Afghanistan vs Iraq.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Admin Khan - Well said. I would expect any soul who has been wronged by the US anywhere in the world to have a negative perspective on the US. And no doubt, when the US does something, they are doing it for a reason, and that reason is always going to include a WHIFM (whats in it for me). So I could definately see your point about having a base in Afghanistan, although I trully believe they wouldn't be there if 9/11 didn't happen.

And, you are right on the mark defending the citizenry of the US and their higher order thinking skills. Remarks that somehow Americans are moths led to the light are far fetched at best. For every FOX News Channel, there is an MSNBC. Debate is live and well in the US where many here do not support our current foreign policy. These conspiracies and claims of corporations ruling the US are fallacies born out of contempt, not real history or social science.

Awreedunkay, are you DavidKross?


Explain to us how plutocracy and oligarchy are not real history or social science; and why would "contempt" be a motive; why not love of Justice or Morality? Why is 9/11 the motivation for action when involvement in Middle East, including Afghanistan pre-dates 9/11?

sounds like a conspiracy theory to counter balance conspiracy theories? ironic?

[awreedunkey]

Scimitar,

Hillbillies indeed. Hey, let's call a rose a rose shall we? You are a radical. I am sure you would not disagree. Where Barakzai is absolutely correct in that you are highly educated in academia, he certainly could not mean socially adept. Your arguments are soaking with intellectual elitism. You have an axe to grind, so you use particular events that you pick and choose, then you weave a complicated argument full of eloquent vocabulary. Just as before when you accused me of playing with semantics, that's all you do.

Your self describing elitism allows you to call people hilbillies, or generalize whole populations as moronic imbeciles simply marching to another's tune. I pointed out your location because it is relevent. And I respect your acknowledgment of your nationality, even if it obviously lacks your allegience. And, I am sure those poor hillbillies do have a bit of a point in that if you are so against a certain culture, country, or place, then why not take your conscience on the road if possible. I myself agree with you that "love it or leave it" is quite ignorant, but only in an economic sense.

But, hey, you live in America. Spout off loud and clear, for it is your right. But, it is also the right of others to point out your biased utilization of incredibly eloquent vocabulary.

Without getting personal, I hope, we shall continue to clash verbally on here I am sure, but it's all good. I think you are all a few minutes away from your New Year. Have fun, stay safe, and have a great New Year!

[graveyardofempires]

Well see my viewpoint comes from a different philosophical tract than yours. To me "Best technology best higher education" is defined only in terms of the context of an Industrial Capitalist Order. The problem is this order is an artificial one and is ultimately destructive and detrimental for the human species and our relationship to the ecosystem. So although we may strive to achieve education and may feel this prestige and privilege of having been educated here; the reality is this feeling only arises because we've been habituated or live under conditions that have been artificially created to which our ability to function effectively has been impeded unless we fulfill the demands of these manufactured "norms". In essence the education we derive is only for the maintenance of these institutions and this system, and the cycle continues.

It's ironic because it was through being educated in this process that I came to realize the reality behind these norms as a result of being introduced to societal and civilization critiques. I began to realize that education for the sake of trying to achieve things defined by their manufactured standards was pointless. We shouldn't be educating ourselves so we can "have what they have" we should be educating ourselves only for the sole purpose of Bringing it all down; so that one day our children and future generations and more over our Mother Earth can be free, and all of us truly liberated.

Feel free to disagree or criticize my post; but that's my take on things.

do we have a fellow treehugger in here?

[Toramana]

Admin Khan, that is the whole point awreedunkey wants to bring home i.e., American policy anywhere in the world is driven entirely by its own national interests and not by any other consideration (e.g., benign or philonthropist motive). And as I can understand his point, he is proposing the same thing to you i.e., what are your interests as Pashtuns and how can we (i.e., Pashtuns and Americans) work togethor so both the interests are harmonized?

Now what is the problem with BarazaiAbdali and Edge? Their problem is, they are looking at the problem through Muslim Ummah prism. Obviously, Pashtun interests don't count in this universalistic agenda/view. However, I will get Barazkai more credit because he at least is a bit more sincere to his Pan-Muslim Ummah utopia compared to Edge who seems to be driven wholy by Arab-centered sentiments.

[Admin Khan]

scimitarXEdge,
Assalam-Alaikum. I hope you are in good health. I hope all is well with you. Also, nice to meet you.

Well see my viewpoint comes from a different philosophical tract than yours. To me "Best technology best higher education" is defined only in terms of the context of an Industrial Capitalist Order. The problem is this order is an artificial one and is ultimately destructive and detrimental for the human species and our relationship to the ecosystem.

You made some pretty bold claims here, and before I offer my dus-pesos, I would appreciate it if you can elaborate on your stance here. I would love to further discuss this with you, so ultimately we can have a fruitful discussion which can result in us both learning from one another.

So although we may strive to achieve education and may feel this prestige and privilege of having been educated here; the reality is this feeling only arises because we've been habituated or live under conditions that have been artificially created to which our ability to function effectively has been impeded unless we fulfill the demands of these manufactured "norms". In essence the education we derive is only for the maintenance of these institutions and this system, and the cycle continues.

I can understand your angle of thought, but I disagree on a few basic things with you. I think we are blowing this out of proportion. Many immigrants come here by choice. And I understand what you are going to say, that they have been forced cause their countries have been destroyed by the same USA, which to a certain extent, I agree with. However, not every University has an agenda. Some students simply come here because the opportunities here exceed every other nation in the world. England, Germany, and all these other "developed" nation simply aren't on the same level as the US, as far as research goes. I mean, I read this article once that the US spends more on it's research programs than most of the developed European nations combined. So, I can smell more grants right from that line alone for future students. Also, what would you say about those students who come here, reap the benefits of a top notch education and they end up serving their homeland. Isn't the US pretty much been abused in that sense? Considering the basic fact that most get free education anyways[scholarships]. I do agree with you that there are some institutions that can make you become a Zombie.

It's ironic because it was through being educated in this process that I came to realize the reality behind these norms as a result of being introduced to societal and civilization critiques. I began to realize that education for the sake of trying to achieve things defined by their manufactured standards was pointless. We shouldn't be educating ourselves so we can "have what they have" we should be educating ourselves only for the sole purpose of Bringing it all down; so that one day our children and future generations and more over our Mother Earth can be free, and all of us truly liberated.

Feel free to disagree or criticize my post; but that's my take on things.

Last time I checked, I doubt anyone gets educated to 'have what they have'. If you read the mission statements of most prestigious Universities, they would beg to differ with the aforementioned.

[Toramana]

Probably, no nation anywhere in time and space has acted wholy out of selfless and benign motives...This is true of US (United States) as well as of the Arab Empires of the bygone ages. This is the whole point.

[randolph85]

Probably, no nation anywhere in time and space has acted wholy out of selfless and benign motives...This is true of US (United States) as well as of the Arab Empires of the bygone age. This is the whole point.

but the byproduct of the motives have been vastly different in a historical context.

[Toramana]

As for this Edge, he simply lackes the kind of skepticism that characterises academic or intellectual curiosity and caution-ness. He is absolutist and dogmatic at best in academic investigation as well probably to the same degree as he is in his religious life.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Scimitar,

Hillbillies indeed. Hey, let's call a rose a rose shall we? You are a radical. I am sure you would not disagree. Where Barakzai is absolutely correct in that you are highly educated in academia, he certainly could not mean socially adept. Your arguments are soaking with intellectual elitism. You have an axe to grind, so you use particular events that you pick and choose, then you weave a complicated argument full of eloquent vocabulary. Just as before when you accused me of playing with semantics, that's all you do.

Your self describing elitism allows you to call people hilbillies, or generalize whole populations as moronic imbeciles simply marching to another's tune. I pointed out your location because it is relevent. And I respect your acknowledgment of your nationality, even if it obviously lacks your allegience. And, I am sure those poor hillbillies do have a bit of a point in that if you are so against a certain culture, country, or place, then why not take your conscience on the road if possible. I myself agree with you that "love it or leave it" is quite ignorant, but only in an economic sense.

But, hey, you live in America. Spout off loud and clear, for it is your right. But, it is also the right of others to point out your biased utilization of incredibly eloquent vocabulary.

Without getting personal, I hope, we shall continue to clash verbally on here I am sure, but it's all good. I think you are all a few minutes away from your New Year. Have fun, stay safe, and have a great New Year!

You know one thing I noticed when there is an attempt at defending the Hierarchal Status Quo of Imperialism and/or the Mainstream Capitalist Institutions that rule over America such as Oligarchy and Plutocracy. After awhile when the proper logical rebuttals can't be made many start drawing on False Logical Appeals as a response without actually debunking the argument.

One such Appeal is what's called Ad-Hominem; another is red herring. Often times in Red Herring things completely irrelevant get thrown out as if to discredit the point; such as writing style or vocabulary. Others might be accusations of "elitism". However these don't refute much.

If I had accused you of playing semantics; it wasn't merely to accuse someone. It was because based on my understanding of what defines things like "Conspiracy", it matched the criteria of what would denote the word. The CIA isn't just there to be a transparent organization; and as we all have agreed they have had hegemonic agendas at the cost of human well being. It wasn't like they go around Handing out Reese's Peanut Buttercups and their truck accidentally lost it's clutch and slammed into a group of school kids.

The reason I used the imagery of "Hillbillies" is because it seems that people make very shallow reactions to critiques and one of them is "Love it or Leave It"; When I drive into a more rural part of Pennsylvania or Maryland, I see bumper stickers like this on the backs of 4 X 4's/Broncos, Pick Up Trucks. Much like you attempted to portray me as motivated by some sort of ungrateful hypocrisy of "indulging" , I similarly returned the gesture by passing out my own brand of cliche'.

As for everything else; I don't say these things because I have a bone to pick; I love humanity, I love God and I love our beautiful and yet very sacred planet. So I speak against what I see as corrupt. Even if I'm some how motivated by hypocrisy it doesn't discredit my arguments anyways.

[ScimitarXEdge]

scimitarXEdge,
Assalam-Alaikum. I hope you are in good health. I hope all is well with you. Also, nice to meet you.



You made some pretty bold claims here, and before I offer my dus-pesos, I would appreciate it if you can elaborate on your stance here. I would love to further discuss this with you, so ultimately we can have a fruitful discussion which can result in us both learning from one another.

I can understand your angle of thought, but I disagree on a few basic things with you. I think we are blowing this out of proportion. Many immigrants come here by choice. And I understand what you are going to say, that they have been forced cause their countries have been destroyed by the same USA, which to a certain extent, I agree with. However, not every University has an agenda. Some students simply come here because the opportunities here exceed every other nation in the world. England, Germany, and all these other "developed" nation simply aren't on the same level as the US, as far as research goes. I mean, I read this article once that the US spends more on it's research programs than most of the developed European nations combined. So, I can smell more grants right from that line alone for future students. Also, what would you say about those students who come here, reap the benefits of a top notch education and they end up serving their homeland. Isn't the US pretty much been abused in that sense? Considering the basic fact that most get free education anyways[scholarships]. I do agree with you that there are some institutions that can make you become a Zombie.
Last time I checked, I doubt anyone gets educated to 'have what they have'. If you read the mission statements of most prestigious Universities, they would beg to differ with the aforementioned.

Actually I think you have somewhat presented a Straw Man of my position; which tells me you may not have actually understood my position.

I realize that people choose to come here but the motivations of those choices are byproducts imposed and manufactured conditions. It's not necessarily about country. It's like Native Americans choose to be alcoholics; but the conditions which resulted in their tendency to make such choices has been due to the policies and intrusions of Colonizers. That's a reasonable analogy.

As you know despite being Pashtoon and my love for my Pashtoon heritage; I disregard ideas of Nation. I don't argue from a position of "America destroyed my country"; but rather Capitalist Imperialism and it's various institutions have disrupted and/or sowed dysfunction on a global scale. You don't necessarily have to literally destroy a country to do any of this.This means for me the plight of anyone, from the Sudanese to the Indigenous Tribes of the Rainforest is my cause.

I also understand that many people get an education here and go back to their homeland to help or do work; that's all well and good, but the issue is they still view the solution in context and in terms of the standards of these conditions imposed by capitalist hegemony; which in turn only ends up being a bandaid at best, and a placebo at worst. It's not real solution to issues of scarcity, displacement, resource management and such. Which are underlying problems.

[Admin Khan]

Actually I think you have somewhat presented a Straw Man of my position; which tells me you may not have actually understood my position.

I realize that people choose to come here but the motivations of those choices are byproducts imposed and manufactured conditions. It's not necessarily about country. It's like Native Americans choose to be alcoholics; but the conditions which resulted in their tendency to make such choices has been due to the policies and intrusions of Colonizers. That's a reasonable analogy.

As you know despite being Pashtoon and my love for my Pashtoon heritage; I disregard ideas of Nation. I don't argue from a position of "America destroyed my country"; but rather Capitalist Imperialism and it's various institutions have disrupted and/or sowed dysfunction on a global scale. You don't necessarily have to literally destroy a country to do any of this.This means for me the plight of anyone, from the Sudanese to the Indigenous Tribes of the Rainforest is my cause.

I also understand that many people get an education here and go back to their homeland to help or do work; that's all well and good, but the issue is they still view the solution in context and in terms of the standards of these conditions imposed by capitalist hegemony; which in turn only ends up being a bandaid at best, and a placebo at worst. It's not real solution to issues of scarcity, displacement, resource management and such. Which are underlying problems.

Brother, I did not present anything yet. All I asked you to do was to clarify your stance, I am not so sure how you reached that conclusion. I specifically asked you to elaborate on your claims, so I can have a better understanding. I still wait for you to elaborate on your stance, so I can have a better understanding of your philosophy. So far, we are all over the place.

So far, I noticed your main problem is with capitalism. So you wouldn't blame the US for what it did in Afghanistan, you would rather blame capitalism? At this point, all I am asking is questions so I can learn from you.

[ScimitarXEdge]

As for this Edge, he simply lackes the kind of skepticism that characterises academic or intellectual curiosity and caution-ness. He is absolutist and dogmatic at best in academic investigation as well probably to the same degree as he is in his religious life.

You're just saying all this because of suffering from an inferiority complex because in every debate we have you get intellectually crushed by me and everyone on this forum knows it; that's why most people acknowledge the merit of my arguments while they see the clear ignorances, misinformation and logical weakness of yours.

the CIA trained you, but because you have brown skin, and your parents raised you to dance Bhangra, they didn't train you well enough.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Admin Khan, that is the whole point awreedunkey wants to bring home i.e., American policy anywhere in the world is driven entirely by its own national interests and not by any other consideration (e.g., benign or philonthropist motive). And as I can understand his point, he is proposing the same thing to you i.e., what are your interests as Pashtuns and how can we (i.e., Pashtuns and Americans) work togethor so both the interests are harmonized?

Now what is the problem with BarazaiAbdali and Edge? Their problem is, they are looking at the problem through Muslim Ummah prism. Obviously, Pashtun interests don't count in this universalistic agenda/view. However, I will get Barazkai more credit because he at least is a bit more sincere to his Pan-Muslim Ummah utopia compared to Edge who seems to be driven wholy by Arab-centered sentiments.

Can you show me a single quote that proves that I am driven by wholly Arab centered sentiments? can you show a quote where I gave had special favor for it?

Or is this merely the smokescreen of imperialistic disinformation and attempting to create a Divide and Rule Tactic between BarakzaiAbdali and I. Seizing an opportunity about differences of opinion Pitting one group against another.

Where did I say "Pashtoon interests don't count"?


Why should we see racial/bigoted ethnocentric agendas as valid?

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Admin Khan, that is the whole point awreedunkey wants to bring home i.e., American policy anywhere in the world is driven entirely by its own national interests and not by any other consideration (e.g., benign or philonthropist motive). And as I can understand his point, he is proposing the same thing to you i.e., what are your interests as Pashtuns and how can we (i.e., Pashtuns and Americans) work togethor so both the interests are harmonized?

Now what is the problem with BarazaiAbdali and Edge? Their problem is, they are looking at the problem through Muslim Ummah prism. Obviously, Pashtun interests don't count in this universalistic agenda/view. However, I will get Barazkai more credit because he at least is a bit more sincere to his Pan-Muslim Ummah utopia compared to Edge who seems to be driven wholy by Arab-centered sentiments.

I do not speak for Edge, but I think that the fact you live in Canada and probably spent most of your life in Pashtunkhwa affects your ability to see it the way I do. We had a unique upbrining here. Perhaps Admin Khan could translate the experience for you, I dont know. In the states we first had the Articles of the Confederation before the US Constitution. In general, a Tennessean loves his state. He also then goes on to love his region (the South) and considers Northerners elitists, tree huggers, out of touch with rural America, etc. The Californian looks at both the Northern and the Southerner and is just glad to be free of both of them in his day to day life. The northern looks at the southern as a hilljack.

In general, we southerners believe in states rights and the North can be called a bastion of federalism (some prefer rural versus urban). Lincoln solidified the federalist government by denying states the rights to secede from the Union. His battle to tame the confederacy was in some ways like the Ridda Wars of Abu Bakr's era.

When there is no threat from the outside, you will see southern politicians maligning the Kennedys and Northerns maligning the Bushs. However, when an attack occurs, these lines cease to exist. The nation generally rallies as one. When the threat is disintegrating, these differences come back. In fact they can be stark. Some feel that the steel belt states are denied certain fair federal resources. Then there is pork barrell spending that goes on.

So in this way, as a southerner, I do not see it as sacrifice for the ummah the rights of the individual and the state. Instead, I see the Pashtuns as a "state like entity" within the whole. If the Pashtun feels maligned or threatened or abused, he is to protest vigorously and assert his independence the same way an Alabaman asserts his own when he feels Obama's agenda infringes on his rights.

I do not cede to Arabs the right to lead the caliphate, nor do I cede that right to Turks. If a meritorious Pashtun or Somalian or Ugandan or American is fit to lead, he ought to lead. Moreover, I see the Majlis e Shura as the venue in which to express our angst if we feel wronged.

Finally, since we have not yet had our Lincoln period as an ummah in the modern sense, I like John Calhoun, reserve the right to defend my people against all onslaught and withdraw from the Union in question. Now, if a single great leader comes along and federalizes the ummah and crushes the ability of all parties to secede from the union then we will have a similar set up as we do here. This cessation does not mean from islam... it simply means that people have the right to bear arms against any tyranny, even their own. In fact Abu Bakr advocated his own overthrowing should tyranny initiate under him.

So you are 100% wrong when you say I cannot imagine an independent Pashtun cause. My Americanism has armed me in a way that your Canadian-Pakistani identity has not. I can see with eyes that look to the West and look to the East. I can see the body and I can see the heart. The ummah is the body and the Pashtun is the heart of it. If the body threatens the heart, the heart shall cease to beat and that ummah shall then fracture. But I have hope that this will not occur.

[randolph85]

to think that pan islamism is arab centric is misguided and wrong. if anything, arab politics and arab socialist nationalism in the last 50 years have been most detrimental to pan islamist ideology.