dr najeeb speech on shah nawaz tanai

[Alchemist]

Most of these kids that are trying to defend The Cow are just regurjitating what their own commie parents have fed them.
Their own commi parents were the ones participating in marches, standing up and saluting their commi flags, snitching and spying on their co-workers and neighbors ....just to get them snatched in the middle of night and disappear. Extreme party loyalty that still hasn't died out...

Toromana...
You are a sly, double tonged old man...very sly.
Get a hobby. A real one.

[Alchemist]

The word logic coming out of the mouth of an ahmadi?
LOL

What's next?
Richard Dawkins joins scientology?
Vegetarians advocat cannabilism as an alternative?
Gays castrate themselves?
Hindus taking baths regularly?
Queen Elizebeth accepts Islam?


All of the above are more probable than an ahmadi speaking logically.

[Shayesta]

From Najibullah, to Massoud, to Rabbani, to Dostum, to Fahim, to Taliban, each and every one of them had their hands filled with innocent Afghan blood. The likes of Rabbani and Massoud kept destroyed their country by serving ISI and ended up coming to agreements with the very same Russians they so-called took up arms against. Likes of Fahim and Dostum kept murdering innocents during Russian war, they murdered innocents during Mujahideen, and the hat-trick was completed during their horrifically brutal atrocities against many Pukhtoon men, women and children. The Taliban on the other hand still serves the very same Pakistani government which didn't hesitate for a second to fight the Taliban as soon as the White House came up with some shiny Dollars on their soil.

Najibullah at least was firm in his position, he didn't keep changing groups, nor did he have any ethnic interest. The seven Hizbs had to be stopped and just like all seven Hizbs try to destabilize each other, Najibullah's point was to destabilize them as a whole. Let's not forget that those so-called Mujahideen had joined ISI way before Afghan-Russian war even took place, isn't it obvious that both Pakistan and USA upon Russia's arrival in Afghanistan only found a rather excellent excuse to officially send them to spread the fire?

Afghanistan only had two options; Russia or Pakistan/USA/and rest of USA's chamchagan a.k.a. Europe. At least with Russia we didn't have the risk to have over 40 countries on our soil, nor did we have ethnics divided in such a heart-ripping way it's impossible to regain each other's trust, and nor would other countries try to fight their own war using our soil. Najibullah knew very well what Pakistan's idea was, he knew very well why Pakistan was so interested in an Pakistan-friendly Kabul, he knew very well this very same policy of Pakistan can change with the amount US offers them.

Mujahideen could have joined Najibullah upon Taliban's arrival if they truly stood for freedom of Afghanistan. Taliban would have come to an agreement with Najibullah if they truly came to spread peace. As we saw, both groups went their own separate ways but still, Najibullah did not change his group, position, nor party. And yes, it was possible for him to flee Kabul like every single Mujahideen which survived those eras, but he didn't. He handled Kabul quiet harshly, much more than one should have, but at least we would have been in a million times better position than today! Russia didn't come to Afghanistan to start a war, the war was being created by some of our neighbours, and some of Russia's enemies.

Had we been a fortunate nation, we would have solved our own problems within our own borders. It's us who made a joke out of our country, and enemies are only taking advantage of it by making us fight each other for another few decades. Which by sound of it sounds very less, in fact. Any disagreements, please do correct me where you disagree.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Basically this is what I got out of your response: Najib was evil, but he was organized evil.

That's like saying Hitler was a Genocidal Mass Murderer; but he did it with class.

What does class, or organizational level have to do with the heinousness of what they do? They're completely nonsensical factors when it comes to the destructive impact they possess.

And it's not true; Najib was willing to abdicate and have a cooperative Government with Massoud. Not exactly "sticking to his guns" as you're trying to portray.

Sure, his only redeeming quality was that he was not rigidly ethnocentric at least overtly; but can you say Hekmatyar or Massoud were really ethnocentric either? Hekmatyar had tons of Tajiks and Massoud had a few Pashtuns on his side. Sure Najib was working against all them; but not FOR Afghanistan, but FOR Russia; the whole War happened because Russia was fearing they'd lose their central asian Hegemony, otherwise why else would they care what happens in Afghanistan? Where as Massoud and Hekmatyar were funded by Pakistan or America; but were really in it for themselves. Furthermore the Pashtunistan issue would have lead to an ethnic division, so perhaps Najib would have ended up being an ethnofascist in the end if he remained in power.

Russia's excuse wouldn't be there if Russians didn't somehow feel Afghanistan was "their territory". It was because they felt Afghanistan belonged to them that they were willing to militarily intervene. And that reveals how pathetically in bed the people who claimed they were Nationalists and Patriotic Watandars were with betraying their country. It seems patriotism is often just a scam to pull the wool over peoples eyes and manipulate them; only to leave them betrayed in the end.

While we talk about ethnic rife in a "heart ripping" way, Najib ripped eyes, limbs, tongues, had women stripped, raped and urinated on; often Pashtun women, since so many here only care about their own ethnicity and . They also did that to many Hazaras and Tajiks; of course not because they were Tajik, Hazara, but because they were not willing to surrender their Morality to Russian Immorality. It was Russia's war which Najib was fighting on Afghan soil. This isn't about how many countries; but magnitude of Hegemony; the Soviet conquest of Hegemony was up against the Capitalist Hegemony, and it was composed of numerous countries itself; Latvians, Ukranians, and basically every Soviet State; so even the arguiments premise is false. Russia was fighting for Soviet Hegemony, the same way the U.S and the 40+ countries of NATO are fighting for Capitalist Hegemony.

In any defense of Najib, the usual comment is "well look at what the Mujahideen did after Najib...."; as if the wrong doings of others makes up for Najib. The difference is, The Mujahideen wasn't apart of the death of 1.5 Million Afghans, they were apart of the death 100,000, Najib however was apart of 1.5 Million deaths whether by collaboration or direct murders. Now evil is evil; but scale does count. The scale of Najibs crimes far outweighs and was more damaging than the scale of the Mujahideen, so Najib defenders always using the Mujahideen crimes as a scapegoat, has absolutely no logical merit. Also very few people actual defend the Mujahideen who committed crimes; so the whole argument is pure Straw Man. It's a diversion to exonerate a criminal.

Najib stayed in Kabul; not because he stuck to his guns; but because Russia was giving promises to rescue him, which they totally turned heels on. What most people don't acknowledge is that even after the Russians left; they brokered a deal in which they could have a puppet Government so they don't completely lose their hegemony. This was important because the Soviet Union Collapsed, and Russia was the most powerful of the post union countries. If Najib was so brave, he wouldn't have sought refuge in the UN Consulate, seeking asylum. How does being a puppet of the Russians, even after Soviet collapse equate to freedom. That's like saying if everyone was tied to the same leash, they wouldn't get strangled.

Any time you have to add an "at least" condition; the rest of the argument becomes invalidated; because the "at least" part means you accept the fundamental premise of the criminality of the people involved; but are only adding an "at least" to white wash their crimes in some way. Obviously it's true, the Pakistani ISI was behind Najibs death; but just because that's the case that doesn't make Najib a hero, someone who stood for freedom or anything of the sort; It just means One evil Dog killed another evil dog.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

^

Let me get this straight, if the Mujahideen had killed 1,500,001 you would have favoured Dr. Najib? And, therefore, the USSR would have been your buddies? Also, how many people have the American's killed so far? Is it over or under that of the Mujahideen?

Moreover, who should have been his real prosecutors? Obviously, the Taliban were the creation of Pakistan. So, is it safe to assume that Pakistan did the right thing, and hence Pakistan being a good boy? And, since the Mujahideen were funded by America and Saudi Arabia, is it safe to say that both America and Saudi Araiba are good, since one is a Muslim country and the other is a support of Muslims?

I am just trying to figure out your logic...

Also, what is the difference between British style imperialism and Arab style. What justifies what?

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Alchemist, the reason why you have a hard time understanding what real logic is because you have followers who are already converted. Your real manners prevent you from acquiring new converts. You just have a following because you speak the language of the majority here, albeit in a very despicable and ill-mannered way. The rest don't make sense or are not as aggressive, or lack the specialty in being ill-mannered. You can write, albeit full of personal attacks, you are very aggressive and lack decency. So, it is a safe bet you will have people staying away from you. Don't count that as a victory.

[ScimitarXEdge]

That's the thing; the reason you can't comprehend is because you base everything on false premises; which makes them logically false.

Here's a logical riddle for you; If Cancer cells were able to consume the AIDS Virus; would this mean it would be better for us to get Cancer.

[ScimitarXEdge]

as for the question of Imperialism


the British style Imperialism was a real event; the Arab style Imperialism was a manufactured fallacy/exaggeration created by British and French Orientalist writers to stir Ethnic Animosity amongst Muslims and divide and rule, which their stooges peddle to help maintain the Imperial dominance.

That's the difference.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

That's the thing; the reason you can't comprehend is because you base everything on false premises; which makes them logically false.

Here's a logical riddle for you; If Cancer cells were able to consume the AIDS Virus; would this mean it would be better for us to get Cancer.

Sorry to hear.

Well then, you better hop on the next flight to Japan and "volunteer" to help at Fukushima. Just say you are hoping for "survival." This way you won't be detected.

I hope you get cured.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

as for the question of Imperialism


the British style Imperialism was a real event; the Arab style Imperialism was a manufactured fallacy/exaggeration created by British and French Orientalist writers to stir Ethnic Animosity amongst Muslims and divide and rule, which their stooges peddle to help maintain the Imperial dominance.

That's the difference.

I am referring to present day Arab imperialistic aspirations.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Sorry to hear.

Well then, you better hop on the next flight to Japan and "volunteer" to help at Fukushima. Just say you are hoping for "survival." This way you won't be detected.

I hope you get cured.

Don't worry I know you understood what I meant; I'll take this as you realizing why your whole understanding of things is pure garbage.

[ScimitarXEdge]

I am referring to present day Arab imperialistic aspirations.

That too is a mythologization; because if there was some Arab agenda, why aren't Yemen, Oman, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and other Arab Nations making moves for it?

This is just a scapegoat by Imperialists, their Ethnocentric Nationalists Cronies and Najib supporters to justify their activities; and this too is an extension of Eurocentric Imperialism; because it was British, French etc etc who created all the current nation state demarcations, including of Afghanistan today and of course Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Thus Saudi Arabia is a red herring since they're essentially a puppet state of Imperialists.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Don't worry I know you understood what I meant; I'll take this as you realizing why your whole understanding of things is pure garbage.

You're so bait.

I am pretty sure your family would rather say you died from cancer than from AIDS.



ps

You commit the same logical fallacies throughout your reasoning. I could go on and show how flawed your thinking is, but you don't have the stamina to keep with me.

[graveyardofempires]

this thread is messed up.

facts

najib was a bad person
so were the warlords who opposed him

[ScimitarXEdge]

You're so bait.

I am pretty sure your family would rather say you died from cancer than from AIDS.

Even though this has nothing to do with the riddle at all; I feel this highlights exactly what's wrong with the Qadiyani Cult, and why your way of thinking is severely flawed.

see that's your problem; you look at things by what others think of you, rather than substance.

since you represent Qadiyanism; is that what qadiyanism stresses, superficiality over merit?