the pathan and the pakhtun

[Bengal_Tiger]

As a Bengali, in Bangladesh and India we use the word "Pathan" to describe Pakhtuns, but it is purely a form of linguistic expression. If anything in the Bengali (and Indian) context it has positive connotations, in Bangladesh we think of Pathans primarily as people of honesty and decency.

In the Pakistani-Punjabi context however, especially with the very tone some Punjabis pronounce it (which carries a sneer and condescension at times) I can understand why it can be offensive for some. However for idiots who want to complain about Punjabis making fun out of Pashtuns with this word then go and talk to Pakistanis, but for these same foul mouthed vulgar trashy idiots who insult people's families and ancestry the word "Pathan" is here to stay in Bengali, so go and get lost.

Anyway coming to the point, there are two types of Pakistani-nationalist Pakhtun nationalists (amongst others).

1. The first type is a proud Pashtun and loves Pashto and Pashtunwali, and more importantly is a proud Muslim and merely wishes to live in peace with other fellow Muslims in the nation-state that he (for whatever reason historically - a separate issue) is part of. A Punjabi, Sindhi, Hindustani is still a fellow human being and Muslim in his eyes.

However if it really comes down to the crunch and the Pakistani regime turns against Islam and Pashtunwali, he in turn will turn against the Pakistani regime. This comprises the vast bulk of Pashtunkhwa Pakhtuns.

2. The second type is a complete sell-out and moron (Luffy is an example) who is a secular nationalist, who while more than happy to take pride in his "Pathan" ancestry, does not care for Pakhtun culture or its preservation. They are Pakistani nationalists and religion is secondary to them. They love alcohol drinking, pork-eating British barrister, Ali Jinnah grandson of Hindu Poonja Gokuldas Meghji.

His grandfather was Poonja Gokuldas Meghji, a Hindu Bhatia Rajput from Paneli village in Gondal state in Kathiawar

http://pakistanherald.com/Profile/Mu...li-Jinnah-1173

They hate Afghanistan and will talk of expelling Afghan refugees or even nuking Afghanistan if so be. If their grandchildren were to be mono-lingual speakers of Urdu and proud Pakistani nationalists (not that Pakistan will last that long) they would be more than happy.


I have respect for the first type and know some personally, some believe it or not who are even ANP members (even Afzal Khan Lala's son is in the army), as for the second type they are the shameless "Pathans" that Yaggi has correctly identified.

In other words I do not think every pro-Pakistani Pakhtun is a sell-out, just the "Pathans" I mentioned above.

[Master Khan]

Its True, I hate it when Pashtun call themselfs "Pathans", you should accept the name which "WE GIVE OURSELF", not what Indian call us.

I though you Pakis hate Indians..why use the name which they call you.

you are a Pashtun...not Pathan.

plus the Durand Line agreement expired in 1993 so we are not part of this rubbish pathetic terrorist Nation of Gholistan(Pakistan).
I don't get it..China got back Hong Kong in 100 years of agreement, then why we are still part of this freaking rubbish punjabi Nation!!.

[MostafaM]

You are wrong. Afghanistan was always a thorn in the eye of Pakistan´s unity and nationals. If Afghanistan plays it´s dirty game, we can play it, too, and even better than Afghanistan. There are enough traitors in Afghanistan who can be bought.

Time will tell!

Daud Khan was the one who even started to collect a tribal army against Pakistan.

According to the Durand Line Agreement, FATA and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa were declared as "free areas" and NOT as integral parts of British India. Pakistan as a successor state to British India is still bound to that agreement and it´s annexation of FATA, KPK and parts of Baluchistan were and are illegal under international law.

Fending the border region and mine both sides of the border was many times, if not 100 times, repeated by Pakistan but Kabul did not want it. The last one when we asked Kabul to support us (4years ago) they rejected and told us it is against Pashtun nation. Today, we do not want to listen to Kabul. We are an independant state and we will push our own interests in the region and that is a reason why we have started to build walls and fences for now 2 months, AGAINST THE WILL OF KABUL.

Fencing and mining the border is exactly what you people should do. Make the barrier visible for the people. People need visible signs of how they get divided, how mines are planted on their soil which blow off their childrens legs. Please, go ahead!

You are doing the Pashtun/Afghan cause a great favozour.

And let´s be serious. Afghanistan can not mess with Pakistan. Afghan army has not the skill to fight us. And they have not any rights to attack Pakistan. We just defend our country from central asian terrorists, mostly Uzbeks and Tajiks, who come to our lands, take many women with them as long they stay there, force everyone to leave their homes to these terrorists and noone, except the army, can deal with these creatures.

Are you sure about that comment?
As far as I know, Baluchi, Pashtun and certain Sindhi separatist movements operate from Afghan territory.
With a 30% cut of your armies budget, the US has taken their firsts steps to show you a lesson. What is your army? In any case of an Indian attack, you wouldn´t be able to do anything. Wih 120.000 soldiers on the Afghan frontier, you will overran like a kindergarten toddler group by nashorns.

But India is not stupid. No country is stupid.
Attacking Pakistan openly would give your state the chance to unify your diverse population by propagating an outside attack and "foreign hands".

Believe me, we "foreign hands" just sit, talk and wait for your decaying Pakistani body to fall apart by itself. Implosions are more fun than explosions.

Tajiks and Uzbeks self have Shias, such as we have many Shias, too. Afghanistan was always home of Shias and Ismaelis. The greatest islamic scientist were from Afghanistan and either Shias or Ismaelis.

That is BS!
The Shia minority of Afghanistan makes up 12% of all the population and 90% of that 12% are Hazaras. The non-Hazara Shias are called Qezelbash. They settled in Afghanistan´s main garrison towns like Kandahar, Qardez and Kabul during the Saffawid rule 200 years ago. The Tajiks and Usbeks are purely Sunni muslims.

The number of non-Pashtoons who fled from Russia was very small (between 100 000 and 150 000 Turkmans, Uzbaks, Tajiks, Kirgyz) compared to that of Pashtuns who were forcefully settled in Afghanistan, specially in the north. Ever heard of the Basmachis? Read Afghanistan´s history. Non-Pashtoons always played a very important role, even for the Pashtun kings. They made out of you ''Kabulians'' but you have not realised it. They did it slowly and slowly so that noone could realize what happen to them. Here you insult us because we accept Urdu as national language where we are not a majority and Urdu is not the language of any nation that was imposed on us.

Where did you get these numbers from?
And if they were true, can you use your own logic and see it relativly to the population of the mentioned countries BACK THEN?

In Pakistan, education is not bounded to any language! unlike Afghanistan. Do you know that your fellow Tajiks call non-Farsiwans as uncivilised people? In your Afghanistan Farsi became the language of the elite society and educated and civilised people. Here in Pakistan, everyone can be educated in every language, including Pakhtu and all languages are equally, just that Urdu is the national language and is used in the same meaning as Farsi is in Afghanistan, inter-tribal language for communication.

You are mentioning the mindset of a minority anti-Pashtun community while sidelining the fact that Pashto is the official language next to Farsi AND the NATIONAL language of a Pashtun-dominated country and try to explain why in Pakistan Pashto is not even an official language in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

Farsi was the lingua franca of Afghanistan untill the 1930s when Afghanistan opened up for the rest of the world. Back then, Farsi was one of the languages next to Arabic in which islamic scholars had written their books.

Today the parlamentarians, the president and the press communicates in Pashto. Even non-Pashtun vice presidents hold their speeches in Pashto.

Why?

Because Afghanistan is not Pakistan!

Taliban are originally Pashtuns from Afghanistan. Our Taliban fight against Islamabad, not Afghanistan. But your Taliban fight against Afghanistan and us. Taliban is not something you can get. It´s in nearly every non-educated Pashtun vain. It´s a culture, a codex. In fact, Talibanism is supported by Pashtunwali. You want to fight the Taliban, start first on yourself!

Another stupid remark, Gandoo jee.
Pashtunwali is a pre-islamic code that denies basic parts of Islam.
I do not where you get these things from but I guess you are trying hard to make points where there arent any.

Sounds really stupid to my mind.

Your Russian and American friends. In Pakistan, you just got trained. The weapons you got from Russia, America and Saudi-Arabia. The entire FATA who feel close to Pashtuns of Afghanistan since their past role in Afghanistan, farbricate all those weapons. Out of our controls. For you. Not for us.

Last I checked, it was your Naval bases and military headquarters that got ifiltrated, bombed and destroyed.

This is a lie. How many Pashtuns here are from Karachi, Pakhtunkhwah and have acces to drink water, internet!, thus electricity, education.. at least much better than in Afghanistan. This is the difference between Pakistan and Afghanistan. We give you jobs and homes and we accept and feed you for many decades.

Afghan businessmen come to your places, take over your jobs and works because they are better in these things, make money and you call it "feeding us"?
You must be joking. Just have a look at every big city with high rates of Pashtuns from Afghanistan.

There is no need to fool yourself.
Feed your own country first that would be bankrupt without the annual 3 Billion $ help from the US.
Afghanistan went through 30 years of WAR, what is Pakistans excuse for being an absolute failure?

Are we still talking about Pashtoons? Those ''missiles'' are named after non-Pashtoon kings and leaders. The national anthem is in Farsi because of it´s deep root in the Indian sub-continent. Those names are no Pashtoons. Stop creating a vail. With ''Afghan heroes'' you mean Sultan Ghaznawiy, right? Well, he was enslaving many thousand Pashtoons and killed many thousand at the same time. They are maybe heroes of Farsiwans and Uzbaks, but not of us, except idols for Islam. That´s it.

I dont know....
ABDALI, LODHI etc. sound to be like Pashtuns tribes called ABDALI and LODHI.

Mahmud Ghaznawi´s mother was a Pashtana from Ghazni. As you might know, Ghazni is in modern da Afghanistan and has an overwhelmingly Pashtun majority.
The royal family of the Ghaznawids may have been from Moghul descent but what about his power base?
His army?
His Generals?

I mean those who massacred your ancestors?

Stop fooling yourself.

Please, stay on your side and we will stay on our side and no one will have any problem with anyone. Where is the problem to get such an easy thing? Oh yes, the problem is the Afghan Pashtoon nationalism. Deal first with your own and establish a stable country with a healthy economy before asking for anything that is not yours.

Definitly!
We stay here, watch you and your kind die a slowly death.
There is no need to interact with a decaying idea called "Pakistan".
Let your own insurgencies take care of you!

[Chelsea-Fan]

Durand Line - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

According to the Durand Line Agreement, FATA and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa were declared as "free areas" and NOT as integral parts of British India. Pakistan as a successor state to British India is still bound to that agreement and it´s annexation of FATA, KPK and parts of Baluchistan were and are illegal under international law.

FATA is a free zone, an independant small state within a state. Pakhtunkhwah was never part of any free zone.

Are you sure about that comment?
As far as I know, Baluchi, Pashtun and certain Sindhi separatist movements operate from Afghan territory.
With a 30% cut of your armies budget, the US has taken their firsts steps to show you a lesson. What is your army? In any case of an Indian attack, you wouldn´t be able to do anything. Wih 120.000 soldiers on the Afghan frontier, you will overran like a kindergarten toddler group by nashorns.

But India is not stupid. No country is stupid.
Attacking Pakistan openly would give your state the chance to unify your diverse population by propagating an outside attack and "foreign hands".

Believe me, we "foreign hands" just sit, talk and wait for your decaying Pakistani body to fall apart by itself. Implosions are more fun than explosions.

Noone will attack Pakistan. This is your dream like your dream of Durand Line.

The Shia minority of Afghanistan makes up 12% of all the population and 90% of that 12% are Hazaras. The non-Hazara Shias are called Qezelbash. They settled in Afghanistan´s main garrison towns like Kandahar, Qardez and Kabul during the Saffawid rule 200 years ago. The Tajiks and Usbeks are purely Sunni muslims.

Go inform yourself ... according to your words, Shia and Ismaeli Pashtuns are also non-existent.

And if they were true, can you use your own logic and see it relativly to the population of the mentioned countries BACK THEN?

Today, Afghanistan is assumed having a population of 30 Mio. During the 20s and 30s of the last century it was assumed Afghanistan´s population make between 15mio and 18mio. Now how much does it make 150 000 persons who came from north to Afghanistan and how much does it make when the dominant immigrant groups were by far Pashtuns from the indian sub-continent? Their migration started during Ahmad Shah Baba and reached it peak during the reign of Abdurrahman Khan.

Pashtunwali is a pre-islamic code that denies basic parts of Islam.
I do not where you get these things from but I guess you are trying hard to make points where there arent any.

What does ''pre-Islamic'' means? Jewish? Coptic christian? How many of Pashtunwali is really ''Pashtunic'' and how much not? How many of the customs were taken from other people and neighbours? As you remember, many of the words are not of Pashtu origin. Hamsaya, Badal, Jagh, Maina ...

There is no need to fool yourself.
Feed your own country first that would be bankrupt without the annual 3 Billion $ help from the US.
Afghanistan went through 30 years of WAR, what is Pakistans excuse for being an absolute failure?

You won´t understand it, won´t you? The thing is we get the money!

Mahmud Ghaznawi´s mother was a Pashtana from Ghazni. As you might know, Ghazni is in modern da Afghanistan and has an overwhelmingly Pashtun majority.
The royal family of the Ghaznawids may have been from Moghul descent but what about his power base?
His army?
His Generals?

I mean those who massacred your ancestors?

Yeah, creating a fake history. Have you ever studied the history of current Afghanistan? Mahmud Ghaznavis mother was a noble Deqan (Deqan=Farsiwan) from Zabul in the Makran-Sistan delta. They were not Mongols but Turkmen, highly Farsiwanized by their Tajik and Iranian lords and through their mothers and wifes who made the entire dynasty a Farsiwan dynasty. Maybe, in later times they had some Pashtun wifes but as we know we had never played any significant role in the history of non-Pashtoons. Did they ever promoted Pashtu or Pashtoons? Have anyone of the Ghazanvian court writers wrote anywhere that Mahmud´s mother was a Pashtun? Even the Iranian Shahnami tell us that his mum was a Farsiwan and this book was written under his own eyes by Pirdusi. The Ghaznavis power was based on Farsiwan bureaucracy and administrations. The army consisted of mainly loyalist Turkic troups and Farsiwans and other non-Pashtuns of the region. When they attacked Pashtuns and killed thousands of our ancestors and enslaved thousands of other Pashtuns they forced those to serve in the army. Have you ever heard about the event that they made Pashtuns fighting Pashtuns, Gakkars and Khakris and their Hindu lords of Lahor, the local Raja putra? Pashtuns played a role in the army but not an important role. The important role were playing by Farsiwan nationalist movements and Arabs from Bagdad who later dominated the entire army.

Ghazni is till today a Farsiwan city. Farsiwans who onced lived in Andar and other districts were possibly absorbed by Hazaras and Pashtuns.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

@Chelsea
First of all, welcome to the forum. I hope you enjoy your stay and hopefully we can have a healthy debate.

As far as your argument is concerned, a Pakistani Pukhtoon doesn't need to explain himself for why he accepted Pakistan as his nation. Though, the 'Islamic' argument only leads to remarks of India still having more Muslims than Pakistan, and Bangladesh feeling oppressed and discriminated against in a country which was supposed to be based on 'Islam'. If Kabul didn't want to recognize the Durrand Line then there were many options there for Pakistan; Fencing and mining the border, higher appeal to protest against Kabul's objection, shelling their borders against Afghan interference, etcetera. By creating anti-Afghan government camps, bombing Afghan regions with no proof of Afghan military men doing the same, continuing to interfere even with governments who weren't even interested in 'Pukhtunistan' issues (Najibullah's regime) and etcetera, your government has only proved who the real problem is; Afghanistan, or Pakistan? And don't crack jokes by comparing Pak-Afghan issues with Afghan-Russian 'war'. And as far as non-Pukhtoons not having a problem with Pakistan, you once again cracked another joke. These anti-Pakistani government/army protests are being organized by non-Pukhtoons, the biggest resistance to Taliban a.k.a. recognized government by only Pakistan and Saudi came from non-Pukhtoons, the anti-Pakistan mentality in Kabul has been created by non-Pukhtoons. And as far as Tajiks and Uzbeks not questioning existence of their neighbours is concerned, simple; Tajiks and Uzbeks themselves choose to be a part of Afghanistan, getting rid of Shia-mentality of Iran was their own choice. Why should they question a country's existence whom they themselves didn't want to be part of? And not to forget, we also had many immigrants from Tajikistan and Uzbekistan while those countries were under Russian dominance. Just like how you can't see Afghan refugees/immigrants decide Pakistan's future, same could be said about those immigrants.

And as far as civilisation of Pukhtoons are concerned, what is civilisation in your opinion? Being educated in Urdu and Dari? Being influenced by Punjabis and Tajiks? If yes, then rest in peace our Pukhtoon leaders' legacy for fighting for a nation with mentalities like yourself. And now coming to Taliban, despite of being aware of their nature, why did your government recognize them as our leaders? Why were they supported by your government? And eventually, why were the Americans being helped by your very same government to oust those very same Taliban? Confused much? You were forced to take weapons against us? Really? Did you forget who armed us against our own countrymen to begin with? Do you even know how all these weapons and explosives came to Afghanistan in first place? I will give a hundred guesses. And yes, of course Pakistan doesn't make any difference between ethnics; That's why Swat refugees were refused entry in 'posh' areas of Punjab during 'Taliban raid', that's why Pukhtoons are pictured as monsters in Karachi to justify killings of Pukhtoons, that's why you had to fight for over six decades to finally get an identity for your province, that's why Bangalis felt discriminated enough to seek independence, that's why Balochis feel discriminated enough to seek justice. Other than that, there is absolutely no discrimination whatsoever. True my friend, very true.

And in today's Afghanistan, minorities got as much to say as Pukhtoons do. Opposition against Pukhtoons as a nation has hardly ever happened, that was only the case when minorities were oppressed under the Taliban regime. And regarding what makes us a proud Pukhtoon of Afghanistan, ask yourself the same question. Even today I got relatives in Pakhtunkhwa who haven't got electricity, not enough clean water, for better education they have to leave to Karachi or Punjab, etcetera. We depend on you as much as you depend on us; You supply goods, we supply money. And the terms of respect could be a question to Pakistanis as well. In your history Afghans are regarded very highly, you name your missiles after Afghan heroes, half of your national anthem is in our official language, yet the interference of destruction by your government hasn't stopped. Indeed, where is your respect? The only reason why today an average Pakistan questions an Afghan's respect, dignity and honour is because of the mess your country has landed in thanks to (supposedly) 'Afghans'. Nothing more, nothing less. And as far as our neighbours are concerned; Iran never was okay with it's neighbours Iraq and Azerbaijan, Tajikistan has their internal issue as well as issues with other neighbours, Uzbekistan has issues with their neighbours as well as internal issues. Pakistan by the way is the biggest example. You already had problems with Afghanistan and India, now even Iran is added to the list. And as far as Pakistan not punishing anyone on 'valid' grounds, of course, you can buy off any crime you want. Same-wise if you can't buy off any force by their policemen, you are made a criminal. Not paying the policemen bribe has been a very popular reason to accuse Afghans of militancy, drug-trafficking, etcetera. Been there, done that.

And what proof do you have that those insurgents attacking Pakistan are trained in Afghanistan and Iran? What enmity does Iran have with you anyway? How do these militants enter Pakistan so easily and how do they get away with it? And most importantly, why don't these militants create the same havoc in their own country as they do in Pakistan? Why? And to point out your last and most painful flaw; Half of Pukhtoons who have settled in Punjab for over a century or so are from Kabul. There you go.

I agree with your many valid points. However, the Najib government was no more legitimate than any occupier government. He was a clear and present danger to the populace and his ouster was a legendary feat. The attempt to justify the Russian invasion, as I have noted previously, makes no sense. Why not just criticize various generations of Afghans previously to have "accepted" foreign occupation by an actual land occupying Army as in the case of Isfahan's Gurgin, the British, etc.? The "great game" was as much in play in the days of those incursions as it was during the najib period. How did the British and the Russians differ in that regard? In fact, the deislamicization of Tajikistan, uzbekistan, etc is more than adequate proof that the Russians were much more worth fighting than any other prior groups of people. It is mainly the self interested Elites that have lost touch with the rural populace that argue for a nostalgic view of the Najib era.

Regarding this Afghanistan Pashtuns versus Pakistan Pashtuns feud:
The issue comes down to who threw the first punch. If we look at this historically, Khushaal Khan's poetry indicates that Indic incursion, and Mir Wais Neka's writings indicate Iranian incursion have been an ongoing issue for generations. The fatal blow really did come in when Azmaals supposed pretend grandfather Abdurrahman signed the contract (possibly under durress) and his other incompetent grandfather in Pakistan, Telai, sold out to Rao Singh. However, if we want to discuss borders and the modern situation, then let us do so in earnest.

What follows pissed off a few people when I said it here previously, but it is very simply the truth.

I think you are rather bright and have recognized a key fact that Ghaznavi also appeared to high light: We tighten Pakistani unity against our own self interest by giving the government/military a focal point to unite around. This is why I think your enforcement here, of an insult free zone, is very sharp on your part, it forces the sides to derive evidence based arguments. Like many countries have done (America included with its Red Menace Rhetoric previously and now the IslamoFasicsm Bogey Man) Pakistan unites its disparate and diverse populations and earns its military the title, protector of the realm, with the narrative of being surrounded on all sides by enemies and with the threat of impending denuclearization. The minute that narrative is challenged by diffusing the focal points (Afghanistan and India) the Pashtuns, Baloch, Sindhis, etc all begin to ponder on their respective disenfranchized situations. The Pakistani confederation exists primarily because of this double pincer hold narrative sold on the TV screens there. I have encountered how deeply imbedded this is there. A laughable joke about the Americans is that, in Kentucky, when they are asked their ethnicity they blurt "American." The sad irony is that this same phenomena exists in the Pashunkhwa province and its derived diaspora. The identity cards used to say: Afghan. Yusuf Ali, in his Quranic writings as late as 1950, noted the Pashtuns as of the Afghan ethnicity. Now, diaspora identify their ethnicity as "Pakistani." There is, of course, truth to the India Pakistan rivalry, and to do deny India's involvement as Pakistan's arch enemy is also defying reality. However, this has little to do with Afghanistan and its policy toward Pakistan, which could stand completely separate and neutral, denying the Pakistani strategists the right to "strategic depth."

So back to the question: who threw the first punch? History does not lie and I am sure the anger that will flow my way for saying this is going to be harsh, but thats what the truth is about.

1) Zahir and Nadir Shah's government, if viewed through traditional Afghan eyes was reasonably illegitimateas Nadir, in a way, usurped the Kabul throne from Amanullah. So perhaps, some of the actions detailed below may be viewed as not necessarily reflecting the will of the Afghan people.

2) Nonetheless: When Pakistan was created, the sole country to oppose its League of Nations admission was Afghanistan, with the protest being lodged by the Afghan government over the NWFP territories. (Slap 1)

3) Zahir Shah, when hearing about the jirgas that the Wazirs executed, wherein they, and other tribals, decided to join the nascent state, armed Kharotian tribals to make incursions (this is FACT) into the new nation state. The Kharotian, generations ago, had owned Wana and its territories before the Yargu Khel Wazirs threw them out. This was a boneheaded way to foment unity amongst Pashtuns and caused death and consternation (PUNCH 1). It would be like arming Alokozaays against Nurzaays (being done now actually). The further proof of the NWFP Pashtuns acquiescence to the new state is found in the simple, but powerful example of the Faqir e Ipi's insurgency against the British. During the British era, he had a strong foothold and powerful rallying capability. However, many of his supporters subsequently backed the new state to his dismay. In none of his writings, nor of the work of his supposed son, do they indicate that his tribesmen were forced to accept the new state.

The evidences for Zahir Shah's armed Kharoti incursions is found in the earliest paper on the subject:

Pakistan-Afghanistan Relations in the Asian Survey Vol. 2, No 7 (1962), and lest anybody decry Dr. Hasan as a Pakistani diplomat stationed in Kabul (the writer), Ian Talbot, a British historian backs up the claims: Ian Talbot, Pakistan: A Modern History of Pakistan.

4) BLS wrorre likens this situation to the Palestinian movement with Zahir Shah being a Shah Faisal of sorts (an unlikely comparison in any way I between a real man (Faisal) and half a man (Zahir Shah). The reason it is not an apt comparison is that the jirgas, and Bacha Khan, as noted, threw their lot in with the nation state. It was only the Faqir of Ipi, a rural and simple leader that understood the blight that this would put on the people, and who argued against this. I think a better comparison would be the Tex Mex border situation. Surely, in a legal sense, previously in an ethnic sense, the southern border region of Texas was and continues to be viewed as Mexican or Latin American land. However, the likelihood of the US EVER giving back the land is nil to nothing. The populace there, despite Texas's occasional separatist sentiments, is firmly apart of the American Union despite the ethnic disparity there. As I noted a thousand times elsewhere, there is not a single survey nor support for the notion that the Pashtuns of the NWFP are ready to make armed conflict with the Pakistani state. Rather, they ascribe to it and to the narrative hoisted on the NWFP. A vocal and sizable minority (ANP/PMAP) with various electorial wins related more to the agnst with the prior government then a blank check to pursue the complete agenda may view themselves as disenfranchized. Two empiric comparisons are the Baluch insurgency (ongoing and festering) and the lack of support for the Faqir's insurgency.

So in the end Khoraa, the best strategy is to encourage autonomy and SOVEREIGNTY

The elites like to beckon to the fence sitters and say that the Kabul government under Karzai with ties to India is their best bet. They whisper of Pakistani plots that fuel a popular insurgency (conveniently overlooking the fact that the rural Pashtun that joined the Taliban may just very well not like infidel farangyaan occupying their country).

Yet this strategy merely hoists inept masters over the Pashtuns.

Second, avoid involving ourselves in any way in the discussions of Pakistan, as Ghaznavi has done. Basically, allow the narrative of the pincer hold to lose its effect, but not with this idiocy of saying its either the Karzai way or the Pakistani way as if no intermediate choice exists.
This allows the situation to come into play where Pakistani Pashtuns will have to ask tough questions and demand answers of their government. Take a look at Karachi where Pashtuns have come to understand exactly what subservience means. Their concern is no longer what is going on on the durand line or who might be arming who to make incursions into bajaur. Rather, they are focused on their disenfranchized situation and might very well endorse a unity stance before playing into the narrative.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Yaggi ...you're paroding Malcolm X's speeches lol

[BarakzaiAbdali]

The other option is to allow the Islamists to first take care of Mr. Karzai and his ilk with this war of attrition and to allow the Pashtunkhwa Pashtuns (Mehsud) to chip away at the Pakistani confederacy without the Pakistanis seeing the Afghan Taliban as a threat. Then, the momentum should turn toward Islamabad with Afghan help, to unseat the government and establish an Islamic emirate with its seat of power back in Kandahar. The Islamic elements of the Pak Army should then be coopted as well as the arsenal. Unrealistic I know.

[graveyardofempires]

@Yaggi
Whatever you described in your comment hasn't got anything to do with being a 'Pathan' or being a 'Pukhtoon' because what you are basically saying is that a Pathan is pro-Pakistan while a Pukhtoon is anti-Pakistan. But then you are forgetting two famous personalities who weren't pro-Pakistan, nor anti-Pakistan, but definitely very proud Pukhtoons; Badshah Khan and Ghani Khan. Now think about my comment as to what I am trying to tell you.

you are worng and want us all to follow your ignorance.

why shoudl such a biased person such as you get the responsibility of being a moderator.

[Digital Malang]

I am not criticizing Shayesta as a mod but I think moderators should be selected by the members of the forum by a poll.

[MostafaM]

^Guys, let´s stay focused on the topic here.

The problems with the mods can be dealt with via private messages, too. The mods don´t disagree with us on the main points.

For now the "Paki Pathan" connection has to be dealt with!

[graveyardofempires]

i will not use the word pakistani to refer to a people
callingn them pure/clean people)cuz i dont believe these people are pak and i will not call this country built upon the graves of our elders and at the hands of the british and their most loyal slaves pakistan(land of clean/pure people)cuz that will be totally a slap in the face of my Pukhtun nation.

so anyone saying paki/napaki/ is a racial slur should first know its meaning than talk,this doesnt talk about a race and if i dont believe these people are pak why the hell should i cal them that.

thats like asking pukhtane to call their british invaders holy.

calling these people pak or calling this land pakistan is against my nation and against my religion cuz these people are not pak only Allah is pak thats why we say Allah pak.

so keep that indoctination to yourself.

[Chelsea-Fan]

i will not use the word pakistani to refer to a people
callingn them pure/clean people)cuz i dont believe these people are pak and i will not call this country built upon the graves of our elders and at the hands of the british and their most loyal slaves pakistan(land of clean/pure people)cuz that will be totally a slap in the face of my Pukhtun nation.

so anyone saying paki/napaki/ is a racial slur should first know its meaning than talk,this doesnt talk about a race and if i dont believe these people are pak why the hell should i cal them that.

thats like asking pukhtane to call their british invaders holy.

calling these people pak or calling this land pakistan is against my nation and against my religion cuz these people are not pak only Allah is pak thats why we say Allah pak.

so keep that indoctination to yourself.

Isn´t this racism and a reason to ban vulgar and respectless Users? Where are the guards of this forum? Equal treatment for everyone? Admins?

[graveyardofempires]

Isn´t this racism and a reason to ban vulgar and respectless Users? Where are the guards of this forum? Equal treatment for everyone?

not interested to get into talkign with someone as ignorant as you.

take a hike.

[Michin Khel]

you are worng and want us all to follow your ignorance.

why shoudl such a biased person such as you get the responsibility of being a moderator.

She is perfect as a moderator. She is editing all vulgar and indecent posts of you guys.
Rest of mods have perhaps gone into some sort of coma.

[Nokia_Apridy]

I am not criticizing Shayesta as a mod but I think moderators should be selected by the members of the forum by a poll.

haha :P dar kha na phogay mung da bya Toor jawar koye ta :P