dr najeeb speech on shah nawaz tanai

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Beg then to the ISI and Punjabis who through their puppets converted afghanistan into a den of terrorists from the whole world. You seem to be like you know nothing about the very recent history and as if NATO has come here for some picnic.

Those who are engaged in a guerilla warfare against ones own government and on his own soil is responsible for the killings of innocent afghans since actually they use civillians as human shield and only they are the people to be condemned because they are in fact promoting Punjab's agenda of destabilizing and annihilating afghan state turning it into Punjab's colony.

How can you expect the undeserving to govern the ones who actually fought for the soil? You termed it legitimate, not Mr Ghaljaay, a native of the Suleiman mountains, likely, and possibly an Ahmadzai, of the same tribe as the man you hold in high regard, Mr. Najib. So I think Mr. Ghaljaay has shown quiet a bit of an ability to separate himself from worldly gain for his tribe.

Mr. Karzai, Mr. Ghani, Mr. Dostum... you expect folks to submit to these turn tails and yellow backs? They abandoned the country instead of standing like men and reclaiming it and then bringing back a semblance of stability.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Toramana! You must know that he should have known the very basic issue in Paki-afghan relation which a ten years of young afghan child can tell you. This seems very intriguing to me at least. 'Tar Attaka afghan watan di'. Every afghan well tell you this. Only paki pashtuns don't know much about history.

Also, there is no reason why what I proposed is not feasible. Benazir Bhutto was from what I understand shiah... Karachi and Lahore partake in all sorts of unislamic mores. Its quiet easy to construct a picture (which is a reality for the most part) of a region of Pakistan that practices munafiq style mannerisms and is seeking to occupy, financially, landwise, etc KP. Deflect the religious sentiment back towards Islamabad and you will see galvanizing effect on the people. However, its your own elites that you will have to contend with as Mr. Sherpao and others appear to be very happy in their positions and with the status quo.

[khyaal]

Malgariya ! if you look at this whole episode of proxy afghan wars, this is very evident that the whole series of catastrophe started with Pakistan's intervention in Afghanistan, the root cause of which is the occupied afghan land which not only Pakis occupies but also uses as war front against afghanistan. And this is nothing new even the British had done the same to Ghazi Aman ullah khan from occupied Pashtun soil inside the British india.

It has been quite a long time since the British occupation and Pakhtunkhwa's ultimate hand overing to Punjab as a bonus for their loyalty towards their masters, the British.

This is the proper context of the whole afghan tragedy and any true afghan should start from here then look inside what is happening in azad afghanistan.

It is too lame an excuse to justify Pakistan's (a so-called islamic country with an anti islamic past) occupation of Afghan land in the name of Islam. Islam has never endorsed the theft and seizure of ones asset and property by another fellow muslim.

We all know that men are fallible and are not immaculate, what afghan now need is unity and not controversies around personalities in the past and present and we expect every true and patriotic afghan to work for the unity and not to add to confusion and chaos. Instigation for war on ones homeland is tantamount to treachery and pushing someone else's agenda as we all know this.

Pakistan in the intial phase had all its provincial governers and military chief as Infidel British, afghan is far better despite the huge human losses and the absence of a state machinery it has its constitution and its intutions in the making. We hope that soon afghanistan will become a prosperous state looking at its immense natural resources and its hard working people.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Malgariya ! if you look at this whole episode of proxy afghan wars, this is very evident that the whole series of catastrophe started with Pakistan's intervention in Afghanistan, the root cause of which is the occupied afghan land which not only Pakis occupies but also uses as war front against afghanistan. And this is nothing new even the British had done the same to Ghazi Aman ullah khan from occupied Pashtun soil inside the British india.

It has been quite a long time since the British occupation and Pakhtunkhwa's ultimate hand overing to Punjab as a bonus for their loyalty towards their masters, the British.

This is the proper context of the whole afghan tragedy and any true afghan should start from here then look inside what is happening in azad afghanistan.

It is too lame an excuse to justify Pakistan's (a so-called islamic country with an anti islamic past) occupation of Afghan land in the name of Islam. Islam has never endorsed the theft and seizure of ones asset and property by another fellow muslim.

We all know that men are fallible and are not immaculate, what afghan now need is unity and not controversies around personalities in the past and present and we expect every true and patriotic afghan to work for the unity and not to add to confusion and chaos. Instigation for war on ones homeland is tantamount to treachery and pushing someone else's agenda as we all know this.

Pakistan in the intial phase had all its provincial governers and military chief as Infidel British, afghan is far better despite the huge human losses and the absence of a state machinery it has its constitution and its intutions in the making. We hope that soon afghanistan will become a prosperous state looking at its immense natural resources and its hard working people.

You're doing that same reflexive thing again that I told you about that utilizes allegiance questioning and name calling as opposed stone cold pragmatic realities. No one said Pakistan did not intervene. In fact, I confirmed this above. The issue is what are you going to to about it?

You appear to be not reading or watching the news regarding the last paragraph. Corruption is rife to hitherto not before seen levels. The Kabul bank is in shambles. Mr. Karzai has a parliament that he despises and cannot deal with because it appears to deny Pashtuns the rightful number of seats despite their population majority. Moreover, he is a nonentity and has not earned the right to lead as I stated before. He appears to be inept in leadership and his officials lack the basic capabilities to govern a non centralized state.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/MA25Df02.html

You also, once again appear to ignore the ground level reality that there are likely groups that within the insurgency that are fighting simply to remove what they view is an occupier or for other various reasons not relating to Pakistan. Simple logistical support from Pakistan or coming through Pakistan does not simply equate with Pakistani controlled. You would have to, for example, explain the utter lack of arms that Mr. Dauran is fighting with here in Paul Refsdah's documentary (not produced in Pakistan should you ask).

www.liveleak.com/view?i=5e5_1283088242

Your options appear to be the following:

1) Rely on ANP and PMAP to foment an insurgency within KP. As I have stated, I wish for nothing more than for the KP brethren to want to return into Afghanistan, but I cannot simply agree with you that the masses there want it without data. You have offered none. Moreover, ANP and PMAP offer no leadership on the issue. I asked you to furnish an example of a modern Faqier-e-Ipi within the movements, ready, willing, and able to pursue violent rebellion like Bugti and you offered none. As I stated before, the only Pashtuns that appear to be fighting the state are the FATA folks under the Islamic banner, empirically buttressing what I am stating in the most recent posts. I think the pictures of Mr. Achekzai with his buddies in Karachi more than show that Politics as usual is in clear display when it comes to these parties doing anything meaningful.

2) Strengthen Kabul's hand in the hopes that it becomes strong enough to "take back what is rightfully its." OK, so David Petreus himself appears to indicate that to get Afghanistan to the level of even a 3rd world equivalent, say like to the level of Peshawar will take time, money, and inordinate resources. The ANA is in shambles and cannot fight a single war against lightly armed insurgents that control the main roads from Chaman to Kandahar at various junctures, only to melt into teh countryside whenever it suits their needs.

Moreover, you would still, to any concerned Pashtun who loves his brethren and wants to see his brother come to him with open arms and not by fiat, have to provide the data that KP Pashtuns are behind your planning. And thsi doesnt include some silly reference to an ANP dominated KP government as KP has a volatile voting record with its prior MMA government not too long ago, and its PPP strength in some bastions around Peshawar's vale in Khalil tribal areas.

The oligarchy itself, Mr. Sherpao, Mr. Asfandyar, Mr AChekzai, and a host of others appear to be quiet happy in their universe of rabble rousing and then sitting in hujra.

3) Utilize an American and Indian vice to crack the Pakistani nut and splinter the confederacy. Unlikely to happen as America does not want an unstable situation in KP or the rest of Pakistan. Its also, once again poor strategic planning that sound stupid as hell when you or anyone talk like you can somehow utilize the US firepower for your self interests. As I noted and as your our mutual comrade Toramana has pointed to Osho, Empires/Superpowers are rarely motivated to stray from their self interests and strategic goals.

So what are you left with then? Just talk and more talk and more rabble rousing and more rallies and more guesswork and more vain glorious talk. At the end of the day, I have proposed now, two plans:

http://www.pashtunforums.com/politic...unistan-11941/

The former using soft power approaches and the latter utilizing what I stated above about galvanizing Pashtuns under a banner that helps them recognize the Panjab and its benefactors as hypocrits.

Your reality defying approach of preaching to Afghans to accept what they view as open occupation is ludicrous. Its never worked in history, across civilizations, or even on a neighborhood street in small town America.

You can try and once again throw out the Pakistani canard regarding your absurd conclusion that each and every Afghan that is fighting the central governement and NATO is doing so simply at Pakistani's behest, or you can wake up to reality and become a pragmatic and practical thinker to accomplish your goals.

Either way, I wish you the best but continue to fail to see any level of practical planning in your designs. If that makes me a Pakistani, or a goat herder, or a physician scientist, or a communist or whatever label you want to categorize such views with, then by all means proceed with conspiracy mongering regarding fealty and loyalties.

[Alchemist]

Unlikely to happen as America does not want an unstable situation in KP or the rest of Pakistan.

LOL


very funny Dr. America

[ScimitarXEdge]

Beg then to the ISI and Punjabis who through their puppets converted afghanistan into a den of terrorists from the whole world. You seem to be like you know nothing about the very recent history and as if NATO has come here for some picnic.

Those who are engaged in a guerilla warfare against ones own government and on his own soil is responsible for the killings of innocent afghans since actually they use civillians as human shield and only they are the people to be condemned because they are in fact promoting Punjab's agenda of destabilizing and annihilating afghan state turning it into Punjab's colony.

NATO is there to maintain the Historic Colonies of it's Members. The whole "fighting terrorists" garbage is a smokescreen. The problem with the crux of your argument is that it presumes that Pakistan is the central player, and that U.S./NATO are merely misguided participants in the ordeal. That simply isn't the case; it is NATO/U.S. who play the central role, Pakistan is only a proxy of their Geopolitical Designs. If it was the opposite then perhaps; the whole "trying to get the bad guys" argument would have some credibility; but since it is not, it becomes merely a scapegoat where proxies become patsies and the culprits go untouched.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

There's no versions of Islam; Islam is Islam, if you believe there are versions then you dont believe in Islam.

So, are you saying that everyone on this forum accepts the "Islam" you accept as being true and being the same Islam the Holy Prophet (saw) brought?

[ScimitarXEdge]

So, are you saying that everyone on this forum accepts the "Islam" you accept as being true and being the same Islam the Holy Prophet (saw) brought?

you're still relying on the premise of "versions" of Islam. which makes your argument circular because you assume the premise to be already true.

there are no versions of Islam. Islam is simply Islam; to imply otherwise means you believe God sent different religions.

[ScimitarXEdge]

rephrase your question here;s a hint, instead of being a total idiot and saying "versions" , say "understandings".

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

The question is not circular. I omitted the word "version," instead I referred to something people adhere to. If you read carefully, I referred to an adherence of what someone truly believes to that which the Prophet (saw) and his companions (ra) practiced.

In essence, if it was all about an "understanding" we would not have all the bickering we do.

So, the Islam that you adhere to is it the same Islam the Prophet (saw) adhered to? As salaf as saalih believe in that. Ahlul Tashai'u believe in that. If that was not the case then we would not have the problems we do.

Just so you know, I do believe that Islam is Islam and there aren't any "versions." But, the problem is that everyone says that, even modern day Muslim feminists. EVERYONE. So, that leads to a very natural question of what Islam do you believe to be true. Hence, my question: "So, are you saying that everyone on this forum accepts the "Islam" you accept as being true and being the same Islam the Holy Prophet (saw) brought?"

The question is not circular.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Moreover, you commit a lot of personal attacks for someone who is self-declared perfectly logical. Lose the personal attacks or lose the discussion. Your choice. Here is a hint when you are making your decision: ever thought that it might be you who is flawed and has lapses in judgment? Just a suggestion.

[Shayesta]

If you know, then why the silly attempts to rationalize and portray him otherwise?

How am I portraying him, then?

Doesn't make him a hero because he TOO had evil agendas.

Come up with his agendas, and compare it to ISI's agendas. Again you are ignoring that one had to choose the lesser evil for Afghanistan's future, ISI was definitely not that option.

It was just ISI's evil agendas conflicted with Najibs and Massoud's.

It was this very same Massoud who was very familiar with ISI. It's a different thing he got neglected by ISI since ISI had found a new strategy in Afghanistan, namely Taliban.

Najibullah was pro Pashtunistan; what sort of ethnic impact would that
have had on other ethnic groups?

Did he set up any Pukhtunistan movements then? As far as I know he did refuse to recognize the Durrand Line, but then, which Afghan president didn't?

He didn't treat a Pakhtoon the same manner he did an uzbek; he sided with Dostum who hated Pakhtoons.

So he was pro-Pukhtunistan a.k.a. united Pukhtoons, yet he sided Dostum because Dostum was a Pukhtoon-hater..........? I am stuck here, please help me out. Besides, Dostum's cruelty towards Pukhtoons took an ugly turn during and after the Taliban regime, I can't remember he had any anti-Pukhtoon policy beforehand?

Even I wouldn't want the Pakhtunistan issue to come up;

It's a different thing if you don't want Pukhtunistan-issue to come up and therefore think of a policy of your own, and it's another thing if you don't want Pukhtunistan-issue to come up and therefore join your country's arch enemy to succeed both sides policies. No?

I'm of Pashtun background, and used to be a supporter of Pashtunistan a few years ago; until i realized how it's a total contradiction to everything that mankind is supposed to be working towards.

I am glad we agree somewhere, same here.

Russia didn't have any personal enmity; because they thought we were their property and would be good obedient Soviet Sattelite.

This is why we should never have given Russia that much time and space on our soil in first place, which mistake we had made already. Looking at Russian history we knew they didn't give a damn about how many lives they lost, but as soon as they were given a position in a country it was best not to make things worse.

Sure you can say fighting them "destroyed" us, but you can also say the Rape Victim would have lived if she only cooperated and let the Rapist rape her. Basically the same logic.

Surely rape do happen during wars, every country in war faces it. When Russia newly arrived in Afghanistan, they didn't go around raping women. A war broke up, houses were ruined, people were ruined, women lost everyone, they became vulnerable, and very easily raped. And till today's date Afghan women are facing this unfortunately reality, though now under NATO/NA.

The fact is, we'd have been destroyed either way.

That's why one needs to try to make things as less horrific as possible, take Tajikistan and Uzbekistan as an example. We ourselves made ourselves occupied, last thing we should be doing in such cases is attack them on the very same soil we invited them on.

Only reason Pakistan is an arch enemy is because Britain created the situation for conflict.

They are, nonetheless, arch enemies. Just like how you don't want Najibullah's actions to be justified, don't justify Pakistan's either because anyone could give ridiculous amount of evidences against Pakistan's motive as compared to Najibullah's.

Sure I am speculating, but the man was offering citizenship to Pakhtuns of Khyber Pakhtunkhwah;

And that's in fact a very good thing. Maybe Pukhtoons on both sides had more understanding for each other, more sympathy and more awareness of facts. I really don't see that as a problem, do you? Yes, if he had policies in which he planned to reclaim entire Pakhtunkhwa, then we are talking.

Do you have evidence of Massoud, or Hekmatyar?

Crisis Group
Books Googlei
Hazara Nation
UNHCR

Do you have evidence of Fathers killing daughters , wives , sisters because they would rather die than be raped during that time?

I can't find the link where the incident was explained more accurately, but here a few:

Afghan Institute
Books Google
RAWA

That's the thing; we have the testimony of people who were victimized.

Even if I have to believe the stories I got to hear personally, women were most vulnerable during Mujahideen era. I don't even have to post whatever links for it, millions of sources on-line claim the same, as well as the stories I heard during my stay in Afghanistan. The stories weren't pleasant, at all.

but here's a reference to let you know that Soviets did in fact rape Afghan women and sexually abuse them.

Brother, I am not a fool not to believe Russia never committed any rape, I am not living in such a huge denial. Rape has been taking place ever since the war started, women are crying tears of blood ever since the war started. My actual point was regarding the claim you made that Najibullah encouraged the Russians to rape women, urinate on them and what not. I don't know how many links you can show that Najibullah himself or his men committed rape (or encouraged others to), but those for Mujahideen are in millions.

I don't think that they were fighting the Pakistani/American/NATO war.

They were fighting Pakistan's war even before Russia was in picture, and the fact USA only benefited from Russia's loss says enough about why the war took place, and who made it take place. Had Pakistan been involved with us only during Russian war, then Pakistan would have made more sense.

Russia very BLATANTLY invaded Afghanistan,

Okay, let's do it this way; Can you explain how Russians landed in Afghanistan? Tell me from the beginning, we will take it from there.

it was very much the Afghan peoples war, since the things that were going on in afghanistan went against the things Afghans themselves valued.

Such as?

Sure I agree, it's about Imperial conquest; but Russia was doing the same, their ultimate goal was have most of the Middle East under it's sphere; same with America now a days.

So we agree that USA and Russia both had same goal, but different approach. Nonetheless, ask the Middle East who they see as their biggest enemy, and why?

Najibullah was the leader of KHaD; isn't that evidence enough?

Evidence that Najibullah solely was responsible for loss of millions of lives? No, it's not. Najibullah was a supporter of Russia, not it's leader. From Mujahideen, to Russians, to Khalqis, all of them were fighting for a victory and all of them have had their shares in killing civilians. By the way, don't confuse Parcham for Khalq.

1995-1996.

Even though every single politician tried to flee Kabul (with Najibullah being no exception if he truly tried to), he didn't leave his soil until and unless Taliban decided his destiny. Please do confirm with sources that fact has been otherwise.

You proved my point; rather than doing what was good for his country; he served Russia.

Who didn't serve foreigners back then? As much as we like to twist it, everyone served foreigners since we didn't have any government of our own. Nonetheless, we should have picked the least harmful for our future. That's the point I am making.

Actually Pakistan wasn't trying to destablize Afghanistan, they wanted to use Afghanistan for their war with India.

Eh, no. Pakistan bombed us in the '40's which was before the Russian war, they set up camps against our government which was before the Russian war, they armed insurgents against our nation using Russian war as excuse, and even today they are doing the exact same thing now in the name of Taliban insurgencies. So ever since the '40's, all Pakistan did was 'fight India'? What for and why on Afghan soil? Even Russia didn't destroy us as much as Pakistan's policy is, and you are fooling yourself in believing their motive was not our instability? Wauw........

Now they want to destablize Afghanistan to help the Americans exploit Afghanistan and get money.

First they destabilized us for Pakhtunkhwa, now for USA. They remain the same sh*t with same motives but different ways, nothing else.

not even Amanullah's government was independent as he was pleading for the interventions of all of Europe.

Amanullah Khan could have been the answer to a modern Afghanistan, it's just a shame some brainless morons took his policies as an attack on Islam and destroyed the very little hope we had.

That's why it was the people who fought Russia and not the Government, that's why it was the people who are protesting America and not the Government.

It was the Mujahideen who were armed against the Russians, and the people got more fed up of those Mujahideen than Russians. It's Taliban who are being armed against NATO, and people are more fed up with Taliban than NATO. Either way, as I said, it's been our people who have been suffering.

We're talking about Najib here, Daud Khan, at least never massacred or helped to Massacre millions of Afghans, even if he's a stooge.

Afghanistan was peaceful back then, there was no war back then so I wouldn't understand why 'massacre' would take place?

Karzai is a stooge but he at least vocally opposes the Americans when they kill Afghans,

Karzai by far is the least evil out of all the politicians we have, which is why we shouldn't keep wondering how 'Mister A' as compared to Karzai would have controlled Afghanistan. But even with Karzai it's the same thing, he only speaks, where is his action? The situation back then and right now is much different by the way, we can't compare these two eras.

his government as far as we know doesn't have secret detention centers to rip out out balls and stick rifles in the private organs of women.

Don't tell me Najibullah's did? Though, Hizb-e-Wahdat was very famous for those activities.

We're talking numbers here, no way you can tell me 100,000 deaths in the 90's was worse than 1.5 Million deaths in the 80's.

100,000 is the number of Mujahideen-war only (which I believe is way more than 100,000), those millions during Russian war didn't die due to Russian attacks alone. Mujahideen were as active, it's a different thing people would love to believe otherwise.

they wanted stability in the 90's but so they can use afghanistan for it's battles with India.

The fact you are using India as an excuse to justify Pakistan's actions says enough about your 'patriotism'. Pakistan's enmity with Afghanistan didn't begin because of India, nor did they start interfering because of India. Stop using India as an excuse like a typical Pakistani.

Edit; I will get back to other posts later on.

[unknownprince]

Beg then to the ISI and Punjabis who through their puppets converted afghanistan into a den of terrorists from the whole world. You seem to be like you know nothing about the very recent history and as if NATO has come here for some picnic.

Those who are engaged in a guerilla warfare against ones own government and on his own soil is responsible for the killings of innocent afghans since actually they use civillians as human shield and only they are the people to be condemned because they are in fact promoting Punjab's agenda of destabilizing and annihilating afghan state turning it into Punjab's colony.

So a woman and her child getting crushed by a US vehicle is an Afghans fault? How heartless you are? Go and tell this to those people who have taken up arms? Tell them that you blame them for their own childrens death. You sound like Petraues. You are very disconnected. Are the majority of Afghans opposed to the US, also agents of Punjab?

Or actually, maybe you should take a trip to Kunar where those boys were gunned down by a US chopper. Go and tell the men who have taken up arms that you blame them for their childrens death. See how they react to you.

There is no legitimate government in Afghanistan. Fighting against and defeating foreigners and their Afghan counterparts has and will continue until these creatures run back to where they came from. If no Najibs or Shujas were tolerated, what makes you think an Abdollah or a Karzai will be?

Until ANP, PMAP, and all those other bogus organizations stand on their feet and fight for their land, their thoughts are one bad joke-thats all - never to be taken seriously.

[unknownprince]

[QUOTE=Shayesta;390104]

Fighting Pakistans war? Are the men who have lost their families to US night raids and bombings fighting Pakistan's war?

[graveyardofempires]

Ashrafghaljay

pree yee da

these people are living in lalaland where they believe that isi is behind afghan resistance.There is no evidence what so ever but on the contrary ,pakistan army isi,government have all bowd down to the mighty usa.

these people have no sense of being Afghan or history and one day they will wake up and think "ive wasted so much time being a sheep"