Pashtuns United

[Pashtun_Ultranationalist]

your opinion is worth **** regarding Pukhtane so you either shut up and listen or keep barking.

Goes to show your general knowledge of your own people.

Afghan government blocked supplies to the Faqir, if you did not know, the Germans and Italians were arming the Faqir and were the first to provide him with Radios etc.

Plus Afghanistan did stay neutral during the Indo-pak wars.

Plus, is there anyway, this grave dude, can learn to speak without swearing! He acts as if hes the only pashtun on here

[Pashtun_Ultranationalist]

Toramana you are still in darkness and just cuz you guys were subdued by the british through pakistan doesnt mean there should be something wrong with afghans.

the info you are presenting is irrelevant and as i said far from truth.

I was born in kabul and i know kabul much better than you and others so dont compare to some punjab or islamabad,its an Afghan city and Afghanistan is a country of Pashtuns and it saddens me seeing some brainwashed people from across the fake border making **** up.

you are talking about some bill while we are not even recognising your government in pukhtunkhwa who are pro british enslavement.

OH lord, living in Darkness, your living in a Fantasy.

There has been no Pro Pashtun movement for decades. Neither is there one now, Taliban are not Nationalists, they even enlish Punjabis such as Omar Punjabi into its leadership ranks, Nobody in Afghanistan is supporting a Separatist group in Pashtunkhwa, and no Pashtun is fighting Pakistan army to Join Afghanistan.
Get these misconceptions out of your head!

I use to say the same things, that Pashtuns are fighting Pakistan Army for a independent Pashtunistan, I use to post videos on Youtube of this, that was until I went to Waziristan in 2009 and saw with my own eyes, the Uzbeks, Arabs,Punjabis and hardly a single Pashtun, as most were in IDP camps in DI Khan.

I saw Punjabis under SSP post guarding and patrolling the roads in their 4x4, I saw Wazirs say Da mu "Bhai Jaan" dee, Bhai Jaan is referred to Punjabi Militants.

Then I saw the Geo video of Naik Mohammad Wazir, an former Afghan Taliban commader and now founder of TTP hugging a Punjabi 11th core commander, and stating the Tribal Pashtuns are the "atomic bomb of Pakistan".

Grave, most of us here are grown up mature people and we have witnessed these facts, start acting your age, and if you swear at me again, then goes to show your weak mentality.

Heres some photos for you of your Supposely Pashtunistan Fighters













The founder of the TTP with Pak army.

What a Shame. What makes it even more shameful, is that they killed him in the end. Ask yourself Grave, Mr Know it all, what would have happened if they didnt kill him, he would have continued to lick Paki-ISI boots.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Don't be so naive and disiingenuous Pakistani Ultra Nationalist






Your phony Nationalists are all to eager to hold hands and share romantic gazes into the eyes of the Pakistani Establishment

[ScimitarXEdge]

at least Nek Muhammad Wazir actually had combat against Pakistani Military. You guys talk big but deliver little.

[Pashtun_Ultranationalist]

at least Nek Muhammad Wazir actually had combat against Pakistani Military. You guys talk big but deliver little.

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha

Kwatanay, When did I say I like those guys above me? Not only are you a good liar but also a excellent generaliser!

Mohammad Nek Wazir did battle the Pakistan Army, that was until the big daddy came and slapped his naughty face, you seen how it all turned out?

Nek Mohammad Wazir-"Tribal Pashtuns are atomic bomb of Pakistan"

HA HA HA HA

Mr Edge, ANP Leadership are Sell-Outs, its called Pakistani Politics, just like the Sell-outs in Kandahar who still pray to dead Arab fighters.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7193579.stm

or what about these guys, I bet they enjoyed their tour White House



Talk about Imperialism eh!

While Najibullah stood against American/Arab/Pakistani Imperialism, these guys were being praised by the Imperialist himself. Mr edge, once again your an epic fail.

Remmeber this my American Yemani Friend, Most of you guys are just talk, just like your brother Awlaki, the guy who spent his spare time meeting prostitutes and the rest hating the West lol!

Achakzai was the first guy to oppose CIA/ISI/Arab intervention in Afghanistan, he was the first guy to protest against Pakistan Army's order of 6000 Kandahari dresses for Pak Army units to go into Kandahar.

Showing a few pictures to defame shows how desparate and low you truely are lol.

Have a great day, always remmeber you are a by-gone-product of Reagans Policy!

I personally would never submitt to anyones Imperialism including the one from Arabia, Pashtuns are independent people and should stay that way, no more exploitation!

[Pashtun_Ultranationalist]

So Taliban existed in 1985? How can we be sure these are not anti soviet mujahideen and not Taliban?

Its the best photo I could find to explain my view. Obviously the person who titled it was not informed correctly, but I am sure those guys were no different than Taliban of today.


Vrora, dont you think its time for us to unite without feeling downgraded about loving our culture and having some pride?

I understand too much of anything is bad, including Pride, but we are one of the only people on the planet who are abused,insulted, oppressed and killed even if we show any sort of pride of our people.

Pakistan would crush us if we ever promoted a Pashtun cultural festival highlighting our heros such as Mirza Ali Khan Faqir of Ipi, or bacha khan or even Khushal Khan Khattak, in Afghanistan you know our role is limited and the same minorities who considered us as a threat, I would call them Bhuttos Farsi Legion(ahmad Shah Masood) hate us too and label any Pashtun as a suspected Talib.

I would love to see all my Pashtuns united under a progressive government, if Religion is concerned, I respect Islam, but I would prefer to some extent "Sufi" teachings over more hardcore Wahabi ones, Our forefathers were all mostly Sufis, or followed a Sufi line of teaching, we survived, we continued to live and prosper, look at what Saudi brand of Islam done to us in the last few decades, it destroyed the fabric of our society and community.

I would love to impliment a progressive,modern and strong Pashtun family values, with strong family values, our culture and customs would continue to flourish, instead of asking others(West,Arabia,Pakistan) to teach us how to run a government, we already have our own unique law system which is called Pashtunwali/Pukhtunwali, from there we can start to modernise it and produce a excellent justice system through Jirga.

It saddens me to see our Pashtun women, moved around like cattle or publically whipped.

In the History of Waziristan, my elders told me they have never seen a women be publically shamed or executed, that was until Arab inspired Talib fighters with those from Uzbekistan etc brought this corrupted culture with them.

It saddens me! I would love to see all my Pashtun people prosper!

[Pashtun_Ultranationalist]

I agree with you vrora. We Pashtuns are too tired to fight "Superstitiously" the world is a extremely cold and cruel place, if we all contribute and help eachother, we may all be free of outside troubles, however at present we are being dragged into conflicts of no concern to us.

[BLS_1919v2.0]

Actually Pashtuns fit this mold very well, the strong precedence of Pastoral Nomadism is demonstrative of that.



Technocracy is a very recent advent, how it could exist since the dawn of a civilization; now if you're defining technocracy as the use of tools, then it would have existed since pre-civilization.

But the formal definition; if you dare me to be pedantic again centers around the primacy of technology or people involved in technology as the central deciding factor of social and political governance. I.e. he who has the biggest, best, most advanced utilities should run the show.



I would argue yes, if we take Marxian idealizations out of it. But let's not draw straw hairs here, I'm not here to debate communism but highlight what we face now.



But you presented an argument which insinuated a contrast between left and right on such a measure. Now obviously they contrast but the degree to which they do is not as great as their words suggest. And I agree they create this hoopla over side show issues and it seems to the populace raised on what I term the spoiled brat mentality to base their lives around it. Everything else you stated I concur with.



Well Scandinavia used to be one of the poorest parts of Europe, but I digress, Scandinavia is seen as the citadel of the Northern European race, land of Vikings. Also it's not true that Scandinavia was somehow not an Imperial Heritage, Danish Indian and African colonies existed; and furthermore Scandinavia is such a small population even factoring Norway, Denmark and Sweden..



Improvement on what scale relative poverty or absolute poverty? Absolute Poverty has increased in India. Hence the large slums of Mumbai, Calcutta and so on, rampant human trafficking which was at one time virtually non-existent. But it's true India always had relative Poverty; most Indians were simple agriculturalists living of the Ganges and it's tributaries. Despite the creation of a "middle class" the most destitute are the most destitute and the population of that destitution is massive.



China is great as a springboard, I think they're our best option.

Pashtuns were of a mostly nomadic or semi-nomadic stock but not anymore. Majority have settled down bar the Kochi population.

Regarding the Marxist example, I don't think it was splitting hairs rather maintaining a certain base definition of the terms we are going to use. You seem to have used many terms very loosely which I don't think is entirely fair if we are going to discuss. I merely pointed out a few things.

I didn't present an argument with the intention of dividing left and right. Remember that you were the one that tried to use capitalism and technocracy under a similar banner. I pointed out that that is an unfair categorization, since they are not exclusively together. To further elaborate my point I use the example of Daniel Bell. The reason I pointed out his political inclinations was to show you with an example of how they can't be used together exclusively.

Their heritage as Vikings is known fact but what does that have to do with the topic a hand? Second of all, I pointed out the Dutch colonization because it was the only country of them with a significant colonial history. True there were a few danish and swedish colonies.
Their population is not relevant, I used them as an example to counter your initial claim. I believe it fit well.

About India, well it is a country of a billion..so its proportion of destitute will be massive and so will its middle class. It would be to argue otherwise. Again in the greater scheme of things, India is far better off economically today than it was decades ago. I don't see how you would argue to the contrary unless you have some different definitions of economic progress.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Talk about Imperialism eh!

yes Let's about Imperialism; Namely the Russian/Soviet Imperialism There's some things you might want to know about Najibullah before you give him an endorsement.

While Najibullah stood against American/Arab/Pakistani Imperialism, these guys were being praised by the Imperialist himself. Mr edge, once again your an epic fail.

False;; Najibullah was nothing but a Soviet Stooge; the Pashtuns and other Afghans were very legitimate in their opposition to Najibullah regardless of where their funding or who their support came from.

Here's a perfect example as to why



So basically Najib used to sexually assault women and cut off their breasts? Even if it wasn't Najib himself; they did it under his command. This is worse than whatever the Taliban have been doing. Way worse.


Najibullah never was fighting on behalf of Afghanistan or Pashtuns either; after all he was a Parchami, but even more than that He was completely subordinate to The Kremlin.




If Najib was independent and fighting for Afghan Liberation against Imperialism then he wouldn't be "reporting to " a Soviet Intelligence Organization

You honestly can't believe the nonsense you write here.


[

Even his own brothers say that Najib behaved contradictory to Afghan morals and values You clearly have low standards when it comes to heros

Just because he spoke against Palistan, didnt mean he was doing so for Afghanistan; it just means he was doing it for Russia.

Showing a few pictures to defame shows how desparate and low you truely are lol.

This is nothing but a weak attempt at psychological blackmail to silence the Truth. You're upset because you dont want to admit your Nationalists are bigger cheats.

Also you've been contradicting yourself because that's exactly what you did that initiated this; posted pictures of Nek Muhammad with Pakistani Militar, while your heros are hugging and gazing dreamily into Zardaris eyes.

I know pictures like these bite at your conscience



look at how romantically Achakzai Sahib is gazing into Zardari's eyes?

Have a great day, always remmeber you are a by-gone-product of Reagans Policy!

Of course you'd think that, after all you're a by-gone-product of the British Raj

I personally would never submitt to anyones Imperialism including the one from Arabia, Pashtuns are independent people and should stay that way, no more exploitation!

This is a blatant lie; the minute you found out an American was here you gleefully bowed down to his feet as if he was your Savior. You clearly have no shame.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Pashtuns were of a mostly nomadic or semi-nomadic stock but not anymore. Majority have settled down bar the Kochi population.

Regarding the Marxist example, I don't think it was splitting hairs rather maintaining a certain base definition of the terms we are going to use. You seem to have used many terms very loosely which I don't think is entirely fair if we are going to discuss. I merely pointed out a few things.

I didn't present an argument with the intention of dividing left and right. Remember that you were the one that tried to use capitalism and technocracy under a similar banner. I pointed out that that is an unfair categorization, since they are not exclusively together. To further elaborate my point I use the example of Daniel Bell. The reason I pointed out his political inclinations was to show you with an example of how they can't be used together exclusively.

Their heritage as Vikings is known fact but what does that have to do with the topic a hand? Second of all, I pointed out the Dutch colonization because it was the only country of them with a significant colonial history. True there were a few danish and swedish colonies.
Their population is not relevant, I used them as an example to counter your initial claim. I believe it fit well.

About India, well it is a country of a billion..so its proportion of destitute will be massive and so will its middle class. It would be to argue otherwise. Again in the greater scheme of things, India is far better off economically today than it was decades ago. I don't see how you would argue to the contrary unless you have some different definitions of economic progress.

Then by your own admission you acknowledge that the Pastoral Nomadism of Pashtuns was what established the natural ecological relationships to the region. which would contradict your original point on this matter.

What you're describing has nothing to do with defining Communism; it has to do with what Marx felt would be the ultimate consequence of Communism. Capitalists too try to use such rhetoric to dupe people into complying with the capitalist order; they say "it will all trickle down eventually" and that people will end up having plenty by the "Unseen Hand". Their definitions have nothing to do with what their ideologues wild imagination carry.


The Heritage of the Viking is why Scandinavia is apart of the Capitalist Cultural Bloc of Former Colonial Powers despite its seemingly innocuous disconnected from the Imperial Game (even though that's not true). The Dutch aren't Scandinavian either by the way. our example doesn't still hold; because it was patently inaccurate. The way the population is relevant is because Scandinavian Colonialism provided an exploitative advantage in proportion to it's populace.

Using an exception to a rule to disprove a rule; which is what you seemingly are trying to do, does not serve it's purpose. It's also not accurate. In fact the exception proves the rule. The real Defacto truth is capitalism could not expand without technocracy and technocracy without capitalism. Whether you see them as "identical" is irrelevant; they're part and parcel of each other. A lone example, which I might add doesn't even serve it's purpose, is like saying that Hydrogen and Chloride does not form Hydogren Chloride because the Reaction Mechanisms only create Hydrogen Chloride 99% of the time due to the probabilistic nature of chemical collisions. (don't read too deeply into this, I'm not debating chemistry, I'm using an analogy).

Again like I said there's Relative Poverty and there's Absolute Poverty; It's important to factor those. The Middle Class in India are perhaps 50 Million, and have disposable income around $ 4000-20,000 a year, This is almost at par with a Welfare Mother in America. The Poor in India live on 2 Dollars per/day and number as 700 Million. How poor people are is not measured upon economic growth alone but purchasing power parity. People in India are actually poorer than ever, because they cannot subsist, and thus there are more people in India who suffer from Absolute Poverty, than relative Poverty.