dr najeeb speech on shah nawaz tanai

[khyaal]

LOOK. MWMN, please stop this topic otherwise you are providing them opportunity to keep on this anti afghan rant. I told you they won't spare any person around whom or around whose thinking the people of afghanistan could unite. They only tolerate Paki/Punjaabi puppets.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Well to distill this 20 sum page thread into the pertinents questions, they are as follows:

1) Was Najib an agent of the USSR. I think the evidences speaks to that effect.

2) The Taliban versus the Muj factions versus the Communists versus the Monarchy versus Karzai.... who best represents the population of Afghanistan?

3) To what levels are/were the players in 2 imposed and by who?

4) Does the possibility exist that someone one dislikes (e.g. Iran or Pakistan or Saudi) backed a movement that was the most representative of the rural Afghan? Why does that particular group get more maligned by the children of Parcham loyalists than Mr. Karzai if the guiding hand behind both was supposedly the same?

For example:
If the chain of responsiblity for the Taliban is as follows:
US funding/support --> Panjab catalyst ---> Taliban secures foothold

versus the same lead link in the chain:
US funding/support --> NATO forces --> Karzai secures a foothold only in Kabul

Doesnt this speak to a logical fallacy in your argument? On the one hand the former movement secured a sure foothold across the swathe of Pashtun lands... yet Karzais writ barely exists outside of Kabul despite intense NATO pressure. One might surmise Pakistan as the wild card... but that is cop out

Moreover, if one disregards the Islamist doctrines, even then your own doctrine enables them to fight the Karzai regime because the lead link in the chain is exactly the same.

So it is you that has to reconcile the imposition of the oligarchial and effeminate Karzai who fled his country in its time of need alongside the other elite and tribal maliks with mud bathes in Italy.

Find me a leader. Your post is inviting more bloodshed.

The game is how to maintain power. He was good at it. The rest have done the same and have never been 1/100 the leader he was.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

LOOK. MWMN, please stop this topic otherwise you are providing them opportunity to keep on this anti afghan rant. I told you they won't spare any person around whom or around whose thinking the people of afghanistan could unite. They only tolerate Paki/Punjaabi puppets.

I get that feeling. It is pointless, you are right.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

My family is much more reliable. I have friends who lived in his time. The rest of your post is not much different than what any ruler would do to maintain power.

Look at the irony, people hate to live in Muslim countries today. Why? Because they all do the same. The West have internal justice which prevents them from exploiting power, otherwise they would do it as well. Just look at their foreign policies.

I dont disagree.. but you make my point for me. They killed their own populatiosn to stay in power. The same occured in Uzbekistan. You must produce for me a case report equivalent of a nation under the iron curtain that did not recieve the Soviet "medicine." If you cannot, then you are simply asking me to accept the brand of logic I asked you to accept regarding my connections to Dr. Safi, najibs classmate. Basically, you then ask me to accept anicdote. 100% of Soviet occupied countries prior to that failed venture resulted in imposed communsit doctrine from europe to asia. For me to trust your anecdote would be like you telling me as a doctor to trust you when you say that you once saw a case where a patient got only Tylenol when he was septic with a bacterial infection and that was optimal therapy and saved his life. Its non evidence based practice. There was no historical reason for the Afghans to trust the Russian occupiers with their culture, religion, or lives based on firm and establishd precedent.

[ScimitarXEdge]

LOOK. MWMN, please stop this topic otherwise you are providing them opportunity to keep on this anti afghan rant. I told you they won't spare any person around whom or around whose thinking the people of afghanistan could unite. They only tolerate Paki/Punjaabi puppets.

how can speaking against a guy who let Russia treat Afghanistan as their property be Anti Afghan?

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Actually; the story was presented inaccurately; It happened while he was staying in Madinah; and he ended up going back to Madinah. By the way Fath Al Makkah means they had an uprising against Makkah, I thought uprisings are against Islam?

It was bloodless. The Makkans were too scared.

[khyaal]

The hit installations of ISI/military bases are in Panjab. Police Chief Ghayur dieing in some Peshawar suburb is merely an example of the local Pakistani loyalist axis being hit. So your argument is still not based on evidence.

ISI installation has mere symbolic value. They wanted to show the world that they are also victims of al qaeda, nothing more. Besides, Sifat Ghayur was a Pashtun and not Punjabi.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Find me a leader. Your post is inviting more bloodshed.

The game is how to maintain power. He was good at it. The rest have done the same and have never been 1/100 the leader he was.

That's not being a good leader, that's being a good criminal.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

I dont disagree.. but you make my point for me. They killed their own populatiosn to stay in power. The same occured in Uzbekistan. You must produce for me a case report equivalent of a nation under the iron curtain that did not recieve the Soviet "medicine." If you cannot, then you are simply asking me to accept the brand of logic I asked you to accept regarding my connections to Dr. Safi, najibs classmate. Basically, you then ask me to accept anicdote. 100% of Soviet occupied countries prior to that failed venture resulted in imposed communsit doctrine from europe to asia. For me to trust your anecdote would be like you telling me as a doctor to trust you when you say that you once saw a case where a patient got only Tylenol when he was septic with a bacterial infection and that was optimal therapy and saved his life. Its non evidence based practice. There was no historical reason for the Afghans to trust the Russian occupiers with their culture, religion, or lives based on firm and establishd precedent.

They were all evil. I never denied that. I just maintain that he was the best we've had so far.

I am done. I made a promise with khyaal.

[ScimitarXEdge]

It was bloodless. The Makkans were too scared.

But Muhammad(saw) was prepared to fight though right?

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Find me a leader. Your post is inviting more bloodshed.

The game is how to maintain power. He was good at it. The rest have done the same and have never been 1/100 the leader he was.

Well, I would say that I can provide you a simple example. If you read Abdul Salaam Zaeefs biography, he waxes idyllic about his youth under zahir shah. So if a Taliban agent himself remembered a more stable period under the Mohammadzai monarchy, then that is a simple answer to your question of a more stable set up. That by no means indicates I am a royalist as I think that Zahir Shah set up a nonmeritocratic system... but its an answer to your question in support of a party that at least was much more reliable and acceptable to the public (the public was and is still willing to accept a monarchial resurrectin as opposed to outside rule).

[khyaal]

If Pakis are so vulnerable, why don't they start operation against their stooges in North Waziristan? Why they discriminate against various factions?

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

That's not being a good leader, that's being a good criminal.

Finally, you are getting the point. Who is not a criminal? And among all of the them he was well versed on how to bring peace in Afghanistan. It was the US fueling more bloodshed. The Mujahideen would do anything for power.

But yes, he was the best. He could have brought peace had it not been US meddling with their puppets. The US wanted an Afghanistan without him, and they got it. Proves that no one was skilled as him when it came to politics.

Without Najib and with the Taliban the whole idea of Pashtunistan died.

[khyaal]

how can speaking against a guy who let Russia treat Afghanistan as their property be Anti Afghan?

The peaceful dissolution of USSR is a proof that even the 15 federating units of the erstwhile USSR weren't colonies let alone afghanistan. But you can't say the same about Punjab which occupies more afghan land than that of india.

[MeemWawMeemNoon]

Well, I would say that I can provide you a simple example. If you read Abdul Salaam Zaeefs biography, he waxes idyllic about his youth under zahir shah. So if a Taliban agent himself remembered a more stable period under the Mohammadzai monarchy, then that is a simple answer to your question of a more stable set up. That by no means indicates I am a royalist as I think that Zahir Shah set up a nonmeritocratic system... but its an answer to your question in support of a party that at least was much more reliable and acceptable to the public (the public was and is still willing to accept a monarchial resurrectin as opposed to outside rule).

Zahir Shah was the reason why Afghanistan only had a 10% literacy rate. That is why Afghanistan is being stomped upon by every Pakistani and US and USSR puppets. The best of all these puppets was Najib. He realized his mistake and it was too late.