The founder of Afghanistan is Nadir Shah Irani, not Ahmad Shah Abdali

[jama0112]

I guess you're not going to quit lol ...that's cool

you're a Killzai associate :p

You don't really come up with good arguments at all.

I at least come up with reasons how we aren't related at all. You just use witty jokes/insults and sounds like killzai.

As yourself stated, I and my family are pahstuns. Why would i troll other pahstuns? Huh? And why would i hang out with some 30 year old guy?
I have send you a lot of arguments, but you can't really prove i'm related to killzai and makes smily-faces to look smart, when you looks the opposite: Desperate and dumb.



Seriously, what do you guys have against me? I came up with everything and the next thing you do: "YOU'RE CONNECTED TO KILLZAI! WAAAAAAH!"

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

You don't really come up with good arguments at all.

I at least come up with reasons how we aren't related at all. You just use witty jokes/insults and sounds like killzai.

As yourself stated, I and my family are pahstuns. Why would i troll other pahstuns? Huh? And why would i hang out with some 30 year old guy?
I have send you a lot of arguments, but you can't really prove i'm related to killzai and makes smily-faces to look smart, when you looks the opposite: Desperate and dumb.



Seriously, what do you guys have against me? I came up with everything and the next thing you do: "YOU'RE CONNECTED TO KILLZAI! WAAAAAAH!"

You don't need to "argue" with the guilty party lol ....everyone else can see the connections.


My guess as to why? Like Black Pakistani, you probably dislike the fact that our regional anthropology suggests that Pashtuns have some association historically with the "Aryans", because it doesn't fit into the "Gangstaaah" world view. Based on the lingo you've used, you seem to be very influenced by Western Rap music like Black Pakistani is, so it makes sense you're probably into the "GaNNNgstaah" nonsense too.

[jama0112]

Seems like none of you guys could prove me being related to killzai at all, while i came up with many good reasons.

Looks like you're wrong and i'm right.

[jama0112]

You don't need to "argue" with the guilty party lol ....everyone else can see the connections.


My guess as to why? You're probably upset like Black Pakistani is that Pashtuns have some association with "Aryans", from the lingo you used, you seem to be very influenced by Western Rap music like Black Pakisani is and want to forge some connection with them to feel more "GaNgStaaaah" lol

WTF? Where does that **** come from? Pahstuns? Aryans? WHaaaaaat?

Like, WTF? Holy ****, this is the first time i hear the word aryan in our discussion. You really can't come up with anything.

And for the "Gangstah" influence, so me saying "****, **** yourself, suck on your boyfriend etc" makes me look extremely gangstah-influenced?

So, if i stop saying **** and NEVER ask one simple question about killzai, according to you, i'm not related to killzai more? What? You do know, all these insults are used by everyone else, right?

And you even said i look more pahstun than punjabi and did aknowlegde my whole family being pahstuns. Why the hell would i care what we're labelled as?


Can you mention the connections, please?
(No, responding to his socks don't count, when the responds were just the same as yours to pakhton)

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

Seems like none of you guys could prove me being related to killzai at all, while i came up with many good reasons.

Looks like you're wrong and i'm right.

That's a very Black Pakistani thing to say LOL

[jama0112]

That's a very Black Pakistani thing to say LOL

Everything is a black pakistani thing.

Man, you have no back-up evidence at all, at least not strong as mine(and you still keep ignoring my arguments, that's an actual black pakistani thing to do)

[maneatinglizard]

I don’t have to read this entire thread to understand that pakhton is a weirdo.

In the age before ethnic nationalism and nation states, Abdali was taking Hindu heads and solidifying Islamic rule on the Subcontinent at a ripe young age when Afghan men these days the same age as him haven’t left home yet because they are unmarried.

Yeah, I feel like he’s being judged by modern notions of ethnic solidarity and nationalism. He was only a teenager when he was captured by Afshar, and around 25 when Afshar was killed. Plus he grew up in a highly Persianized environment, not a Pashtun village out in the mountains.

The fact that he was able to unite the Pashtun tribes and create one of the most powerful forces in Asia (even if it was short lived) in his twenties is a big achievement, and as far as I know, he wasn’t a bad person on a personal level either.

His reality might not hold up to the Pashtun nationalist narrative, but on his own merits he had a very impressive and accomplished life.

[jama0112]

Cry me a river. Mashooma, i barely noticed you on this forum, never paid attention to your posts, always skipped reading your posts. The first time you got my attention, were you sharing photos of yourself and your family on that thread. I shared my thoughts on the matter, thats it. Dont expect me to read your garbage posts all the time, i have not noticed at all that you have addressed me some where.

Now when i think about it, i didn't mention you on this post, but how did you knew i wrote your name down? Your name wasn't in big letters, and as you say yourself, you skip my posts? How did you knew i was writing about you?

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

Yeah, I feel like he’s being judged by modern notions of ethnic solidarity and nationalism. He was only a teenager when he was captured by Afshar, and around 25 when Afshar was killed. Plus he grew up in a highly Persianized environment, not a Pashtun village out in the mountains.

The fact that he was able to unite the Pashtun tribes and create one of the most powerful forces in Asia (even if it was short lived) in his twenties is a big achievement, and as far as I know, he wasn’t a bad person on a personal level either.

His reality might not hold up to the Pashtun nationalist narrative, but on his own merits he had a very impressive and accomplished life.

Since I'm the primary critic of Abdali on this forum; no it's not his lack of ethnic solidarity or nationalism in the modern sense that I'm evaluating him by. I'm not an ethnocentrist nor am I a nationalist.

When I call him a servant of Afshar, it's because he was more loyal to Afshar than anything. He may have had very valid reasons for why.

But it's a historical fact; he supported the triumph of a foreign power against a Pashtun authority. Clearly the enmity of the Pashtuns who were in power was greater than the concern for foreign domination, but if Afshar wasn't assasinated by his own men, we'd have more than likely have been an Afsharid state, and that would more than likely have been just fine and dandy for Abdali.In my view, Abdali's accomplishments are a mixed bag. We extol his tirumphs but ignore his blunders. Namely his failure to confront the Qing's , his failure to offset the Russian expansion into Central Asia. His failure to retard the ascent of the British. One can argue, he had limited resources and stretched thin, but there's plenty of evidence that he was just preoccupied with some vain notion of victory rather than really having any lasting impact.

"Whacking off Hindu heads" may sound cool from a standpoint of Islamic Bravado. But the paradox is, bravado is not Islamic and really he basically targeted largely defenseless civilians and did nothing to defeat the at the time potentially dangerous forces to Muslims, namely the British and Russians. With the exception of the Marathas, I don't see that as much to be proud of.

I know often it sounds like I'm basically an iconoclast and stepping on all the sacred totems of Afghans. but it's more because this sh*t seems to have created a cross generational mental fog and mass delusion built on our mythology, where there's a clear gulf between fantasy and reality. I should know, I was filled with it too.

It's the same with Muslims in general that over romanticize about The "Golden Age" of Islam and just relish on how "great we were" but little is actually being done with that. We're under everyone's boot-heel.

That's why we have these trolls come here, think that by donning a pompous bunch of jargon that it somehow gives them "Cred"; because that's what we project. And sure that's not unique to us, but it's a syndrome that keeps us in a vicious cycle.

Comparing him with toothless Afghans expats who mumble rap in their bedroom rather than doing anything productive isn't really the way to analyze Abdali.

Similarly, I have very recently taken a favorable view of Habibullah Kalakani, who Pashun Nationalists deride as Bacha-ye Saqao. But I have greater appreciation for him despite his revolt against a Pashtun ruler and he being a Tajik. Him being "Bacha Saqao" is more a testimony of his resolve that he comes from basically poverty and rose up against the existing power structure, rather than riding the coattails of a foreign invader.

[khushal]

The question is, did that foreign power commit any atrocities or harm to Pashtuns or were Pashtuns propelled as a power? Nadir Shah would not have had the power he did with out the consent of Afghans.

The Golden age should be learned and remembered, it's a historical fact and we should learn how it started and how it ended. The reasons behind it.

Also the Marathas got their power back and he was forced to leave because of depleted treasury and rebellions at home. Many Empires that had started in Afghanistan always moved south because of constant rebellions in Afghanistan. The capital was moved from Kandahar to Kabul also because of constant rebellions in Kandahar. How can you administer when you have constant rebellions around you. This is also why Great World armies are forced to leave because of the constant rebellions. Those armies aren't really defeated in battle, it's just that the constant rebellions depletes your treasury and it makes it very hard to administer.

[Samandri]

The fact that he was able to unite the Pashtun tribes and create one of the most powerful forces in Asia (even if it was short lived) in his twenties is a big achievement

He did not create his army from scratch. The credit for great quality of his army goes to Nadir Shah Afshar. Ahmad Shah's army was split away force from Nadir Shah's army. His powerful regular army entirely consisted of former soldiers of Nadir Shah's army while the irregular tribesmen provided by some tribes in lieu of taxes, were just expendables. I was actually not joking when i said that without existence of Nadir Shah, there would have been no Durrani empire. His army was not that large, it never exceeded 35,000 in any of his battles. In one of his invasion of India, he only went with 12,000 men from Afghanistan.

He actually did not knit Pashtun tribes into one nation, its just that as a Pashtun he knew how to deal with tribes. Deals were made in which tribes had to either provide small number of men for his military campaigns or pay nominal tribute. Powerful tribes like those of Waziristan and Yousafzais were completely independent and he did not demand any thing from them. He did not unite Pashtun tribes , he just made sure that his troublesome people with unruly nature dont cause problems for him.

[Friends of Baloch]

Since I'm the primary critic of Abdali on this forum; no it's not his lack of ethnic solidarity or nationalism in the modern sense that I'm evaluating him by. I'm not an ethnocentrist nor am I a nationalist.

When I call him a servant of Afshar, it's because he was more loyal to Afshar than anything. He may have had very valid reasons for why.

But it's a historical fact; he supported the triumph of a foreign power against a Pashtun authority. Clearly the enmity of the Pashtuns who were in power was greater than the concern for foreign domination, but if Afshar wasn't assasinated by his own men, we'd have more than likely have been an Afsharid state, and that would more than likely have been just fine and dandy for Abdali.In my view, Abdali's accomplishments are a mixed bag. We extol his tirumphs but ignore his blunders. Namely his failure to confront the Qing's , his failure to offset the Russian expansion into Central Asia. His failure to retard the ascent of the British. One can argue, he had limited resources and stretched thin, but there's plenty of evidence that he was just preoccupied with some vain notion of victory rather than really having any lasting impact.

"Whacking off Hindu heads" may sound cool from a standpoint of Islamic Bravado. But the paradox is, bravado is not Islamic and really he basically targeted largely defenseless civilians and did nothing to defeat the at the time potentially dangerous forces to Muslims, namely the British and Russians. With the exception of the Marathas, I don't see that as much to be proud of.

I know often it sounds like I'm basically an iconoclast and stepping on all the sacred totems of Afghans. but it's more because this sh*t seems to have created a cross generational mental fog and mass delusion built on our mythology, where there's a clear gulf between fantasy and reality. I should know, I was filled with it too.

It's the same with Muslims in general that over romanticize about The "Golden Age" of Islam and just relish on how "great we were" but little is actually being done with that. We're under everyone's boot-heel.

That's why we have these trolls come here, think that by donning a pompous bunch of jargon that it somehow gives them "Cred"; because that's what we project. And sure that's not unique to us, but it's a syndrome that keeps us in a vicious cycle.

Comparing him with toothless Afghans expats who mumble rap in their bedroom rather than doing anything productive isn't really the way to analyze Abdali.

Similarly, I have very recently taken a favorable view of Habibullah Kalakani, who Pashun Nationalists deride as Bacha-ye Saqao. But I have greater appreciation for him despite his revolt against a Pashtun ruler and he being a Tajik. Him being "Bacha Saqao" is more a testimony of his resolve that he comes from basically poverty and rose up against the existing power structure, rather than riding the coattails of a foreign invader.

Many Abdalis had joined Nader Shah and sided with the Persians against the Ghilzais when Ahmad was only a little child. He was a product of his time, in which there was no single Afghan/Pashtun polity or nationhood. This is not unusual among peoples that were mostly semi-nomadic and tribe based. Similar patterns of ethnic disunity can be seen among the Kurds at that time (also a mostly semi-nomadic, tribal people), some being on the side of the Ottomans, others on the side of Nader Shah.

Also the Russian expansion into Central Asia occurred in the 19th century, not 18th century. All of the major Russian conquests there (Khiva, Samarqand, Marv etc) took place decades after Abdali was dead. Turkmens were defeated a century after he had died.

Central Asia's conquest by Russias has nothing to do with Abdali or Afghans.

Afghans lived so far away at that time from the centre of Uzbek power, let alone having any significant contacts with the Kazakhs. How exactly was Ahmad supposed to prepare for offsetting future Russian conquests of Kazakh, Uzbek and Turkmen territories when nobody saw that coming, not even Russians themselves? Russians didnt have a grand plan for taking over Central Asia, they did it piecemeal over a span of some 60 years, and that too long after Ahmad Shah was deceased.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

Many Abdalis had joined Nader Shah and sided with the Persians against the Ghilzais when Ahmad was only a little child. He was a product of his time, in which there was no single Afghan/Pashtun polity or nationhood. This is not unusual among peoples that were mostly semi-nomadic and tribe based. Similar patterns of ethnic disunity can be seen among the Kurds at that time (also a mostly semi-nomadic, tribal people), some being on the side of the Ottomans, others on the side of Nader Shah.

Also the Russian expansion into Central Asia occurred in the 19th century, not 18th century. All of the major Russian conquests there (Khiva, Samarqand, Marv etc) took place decades after Abdali was dead. Turkmens were defeated a century after he had died.

Central Asia's conquest by Russias has nothing to do with Abdali or Afghans.

Afghans lived so far away at that time from the centre of Uzbek power, let alone having any significant contacts with the Kazakhs. How exactly was Ahmad supposed to prepare for offsetting future Russian conquests of Kazakh, Uzbek and Turkmen territories when nobody saw that coming, not even Russians themselves? Russians didnt have a grand plan for taking over Central Asia, they did it piecemeal over a span of some 60 years, and that too long after Ahmad Shah was deceased.

Last post first. We can agree that Abdalis sided with the Afsharids during Ahmad's lifetime, but it's largely unclear to what degree they were with the Safawids or not prior to that. It's not that they sided with the Afsharids or the Safawids that is an issue. It's the context in which they did. Whether we blame Ahmad Abdali's decisions on the what he was surrounded with or his resentment to the Ghilzai tribes, he embraced the domination of foreign hegemony over the betterment of the Afghan tribes sorvreignty. Why should he be honored for this? Did he redeem himself by the fact Afghanistan was established today? Afghans have suffered terribly as a consequence of the Sadozai and then Mohmadzai rulers.

This point holds regardless of whether he held to any contemporary notion of national unity or not or even tribal unity. His efforts were simply not aimed at the sovreignty of Afghans, whether that was justified based on the state/condition of Afghans is another issue.

Mirwais Hotaki sought to slough the rule of the Safawids. He did not try to ally himself with the Ottomans nor the Mughals. all the evidence suggests that he stood behind sovreignty irregardless of possessiing a national identity.

Russian expansion into Central Asia happened in the 19th Century, but they were making incursions into Khiva as early as 1717 under Alexander Bekovich, which ended in failure, however, there was no attempt to fortify or guard the region. So the presence of Russian menace was well known and expressed throughout Central Asia ...it would be unlikely that a military commander of Ahmad Abdali's recognition would not be aware of Russians and their military attempts.

Khiva is only a Few days travel from Bukhara; and Abdali had alliances with the Uzbeks, especially as he tried to secure Herat from the remnants of the Persians. He would have certainly had steady contact with the region.

The fact is, that Abdali was more preoccupied with regional rivals rather than offsetting expansionist Britain or Russia. Again why should he praised for this?

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

The question is, did that foreign power commit any atrocities or harm to Pashtuns

.

As a matter of fact yes, Nadir destroyed Kandahar city,

[Samandri]

As a matter of fact yes, Nadir destroyed Kandahar city,

And slaughtered many Pashtuns during his conquests. For example this tradition :

"The Badalzais are said to have been the most powerful of the four Barechi sections. According to their own account, at the time when Nadir Shah Afshar was overrunning the country, all the other Barechis retired to the hills on hearing of the approach of his army. The Eid or some other great festival, was then in process of celebration, and the Badalzais resolved to stand their ground. Nadir Shah's troops arrived and attacked them: they fought desperately in defence of their families and property and were almost annihilated. (Historical and Political Gazetteer of Afghanistan, pp-70-71)

There are also many other accounts.