US-led raid kills 16 Afghan civilians

[MostafaM]

Definitly not!

I do not support any bloodshed on the expense of Afghans!

This year alone almost 2500 people died in military operations on both sides. 4/5 of all them were killed in suicide bombings.

Do you support this? I know you do and that´s the tragic point here.

UN: Deadliest six months for Afghan civilians - Central & South Asia - Al Jazeera English

[unknownprince]

[QUOTE=Mostafa1919;482494]Definitly not!

I do not support any bloodshed on the expense of Afghans!

Really?

This year alone almost 2500 people died in military operations on both sides. 4/5 of all them were killed in suicide bombings.

All the deaths are due to the US presence. ALL THE DEATHS aside from the airstrikes and night raids which have killed thousands upon thousands of Afghans.

Do you support this? I know you do and that´s the tragic point here.

UN: Deadliest six months for Afghan civilians - Central & South Asia - Al Jazeera English

You cite a biased UN report which is the tool of the US. The fact of the matter is, Afghans would not be fighting if there was no US presence. The fact is peace was being established throughout Afghanistan. The US disrupted this.


All the deaths are due to the US. 100% are due to the US. DO you know how many people have died from airstrikes and night raids?

[unknownprince]

In fact, why don't you count for me how many Afghans have been killed in airstrikes and night raids?

The UN report is all BS. The US regularly murders Afghans in airstrikes and night raids.

[MostafaM]

All the deaths are due to the US presence. ALL THE DEATHS aside from the airstrikes and night raids which have killed thousands upon thousands of Afghans.

The American presence is because Taliban gave shelter to a group that killed it´s citizens and continues to do that. What do you expect? I mean from a logical point of view without any emotions: what do you expect for a military power to do if you attack it?

And wasn´t it OBL´s plan to trap the US in Afghanistan?

‪Osama bin Laden‬‏ - YouTube

You cite a biased UN report which is the tool of the US. The fact of the matter is, Afghans would not be fighting if there was no US presence. The fact is peace was being established throughout Afghanistan. The US disrupted this.

Yes, the UN is biased. What about the numbers of dead people counted in hospitals? Are you such an idiot that you spit on 2000 people´s dead bodies because for you the other 500 who were killed by US forces are more important?

This is vicious circle.
The Taliban movement as an alien funded, supported and lead entity cause problems, too. If I was simple as you, I would argue that the Taliban´s presence lengthens the US´s involvement in Afghanistan.

I see that you are way to naive and simple to understand certain basic things.

[unknownprince]

[QUOTE=Mostafa1919;482507]

The American presence is because Taliban gave shelter to a group that killed it´s citizens and continues to do that. What do you expect? I mean from a logical point of view without any emotions: what do you expect for a military power to do if you attack it?

And wasn´t it OBL´s plan to trap the US in Afghanistan?

This is the biggest lie in the books. Please explain the American war against the Iraqi people, How about against the Vietnamese? The Koreans. Major fail on your part. You are a supporter of the war against Afghan people, and at least everyone knows who you are. The US is the biggest supporter of American terrorist outfit Blackwater which according to Hamid Karzai is behind several terrorist attacks in Afghanistan.

Yes, the UN is biased. What about the numbers of dead people counted in hospitals? Are you such an idiot that you spit on 2000 people´s dead bodies because for you the other 500 who were killed by US forces are more important?

More than 2000 have been killed. WAY WAY MORe. Only you would put faith in numbers produced by the US and UN. They have a history of lying.

This is vicious circle.
The Taliban movement as an alien funded, supported and lead entity cause problems, too. If I was simple as you, I would argue that the Taliban´s presence lengthens the US´s involvement in Afghanistan.

All evidence contradicts this. I have shown you before and will show you again that they have a lot of support in Afghanistan.

US report shows Taliban support in Afghanistan, blames Karzai | America-Canada | World Bulletin

Taliban support rising in Afghanistan: study - CTV News

I see that you are way to naive and simple to understand certain basic things

You are a member of the flat earth society. To you all Afghans from Kandahar to Paktia are fighting for Pakistan. They dance the Bhangra instead of the attan, and they actively fight for Pakistan's interest. They also flew the Pakistani flag in Kandahar for all those years. You would have us believe that the Taliban who took control of Afghanistan from fighting factions like Ahmad Shaw Masooudov's crew were all Pakistani punjabis who dressed up as pashtuns, spoke pashto, and managed to rule the country for 4 years. this narrative is done to deny reality. The narrative has failed with with Saleh's demise. No one, not even the US is buying it.

[MostafaM]

Have you ever heard the expression "SHEEN KHAR" in Pashto?

[unknownprince]

It appears you can not answer me with logic or evidence, so you resort to shiitttting from your mouth.

This coming from a slave donkey such as yourself who continues to tout the views of Saleh khar, spanta khar, and all the rest of your heroes, especially that dog Ahmad SHAW Massoudov, and lets not forget that filthy pimmmp AA who is an insult to the name Abdullah.

Keep taking the Slaeh line which has been proven false. No one, not even Hamid Karzai touts this line.

Keep your pretense here to yourself you trash. Keep trying to come here and divide Muslims/ Pashtuns.

[MostafaM]

This is the biggest lie in the books.

You saw the interview with your hero OBL, didn´t you?
What did he say?
It´s the common goal of the ummah and it doesn´t matter if Afghan civilians get killed by US bombs, if his fighters engage the US in a war on Afghan soil.

We are not talking about the unjust wars against other countries, stick to Afghanistan.

More than 2000 have been killed. WAY WAY MORe. Only you would put faith in numbers produced by the US and UN. They have a history of lying.

What are your sources that these numbers are a fraud?
Can you prodvide us with better and more accurate numbers?
Will you quote Press TV now because the UN is too biased for you?
What kinda donkey are you? A green one or a normal grey one?

You are a member of the flat earth society. To you all Afghans from Kandahar to Paktia are fighting for Pakistan. They dance the Bhangra instead of the attan, and they actively fight for Pakistan's interest. They also flew the Pakistani flag in Kandahar for all those years. You would have us believe that the Taliban who took control of Afghanistan from fighting factions like Ahmad Shaw Masooudov's crew were all Pakistani punjabis who dressed up as pashtuns, spoke pashto, and managed to rule the country for 4 years. this narrative is done to deny reality. The narrative has failed with with Saleh's demise. No one, not even the US is buying it.

There is hardly any violence from the insurgency in Paktia, Khost etc.
Attan would be banned if your Taliban come back.
Pakistan´s flag wasn´t flying anywhere but even Taliban members like Mullah Zaeef etc. mentioned that Pakistani ISI officers were present in Kandahar as advisers to him. You can live in denial or face reality.

No, 90% of all Taliban were and are Pashtuns.
That´s not a fact I am proud of because it clearly states how brainwashed Pashtun kids can get in Deobandi madrassas.

You seem to be very obsesses with Saleh. Did he hit a nerve?

[ScimitarXEdge]

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/num...8n3-kradin.pdf

this is talking about Turkic Nomads not Bactrians.

I just tried searching the document, the word Bactrian isn't even in the article. So this doesn't support your statement.

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

this says nothing bout Pashto, evidence of Avestan is NOT evidence of Pashto. Pashto and Avestan are not the same language

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.

That's probably because that wasn't remotely what my claim was in the first place. Reread what I said clearly

I said the Pashto language and Pashto ethnogenesis does not have any evidence until AFTER Islam became predominant. I never said Pashto is semitic or derived from any semitic languages.

You're committing a Straw-Man Fallacy.

Please avoid committing such logical fallacies in the future.

Fallacy: Straw Man

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.

I didn't make a claim to be backed up...so no need. Your secondary literature doesn't mention Pashto or Bactrians....even if it did it doesn't necessarily amount to evidence, depending on what referential data it has. However, they don't so point is once again moot.

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

well one way to back up the claim is the fact

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?

It is irrelevant we're talking about PASHTO and Pashtuns, proving others existed is not proof that Pashtuns existed at this time. It could be some of the predecessors to Pashtuns are these people. But they did not have Pashto language, culture or identify themselves as Pashtuns as clearly evidence by the fact they were called other things and spoke a different language.

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.

that doesn't mean he was saying that those portions are from 700 AD. You're presenting very flimsy arguments here. Modern Pashto is what we have today, which would mean the Pashto of the 1800's is "middle Pashto", which would make Pashto actually much younger.

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

instead of showing just the citation, show the direct quotations from the source itself Use a translator service if you need to translate it from German.

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.

show the references for the Gold Coins...and show that the Mangal tribes ALWAYS inhabited there, show that the references to Mangal the God of Mars is the same meaning as Mangal in Pashto.

without this you're speculating.

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.

Being that my father's side of my family are Ghaznichi/Zabulwal Ghilzai Pashtun, I know how Pashtuns love to make elaborate stories. This doesn't count as evidence though. I can't believe you're even using an anecdote as evidence.

You're not limited to online sources; go to libraries or research journals anywhere which has concrete references.

Just don't tell me nonsense stories your nikuh or plar told you. That's intellectually weak.

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).

Meanings can change but their etymological root doesn't change. There is no evidence that etymology of the word for a fire place (mangal) is in anyway be etymologically linked to Mangal in Sanskrit (word for Mars).

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

I was actually, pashto qamosona says the word refers to a nagharrai (fire place)

qamosona.com Free Pashto Dictionaries has that meaning there if you type Mangl

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.

you're doing a straw man argument; we're not talking about Pashto script, we're talking about written evidence of Pashto language. You can have a language written in many different scripts. We don't have a SINGLE piece of evidence of Pashto written before the 14th Century.

Please stop changing the context of the discussion. I'm not some uneducated guy off the street I know the differences.

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.

Fair enough, then I caution you about committing straw man arguments/fallacies and changing goal posts. As these are intellectually dishonest tactics. Also if you use references try to quote precisely the parts which support your statements. And post only RELEVANT material.

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.

I never said that you said that, I didn't even bring up the issue of script. I merely said there is NO WRITTEN EVIDENCE OF PASHTO, where as all these other languages that are from surrounding areas and are somehow related to Pashto have written evidence from antiquity.




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.

Firstly you're assuming that I believe Amir Kror actually existed. I don't. I believe this is just Pashto folklore invented later on. Secondly, My point was EVEN IF we were to believe this person to be true, it demonstrates Islam being amongst Pashtuns before any concrete reference to Pashtuns as an ethnic-cultural group existed. However, evidence shows Islam did not become predominant until a few centuries later. So even if an Amir Kror existed, he existed much later. Thirdly I never claimed that this happened in 60-70 years. It probably took a few centuries. The point being that the lack of any actual concrete evidence of Pashto language, Pashtun culture, until around the 12-13th Century indicates that Pashtuns probably originated from other groups and after becoming Muslims, evolved into Pashtuns. Note this isn't claiming they adopted Arabic, Arabic and becoming Muslim are not necessarily parallel. The comment about Amir Kror, having the name Amir indicates Pashto got the name by way of adopting Islam, and thus from Arabic. So it could not be from some other semitic language.

[unknownprince]

[QUOTE=Mostafa1919;482730]

We are not talking about the unjust wars against other countries, stick to Afghanistan.

Oh, so you are saying the US war against Afghanistan is just?

There is hardly any violence from the insurgency in Paktia, Khost etc.
Attan would be banned if your Taliban come back.

LOL, another Saleh lie that almost came right out of his stinky backside LOL.

You obviously are either in denial or are so bent on propagating a distortion that you even in the face of mounting evidence, you continue to sing Saleh's song which is no longer played by anyone, not even US officials he courted LOL.

All Southern and Eastern Afghanistan have been termed the areas where there is unrest due to the US occupation. I can embarrass you further to refute your claim here like I did when you said the Taliban have no support to which I showed you US reports indicating otherwise- BTW you still did not respond to that- do you take back your words?), but you are clearly out of touch with reality. It is well known in Afghanistan that Paktia, Kunar, and Paktika are one of the most unfriendliest areas to the US, much like any Pashtun area in Afghanistan.

The pressure is on you to provide me proof for your claim that this is not the case in regards to Paktia, then I will proceed to refute that with evidence. Oh and you can just google it.

Pakistan´s flag wasn´t flying anywhere but even Taliban members like Mullah Zaeef etc. mentioned that Pakistani ISI officers were present in Kandahar as advisers to him. You can live in denial or face reality.

What is your point? It proves nothing. In fact Mullah Zaeef shows that they are indeed an independent political group. His words against Pakistan are similar to the same words every other nation has termed Pakistan, double faced and unreliable. You present evidence to refute your own point trying to make an indigenous group alien LOL.

No, 90% of all Taliban were and are Pashtuns.
That´s not a fact I am proud of because it clearly states how brainwashed Pashtun kids can get in Deobandi madrassas.

Well, its obvious that you prefer a non-religious society in Afghanistan. Well, let it be known to you that Afghanistan's present borders were made by Mirwais neeka and Ahmad Shah Baba, and Sharia law was what they implemented.; Sharia law is the law of Allah(swt), and nobody is going to change that, especially a group of secular failure expats who are misfits in their own societies. All I want is Afghanistan to be left alone by all the intervention. And let me remind you that it was Ahmad SHAW MASOODOV who invited Osama, not the Taliban- the Northern Alliance.


At the end of the day, all I want is for Afghanistan to be left alone and free from foreign intervention. I want Afghans to determine their own destiny, not outsiders to impose tyranny upon them.

You seem to be very obsesses with Saleh. Did he hit a nerve?

You expose yourself too well when you sings Saleh's song.

[ScimitarXEdge]

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!

and by your same account, the suicide bombers have support from locals, not every local but significant enough on grounds of their political aims. Read all of the articles. People who are sympathetic to the Talibam are not really into the Taliban themselves, but would rather have Taliban running the show, hence they support , give refuge and assist the Taliban.

Even many to articles Ashraf posted verify this. and they're not all from PressTV 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?

Yes it is their opinion; their ideas are not universal laws. Hence it's an 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.

This only means their theories were only successful in context to their society, not that they sound some secret ingredient.

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.

You know very little about Pashtuns Tribal culture then. I assume you're a Pashtun from Kabul and perhaps de-tribalized. Even though you probably speak Pashto your socio-cultural understandings indicate European experiences and understandings.

Pashtun tribes control roads, passages, many things. "Ordinary" people in the Pashtun sense are tribesman and local Mashars/Maliks. These people are the ones who have the say of what goes on, on the roads

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.

Thanks for proving my point; you're confirming that there is a large scale (not necessarily majority) support for the Taliban, enough so that they can act out local missions with little detection.

As for the war being 10 years old, you're drawing straw hairs, 8 , 10 it doesn't matter. However the fact the U.S. Military has been there for 10 years indicates this war has gone on 10 years. Otherwise they'd have left in 03.

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

Pashtun Tribal society, the tribes follow their Mashar.

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

You even confirmed they were in Pakistan and had bases there. Hence it's not point that disproved anything, you did all the work for me. Thanks.

By the way, you also forgot to address the presence of Taliban situated and running freely in areas not bordering Pakistan, shows your argument isn't at all accurate. The Taliban operating in these areas would mean that local support is definitively involved without a shadow of doubt.

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 you just confirmed above that the Taliban also have moral support of at least a large part of the population. You confirmed that corrupt foreign backed government led to the sway to sympathizing with Taliban or at least Insurgency. (I Think it is time we distinguish between insurgency and Taliban, as not all insurgents necessarily are aligned with the Taliban or Hezbe Islami Hekmatyar).

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.

That's called changing goal posts. You're defining military operations for what suits you. These are military operations by definition. Which make your point once again moot.

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.

Yeah sure, but you're confusing Pakistani Taliban with Afghan Taliban, two distinct movements The Pakistani Taliban are against the Pakistani Government. The Tribal elders are pro Pakistani Government. It's a different shift of dynamics here.

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.

They do suicide bombings all over Afghanistan, Paktia doesn't have many foreign forces either, which can also explain the lack of Taliban presence there. Plus Zadrans are very powerful, I doubt Taliban really want to upset the tribal balance there.

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!)

Your common sense has been inaccurate many times; furthermore you have contradicted and even nullified your own arguments.

This near enemy and far enemy dichotomy fails when you consider we're in the Post Colonial Globalized era. Pakistan is simply a proxy of former Imperial Powers. IN fact Modern Afghanistan is also a proxy. All Present Day Nation states in Asia (and Africa and Middle East) were manufactured by Colonial Powers to maintain hegemony in global matters by rearranging power structures. Some were willful proxies (Pakistan) other were just proxy by default (Afghanistan).

Pakistan is merely an "extension" of what you label "the far enemy"; which actually isn't that far since they have direct involvement and presence in locl affairs in Afghanistan.

What thinkers like Chomsky highlight is that these countries like Pakistan or Saudi Arabia are essentially stooge regimes, so much of their activity regionally have to do with America's geopolitical designs. Hence America is both the far enemy and near enemy by proxies.

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.

Well for the reasons I already stated; these are all manufactured conflicts that are made from divide and rule policies. This whole situation is to maintain divide and rule. get people to squabble amongst themselves, keep them dependent. So there can be no doubt that the Imperial hand is the source of strength for both Afghanistan and Pakistan. Without America or UK support or general Farangay support they'll both erode. Which is for the better if you ask me.

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.

The media doesn't come up with slogans like "divide and rule" ; the Media says America and their Allies are waving the flag of "freedom" and "liberty". This is a fact about imperial history and its current metamorphasis. It is very relevant as it is the central principle which cultivated this situation. However, this implies that Afghanistan as with most Asian countries of today really residue of imperial presence; so this issue of National interests is really an extension of the "Great Game". As you mentioned.

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?

Pakistan's major AID supplier is the U.S. Without that, many of these project would be financially impossible. China doesn't want to nurse Pakistan, the just want regional hegemony. Pakistan's existence doesn't rest on China. It rests on America. I would rather have Chinese Hegemony than European one.

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

I cannot grasp your naivity in this point.

Pakistan's internal instability and need for Imperial support is what is key for their survival. Same goes for Afghanistan. I would like to see an end to all current Asian Nation states. I think it is possible. China is powerful but not that powerful, not on the scale of being an imperial power yet.


My Goal here is to awaken people to the greater enemy; these secondary squabbles can wait.

[MostafaM]

this is talking about Turkic Nomads not Bactrians.

I just tried searching the document, the word Bactrian isn't even in the article. So this doesn't support your statement.

This was a general information about nomadism and tribal systems.
If you want to know more about the tribal systems of the nomadic Bactrians and Soghdians, read here:

Bactria

I hope Herodotus is a source that you can accept:

Herodotus' Histories: the 28 logoi

this says nothing bout Pashto, evidence of Avestan is NOT evidence of Pashto. Pashto and Avestan are not the same language

No one said that.
But languages that evolve from each other or are closely related is a proof that proto-Pashto or older forms of Pashto have existed hundreds of years ago before Islam arrived.
Do I need to chew every bit for you into bite-sized peaces?

I said the Pashto language and Pashto ethnogenesis does not have any evidence until AFTER Islam became predominant. I never said Pashto is semitic or derived from any semitic languages.

An onthogenesis describes a process.
You on the other hand insist that prior to Islam, nothing remotly connect to Pashto as a language or Pashto as a culture existed.
A "missing link" is not an evidence for your claims.
A "missing link" doesn´t exist IF there are languages and cultures that are close to Pashto and it´s heritage.
You cannot deny that.

It is irrelevant we're talking about PASHTO and Pashtuns, proving others existed is not proof that Pashtuns existed at this time. It could be some of the predecessors to Pashtuns are these people. But they did not have Pashto language, culture or identify themselves as Pashtuns as clearly evidence by the fact they were called other things and spoke a different language.

That´s the greates nonsense I have ever heard.
Yaghnobi and Ossetian are languages that are spoken today by people who live. Their languages resemble Pashto more than any other existing language on earth. Pashtuns didn´t fall from the sky or as you may want it with the arrival of Islam.

And you still didn´t answer my question what your proof for your claims are.

When did Pashtun identity came into existence?
And what aspects of Pashtunwali or tribal code have anything to do with Islam?

Elaborate!

that doesn't mean he was saying that those portions are from 700 AD. You're presenting very flimsy arguments here. Modern Pashto is what we have today, which would mean the Pashto of the 1800's is "middle Pashto", which would make Pashto actually much younger.

You make a claim without giving any source.

The Era of Middle Pashto dates back to the times of Islamic conquest of central asia. Old Pashto dates back further.

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

instead of showing just the citation, show the direct quotations from the source itself Use a translator service if you need to translate it from German.

I do not need google-translator because I am fluent in German and English. I do not poccess the book. I had read it at the library of the University of Düsseldorf, Germany. I couldn´t find an online version either, so all I have is my memory and a wikipedia entry in German about this source.

I gave you the book and the page.
In a scientific debate nothing else is needed but if you find the book, I will translate it for you.

show the references for the Gold Coins...and show that the Mangal tribes ALWAYS inhabited there, show that the references to Mangal the God of Mars is the same meaning as Mangal in Pashto.

1. I cannot provide any referrence to the gold coins.
That´s the only online source I found: Afghanistan: Mir Zakah, Paktia Province

I will try to find information at the British Museum.

2. As far as I know, Mangal, the father of the tribe left Wardak (Mangal and Wardak were brothers and historical figures) and moved to modern day Paktia. There is no historical data that would imply that the Mangal has been relocated or moved anywhere else so far.

3. There is no need to prove that. Mangal means God of Mars to Hindus, it may have long lost it´s meaning for people who have lost their Hindu religion. That may occur to you or not.

Being that my father's side of my family are Ghaznichi/Zabulwal Ghilzai Pashtun, I know how Pashtuns love to make elaborate stories. This doesn't count as evidence though. I can't believe you're even using an anecdote as evidence.

Anecdotes do not fall from the sky.
They have a certain amount of truth in them.

Meanings can change but their etymological root doesn't change. There is no evidence that etymology of the word for a fire place (mangal) is in anyway be etymologically linked to Mangal in Sanskrit (word for Mars).

For someone who questions etymological research in the first place, you seem to be very clingy when it suits your arguements. lol

The God Mars, the red planet, and the God of war....I would suggest, that almost every culture and it´s mythology have connected the planet Mars with war, fire and destruction, your arguement that Mangal may mean fire place is a valid point.
In Turkic languages Mangal means fireplace or grill!
Good point but not in your favour!

you're doing a straw man argument; we're not talking about Pashto script, we're talking about written evidence of Pashto language. You can have a language written in many different scripts. We don't have a SINGLE piece of evidence of Pashto written before the 14th Century.

Well, you can ask for written evidence for Aboriginal languages, too. But you won´t find any because of their oral tradition. Your whole arguement here is weak. This means no one spoke Pashto before 14 AC?

Firstly you're assuming that I believe Amir Kror actually existed. I don't. I believe this is just Pashto folklore invented later on. Secondly, My point was EVEN IF we were to believe this person to be true, it demonstrates Islam being amongst Pashtuns before any concrete reference to Pashtuns as an ethnic-cultural group existed. However, evidence shows Islam did not become predominant until a few centuries later. So even if an Amir Kror existed, he existed much later. Thirdly I never claimed that this happened in 60-70 years. It probably took a few centuries. The point being that the lack of any actual concrete evidence of Pashto language, Pashtun culture, until around the 12-13th Century indicates that Pashtuns probably originated from other groups and after becoming Muslims, evolved into Pashtuns. Note this isn't claiming they adopted Arabic, Arabic and becoming Muslim are not necessarily parallel. The comment about Amir Kror, having the name Amir indicates Pashto got the name by way of adopting Islam, and thus from Arabic. So it could not be from some other semitic language.

Your speculations how things MAY have happened are really weak.
As I mentioned, Iranists around the world have done research on Pashto.

Manfred Lorenz: Lehrbuch des Pashto (Afghanisch). Verlag Enzyklopädie, Leipzig 1982.

Their result is that Pashto is much older than you say and I would trust them more because they are experts in this fields.

Kabul revolted against the Arab invaders in 683 AC.

Ancient Indian History and Civilization, by Sailendra Nath Sen, p 347.

A "tribal revolt" of Afghans lasted many years against Arab rule.

"...In the eighth and ninth centuries ancestors of many of today's Turkic-speaking Afghans settled in the Hindu Kush area (partly to obtain better grazing land) and began to assimilate much of the culture and language of the Pashtun tribes already present there (see Ethnic Groups, ch. 2)...."

Sources : http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/...OCID+af0006%29

Afghanistan -- Britannica Online Encyclopedia


The next time you make any assumptions, back up your claim or just stop nonsense discussions. You are not right in this topic.

[MostafaM]

and by your same account, the suicide bombers have support from locals, not every local but significant enough on grounds of their political aims. Read all of the articles. People who are sympathetic to the Talibam are not really into the Taliban themselves, but would rather have Taliban running the show, hence they support , give refuge and assist the Taliban.

You didn´t elaborate on the suicide bombin tactic.
Did we reach a common ground there?

Yes it is their opinion; their ideas are not universal laws. Hence it's an opinion.

Then your opinion about their opinion is an opinion, too.
People who have a name in the field of military history do not agree with you and it doesn´t matter what you claim. Their works are regarded as standards in literature about guerilla warfare.

This only means their theories were only successful in context to their society, not that they sound some secret ingredient.

Strategy and tactics are universal.
Their application needs to take regional aspects into account.

Pashtun tribes control roads, passages, many things. "Ordinary" people in the Pashtun sense are tribesman and local Mashars/Maliks. These people are the ones who have the say of what goes on, on the roads

Where do you live?

The southern parts of Afghanistan have changed from a malik-system into a strong-men system.
The only place where tribal system in it´s real meaning has maintained are areas like Ghazni, Wardag, Paktia, Paktika, Khost and the areas in FATA where tribal elders (speen gerey) als respected members of the tribe have a regulatory role.
No Pashtun who is armed to the teeth can be told by anyone which road to use.

The hot-bet insurgency areas like Kandahar etc. where Islamic rulers on the one side and warlords on the other side have taken controle and have sidelined the rule of the tribal councils of the old days, your talking doesn´t mean anything. Wali Karzai, a 49 year old drug-trafficer was the leader of whole southern Afghanistan. In the old days, no one would have greeted him on the streets.

Pashtun Tribal society, the tribes follow their Mashar.

I do not know where you are from, but the Pashtuns I know don´t even follow their speen gereys if they don´t want it and no one can force them.

By the way, you also forgot to address the presence of Taliban situated and running freely in areas not bordering Pakistan, shows your argument isn't at all accurate. The Taliban operating in these areas would mean that local support is definitively involved without a shadow of doubt.

Yes, the Usbek diaspora located in Chahar Darra in the north provide sanctuaries for the Taliban. They are die-hard supporters of the Taliban.

In areas like Baghlan people have resorted to support the Taliban because there is a strong animosity between the pashtuns and other ethnicities there. The Taliban are exploiting that moment.

And you just confirmed above that the Taliban also have moral support of at least a large part of the population. You confirmed that corrupt foreign backed government led to the sway to sympathizing with Taliban or at least Insurgency. (I Think it is time we distinguish between insurgency and Taliban, as not all insurgents necessarily are aligned with the Taliban or Hezbe Islami Hekmatyar).

These are common knowledge.

Yeah sure, but you're confusing Pakistani Taliban with Afghan Taliban, two distinct movements The Pakistani Taliban are against the Pakistani Government. The Tribal elders are pro Pakistani Government. It's a different shift of dynamics here.

There is no such thing. Both have the same ideology and objective. Even when South Waziristan was attacked, the "Pakistani Taliban" went to North Waziristan or Bajaur.

They do suicide bombings all over Afghanistan, Paktia doesn't have many foreign forces either, which can also explain the lack of Taliban presence there. Plus Zadrans are very powerful, I doubt Taliban really want to upset the tribal balance there.

1. Forward Base Chapman in Khost.

2. Gardez Air Base

America´s presence there is strong and robust. But they could do **** if the Taliban were welcome amongst the ordinary people. All your points so far are just cheap shots without any reference.

Haqqani himself is Zadran.
He was protected by his clan in 2001 when he left Afghanistan. After alot of attacks of his men and his Arab monkeys on ordinary people, even the Zadran broke with him.

This near enemy and far enemy dichotomy fails when you consider we're in the Post Colonial Globalized era. Pakistan is simply a proxy of former Imperial Powers. IN fact Modern Afghanistan is also a proxy. All Present Day Nation states in Asia (and Africa and Middle East) were manufactured by Colonial Powers to maintain hegemony in global matters by rearranging power structures. Some were willful proxies (Pakistan) other were just proxy by default (Afghanistan).

Afghanistan as a settlement area of "Afghans" has been mentioned by Iranian historians. Safi wrote in his book "Tareekh-e Herat" about Afghans/Pashtuns and the area they live in. Afghanistan has been invaded but it´s not a fake creation like Pakistan. It has a historical background.

Pakistan is merely an "extension" of what you label "the far enemy"; which actually isn't that far since they have direct involvement and presence in locl affairs in Afghanistan.

The US´s involvement isn´t older than Pakistans direct involvement. Pakistan´s support for a coup against the Daoud regime really shows how clueless you are. No US intervention has been proved prior to a Pakistani involvement.

Well for the reasons I already stated; these are all manufactured conflicts that are made from divide and rule policies. This whole situation is to maintain divide and rule. get people to squabble amongst themselves, keep them dependent. So there can be no doubt that the Imperial hand is the source of strength for both Afghanistan and Pakistan. Without America or UK support or general Farangay support they'll both erode. Which is for the better if you ask me.

Your theories about imperial policies sound well-known to anyones ears.
They cannot change the fact that Afghanistan´s national identity and national interests have to be protected and defined.

The media doesn't come up with slogans like "divide and rule" ; the Media says America and their Allies are waving the flag of "freedom" and "liberty". This is a fact about imperial history and its current metamorphasis. It is very relevant as it is the central principle which cultivated this situation. However, this implies that Afghanistan as with most Asian countries of today really residue of imperial presence; so this issue of National interests is really an extension of the "Great Game". As you mentioned.

From your talking so far, you seem to back the so-called internationalist idea of the "Ummah", am I wrong?

Well, if that didn´t happen in the last 1400 years when NO imperial power was intervening, then it won´t happen in the future, too.

Pakistan's major AID supplier is the U.S. Without that, many of these project would be financially impossible. China doesn't want to nurse Pakistan, the just want regional hegemony. Pakistan's existence doesn't rest on China. It rests on America. I would rather have Chinese Hegemony than European one.

Alliances shift daily.
Pakistan´s role as Chinas proxy against India is something China will never let go. They say that "Pakistan is China´s Israel", they will support Pakistan no matter what.

Your conclusions here are short sighted and naive.
Your internationalistic approach with an islamic branding on it is not an utopian and childish idea.
Internationalist ideologies have failed so far. Every history teacher could tell you that.

[graveyardofempires]

The earth is flate

[ScimitarXEdge]

This was a general information about nomadism and tribal systems.
If you want to know more about the tribal systems of the nomadic Bactrians and Soghdians, read here:

Bactria

I hope Herodotus is a source that you can accept:

Herodotus' Histories: the 28 logoi

Nothing about Bactrians being Nomadic. Athough it says that Zardusht was Bactrian....but Bactrians were not Avestan speakers so this is bit of misnomer.

No one said that.
But languages that evolve from each other or are closely related is a proof that proto-Pashto or older forms of Pashto have existed hundreds of years ago before Islam arrived.
Do I need to chew every bit for you into bite-sized peaces?

No it isn't proof of Proto Pashto existing for hundreds of years. It is only proof that Pashto evolved from OTHER languages.Key words here is OTHER languages. Which means Pashto didn't exist prior to something else evolving into it. Which means that they were NOT Pashtuns.

What you need to do is SHOW EVIDENCE and not invent something and claim it as "proof", When nothing even supports it.

We have Yaghnobi ...we have Soghdian ...we don't have evidence of Pashto.

An onthogenesis describes a process.
You on the other hand insist that prior to Islam, nothing remotly connect to Pashto as a language or Pashto as a culture existed.
A "missing link" is not an evidence for your claims.
A "missing link" doesn´t exist IF there are languages and cultures that are close to Pashto and it´s heritage.
You cannot deny that.

You're being intellectually dishonest; I fully admit languages linguistically related to Pashto existed before Islam in the region. Soghdian existed, Avetan existed.

What I'm saying is that just because these existed before Islam became predominant does not mean Pashto existed. Evidence of related languages is NOT I repeat NOT evidence of Pashto. You keep trying to deceptively weasal other languages and use some crafty manufactured jingo of "Proto Pashto". If by proto Pashto you mean "Soghdian" that is STILL not Pashto.

Evidence ....Evidence ...Evidence ...how many times do I have to stress this term?

That´s the greates nonsense I have ever heard.
Yaghnobi and Ossetian are languages that are spoken today by people who live. Their languages resemble Pashto more than any other existing language on earth. Pashtuns didn´t fall from the sky or as you may want it with the arrival of Islam.

And not ironically their respective cultures are vastly different from Pashtuns.
Their languages being related to Pashto is not evidence of Pashto. I didn't say Pashtuns fell from the sky. I said their ethnogenesis proceeds Islam.

Stop being intellectually dishonest and committing straw man fallacies please.

you still didn´t answer my question what your proof for your claims are.

The proofs are the fact that only existing evidence of Pashtun culture, ethnicity and language only occur after the Islamic era when Islam had become the predominant religion of the region.

When did Pashtun identity came into existence?

based on the evidence probably 1000 years ago.

And what aspects of Pashtunwali or tribal code have anything to do with Islam?

Elaborate!

badal (Hindus and Buddhists were non-violent and against badal)
Lashkar (Hindus and Buddhists were against warfare)
tor makh (even though Hindus and Buddhists forbade sexual immorality, they rarely penalized it so harshly)
Patrilineage (zai= bin)

You make a claim without giving any source.

The Era of Middle Pashto dates back to the times of Islamic conquest of central asia. Old Pashto dates back further.

What evidence do you need? I would say the only mention of Pashtuns come from when Pashtuns were Muslims as evidence.

What evidence of Pashto from the middle or old era do we have to confirm that this is the case?

where is YOUR evidence for these being the datings? Or that this is what your reference implied?

I do not need google-translator because I am fluent in German and English. I do not poccess the book. I had read it at the library of the University of Düsseldorf, Germany. I couldn´t find an online version either, so all I have is my memory and a wikipedia entry in German about this source.

Then go to the library and post the relevant quotations please.

I gave you the book and the page.
In a scientific debate nothing else is needed but if you find the book, I will translate it for you.

That's a very deceptive way to evade presenting evidence. since you know where the evidence is, You must find it and translate the relevant portions. Or it is hearsay.

1. I cannot provide any referrence to the gold coins.
That´s the only online source I found: Afghanistan: Mir Zakah, Paktia Province

I will try to find information at the British Museum.

2. As far as I know, Mangal, the father of the tribe left Wardak (Mangal and Wardak were brothers and historical figures) and moved to modern day Paktia. There is no historical data that would imply that the Mangal has been relocated or moved anywhere else so far.

3. There is no need to prove that. Mangal means God of Mars to Hindus, it may have long lost it´s meaning for people who have lost their Hindu religion. That may occur to you or not.

So you indicate that coins exist. Fine, I never doubted their existence. I'm asking what reference of their reference to the Mangal tribe is there.

Anecdotes do not fall from the sky.
They have a certain amount of truth in them.

that's the problem we dont know what amount is false, which isnt, or even if it's all false. That is why they're unreliable for the most part. Definitely NOT scientific. Science doesnt run on anecdotes.

For someone who questions etymological research in the first place, you seem to be very clingy when it suits your arguements. lol

I'm the one who stressed the etymological research; you were the one who were originally trying to shrug it off.

The God Mars, the red planet, and the God of war....I would suggest, that almost every culture and it´s mythology have connected the planet Mars with war, fire and destruction, your arguement that Mangal may mean fire place is a valid point.

but there's no mention of fire in any reference about Mars
Mangala - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In Turkic languages Mangal means fireplace or grill!
Good point but not in your favour!

then why is it in the Pashto dictionary? Look up Mangal yourself in qamosona.com Free Pashto Dictionaries

It says nagharrai

your confirmation also alludes to Turkic origins for the Mangal tribe

Well, you can ask for written evidence for Aboriginal languages, too. But you won´t find any because of their oral tradition. Your whole arguement here is weak. This means no one spoke Pashto before 14 AC?

But the difference is all the related languages in the vicinity of Pashto which predate Pashto have written languages.

The aboriginal languages dont have that same feature. Therefore for Pashto exist before Islam similar evidence should exist, just like it should for Soghdian and Avestan and Bactrian

Your speculations how things MAY have happened are really weak.
As I mentioned, Iranists around the world have done research on Pashto.

Then why are you completely unable to show or demonstrate this research. showing me a citation doesn't show me proof

quote the citation.

Their result is that Pashto is much older than you say and I would trust them more because they are experts in this fields.

I would only trust research which I can access. I do trust research but you making a claim which you allege has support is not the same as research itself being demonstrated.

Kabul revolted against the Arab invaders in 683 AC.

Kabul was not inhabited by Pashtuns in 683

Ancient Indian History and Civilization, by Sailendra Nath Sen, p 347.

A "tribal revolt" of Afghans lasted many years against Arab rule.

"...In the eighth and ninth centuries ancestors of many of today's Turkic-speaking Afghans settled in the Hindu Kush area (partly to obtain better grazing land) and began to assimilate much of the culture and language of the Pashtun tribes already present there (see Ethnic Groups, ch. 2)...."

where is the authors evidence supporting that?

Sources : http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/...OCID+af0006%29

Afghanistan -- Britannica Online Encyclopedia

the sources do not indicate any referential support where they derived this information.

It may as well been written by you.

The next time you make any assumptions, back up your claim or just stop nonsense discussions. You are not right in this topic.

which is what you have failed to do. follow your own advice