful?

Quote:
If Pakistan wanted something to happen, it could've executed. All that is nothing but smokescreen for the international media. Pakistan's intentions are very clear, it want's a friendly, and dependent Afghanistan. And that is exactly what it pursued, an even today it's supporting the Taliban to pursue that goal. You can tell me all you want about these meetings but the reality is what we see, and what we witnessed.
A friendly Afghanistan (ruled by Pashtuns presumably) would be in Pakistan's interests. A feudal Afghanistan, an unstable Afghanistan is not in Pakistan's interests. Instability will cross the border and find its way into Pakistan imo.

What Pakistan wants is a friendly Afghanistan imo.

Quote:
Brother, I don't mind elaborating. However, can you at least read my first few posts in this thread? I really showed you how the Pakistani government played a hypocrites role.

I'm not in a rush. We can take this slowly, that way I can learn from you. And you can learn from me. That's whole purpose of this site, learning.
You've mentioned foreign policy in your first posts in this thread. That does not have anything to do with what I asked. This is what I asked. This is what happened following the Soviet withdrawal. Who was at fault for the ensuing Civil War? This is who caused the instability in Afghanistan. If it was Pakistan, explain why you think so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadrunner
As far as I am aware, the UN under Sevan suggested a five point peace plan for power sharing. It did not work. The reason it didn't work was predominantly down to what? Pakistan? Iran? I don't think either were at fault. It was the UN expecting everyone would listen to them, and not bothering to enforce their resolutions. Where did Pakistan fit into this equation? Pakistan did enter the equation later on in trying to unify the maniacs that militant deobandi Islam's spread had created.

Now if I'm wrong on this, explain to me how Pakistan was responsible for the Civil War? You might be correct and I'm missing something.

Last edited by roadrunner; 03-23-2011 at 09:19 PM.
Reply With Quote
(#104)
Old
roadrunner
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)
Tagged: Thread(s)
Default 03-23-2011, 09:33 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alchemist View Post
We have been giving you more than adequate of an explanation to the cause of the civil war and all unrest in Afghanistan but you have your fingers in your ears and your foot in your mouth. The root of the problem, the civil war, has been Pakistan. Even after the taliban subdued all the different factions that were vying for power, the ISI protected the biggest war criminal from their wraths - namely Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. This criminal has killed more Afghans than soviets...he had links to the KGB KHAD and the ISI knew of it. He operates the biggest drug network in the region and is more famous for throwing acid on girls.
Noone's given me an explanation of who caused the Civil War. I've heard many people blurt out Pakistan, but noone has told me how.

You do realize that the Civil War in Afghanistan started in 1991, well before the emergence of the Taliban? Who started it in 1991 is what I was asking? Don't blurt Pakistan. What did Pakistan do to instigate the Civil War? And give some evidence.

Let's assume the Afghan people wanted the ex-king back. Why wasn't he part of the 5-point UN peace plan? And why did Masood launch an attack on Kabul before the peace plan was finalized?
Reply With Quote
(#105)
Old
BarakzaiAbdali's Avatar
BarakzaiAbdali BarakzaiAbdali is offline
PF senior
BarakzaiAbdali is an unknown quantity at this point
 
Posts: 4,171
Thanks: 92
Thanked 2,210 Times in 1,412 Posts
My Mood: Hot
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Default 03-23-2011, 09:46 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toramana View Post
Barakzai, I petty on you...I am not suffering from any kind of identity crisis neither the one based in religion nor the other rooted in tribalism. What I observe is, how perfectly aligned are your views with those of Pakistanis of both genres; the liberal secular as well as the fundamentalist. The clean shaven general of Pakistan army or an equally refined-looking civilian Pakistani ideologue/nationalist can have the same stance as an Islamist fundamentalists like General Hamid Gul and Qazi Hussain Ahmad when it comes to Taleban i.e. they are an indegenous Pashtun movement resisting foreign occupation. That is why one skeptically sees a Pakistani in you instead of an Afghan.

Now your argument runs like this.

"Pashtuns have always risen against foreign occupation" and "that they have always risen in the name of Islam"...And this not to mention the distortion of an established fact not just from onesource but multiple sources and perspectives...
Its "pity" as in "I pity you." Petty means "insignificant/trifeling."

I never said they rose "in the name of Islam" and were "sahaba" replicas. I am merely saying what John Esposito noted in his survey "Who Speaks for Islam?" And that is that folks in that region utilize Islam as a rallying tool similar to how religion is utilized as a rallying tool in the American south and midwest via the Baptist pulpit. It doesnt mean that they are all Jesus Christ Incarnate. Quit seeing the Islamic bogey man around each dark corner, it does you injustice. Its no different than how the Iranian people, communists and all rallied around the Islamist banner. Professor Gerade at Vanderbilt has stated this in his sound work on the Iranian revolution in regard to Islam serving as a galvanizing force for all sorts of people responding to incursions in Persia, especially against the Pahlavi regime.

Regarding Scheuer/Hoh/Tribal Analysis center, you have been incapable of debunking their work. Why would I quit quoting a doyen like Dr. Scheuer who continues to be spot on in his analyses and has no vested interest in seeing Islamists win their causes? Your criticism of utilizing him as a resource is absurd. To me, its like a nurse practitioner criticizing a high impact factor source like the New England Journal of Medicine (meaning an amateur criticizing a well regarded and established source)... or in the engineering field, like an auto mechanic saying that the IEEE journals were being cited too much (equally absurd). So until you deal with their work and do a point by point rebuttal of it, I'll keep smashing your arguments with their evidence leaving you in the dust as you answer with what I refer to now as "Toramanaisms."

Definition of Toramanaism?
Toramanaism: The act of defining any and all things one is uncomfortable with as an Islamist/Pakistani/Arab mediated plot. A subset of the psychological coping mechanism of denial.

You know Toramana, I continue to be depressed at your continued lack of logic. As one former engineer to someone like yourself (a current engineer) I thought that the field was built on evidence and logic as opposed to emotional driven rhetoric. Engineers are supposed to be the lethal witness in a court case because they see the world as it is, not as they want it to be. They are the ultimate pragmatists. Yet you defy this character type and continue to utilize the following strategy that even the youth like Graveyard pick up on:

Here is your algorithm:

1) ANP driven rhetoric comes out
2) If 1) is opposed with evidence to the contrary label it Pakistani or Arab motivated
3) of 2) does not work, continue to repeat until self is convinced that the opposing viewpoint is utterly and purely Hamid Gul generated.

So, brother to give you some rest, I'll give you what you want. I'll erect an alternate reality (nonreality) that you can live in to comfort yourself.
I'll let you assume that I am actually the fusion of a lab project:

They took Arab gametes and fused them with Pakistani gametes and created me in a lab in the Panjab. I then grew up in Hamid Gul's basement on a leash. I was taken to Pashtunkhwa and I learned pashto there and was given many books to study Pashtun culture. Being the lab creation that I was, my weak DNA started to break down and I had to be shipped to America for folks at the NIH to work on strengthening it. In my spare time, I enjoy dancing bangra and instead of praying salah, I sing the Pakistani national anthem as well as praises of the Panjab. I chose the name BarakzaiAbdali because the initials form B/A, or if you say it right, P/A, for my codename: PanjabiArab.

There you go Toramana, I hope this gives you comfort and allows you to rest comforted that you exposed Hamid Gul's laboratory creation. loool.
Reply With Quote
(#106)
Old
BarakzaiAbdali's Avatar
BarakzaiAbdali BarakzaiAbdali is offline
PF senior
BarakzaiAbdali is an unknown quantity at this point
 
Posts: 4,171
Thanks: 92
Thanked 2,210 Times in 1,412 Posts
My Mood: Hot
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Default 03-23-2011, 10:02 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by graveyardofempires View Post
Toramana is here trying to say "If you are against the war in Afghanistan you support isi and pakistan interests" how is that even possible?
Wrorre, they are uncomfortable with their own past mistakes and sins that either they or their parents committed when they left their people to fight the Russian juggernaut or now as they surrender their people over to the Pakistani fauj under some feudal banner called ANP. They refuse to comment on Commander Dauran as depicted by Paul Refsdahl because it reminds them of their humiliations and guilt. They know he is as Afghan as they come and that he represents the beating heart of the Afghan populace that rises against what they seek to impose upon it. They cannot, with their own hands, kill such a man who represents, in his most basic element, the proof positive that struggle against tyranny can proceed with even the most base weapons if one has the heart of a lion.

There were oppressors like this before. When the CIA agent held a gun to Che Guevara, after they caught him in Bolivia as he struggled against imperialism under the banner of an ideology that I do not agree with (yet I still admire his goals), they could not pull the trigger. He, per their own records, looked squarely at them and said "what, are you afraid to simply kill a man?" And the agent passed the gun to his Bolivian henchman who pulled the trigger.

These people, like Karzai Bibi/Toramana are comfortable letting the Americans kill Commander Dauran and his children because they do not want their own hands to get dirty. In Baygham's words, "why get your own hands dirty when you got a slave to do it for you!"

They sleep at night by labeling these folks that carry the banner against tyranny with terms like Terrorist/Fascist/Paki agent etc. In their heart of hearts they know that they are kil

Force them to comment on who this man is, and to justify how this individual is either brainwashed, indoctrinated by Pakistan, ISI created, or some secret Panjabi in Pashtun clothes:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=5e5_1283088242
Reply With Quote
(#107)
Old
BarakzaiAbdali's Avatar
BarakzaiAbdali BarakzaiAbdali is offline
PF senior
BarakzaiAbdali is an unknown quantity at this point
 
Posts: 4,171
Thanks: 92
Thanked 2,210 Times in 1,412 Posts
My Mood: Hot
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Default 03-23-2011, 10:14 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by roadrunner View Post
Noone's given me an explanation of who caused the Civil War. I've heard many people blurt out Pakistan, but noone has told me how.

You do realize that the Civil War in Afghanistan started in 1991, well before the emergence of the Taliban? Who started it in 1991 is what I was asking? Don't blurt Pakistan. What did Pakistan do to instigate the Civil War? And give some evidence.

Let's assume the Afghan people wanted the ex-king back. Why wasn't he part of the 5-point UN peace plan? And why did Masood launch an attack on Kabul before the peace plan was finalized?
I think I can offer you some information. Per Scheuer's latest book, a bio of Osama Bin Ladin, he says that of the factions, the contribution Pakistan made to the Civil War was as follows:

Saudi Intelligence and the ISI supported Abdul Rasul Sayyaf (he was a favorite of Turky Bin Faisal). Abdul Azzam on the other hand supported Mossoud. Mr. Bin Ladin appeared to support a Pashtun dominance as well and broke ranks with Azzam, but remained cordial. So I think that there is evidence that Pakistan did have its money on a particular horse. The dilemma was that they simulataneously backed Hekmetyaar in the assumption that if their other war horses lost, they could at least have someone sympathic to their cause. Bin Ladin collected the various factions together and attempted to bargain a peace between the factions to no avail. He was in Jalalabad and had not heard of the Taliban when they poured out of Helmand and approached Jalalabad. When they took it, they asked him his loyalties and made an armistace with them. However, even he was surprised by their rapid ascendency from the chaos of the Civil War. So it would seem reasonable to assume that where Sayyaf and Hekmetyaar could not win with their backers money/arms; Pakistan saw more promise in this nascent movement being cradled in the Arghandab and Urzogan that eventually gave birth to the Taliban and catalyzed what was likely to happen anyways. In the mean time, America (once again per Dr. Scheuer's excellent work) and western powers had not, as is popularly stated, abandoned Afghanistan. They were working heavily and actively to install a secular and irreligious government, which was ridiculous as they had utilized religious and devout men to win the war while soft handed, effeminate, elitists ran to mud baths in Italy.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to BarakzaiAbdali For This Useful Post:
Nokia_Apridy (03-23-2011)
(#108)
Old
BLS_1919v2.0's Avatar
BLS_1919v2.0 BLS_1919v2.0 is offline
PF senior
BLS_1919v2.0 is on a distinguished road
 
Posts: 3,229
Thanks: 1,270
Thanked 1,033 Times in 702 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Join Date: Mar 2010
Default 03-23-2011, 10:21 PM

Barakzai your initial argument on Khyber-Pashtunkhwa is fallacious. The reason Pashtunkhwa should be separated from the policy of Pakistan (in the way you described it) is simply that one of the intentions of Pakistan's policy was to sideline the Pashtuns east of the durand line. Pakistan, due to the initial history of its creation, has had a rough patch in that region so they had to formulate a policy which they perceived could sideline the Pashtuns east of the line politically. Second of all, had these policies bore any fruit for Pashtunkhwa Pashtuns then they wouldn't be the primary losers in it. Up until now, Pashtunkhwa has gone backwards in all counts thanks to this policy. And it is becoming even more clearer that those regions are at best a second tier region and at worse a backyard for strategic games. I don't think it is fair for you to make such statements and you have to stop going back "listening to kabul, etc". That is not the point. The 30 years of war in Afghanistan has had political consequences for Pashtuns on both sides, it is not as simple as saying they won't listen to kabul or Kabul won't accept them. The situation has fundamentally crossed that. When we look at Pashtun lands now we have to look at it from different perspective and with different actors.

Michael Scheur is a decent analyst at best, but he is by no means the only one....one can also take a look at Selig Harrison, Ahmed Rashid, etc.

P.S. ISI initially supported Hekmatyaar until the 90s bore a different outcome during the siege of Kabul. Azzam and OBL's break I believe also came from some internal issues of the Arab fighter's ranks.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to BLS_1919v2.0 For This Useful Post:
Espresso (03-25-2011)
(#109)
Old
fzpz fzpz is offline
PF Frequent visitor
fzpz is on a distinguished road
 
Posts: 292
Thanks: 190
Thanked 64 Times in 53 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Join Date: Nov 2010
Default 03-23-2011, 10:30 PM

I respect Selig Harrison for crying in an opinion piece about China building a hi-speed train through a tectonic collision zone, through the highest mountains in the world, to a place where there is no economic, cultural, or political viability of such an adventure by the chinese. The chinese are also putting in missile silos in Gilgit-Baltistan because they ran out of places to put them in all the mountains in Tibet. I suspect your crush on Harrison is more for his comical diatribes than actual reason or analysis.
Reply With Quote
(#110)
Old
BLS_1919v2.0's Avatar
BLS_1919v2.0 BLS_1919v2.0 is offline
PF senior
BLS_1919v2.0 is on a distinguished road
 
Posts: 3,229
Thanks: 1,270
Thanked 1,033 Times in 702 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Join Date: Mar 2010
Default 03-23-2011, 10:33 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by fzpz View Post
I respect Selig Harrison for crying in an opinion piece about China building a hi-speed train through a tectonic collision zone, through the highest mountains in the world, to a place where there is no economic, cultural, or political viability of such an adventure by the chinese. The chinese are also putting in missile silos in Gilgit-Baltistan because they ran out of places to put them in all the mountains in Tibet. I suspect your crush on Harrison is more for his comical diatribes than actual reason or analysis.
fzpz typical lol. The man correctly predicted the 1965 war and has been one of the leading experts on the region. He has given many talks on the internal dynamics of Pakistan and probably runs circles on the likes muhibe watan when it comes to the politics of Baluchistan and Sindh. Of course he is not infallible and his article on the China-karakarom has its issues...but then again do you know of any experts who have not made similar mis-calculations? I can give you one, it is called operation Gibralter ;-).
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to BLS_1919v2.0 For This Useful Post:
Espresso (03-25-2011)
Reply

Tags
pakistan

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off




Learn Pashto Online| Afghan Wiki| TheHujra.com| Pukhtoogle| Afghanvoice.com| Khyber.org| Pukhto.net| Tor_Khan's blog| Abdul Rahman Karim's blog| Voices of the Pashtun land| Pashto TV

User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.0.6 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
No part of this site may be copied without permission of the administration. The views, posts, opinions and threads expressed by members of the community here are not necessarily those of the staff and management of Pashtun Forums.