Lindsay Graham's Bases

[BarakzaiAbdali]

M16,

Any chance that you might address who is to take care of Lindsey Graham’s and Mr. Karzai’s permanent bases?

http://www.greenvilleonline.com/arti...nent-U-S-bases

Here is the video feed of this major player of the senate arms committee and his commentary on the subject:

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/lindsey-g...eliot-spitzer/

In general, where Graham goes, McCain, like a lap dog follows…

Here are the plans for the Iraqi permanent bases:
http://www.antiwar.com/moore/?articleid=11018

Here are the current happenings regarding the embassy in Afghanistan:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp...RZAT866kfUXV8g

We certainly now know from wikileaks that embassies are generally CIA/spying hotspots. It appears that the Nairobi and Kenya embassies were in fact utilized for these ends.

So M16, Toramana, Pashtoonyaar, you could really end quiet a bit of debate about what the options are, should you offer up an option as to what group shall deal with Mr. Graham’s permanent bases that guarantee a permanence to the Durand line.

As I have been arguing, my belief is that outside intervention (whether it be shiah Iranians in the time of Mir Wais, whether it be Britishers in the time of Amanullah Ghazi/Faqir Ipi, and Winston Churchill, whether it be Sikhs in the era of Ahmad Shah Yusufzai) produces an innate immune response in the Pashtoon in which religion galvanizes them and organizes them to oust an invader. Therefore, Churchills Talib ul Ilm, Amanullah’s Ghazis, Mir Wais’s Fatwa were all examples of this innate response. It appears to many of us that this group represents the only response to Mr. Graham's attempt at permanent occupation.

In fact, in this debate with Irshad Manji, Dalia makes it clear that this phenomenon is not unique to Afghanistan. When various ethnic groups are challenged by an outside force, the Islamic fabric appears to assert itself as the mode of expression throughout the Muslim world.

So M16, please offer us the alternative option of who shall take care to ensure Afghanistan does not see the fate of North Korea one day, with permanent bases and a DMZ line?

[parsiwaan]

What’s wrong with permanent base? Do you consider Japan, S Korea, Germany, Italy, Turkey and...52 countries around the world occupied? The problem for us are Porkistan and Iran...both wants a weak, fragmented Afghanistan ruled by stone aged savages who imprisoned woman, ban music, and any sign of civilization.
Sooner then later our people will realize the dogma of religion...there is nothing good in primitive Arab imperialism called Islam. In future Afghanistan anyone are welcome to practice their religion...but the country must be ruled by civil and secular laws...not some primitive law of 1400 years ago.

Time to have a US base...it will keep savage cultureless Porksitanis, Iranis and rest of neighbors in check...we have nothing to fear from permanent US base...we will be fine just as German, Japanese, Koreans, Turks and rest of people.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

I absolutely consider them occupied. A number of prominent Americans including Ron Paul and Michael Scheuer consider those countries occupied or at least as having been occupied and culturally destroyed at one point in recent history. In fact, Scheuer the head of Alec Station, the CIA Unit that hunted Bin Ladin cites this view by the general citizenry of these nations, that the US is an occupational force with policies that are generally not in the best interest of the locals as a source of manpower for the spreading insurgencies. As evidence, he refers to the statistically significant and massively powered University of Maryland polling:

Here is the quote from the University of Maryland Primary Investigator that conducted this study:

"But the basic problem of anger at America still largely exists. Majorities in most Muslim countries continue to have a negative view of the US and to perceive the US as seeking to dominate the Muslim world, to undermine Islam and to impose Western culture."

Here is the link to the data itself:

http://www.publicpolicy.umd.edu/sppu...0and%20America

Here is a subsection of the study regarding the view of the bases by NON ISLAMISTS in Egypt:

"M: How do you feel about the US military bases in the region, especially in the Gulf region?

- R1: We don't like it...The existence of US military bases in any Arab country represents a threat to the Egyptian national security

- M: Let me see a show of hands, how many people sitting here perceive the US military bases as a threat to Egypt? [most raise hands] Why?

- R1: ...These bases are there... to attack us... we'll never trust the Americans

R2: The US is trying to influence things in Egypt...The military bases represent occupation of the Arab world again...

- R3: If it wants to control this area [the Arab world]... [The US must] have military forces ready to take military against any government in an Arab country that would react in a manner that is not in the US's interests.

- M: So, the military bases of the US are there to threaten the countries in the region that do not do what America wants them to do....

- R3: Of course.

M: Does everyone here agree with this? [general agreement]"

So the basic idea is that the citizenry, whether they be whisky drinkers or hardliners, view western interventionalism and bases with disdain.

Afghans are increasingly viewing NATO presence as an occupation force:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/1..._n_792391.html

[BarakzaiAbdali]

So my query for M16 and you guys was a simple one. You guys are clamoring for the abandonment of the Taliban by the Pashtoons. You are also clammoring for the creation of an independent Pashtunkhwa.

I simply am noting that even if one were to view the Taliban as an arm of Pakistani occupation, and even if we permit the assumption that somehow NATO pacifies them, you only peel away one layer of the shell that is the occupation onion.

Then, per Senator Graham, Pashtunkhwa, whether it be secular, whether it be islamist, whether it be communist, whether it be capitalist, shall still be occupied. Furthermore, this will only entrench the Durand line as the American bases will ensure that Afghanistan stabilizes in the image it wants it to form in. There will never be a Cambodian style invasion of Pakistan by the Americans if they can accomplish this.

Then, Khybar Pashtunkhwa shall remain forever in the hand of Zardari and his ilk and southern Afghanistan shall be governed by a government with a Pashtun face (Karzai) and a Parsiwan body (Fahim, Dostum, the remnants of Massoud's men, etc).

So I am simply asking M16, Toramana, Pashtunyaar and others who have been ardent in their support of an INDEPENDENT pashtunkhwa regarding what shall be done and who they offer as the champion of future Pashtoon independence? It appears their champions were the fastest runners in the area. Karzai, Achakzai, Asfriab, Asfandyar all were very capable runners. They showed their speed when turning their backs and not leading their people against foreign occupation.

So, I eagerly await a practical alternative so that the forum can unite behind their plausible (implausble?) choice.

I prefer a reasonable answer and not one that has no basis in history. For example, the answer that the Americans and NATO will leave once the insurgency is quelled is unrealistic. The Koreans can tell you about how when the Americans come, they stay. The Iraqis can add to the knowledge of how permanent their bases are becoming.

The Vietnemese can tell you about how when you successfully throw out an occupier, you become the owner of your own destiny.

We await your answer regarding Lindsey Graham's bases.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Finally, why should the American citizenry clean up your messes? If you want to deal with Pakistan, you are the mighty Afghan that dealt a severe blow to the Russian Bear. Are you telling me that you need some poor guy named Bob to clean up your messes for you? Why should Bob or Tom not get the simple human privilege of going to sleep at night in their own bed in their home town in small town America, next to their wife, and watching their children grow? You can kill each other to your heart's content as you were doing, but there is no need to promote American interventionalism and do a disservice to the American people. A majority of them have no idea that their country is involved in permanent bases throughout the world.

[Baygham]

So my query for M16 and you guys was a simple one. You guys are clamoring for the abandonment of the Taliban by the Pashtoons. You are also clammoring for the creation of an independent Pashtunkhwa.

I simply am noting that even if one were to view the Taliban as an arm of Pakistani occupation, and even if we permit the assumption that somehow NATO pacifies them, you only peel away one layer of the shell that is the occupation onion.

Then, per Senator Graham, Pashtunkhwa, whether it be secular, whether it be islamist, whether it be communist, whether it be capitalist, shall still be occupied. Furthermore, this will only entrench the Durand line as the American bases will ensure that Afghanistan stabilizes in the image it wants it to form in. There will never be a Cambodian style invasion of Pakistan by the Americans if they can accomplish this.

Then, Khybar Pashtunkhwa shall remain forever in the hand of Zardari and his ilk and southern Afghanistan shall be governed by a government with a Pashtun face (Karzai) and a Parsiwan body (Fahim, Dostum, the remnants of Massoud's men, etc).

So I am simply asking M16, Toramana, Pashtunyaar and others who have been ardent in their support of an INDEPENDENT pashtunkhwa regarding what shall be done and who they offer as the champion of future Pashtoon independence? It appears their champions were the fastest runners in the area. Karzai, Achakzai, Asfriab, Asfandyar all were very capable runners. They showed their speed when turning their backs and not leading their people against foreign occupation.

So, I eagerly await a practical alternative so that the forum can unite behind their plausible (implausble?) choice.

I prefer a reasonable answer and not one that has no basis in history. For example, the answer that the Americans and NATO will leave once the insurgency is quelled is unrealistic. The Koreans can tell you about how when the Americans come, they stay. The Iraqis can add to the knowledge of how permanent their bases are becoming.

The Vietnemese can tell you about how when you successfully throw out an occupier, you become the owner of your own destiny.

We await your answer regarding Lindsey Graham's bases.

I would love an occupied pashtunkhwa, we will even put an idol of lindsey Graham in Chowk yadgar, We put arabian dogs to sodomize us day and night, whats an innocent statue in chock yadgar.

I personally think americans should not humanize their intervention with afghansitan or the muslim world. Hell the taliban dont consider americans or any other infidel as human, why should the reciprocal equation be any different.

Eventually, this islam will have to be dehumanized, like nazi ideology; only then will the american public give the necessary sacrifice to put it in its rightfull place;;may be, maybe then we will live in peace. Till then, arabian, punjabi, tajik, russian, chinese or american, please form a line while I bent over.

[parsiwaan]

I absolutely consider them occupied. A number of prominent Americans including Ron Paul and Michael Scheuer consider those countries occupied or at least as having been occupied and culturally destroyed at one point in recent history. In fact, Scheuer the head of Alec Station, the CIA Unit that hunted Bin Ladin cites this view by the general citizenry of these nations, that the US is an occupational force with policies that are generally not in the best interest of the locals as a source of manpower for the spreading insurgencies. As evidence, he refers to the statistically significant and massively powered University of Maryland polling:

Here is the quote from the University of Maryland Primary Investigator that conducted this study:

"But the basic problem of anger at America still largely exists. Majorities in most Muslim countries continue to have a negative view of the US and to perceive the US as seeking to dominate the Muslim world, to undermine Islam and to impose Western culture."

Here is the link to the data itself:

http://www.publicpolicy.umd.edu/sppu...0and%20America

Here is a subsection of the study regarding the view of the bases by NON ISLAMISTS in Egypt:

"M: How do you feel about the US military bases in the region, especially in the Gulf region?

- R1: We don't like it...The existence of US military bases in any Arab country represents a threat to the Egyptian national security

- M: Let me see a show of hands, how many people sitting here perceive the US military bases as a threat to Egypt? [most raise hands] Why?

- R1: ...These bases are there... to attack us... we'll never trust the Americans

R2: The US is trying to influence things in Egypt...The military bases represent occupation of the Arab world again...

- R3: If it wants to control this area [the Arab world]... [The US must] have military forces ready to take military against any government in an Arab country that would react in a manner that is not in the US's interests.

- M: So, the military bases of the US are there to threaten the countries in the region that do not do what America wants them to do....

- R3: Of course.

M: Does everyone here agree with this? [general agreement]"

So the basic idea is that the citizenry, whether they be whisky drinkers or hardliners, view western interventionalism and bases with disdain.

Afghans are increasingly viewing NATO presence as an occupation force:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/1..._n_792391.html

" Majorities in Muslim world negative view of the US." speak for yourself... if you put the option of Paki-Taliban and American more then 95% of afghans will go for American...also since when a Talitabi supporter like yourself values people choice? Remember there is no room for democracy in Sharia law…either you accept the thug Amir Ul Momeen(all of them appointed by sword.) or you don’t.

We need American base in Afghanistan….we need it for at lest 30 more years…or Afghanistan will turn into ground for dog fight between our evil and loathsome neighbors. F Pakistan!!!





GOD BLESS USA!!!

[pir_Rokhan]

Barakzai wrora

Talibans as a continuity of ghazis and talibul ilms is just your sincere effort to interpret Afghan rebellious history, giving all credit to the religion of Afghans instead of their freedom loving nature [though I fail to understand as to why the same concept of religion could not instill an iota of rebellion in the current Arab world which does not have the guts to issue even a single statement against US occupation in their sacred lands]. I would beg to differ with this interpretation.

In my opinion , the so called rebellion is infact an insurgent role by these naive Talibans to be used once again as a cannon fodder for Pakistani interests as I donot think these rag tag elements have any clue what statecraft is all about that too in a century and times like that of ours in which the individual as well as the collective human affairs have become so complicated due to the advancement of technology culture that we will need half a century to understand which areas we are lagging in , even if we don’t think about steps and initiatives to compensate for the loss.

The success of Taliban , if it ever happens, will be in form the success of these religion loving Pashtuns under the guidance of Pakistan's ISI from the south but in reality will it be the success of the Punjabi planning and interests working behind them, as Col Imam had suggested a decade ago to Mullah Omar.

Now in that case we have three alternatives:

1) Accept the occupation of white man

2) Accept being the fifth province of Pakistan

3) Stand for ourselves to safeguard our national interests.

I stand for third option.

[parsiwaan]

I would love an occupied pashtunkhwa, we will even put an idol of lindsey Graham in Chowk yadgar, We put arabian dogs to sodomize us day and night, whats an innocent statue in chock yadgar.

I personally think americans should not humanize their intervention with afghansitan or the muslim world. Hell the taliban dont consider americans or any other infidel as human, why should the reciprocal equation be any different.

Eventually, this islam will have to be dehumanized, like nazi ideology; only then will the american public give the necessary sacrifice to put it in its rightfull place;;may be, maybe then we will live in peace. Till then, arabian, punjabi, tajik, russian, chinese or american, please form a line while I bent over.

Don't worry about us Tajik and Persian...the Arabian culture--Islam has f-ed us upside down...we turn from a super power.. center of culture and civilization into people that give birth to Khomayni or Rabbani.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

You completely ignored what I posted.

• I did not, in this post, claim to back anyone. I simply said that when all is said and done, who gets rid of American occupation to allow for the creation of Pashtunkhwa?
• You appear to not utilize evidenced based argument. The U of Maryland study quiet clearly that the Muslims do have the following beliefs in contrast to what you advocate:

“For example while large majorities support the principle that will of the people should be the basis of authority for government; majorities also support the notion that shari'a should be the basis for government and that a group of Islamic scholars should be able to vet laws.”

• In fact it appears that the question of Taliban/Al Qaeda is raised and the article notes:

“Al Qaeda has been effective in elaborating this narrative, portraying the US as continuous with the Crusaders. While most Muslims have many reservations about al Qaeda, most do resonate with the narrative that al Qaeda puts forward.”

• You do not appear to have the intelligence to make the connection that Scheuer and Ron Paul and others do, that it is precisely US actions in the Muslim world that create blow back in the form of groups like Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Remove the stimulus and the groups deal with eachother quiet well.
• Regarding the Americans growing up and understanding the conflict, rather it is you that needs to grow up. What sort of mighty Afghan are you in that you cannot sufficiently address or route a group of Panjabis or "Porkis" as you call them? You really need us Americans to do all your dirty work for you? Are you that militarily inept; or that cowardly? I think we Americans are starting to wake up and understand that we need not waste our lives or dollars on your inability to deal with Pakistan or the surrounding countries. Take off the clown suit and man up and deal with the Pakis the way your ancestors would; on your own.
• As an Afghan, I have no love lost for Pakistan, but your typical and evidence lacking arguments are the same as always. I will reproduce here from an old post I made regard to the Pakistan and Afghanistan relationship:

“To assume that elements of Pakistan will not play a role in Afghanistan is both foolish and lacking in historical insight. Pashtuns on the Kabul side of the Durand line must ask themselves a few questions about their own historical realities. First, we ought to dig up the body of our own Afghan kings including Nadir Shah (father of Zahir) and hang the bones as Pakistani agents. Nadir recruited the Wazir and Mehsed tribes to retake the Afghan throne from Bacha Saqo when they were still a part of British India frontier (the precursor to Pakistan). Amanullah Shah also raised the tribal flag and rallied tribal agency tribes on the Pakistani side of the border to fight the anglo invasions in assistance/guerrilla maneuvers. Ahmad Shah Baba utilized the hill tribes during incursions into India. The Pashtoons of Pakistan have an inextricable link into momentous changes that have occured in modern Afghanistan. You cannot on the one hand laud your history and beat your chest like a guerilla claiming that Pakistan must ipso facto stop all Wazir/Mehsud tribal incursions into the current Afghan provinces and then not understand the history of these tribes and their involvement in Afghanistan.

Antagonism. A) The Zahir Shah government was the first government to reject Pakistan's candidacy into the inclusion of nation states. This was an initial volley and slap in the face for the new country. The goal was to renew the hold on the NWFP (incidentally sold off by Afghan Kings per their own folley). B) They beamed radio messages from the Surkh Push movement and attempted to destabilize Pakistan from Afghanistan during the Abdul Ghaffar Khan era. C) The Zahir government formed strong ties with the Soviets and the Indians that eventually backfired. Per Michael Scheuer, the expert on Bin Ladin, the Afghan Mujahideen would recall tales of Indian jets assisting Soviet incursions (see his article in the Diplomat). The summary of this is that Pakistan's military goal will be to maintain strategic depth and avoid allowing India the chance to put it in a pincer hold.”

“1. To delve into this some more, I refer you to the classic paper on Afghanistan Pakistan relations by Khurshid Hasan, entitled quiet astutely, Pakistan-Afghanistan Relations in the Asian Survey Vol. 2, No 7 (1962). This source was written and reviewed by diplomats on both sides of the border and generally is the source written closest to the inception of Pakistan. The issue in each conflict is to get to the root and understand what the players are motivated by and figuratively, "who threw the first punch."
A. Per Dr. Hasan, the history speaks for itself. In September of 1947 Afghanistan threw out the first volley and was the ONLY nation in the world to oppose the entry of Pakistan into the realm of nation states.
B. The first ARMED incursions were encouraged by the Afghan government within days of the creation of Pakistan. Tribal militias were armed and entered territories that were not even traditionally within the sphere of particular tribal groups (e.g. Kharoti Pashtun tribal members were armed to invade parts of Waziristan). An added source to buttress this claim is by Ian Talbot, Pakistan: A Modern History, written in 2005.

Unfortunately, for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. When the Pakistanis felt that they were in the untenable position of having to defend against Indian action on both sides of their borders, they seek to do what most nation states would and defend their realm with the sorts of tactics they have employed since then. This includes the unfortunate treatment afforded to Balochis.”

Deal with the facts buddy

[Wrayun]

Don't worry about us Tajik and Persian...the Arabian culture--Islam has f-ed us upside down...we turn from a super power.. center of culture and civilization into people that give birth to Khomayni or Rabbani.

And like every other sorry arse you make excuses for your pathetic past. How sad that a superpower became overwhelmed by a bunch of sword wielding desert sand dwellers.

However I remember something different, I remember that after Islam, Persian culture became dominant through out Muslim lands, and Farsi became more dominant then Arabic ever could be. Even today many Muslim lands are heavily influenced by Farsi and Persian culture, heritage, architecture, and cuisine than Arabic. Farsi became the Lingua franca of many Muslim empires, something that Arabic never achieved. I remember that amongst the Muslims, Persians defined what was and still is considered civilized, cultured, poetic, artistic, scientific, midst the Muslims. How sad for people like you to fail to see that or acknowledge that.

Now, Toramana would argue again that I am defending bediouns.....yet no one would even bother to point out the victim mentality in some of you underachievers who are looking for scapegoat in a post World War 1 era that didn't turn out so good for Muslims all over, not just the Persians, Afghans or Indics.

If you paint yourself like a victim, that's how you are going to be treated and that is how you are going to down in history. Mind you the Persian empire also enslaved many non-Persian lands and people. They were and are as imperialist as the Arabs were or could be.

[Wrayun]

BarakzaiAbdali,

First, welcome O' pa khair.
Second, great arguments, very throughly put. I loved the comparison you made to the Native Americans in the other thread. It felt like someone read my mind and placed it into words.
Third, don't expect a serious, coherent, reply. Instead be ready to be called names, your character demonized, your family insulted, and labeled an agent. Unfortunately you are dealing with pseudo scholars of copy pastes, single minded, drones who repeat the same old garbage that has been debunked, defaced, derailed and recycled about a billion times over the internets.

In simple terms, you are dealing with the classic embodiment of trolls.

[parsiwaan]

And like every other sorry arse you make excuses for your pathetic past. How sad that a superpower became overwhelmed by a bunch of sword wielding desert sand dwellers.

Arab e sosmaar khor left behind a disease that still after 1400 years are bleeding our society, it discourage innovation, thinking and debate ..it turns people of region into cave monkies with only purpose eat, sleep, marry 4 wives and worship.

However I remember something different, I remember that after Islam, Persian culture became dominant through out Muslim lands, and Farsi became more dominant then Arabic ever could be. Even today many Muslim lands are heavily influenced by Farsi and Persian culture, heritage, architecture, and cuisine than Arabic. Farsi became the Lingua franca of many Muslim empires, something that Arabic never achieved. I remember that amongst the Muslims, Persians defined what was and still is considered civilized, cultured, poetic, artistic, scientific, midst the Muslims. How sad for people like you to fail to see that or acknowledge that.

What does it has to do primitive Arab culture---called Islam? Even before islam Parsi was lingua franca of whole region. (do not called it Farsi for its arabized of actual name Parsi--since Arabs have no P they call it F.)

Now, Toramana would argue again that I am defending bediouns.....yet no one would even bother to point out the victim mentality in some of you underachievers who are looking for scapegoat in a post World War 1 era that didn't turn out so good for Muslims all over, not just the Persians, Afghans or Indics.

Colonization of Muslim world stared long before world war 1, in fact you Pakistanis were royal servants of her majesty the queen 200 about 150 years before world war 1. The problem is not west...the real issue in our part of the world is Islam itself...which is a totaling religion and never converge or allow any believes...thus more then 1.5 billion people have turned into zombie...that eat, sleep and prayers five times with no contribution to humanity. Talibanization of Afghanistan, where women were imprisoned and any thought and idea that were different then Dewabandi/Wahabi interpretation of Taliban were crashed.

If you paint yourself like a victim, that's how you are going to be treated and that is how you are going to down in history. Mind you the Persian empire also enslaved many non-Persian lands and people. They were and are as imperialist as the Arabs were or could be.

No they did not.. read history...in fact Persian empire was the only empire of that time that did not own slaves but paid their workers...

The First Declaration of Human Rights

http://www.cais-soas.com/CAIS/Culture/human_rights.htm



Cyrus The Great (King of Persia): The First Declaration of Human Rights in the World in Iran 2500 years ago#

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Arab e sosmaar khor left behind a disease that still after 1400 years are bleeding our society, it discourage innovation, thinking and debate ..it turns people of region into cave monkies with only purpose eat, sleep, marry 4 wives and worship.




What does it has to do primitive Arab culture---called Islam? Even before islam Parsi was lingua franca of whole region. (do not called it Farsi for its arabized of actual name Parsi--since Arabs have no P they call it F.)





Colonization of Muslim world stared long before world war 1, in fact you Pakistanis were royal servants of her majesty the queen 200 about 150 years before world war 1. The problem is not west...the real issue in our part of the world is Islam itself...which is a totaling religion and never converge or allow any believes...thus more then 1.5 billion people have turned into zombie...that eat, sleep and prayers five times with no contribution to humanity. Talibanization of Afghanistan, where women were imprisoned and any thought and idea that were different then Dewabandi/Wahabi interpretation of Taliban were crashed.





No they did not.. read history...in fact Persian empire was the only empire of that time that did not own slaves but paid their workers...

The First Declaration of Human Rights

http://www.cais-soas.com/CAIS/Culture/human_rights.htm



Cyrus The Great (King of Persia): The First Declaration of Human Rights in the World in Iran 2500 years ago[/URL]#

Parsiwaan,

True to your name, and true to your stereotype, you continue to do your people a disservice. You only prop up the stereotype that you are Russianiazed sell outs with an inferiority complex. Quiet fortunately, I know a great many Uzbeks and Tajiks that do their people much more service and may not prefer Pashtun rule, but certainly do not want some foreign master above their head.

First Code of Conduct? What about Hammurabi's Code? Moreover, what about the fact that Hammurabi was a semite? You know semites... the well from which the Arabs and Jews sprang? What about the fact that Hammurabi predated Cyrus the Great by oh, I dont know, about a millenium?

You see Sir, an education will impart you a few things: 1) The ability to type and possibly speak proper English. 2) The ability to reason with logic and not emotion. 3) The ability to do this very pertinent thing that the first ayah ever revealed requested man to do "Iqraa" or read.

If you live here in the states, then I suggest you approach your former high school counselar about a GED.

The advancements that the Persians made were many and Islam itself honors the first Persian Muslim known as Salman the Parsi, a sahaba.

It is quiet fascinating that you describe Islam as a rate limiting factor in advancement considering that the early caliphate was quiet capable of mowing down the Iranian empire in a few swift blows with desert maneuvers. You would think that that the ubermensch you speak of would have been able to beat back a few "camel jockeys."?

Regarding Pakistan, I will not repeat myself again and you can see the post above regarding the early history between Afghanistan and Pakistan and how this culminated into the Pakistani "Strategic Depth" theory that may or may not hold water. I think you ought to practice reading it so that your English improves and so that you educate yourself.

[parsiwaan]

“To assume that elements of Pakistan will not play a role in Afghanistan is both foolish and lacking in historical insight. Pashtuns on the Kabul side of the Durand line must ask themselves a few questions about their own historical realities. First, we ought to dig up the body of our own Afghan kings including Nadir Shah (father of Zahir) and hang the bones as Pakistani agents. Nadir recruited the Wazir and Mehsed tribes to retake the Afghan throne from Bacha Saqo when they were still a part of British India frontier (the precursor to Pakistan). Amanullah Shah also raised the tribal flag and rallied tribal agency tribes on the Pakistani side of the border to fight the anglo invasions in assistance/guerrilla maneuvers.

Get your facts right....there is was no Porksitan, Nadir e Ghadar was British agent... its well documented how he betray Afghanistan...He planted the seed of ethnic strives in Afghanistan by actively looting Shamlai valley...his Jaji and Zadran troops even looted Kabul.
This is one of Afghanistan great historican Qaseem Raishta writes about Nadir the British agent.


http://www.afghana.com/SocietyAndCulture/amanula.htm

Ahmad Shah Baba utilized the hill tribes during incursions into India. The Pashtoons of Pakistan have an inextricable link into momentous changes that have occured in modern Afghanistan. You cannot on the one hand laud your history and beat your chest like a guerilla claiming that Pakistan must ipso facto stop all Wazir/Mehsud tribal incursions into the current Afghan provinces and then not understand the history of these tribes and their involvement in Afghanistan.

Your missing the point...we do not recognized Pakistan...thus there is no Pashton of Pakistan for us. We are also not against Pashtons of NWFP we are against those punjabi dogs, the barbarism backward cult called Taliban.


Antagonism. A) The Zahir Shah government was the first government to reject Pakistan's candidacy into the inclusion of nation states. This was an initial volley and slap in the face for the new country. The goal was to renew the hold on the NWFP (incidentally sold off by Afghan Kings per their own folley). B) They beamed radio messages from the Surkh Push movement and attempted to destabilize Pakistan from Afghanistan during the Abdul Ghaffar Khan era. C) The Zahir government formed strong ties with the Soviets and the Indians that eventually backfired. Per Michael Scheuer, the expert on Bin Ladin, the Afghan Mujahideen would recall tales of Indian jets assisting Soviet incursions (see his article in the Diplomat). The summary of this is that Pakistan's military goal will be to maintain strategic depth and avoid allowing India the chance to put it in a pincer hold.”

“1. To delve into this some more, I refer you to the classic paper on Afghanistan Pakistan relations by Khurshid Hasan, entitled quiet astutely, Pakistan-Afghanistan Relations in the Asian Survey Vol. 2, No 7 (1962). This source was written and reviewed by diplomats on both sides of the border and generally is the source written closest to the inception of Pakistan. The issue in each conflict is to get to the root and understand what the players are motivated by and figuratively, "who threw the first punch."

A. Per Dr. Hasan, the history speaks for itself. In September of 1947 Afghanistan threw out the first volley and was the ONLY nation in the world to oppose the entry of Pakistan into the realm of nation states.
B. The first ARMED incursions were encouraged by the Afghan government within days of the creation of Pakistan. Tribal militias were armed and entered territories that were not even traditionally within the sphere of particular tribal groups (e.g. Kharoti Pashtun tribal members were armed to invade parts of Waziristan). An added source to buttress this claim is by Ian Talbot, Pakistan: A Modern History, written in 2005.

This is the extend of Pakistani rascality...Pakistan is successor of Imperil British Raj for Afghanistan...from start Pakistan continue the old British forward policy---read Ali Zena speech about FATA. It was 2 years after creation of Pukistan that Afghanistan held a loy Jerga and denounce the Durand line.

Unfortunately, for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. When the Pakistanis felt that they were in the untenable position of having to defend against Indian action on both sides of their borders, they seek to do what most nation states would and defend their realm with the sorts of tactics they have employed since then. This includes the unfortunate treatment afforded to Balochis.”

Deal with the facts buddy

You got your facts twist paki boy...the action was creation of cancer called pakistan based on religion by pork eating, alcohol drinking British agents....with main purpose of continuation of old British forward policy...which included keeping the people of FATA in check, backward, and controlled by Dewbandi mullahs with only purpose of controlling and damaging any sort of modernity and development in Afghanistan. Twice in less then 80s years these poor backward people were used to damage and destroy afghan state... i suggest you read some books about British policy in region...in fact nothing change even after creation fo Islamic porkistan...not even those British regiments and forces...frontier forces, Punjab Regiment, Pathan regiment, political agents and...for past 200 years these murderous forces have been fighting against Afghanistan.

ONE question...are you cultureless Pakistanis not successor of British for Afghanistan?