US-led raid kills 16 Afghan civilians

[MostafaM]

This is also false; "Aryans" are vast and vary greatly in culture; Bactrians for example had no concept of Tribe from previous Aryan-cultures; also Soghdians did not have tribal social structure; so they could not possibly have had Pashtunwali. proto-Avestan speakers did have tribal structure (as indicated by Zardusht's tribal name "Spitama"); but Avestan had dissolved as a spoken language millenia ago. So Pashtuns did not inherit tribal identity from Soghdians nor Avestan speaking peoples. The closest people to Pashtuns are Kurdish and Balouch; but even these people are very different from Soghdians.

Can you tell me what your sources are?
Where did tribal heritage come from?

According to Encyclopedia Irannica, the Avestan people as well as all other "Aryan" people were tribal people.
Encyclopædia Iranica | Articles

I highly doubt that Pashtun tribalism came into existence out of nowhere or because of Islamic influence.

And just because you don't support the theory is inconsequential; What solid research or evidence do you have in support of your theory? It seems you're just grasping for Pactyans, when it could be very well a false cognate.

Ghor may have been the birthplace of Pashto; but this doesn't mean Pactyans who were FAR FURTHER North, more towards Uzbakistan; were the same as Pashtuns. Even if we date Pashto back to Ghor; that is only 9-10 centuries; and Islam had started becoming predominant around this time.

As I said, modern day Ghor and Pactycia resemble geographically. The Pactues were called "Indian" people by Herodotus and there settlements reached to modern day Khyber area.

Ghor´s first known settlements are as old as 5000 BC.
Lithuanian archeologists make discovery in Afghanistan
I just googled it.

The reason Pashto seems to coincide with Islam are numerous; but I'll just highlight the important ones.

A.) No mention of Pashtuns prior to Islam becoming predominant in the area. And when I say Pashtuns I don't mean "Pactyans" or something which vaguely phonetically sounds like Pashtun; I mean the word Pashtuns or any possible known reference to Pashtuns like tribal names and so on.

B.) Pashto literature has no actual written examples prior to Islamic Periods in Afghanistan. This cannot be explained by saying Pashtuns have oral tradition. Soghdians and Bactrians had written language from ancient times; if Pashto culture is derived from these cultures directly, and NOT laterally, Pashto too should have confirmed ancient examples.

C. Certain Pashtun tribal confederacies, such as the Ghilzai seemed emerged in coincidence with other Migrating Populations; like Ghilzai seem to coincide with Migration of Khaladj Turks. The Historical records show a strong correspondence of Turkic movement after Islam and the Ghilzai.

Well, Amir Krror, one of Pashtos most famous poets lived around 700 in modern day Afghanistan. His poems are world famous. I guess, a culture and language needs more than 60 years to evolve. Islam had just newly arrived in modern day Afghanistan.

Tribal names like Zadran and Mangal date back to pre-islamic times. Mangal as a name dates back from the times when Afghans were Hindus. Mangal is the God of Mars.

Soghdians didn´t have a written culture, Bactrian was a graeco-bactrian alphabete and their culture and tradition was lost after they were defeated by the Yuehze (Khushans).
It happens that cultures lose their language and alphabet. Ask an Egyptian if he is a real Egyptian and if he says yes, ask him why he cannot read and write in hyroglyphes. That point is really far fetched my friend.

I do not have sufficient information about your last point. Can you elaborate more?

[MostafaM]

Suicide bombing maybe a military tactic; but it's usage is not an indication of lack of liocal support. THAT was your argument; that argument has been diffused as being incongruent.

Again it is because they usage of suicide bombings has always been used in situations when the enemy was attacked in terrain hostile towards the insurgency. So attacking it by "normal military" means (ambush etc.) would have heavy casualties or wouldn´t even reach the target and that is to the lack local support that your movement has in that area.
The attacks of Tamil Tigers in Senghalese areas etc. have proven that. You chose a suicide bombing, lose one soldier and kill 10.

Guevera and Mao; may have written books about guerilla warfare; but their books are not some sort of Biblical rule book or something. So this again is moot point.

No one has refuted them so far.

The examples you give demonstrate HOW they can move freely within the population; In fact that is EXACTLY WHY they move freely in the population, they are able to plant these things pretty much undetected because the locals how ever many there are are giving them that leverage.

Wrong. IEDs are not planted in villages or in towns but on roads that are accessable to a highly mobile guerilla unit.

In fact using your example with the Russians; the general population also did not engage in fighting until much later on when the tides were significantly in favor of the Mujahideen. So reasoning was not sufficient in demonstrating local support isn't significant.

That is absolutly untrue. From the very first uprising in Sorobi district against the Russian untill 1989, the hot-beds of resistance were carpet bombed to depopulate the areas so the sanctuaries for the resistance get erased, too.
That´s what Russian generals said, that´s what Mujahedin said, you cannot deny that.

The fact people have sanctuaries in Pakistan is somewhat misleading because to the locals on the ground "those areas of pakistan are theirs by heritage". So they see those areas as extensions of their historical homeland anyways. Only people who have been educated abroad or influenced by those facilities view those boundary distinctions as immutable.

I am not talking about "ancestral" this or that.
I am talking from a military point of view. The insurgency crosses the border that I myself do not recognize (!) because the NATO operations are limited to that "border". They use this border to built their sanctuaries in areas that are detached from the areas they operate in.
Is my clear now?

We can agree, taliban or America all go against the peoples interests; but One goes against others interests a bit "more" than the other; I think you can guess which one by the fact this war has gone on for 10 years.

To my mind this war started in 1975 when Afghan resistance movements found refuge in Pakistan. The failed Panjsher uprising under Massoud´s and Hekmatyar´s guidance is a proof to that.
I see the Pakistani foot print in this war is greater than that of the US because the US do have strategic interests in Afghanistan but not any territorial, cultural, religious or identity conflict with Afghanistan.

And this is the main point here!
America will leave one day, defeated and humiliated.
Pakistan will always be there next to us.....untill our solar system implodes!

[ScimitarXEdge]

Can you tell me what your sources are?
Where did tribal heritage come from?

According to Encyclopedia Irannica, the Avestan people as well as all other "Aryan" people were tribal people.
Encyclopædia Iranica | Articles

I highly doubt that Pashtun tribalism came into existence out of nowhere or because of Islamic influence.

The says nothing about Bactrians or Soghdians being tribal; point was that "Aryan" doesn't mean identical culture. All these "Aryan" cultures were vastly different. Perhaps had similar origins but to behave as if they were some monolithic entity is false. The only thing we can say for sure is that they had a related language family. Whether tribalism came under Islam or not isn't what I was arguing. The fact is the IDENTITY known as PASHTUN and it's respective tribal groups did NOT have ANY ...I mean ABSOLUTELY ZEEEEROOOOOO evidence before Islam. What indicates is that Pashtun is probably a hybridized group which collected under Islamic identity from previous other groups, and Pashto and Pashtun culture developed from that springboard. Which would sufficiently explain why Pashtu language has Soghdian attributes while Pashtuns are tribal and nomadic, which Soghdians were not.

'you highly" doubt; well I don't care what you doubt or don't. I care about evidence. Your argument lacks evidential support.

As I said, modern day Ghor and Pactycia resemble geographically. The Pactues were called "Indian" people by Herodotus and there settlements reached to modern day Khyber area.

Ghor´s first known settlements are as old as 5000 BC.
Lithuanian archeologists make discovery in Afghanistan
I just googled it.

But they don't , Pactycia or whatever you called it, is farther North than Ghor but a great distance.

And this Lithuanian Archeologists finding maybe well and good; but there's nothing here even remotely indicates that they were Pashtuns or identified themselves as Pashtuns.

Well, Amir Krror, one of Pashtos most famous poets lived around 700 in modern day Afghanistan. His poems are world famous. I guess, a culture and language needs more than 60 years to evolve. Islam had just newly arrived in modern day Afghanistan.

Amir Kror is only mentioned in Pata Khizana; and the antiquity of Pata Khizana is debated even till this day; Being that there is not extant copies of Pata Khizana before the 17th Century. While Pata Khizana is not forged, it's also not from 700 years ago. This has been established even my Morgenstierne; who you were extoling as verification yesterday.

Tribal names like Zadran and Mangal date back to pre-islamic times. Mangal as a name dates back from the times when Afghans were Hindus. Mangal is the God of Mars.

but the name Mangal does not mean it's the same Pashto name ....Mangal in Pashto means talon; and in Sanskrit it means the Planet Mars; the two completely different meanings shows the words are etymologically unrelated.

..Soghdians didn´t have a written culture,

You're lying; and I can easily prove you are examine this link

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/...age#ref=603453

The oldest surviving Sogdian documents are the so-called Ancient Letters found in a watchtower on the Chinese Great Wall, west of Tun-huang, and dated at the beginning of the 4th century ad. Most of the religious literature written in Sogdian dates from the 9th and 10th centuries.

Bactrian was a graeco-bactrian alphabete and their culture and tradition was lost after they were defeated by the Yuehze (Khushans).

But there is literature which shows their language had existed prior to the 7th Century.

It happens that cultures lose their language and alphabet. Ask an Egyptian if he is a real Egyptian and if he says yes, ask him why he cannot read and write in hyroglyphes.

But we have evidence of Egyptian hieroglyphs and that Egyptians had a language; ...Where is this same evidence for Pashto?

That point is really far fetched my friend.

Well I'm sure you'd like it to be far fetched; because on one hand I caught you blatantly lying about the Soghdians. On another end you're using STILL skeptical reference of Amir Kror; which by the way would only support an Islamic Identity since "Amir" is a Muslim name. So even if we take this as truth it would only support that the Ethnogenesis of Pashtuns happened after Islam.

Finally your logical assessment is flawed' we're talking about EVIIIIIIDEEEEENCEEEE ..not whether people lost their original languages or not. Totally different.

you lost this point on logical fallacy grounds.

I do not have sufficient information about your last point. Can you elaborate more?

Read about the Khalaj and Ghilzai connection here

http://www.khyber.org/articles/2005/...ftheOxus.shtml

[ScimitarXEdge]

Again it is because they usage of suicide bombings has always been used in situations when the enemy was attacked in terrain hostile towards the insurgency. So attacking it by "normal military" means (ambush etc.) would have heavy casualties or wouldn´t even reach the target and that is to the lack local support that your movement has in that area.
The attacks of Tamil Tigers in Senghalese areas etc. have proven that. You chose a suicide bombing, lose one soldier and kill 10.

VietKong were known for suicide bombing in villages, so this again isn't universally true. The Wahhabist influence factors in the Taliban's negligence; as they teach the idea that "people will be martyrs" and thus opens the door for such carelessness.

No one has refuted them so far.

Because it's not needed; their arguments are opinions and like all opinions others have different approaches. a "Refutation" is not required. THey didn't write the standards for guerilla war, and they certainly are not the authorities on it either.

Wrong. IEDs are not planted in villages or in towns but on roads that are accessable to a highly mobile guerilla unit.

No one ever argued that they're planted in villages and towns. You're arguing based on a false dichotomy; that because they're planted on roads, that somehow that local populations are not involved in facilitating it. What about Kuchis?, That would be one example; but even if we didn't have Kuchiyan, locals control and regulate traffic along the highways for whatever reason, trade, commerce, travel. They're the ones who ultimate decide what will go and what won't. This means that significant local support is there. Otherwise 10 years of guerilla war would never have been possible.

That is absolutly untrue. From the very first uprising in Sorobi district against the Russian untill 1989, the hot-beds of resistance were carpet bombed to depopulate the areas so the sanctuaries for the resistance get erased, too. That´s what Russian generals said, that´s what Mujahedin said, you cannot deny that.

'



Here is what one source stated;

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/...d(DOCID+af0101

Olivier Roy estimates that after four years of war there were at least 4,000 bases from which mujahidin units operated. Most of these were affiliated with the seven expatriate parties headquartered in Pakistan which served as sources of supply and varying degrees of supervision. Significant commanders typically led 300 or more men, controlled several bases and dominated a district or a sub-division of a province

So that disproves that the Mujahideen were operating solely locally and did not retreat into Pakistan to evade Soviet counter assault.

If what you're saying were true this wouldn't be the case. I'm not saying locals did not support them. I'm just saying their level of support increased as Mujahideen began to succeed more. This is obvious.

I am not talking about "ancestral" this or that.
I am talking from a military point of view. The insurgency crosses the border that I myself do not recognize (!) because the NATO operations are limited to that "border". They use this border to built their sanctuaries in areas that are detached from the areas they operate in.
Is my clear now?

Well your point is view is irrelevant to the local population; you're looking at things from the eyes of a foreigner not a local. As demonstrated above, the Mujahideen used similar tactics. and NATO operations are not limited to "that border". Drone operations happen cross the border. This means local population support and the transit between borderlands or areas where operations are held and safe havens is not a representation of lack of local support.

Your argument is clear; just completely inconsistent to what we see and observe in reality.

You're actually pushing your "idealizations" as fundamental facts. when in actually the facts are quite contrary.

To my mind this war started in 1975 when Afghan resistance movements found refuge in Pakistan. The failed Panjsher uprising under Massoud´s and Hekmatyar´s guidance is a proof to that.
I see the Pakistani foot print in this war is greater than that of the US because the US do have strategic interests in Afghanistan but not any territorial, cultural, religious or identity conflict with Afghanistan.

Well that's the key terms "to your mind"; you're stretching your opinion into being the actual reality of what happened. Which it wasn't. The wars may have resulted in the eventual other wars, civil war and current war. They are in fact three disntinct wars.

The Foot Print is clearly greater on the American side; the government was directly installed by overt military intervention, not proxy, as may have been the case with the Taliban.

Political Analysts such as Noam Chomksy and Howard Zinn have seen that American Wars are bids for hegemony globally; and secondly historically Pakistan as well as other Nation-States of Asia of Current time are byproducts of European/Western interventionism and hegemonic dominance. Therefore the cultural, religious, and identity conflict with the whole region as a whole. Not just Afghanistan. Pakistan-Afghanistan is merely an extension of divide and rule policy left over from colonial times to present day.

Pakistan is really merely an extension of Central problem of Global Hegemony; not the central problem

And this is the main point here!
America will leave one day, defeated and humiliated.
Pakistan will always be there next to us.....untill our solar system implodes!

And if America leaves humilated and defeated, then Pakistan won't be a worry either because they're just an Imperial proxy state. You're focused on the wrong target.

You want to fight the Puppet, but not the Master .

[Nick]

Brother ScimitarXEdge, and brother Mostafa1919 you guys both have good points and hot discussion I love to join in, however I don't think this is the place (BTW I found strong and weak points in both you but over all great discussion) I hope to have discussion with both in the future somewhere in its own place ie History section.

[MostafaM]

The says nothing about Bactrians or Soghdians being tribal; point was that "Aryan" doesn't mean identical culture. All these "Aryan" cultures were vastly different. Perhaps had similar origins but to behave as if they were some monolithic entity is false. The only thing we can say for sure is that they had a related language family. Whether tribalism came under Islam or not isn't what I was arguing. The fact is the IDENTITY known as PASHTUN and it's respective tribal groups did NOT have ANY ...I mean ABSOLUTELY ZEEEEROOOOOO evidence before Islam. What indicates is that Pashtun is probably a hybridized group which collected under Islamic identity from previous other groups, and Pashto and Pashtun culture developed from that springboard. Which would sufficiently explain why Pashtu language has Soghdian attributes while Pashtuns are tribal and nomadic, which Soghdians were not.

1. Bactrians were nomadic people.
Almost every nomadic sociaty that has been an object of research has been tribal.

http://jwsr.ucr.edu/archive/vol8/number3/pdf/jwsr-v8n3-kradin.pdf

2. A note on what you stated about "Zero Evidence":
Old Iranian Online: Series Introduction

3. How can a eastern-Aryan language evolve from a semitic language when research has established a well funded result that separates Pashto into modern, middle and old Pashto, with old Pashto sharing similatiries with languages like Khwarezmi, Yaghnobi etc.?
You make claims that cannot be backed up by anything and think that you can sideline anthropological, linguistic and genetic research.

I would like you to come up with evidence from your side that backs your claims. I provided you some secondary literature that can be read online.

But they don't , Pactycia or whatever you called it, is farther North than Ghor but a great distance.

And this Lithuanian Archeologists finding maybe well and good; but there's nothing here even remotely indicates that they were Pashtuns or identified themselves as Pashtuns.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/26/Afghanistan_region_during_500_BC.jpg

4. I do not know what the source of this map is, but you may have a look at the historical map. Arachosia is modern day Kandahar, Ghor is just north of it. The location of ancient Pactyans fits really well with the points that Herodotus made with his remark about the Pactues and Pactycia and modern day Ghor.

If you do not agree, please back up your claim.

Bringing up my link about the Lithuanian researchers was aimed at showing you that Ghor has a history that backs 5000 BC. People lived there and spoke their languages before Islam arrived. You got my point?

Amir Kror is only mentioned in Pata Khizana; and the antiquity of Pata Khizana is debated even till this day; Being that there is not extant copies of Pata Khizana before the 17th Century. While Pata Khizana is not forged, it's also not from 700 years ago. This has been established even my Morgenstierne; who you were extoling as verification yesterday.

Although there is a big controversy about "Pata Khazana", Prof. Manfred Lorenz, a German Iranist and specialist on Pashto literature has written extensivly about Pata Khazana and mentioned several times that according to the language that was used in that script, it can be dated linguistically to the age of middle Pashto because many words and synthax of middle Pashto doesn´t exist in modern Pashto. And given the fact that no human being can live for 700 years, atleast parts of Pata Khazana can be described as authentic.
Amir Krror was and still is a well known hero in the oral tradition of Pashtuns. I highly doubt that anyone had heard of Pata Khazana untill Habibi wrote his book, but the stories of Amir Krror, the Palawan are told to every child.

Source:
Manfred Lorenz: Die Anfänge der Paṣto-Literatur und das Peta xazâna. in: A Green Leaf, Papers in honour of Professor Jes. P. Asmussen, Acta Iranica 28, Leiden 1988, S. 211 ff

but the name Mangal does not mean it's the same Pashto name ....Mangal in Pashto means talon; and in Sanskrit it means the Planet Mars; the two completely different meanings shows the words are etymologically unrelated.

The findings of gold coins from period of Hindu rule of the part of the Pashtun belt that has always been inhabitated by the Mangal tribe clearly states that. Parts of an ancient Hindu temple were found hidden under the earth after people had found golden coins in a river that was running under that hidden temple.
I didn´t find any sources online about that but I can tell you that my father was shown these coins in 1996 when he was there to visit family. The whole treasure was locked away in a container and secured by a tribal arbakay. I do not know what happened to it later or if it was brought to the Kabul Museum.

Sometimes the meaning of words change or even lose their original meaning when they are absorbed into another language or culture. Etymology knows many forms, like folk etymology or "bas..terdised words" where words from various languages are formed together, like "sociology"....socio (Latin) logos(Greek).

I never heard the word "Mangal" being used as "talon". Can you elaborate more?

You're lying; and I can easily prove you are examine this link

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/293577/Iranian-languages/74634/The-Middle-Iranian-stage#ref=603453

Read further and see that the Soghdian script was derived from Aramaic.
It´s like Pashto being written in Arabic alphabet and because Arabic doesn´t have certain letters, they were "invented" in Pashto.

AND there is no need to lie because this is a debate about Pashto and it´s origins. I do not attach my ego to it. The reason why I interact here is because I want to exchange views, learn, understand and being understood others. I do interact out of free will and I do not gain anything than knowledge.
So, next time keep your assumptions to yourself and do not imply something that may be your own intention.

But we have evidence of Egyptian hieroglyphs and that Egyptians had a language; ...Where is this same evidence for Pashto?

I didn´t say Pashto had an OWN script and it was.
My example should highlight that even great civilisations come and go, there scripts get lost, their history forgotten.

Well I'm sure you'd like it to be far fetched; because on one hand I caught you blatantly lying about the Soghdians. On another end you're using STILL skeptical reference of Amir Kror; which by the way would only support an Islamic Identity since "Amir" is a Muslim name. So even if we take this as truth it would only support that the Ethnogenesis of Pashtuns happened after Islam.

Yes, you really caught my lying. [sarcasm intended] I am really sorry. Read my comments above.

Amir is a word that is widely used in EVERY semitic language, including Hebrew and Aramaic. If the dates of the ethymological research about middle Pashto are correct, Amri Krror as a historical character existed and lived shortly after Islam had arrived in modern day Afghanistan. He himself being associated with the Suris (that´s a tribe by the way) would even make the most ignorant person understand that Arabic culture and Islam as a religion brought by them wouldn´t make a whole sociaty evolve in 60-70 years into something else.....and that´s what you are implying: that the tribal system and Pashtun identity started with the impact of Islam.

[MostafaM]

VietKong were known for suicide bombing in villages, so this again isn't universally true. The Wahhabist influence factors in the Taliban's negligence; as they teach the idea that "people will be martyrs" and thus opens the door for such carelessness.

You still avoid the point that this military operation is lead by someone who wants to achieve a military and political aim by sending a suicide bomber. It doesn´t matter on what basis that person gets indoctrinated. If you have the ability, you could make a child become a suicide bomber by telling him that the enemy took Bob the Builder hostage, tortured him with his own tools and made him dig his own grave.

IT IS NOT about the ideology BUT about the aims of those people who APPLY ideology!

Because it's not needed; their arguments are opinions and like all opinions others have different approaches. a "Refutation" is not required. THey didn't write the standards for guerilla war, and they certainly are not the authorities on it either.

They studied every single uprising of a movement that could consolidate it´s own position in the face of a standing army, their ability to fight a much larger and more powerfull army and to win, and you are saying that it´s their opinion?

As far as I know, the Cuban Revolution started with 17 men and they overran a standing army that was funded by the Americans.

The same for the communist guerillas against the nationalist Chinese Army.

Their books are considered as "standards" in guerilla warfare by almost every military historian. You can live in denial but that´s definitly your problem.

No one ever argued that they're planted in villages and towns. You're arguing based on a false dichotomy; that because they're planted on roads, that somehow that local populations are not involved in facilitating it. What about Kuchis?, That would be one example; but even if we didn't have Kuchiyan, locals control and regulate traffic along the highways for whatever reason, trade, commerce, travel. They're the ones who ultimate decide what will go and what won't. This means that significant local support is there. Otherwise 10 years of guerilla war would never have been possible.

1. Because they can´t plant there bombs in hostile terrain.

2. Because it doesn´t make sense to plant them there. Hitting supply roots is the main aim and supply lines hardly pass village centres and big cities.

3. Your assumption that the Taliban-led war is going on for 10 years is wrong, too, because untill mid 2003, there was absolut no insurgency whatsoever anywhere in Afghanistan. AFTER the corrupt regime consolidated it´s position and AFTER the people got disillusioned in some areas, the Taliban came in and built shadow-regime of their own.
People were keen to see a new start without violence.

4. Ordinary people DO NOT controle streets and highways. I do not know where you got this from.

'

So that disproves that the Mujahideen were operating solely locally and did not retreat into Pakistan to evade Soviet counter assault.

The Mujahedin of the 80s had local support. Again, the operated from areas located amongst the ordinary people. Your point doesn´t disprove anything.

Well your point is view is irrelevant to the local population; you're looking at things from the eyes of a foreigner not a local. As demonstrated above, the Mujahideen used similar tactics. and NATO operations are not limited to "that border". Drone operations happen cross the border. This means local population support and the transit between borderlands or areas where operations are held and safe havens is not a representation of lack of local support.

The Mujahedin had the moral support of the population. That´s the difference. They fought against an army that started to shoot on people from the 1st day. Russian´s aim was to eliminate a threat against the communist regime and that threat came largely from the Pashtun heartland because of their moral and military support to the arme opposition.

And with military operations I meant ground attacks, Specials Ops, close air support and artillery support. For these kind of attacks, the Durand Line is definitly the limit. Drone attacks are flown against the North Waziristan areas where Haqqani, his Arab allies and other Al-Qaeda affiliated groups are stationed.

The safe havens are a) created by the ISI by arming these groups to the teeth so that any tribal opposition doesn´t occur and b) in some areas these people cannot operate freely, like in Khurram Agency where an alliance of tribes has opted to go against any presence of foreign fighters etc.
I would suggest, you are familiar with the killings of tribal elders and wars between tribes and the insurgency in FATA because they do not have sufficient back-up from the ordinary people there, let the people on this side of the border alone.

For example in Paktia, the can only resort to suicide bombings, no other presence is possible because the tribal Arbakey do not wish their presence.

Well that's the key terms "to your mind"; you're stretching your opinion into being the actual reality of what happened. Which it wasn't. The wars may have resulted in the eventual other wars, civil war and current war. They are in fact three disntinct wars.

The Foot Print is clearly greater on the American side; the government was directly installed by overt military intervention, not proxy, as may have been the case with the Taliban.

Political Analysts such as Noam Chomksy and Howard Zinn have seen that American Wars are bids for hegemony globally; and secondly historically Pakistan as well as other Nation-States of Asia of Current time are byproducts of European/Western interventionism and hegemonic dominance. Therefore the cultural, religious, and identity conflict with the whole region as a whole. Not just Afghanistan. Pakistan-Afghanistan is merely an extension of divide and rule policy left over from colonial times to present day.

Pakistan is really merely an extension of Central problem of Global Hegemony; not the central problem



And if America leaves humilated and defeated, then Pakistan won't be a worry either because they're just an Imperial proxy state. You're focused on the wrong target.

You want to fight the Puppet, but not the Master .

Yes, contrary to you, I highlight what is my opinion after studying various sources and coming to a conclusion, and do not highlight it when I refer to common sense and known facts.

You refer to Chomsky and others and state what the US is in a very general way. Everyone is aware of the imperial nature of the USA.
Afghanistan´s problem is atleast two-dimensional: the near enemy and the far enemy. (No reference to Al-Zawahiris "near Satan" and "far Satan" in his book "Knights under the Prophet´s Banner" intended!)

The far enemy, the US and other powers who have a strategic interest in Afghanistan have shifting alliances, governments etc. Their idea of "how to dominate" changes with time. The "near enemy" has, as I mentioned, territorial, cultural and and identity conflict with Afghanistan.
I do not know if you understand what that does means: it means that whatever regime will be in Islamabad, now or in 1000 years, their strategic aims in Afghanistan will never change because the existence of a viable and strong Afghanistan is a serious threat to Pakistan and vise versa.

There is no need to come up with mere slogans that you got from the media and certain discussions (divide rule etc.). Just stick to the strategic point of Afghanistan´s national interests. That´s the discussion here.

If the USA are defeated, does that mean that Pakistan will be defeated?

China building a deep-water seaport in Gwadar, a Gwadar-Karakorom pipeline in planning, Pakistan wanting to locate a maritime Chinese military facility at Gwadar, Pakistan having close ties to China with many common research projects (production of fighter jets etc.) and a new "Great Game" on the horizon between the Shanghai Cooperation Council on the one side and USA-India on the other side?

You really think Pakistan will vanish so easily because the USA vanishes?

I cannot grasp your naivity in this point.


The discussions with you are not fruitfull from my perspective because you seem to argue for the sake of being right. I am not here to kill time and to boost my ego but to LEARN from Pashtuns across the globe.
So, it would be nice if you stick to the topic and try to get into a healty debate and NOT resort to the "I am right"-desease because in the main points here you are not.
I do not debate to win but to hear NEW things and to see things that are known to me from a different angle. So far you haven´t discussed on that level and I hope that will change.

[MostafaM]

Brother ScimitarXEdge, and brother Mostafa1919 you guys both have good points and hot discussion I love to join in, however I don't think this is the place (BTW I found strong and weak points in both you but over all great discussion) I hope to have discussion with both in the future somewhere in its own place ie History section.

Salam Nick!

It would be nice if you join us.
We can ask the moderaters to relocate this discussion to another forum.

I am here to hear and read new things. Hopefully you will join and let us read your point of view.

[unknownprince]

Mostafa, you have a mental problem, and you are obsessed with Bactrian this, Aryan that.,

Truth be told, Pashtuns are unique Muslims, and all we need to know is that they are the Army of Khorasan, who raise the banners of the black flags.

This has been foretold by Hadith.

The end of this conflict is near, and the region will experience an era of peace with the defeat of the last disintegrating empire.
This thread was about the killing of Afghans by airstrikes.

Take the Bactrian/Aryan crap somewhere else. There are plenty of secular sell-outs who talk about this sh**t

[MostafaM]

Mostafa, you have a mental problem, and you are obsessed with Bactrian this, Aryan that.,

Truth be told, Pashtuns are unique Muslims, and all we need to know is that they are the Army of Khorasan, who raise the banners of the black flags.

This has been foretold by Hadith.

The end of this conflict is near, and the region will experience an era of peace with the defeat of the last disintegrating empire.
This thread was about the killing of Afghans by airstrikes.

Take the Bactrian/Aryan crap somewhere else. There are plenty of secular sell-outs who talk about this sh**t

I do not know what to say to you.
I don´t really read BS in such a comprimated form that much, so I am a little speechless.

Sorry, you are not worth to be answered.

[unknownprince]

The original purpose of this thread is to highlight the murder of Afghans by the US.

[unknownprince]

US-led raid kills 16 Afghan civilians
PressTV - US-led raid kills 16 Afghan civilians

Tue Jul 12, 2011 4:25PM


US-led forces during an air patrol in Afghanistan (file photo).
A US-led airstrike in the troubled eastern Afghanistan has killed at least 16 people, mostly women and children, officials say.


The causalities come after an airstrike targeted residential areas overnight in the Azra district of Afghanistan's Logar province.

"Twelve civilians, including women and children, were killed last night when NATO planes targeted two houses," AFP quoted a regional police chief as saying.

The official also said that the bodies of four suspected Taliban militants had been recovered from the rubble.

Last week, the death of two children in a US-led airstrike sparked demonstrations in southern Afghanistan. NATO says it is investigating the incident.

The United States is pressing ahead with its attacks in Afghanistan despite continuous protests from the Afghan people and government.

President Hamid Karzai has repeatedly condemned attacks on civilians, saying NATO must stop searching for suspected terrorists in Afghan residential areas.

Hundreds of civilians have lost their lives in the US-led airstrikes and ground operations in various parts of Afghanistan over the past few months, with Afghans growing frustrated over the seemingly endless number of deadly assaults.

The attacks have left a large number of Afghan civilians dead since the start of the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001.

The surge in violence comes despite the presence of 150,000 foreign troops, which are engaged in the so-called war on terrorism.

The war in Afghanistan, with civilian and military casualties at record highs, has become the longest war in US history.

JR/PKH/HJL

They killed 6 more Afghans today

[MostafaM]

The original purpose of this thread is to highlight the murder of Afghans by the US.

Discussions lead to other discussions.

Stop being childish.

We got your "Press TV propaganda".

You have opened various threads where you highlight the same kind of "news". Should people not talk about it and try to find the root of the problem and just take your stupid words for granted?
If you want that, open up a website like www.ashrafghaljay.com and spread your un-contested "news" there.

OK?

[unknownprince]

As someone told you before, don't derail the thread. lol, the pressTv is the only source I can use. Yes, obviously it is influenced by Iran, but it still shows more of the reality on the ground than CNN or Fox.

Night raids and airtstrikes. You support this?

[unknownprince]

Do you support night raids and airstrikes?