Taleban commander stoned to death

[khushal]

well I did have facts and based on those facts I made deductions; the deductions lead me to conclude Talibs got killed by Afghan villagers and rightfully so.

My facts were that there's no reason for the Government to lie; in fact they'd have more reason to deny it too, and that the Taliban have a reason to lie and cover things up.

officially they deny it, but that won't preclude them from revenge.
.

What are you talking about. There are no facts here. You just took a statement said by an Afghan official printed in the NYtimes and speculated it as true because you believe that he has no motive to lie while at the same time think the Taliban are falsely denying it because they are known to lie and have a motive to do damage control. You also refuse to believe the villagers could be lieing as well. You are being biased here. You are being intellectually dishonest.

The whole story does not make sense. As barakzai wror has said how did they get the guns from the two, and when they do get the guns from the two, the sons would be so enraged with anger, they would act impulsively and just shoot the two(they just saw their father get shot in front of them), not inform the villagers and start a stoning attack and then hang them up afterwards. Why is this one man with friend called a taliban commander who has no foot soldiers to command except the one with him. The title of the NYtimes article should be "afghan man with friend gets stoned by villagers because he forgot to put more than one bullet in his gun."
The whole thing does not make sense.

Afghanistan has become a place where you can kill someone, label the murdered person as Talib, the chances of you getting away with it is pretty good. The Americans do this all time when they kill innocent civilians, so does the ANA and the PAk Army.

[Afghanistan2010]

OK, so I read through the article in even more detail to make sure Im not missing any villagers and here is the list of names I come up with:

Dawud Ahmadi (government official)
Hajji Hayatullah (government official)
Hajji Abdul Manaff Khan (government official)

Then there is this interesting name:
Haji Ahmad Shah Khan (interestingly, a tribal elderr in NAWA but not Trekh Zaba) - he refers to armed men.. but does not use the word Talib or the group Taliban

Colonel Aqa (hmmm, i wonder what side he is on)

Qari Ahmadi (taliban) - denies involvement.

So Scimitar, I fail to see the quality of evidence here. I enjoy our back and forth, as being a contrarian is not a bad thing... but I expect more from your or at least an admission that this is flimsy evidence. There is much more out there to prove that local talibs can be cruel.. but this case is lacking in merit.

wonderfully explained.

[ScimitarXEdge]

OK, so I read through the article in even more detail to make sure Im not missing any villagers and here is the list of names

Haji Ahmad Shah Khan (interestingly, a tribal elderr in NAWA but not Trekh Zaba) - he refers to armed men.

firstly Trekh Zabar is village in Nawa

Let's examine Haji Ahmad Shah's quote once again

“I don’t think people feel secure in Nawa,” said Haji-Ahmad Shah Khan, a tribal elder in Nawa. “I myself don’t feel secure, because the armed men are so cruel against the people. It is hard to raise voices against them. But when someone kills someone’s father or brother in front of you, it makes you retaliate.”

All your speculation and concern regarding ambiguity would make perfect sense if it weren't for ONE crucial fact

The Taliban control these areas of Helmand or at least claim to.

If it wasn't the Taliban then their claims of providing control and security to Afghans are false, but if they do Control it as they say. Thus the only "armed men" would be Talibs.....heh I never thought I'd use the Taliban's own bull**** to call them out....

So Scimitar, I fail to see the quality of evidence here. I enjoy our back and forth, as being a contrarian is not a bad thing... but I expect more from your or at least an admission that this is flimsy evidence. There is much more out there to prove that local talibs can be cruel.. but this case is lacking in merit.

The evidence here doesn't seem flimsy to me, Taliban claim they control helmand, thus incriminating themselves


this isn't about being your contrary, it's about people trying so hard to make excuses and scapegoats for the Taliban

[ScimitarXEdge]

wonderfully explained.

but easily refuted.

[unknownprince]

^yet, you were unable to do it ScimtiarXEdge.

The US government controls the United States, and crimes still happen. It does not mean that the US government committed those crimes. If a person is shot and killed, does not mean it was a US cop who got shot and killed, or shot and killed?

You just made some "facts" up, and stamped them as truth. Whats next?

The fact is Pashtuns have a gun culture, and no one can restrict a man from carrying an AK-47.

You will now proceed to look for some other way to continue a pointless debate where you are guilty of changing goal posts over and over, but continue to fall flat on your face.


News flash: ISI controls the world Scimitar. They are worried that you have exposed them and their plans to create Punjabistan in Helmand. Not only white vans will sit outside your house, but green vans, too.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

firstly Trekh Zabar is village in Nawa

Let's examine Haji Ahmad Shah's quote once again





All your speculation and concern regarding ambiguity would make perfect sense if it weren't for ONE crucial fact

The Taliban control these areas of Helmand or at least claim to.

If it wasn't the Taliban then their claims of providing control and security to Afghans are false, but if they do Control it as they say. Thus the only "armed men" would be Talibs.....heh I never thought I'd use the Taliban's own bull**** to call them out....






The evidence here doesn't seem flimsy to me, Taliban claim they control helmand, thus incriminating themselves


this isn't about being your contrary, it's about people trying so hard to make excuses and scapegoats for the Taliban

There is nawa and then nawa da barakzaay;

Nawa district has had many operations going on there and is now claimed as a US success story.

http://www.dvidshub.net/news/76507/t...ol-base-jersey

Taliban claiming control of a region is a straw man if anything. Thats like saying, the Americans have jurisidiction over Detroit.. so any Detroit armed man must be a police man. Now you are reaching.

Just as there are districts in East Afghanistan where your father comes from, spotted with hundreds of villages, these villages have their own clans, family strengths, etc.

Also, no one with a modicum of intelligence thinks the Talibs at all levels are spotless. In fact, despite the blank check of authority given to locals to rebel against an occupier is a reasonable thing, but the manuals for civilian leniency are put out by the shura. A local talib can be fighting for this reason for example:

http://freedomsyndicate.com/fair0000/times0045.html

Or he might be a mercenary, no different than Erik Prince's Blackwater... except on a local level.

However, your equivalency here in the Vietnam era would be as the following:

Me: The Vietcong are a legitimate resistance

You: No but they recieve arms from China and other communist powers and are going to power project for them... whereas Dhiem may be an imperial puppet... but they are both puppets

Me: Find me a suitable alternative

You: They dont fight according to the Geneva conventions

Me: Its war.. assymetric war at that. They certainly did not start this one and are not setting up bases in Alabama. Blame the boys from Alabama who are setting up bases in Saigon.

Me: Alternatives?

You: Flanke and deengray from Siagon district seems like a stand up guy... here is a speech by this guy.

Me: So the Dhiem backed government which has none of its own writ and is on paper is a mechanism to allow this guy into power peacefully? Echoes of Pakistan anyone? As Pakistan's whole creation is hinged on this concept that the British left a democratic system that the people of Pakistan can work within. I think Sherpao and the other Karzai equivalent clowns within the NWFP more than adequately prove that a reboot of the whole system is necessary.

There are many easier examples out there to show that the Taliban are not necessarily operating on the purely Islamic paradigm. For instance, the hanging of Najib, despite his crimes... without a shura assessing his crimes, was not a principled thing. In an ideal Islamic set up that would not have happened as it did.

But these propaganda pieces do little to add to a meaningful discussion.

You originally said that this piece witnessed the victims... I cannot, anywhere in it, distinguish this.

So therefore, it continues to be classified as flimsy at best.

[ScimitarXEdge]

There is nawa and then nawa da barakzaay;

Nawa district has had many operations going on there and is now claimed as a US success story.

Nawa-i-Barakzai is the same place as Nawa in Helmand, the Nawa in Ghazni is simply Nawa.

take a look, there's no other Nawa there.

Taliban claiming control of a region is a straw man if anything.

It's not a straw man because I never said that this was your argument; these are what the Taliban themselves claim, they claim they run Helmand. So armed men must be under their directive or supervision. i.e. Talibaan

simple.

Thats like saying, the Americans have jurisidiction over Detroit.. so any Detroit armed man must be a police man. Now you are reaching.

no it's not because America isn't a totalitarian state (yet at least) and there's no due process of Law (hence the extrajudicial killings of the Taiban) The Taliban are the Law (at least they think so) and they operate under the banner of strict controlled authority. Apples and Oranges if there ever was one.

Just as there are districts in East Afghanistan where your father comes from, spotted with hundreds of villages, these villages have their own clans, family strengths, etc.

Doesn't compare with a Totalitarian group like the Taliban.

Also, no one with a modicum of intelligence thinks the Talibs at all levels are spotless. In fact, despite the blank check of authority given to locals to rebel against an occupier is a reasonable thing, but the manuals for civilian leniency are put out by the shura. A local talib can be fighting for this reason for example:

\

It's not just an issue of not being spotless; they're deliberately oppressive.

http://freedomsyndicate.com/fair0000/times0045.html

Or he might be a mercenary, no different than Erik Prince's Blackwater... except on a local level.

However, your equivalency here in the Vietnam era would be as the following:

Me: The Vietcong are a legitimate resistance

I've already debunked this point with Ashraf, the parameters are so distant from the Taliban-iSI that the circumstances can't be compared

a.) China wasn't an ally with America against the Vietkong, while directing the Vietkong
b.) China wasn't directing the Vietkong's activities to tyrannize it's own civilians
c.) China didn't get money from the U.S. to fight the Vietkong
d.) Vietkong had popular support both ideologically and in context of an Imperial power invading.

You: No but they recieve arms from China and other communist powers and are going to power project for them... whereas Dhiem may be an imperial puppet... but they are both puppets

Debunked above and in the debates with ashraf, you're arguing a red herring.

Me: Find me a suitable alternative

A Modern Islamic State with democratic elections and practical use of science and natural resource management

You: They dont fight according to the Geneva conventions

The issue isn't a Geneva convention

it's when they do it to MUSLIMS that's the problem, murdering and oppressing your own people contradicts logic and the legitimacy of resistance.

Me: Its war.. assymetric war at that. They certainly did not start this one and are not setting up bases in Alabama. Blame the boys from Alabama who are setting up bases in Saigon.

Asymmetric wars aren't waged against your own civilians

Me: Alternatives?

Guerilla tactics where you avoid civilian harm, making sound cooperatives and serving the peoples needs and not tyrannizing them so they see you as a valid authority.

.

So therefore, it continues to be classified as flimsy at best.

sure when you create a Manufactured version of a debate on your own terms it seems that way; when the real parameters are addressed your argument fails scrutiny.

[Bengal_Tiger]

A Modern Islamic State with democratic elections and practical use of science and natural resource management

Purely out of genuine curiousity, as I sincerely don't know, who in Afghanistan espouses that?

I think that is something that all of us here would agree with, something Islamic but not obscurantist and which flourishes in the modern world.

This is an issue for non-Afghan Muslims as well and has wider significance.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Nawa-i-Barakzai is the same place as Nawa in Helmand, the Nawa in Ghazni is simply Nawa.

take a look, there's no other Nawa there.










It's not a straw man because I never said that this was your argument; these are what the Taliban themselves claim, they claim they run Helmand. So armed men must be under their directive or supervision. i.e. Talibaan

simple.




no it's not because America isn't a totalitarian state (yet at least) and there's no due process of Law (hence the extrajudicial killings of the Taiban) The Taliban are the Law (at least they think so) and they operate under the banner of strict controlled authority. Apples and Oranges if there ever was one.



Doesn't compare with a Totalitarian group like the Taliban.

\

It's not just an issue of not being spotless; they're deliberately oppressive.

http://freedomsyndicate.com/fair0000/times0045.html

Or he might be a mercenary, no different than Erik Prince's Blackwater... except on a local level.


I've already debunked this point with Ashraf, the parameters are so distant from the Taliban-iSI that the circumstances can't be compared

a.) China wasn't an ally with America against the Vietkong, while directing the Vietkong
b.) China wasn't directing the Vietkong's activities to tyrannize it's own civilians
c.) China didn't get money from the U.S. to fight the Vietkong
d.) Vietkong had popular support both ideologically and in context of an Imperial power invading.




Debunked above and in the debates with ashraf, you're arguing a red herring.



A Modern Islamic State with democratic elections and practical use of science and natural resource management



The issue isn't a Geneva convention

it's when they do it to MUSLIMS that's the problem, murdering and oppressing your own people contradicts logic and the legitimacy of resistance.




Asymmetric wars aren't waged against your own civilians



Guerilla tactics where you avoid civilian harm, making sound cooperatives and serving the peoples needs and not tyrannizing them so they see you as a valid authority.

.



sure when you create a Manufactured version of a debate on your own terms it seems that way; when the real parameters are addressed your argument fails scrutiny.

Regarding Nawa and Nawa Barakzai that was my point, but I see you are making the same one so no need to readdress it. The issue here is the village... I do not know whether the small village cited falls into Nawa Barakzai or Nawa as NATO reports have gotten people, provinces, and locations completely wrong to the point of killing politicians they were not supposed to. Its irrelevent to the rest of the discussion thoug.

1. How do they run Helmand when it took them this long to activate a sleeper agent to take out Wali Karzai? You're basically saying that you acknowledge war propaganda exists [i.e. the Taliban and its supporters saying that they control swathes of areas when they clearly melt away the second NATO enters it and pop up else where (hence why McChyrstal called Afghanistan a game of hungry hungry hippos)].

2. Then you use admitted war propaganda to demand two potentially independent issues be linked via a claim that any armed man is ipso facto Taliban. Do you understand that the statistical considerations are against you here? Helmand province has millions of people in it with arms. Abdul Razzaq's men are also armed, as are others. They have been armed to the point where they killed hundreds of Nurzai tribesmen not too long ago. Where these armed men Taliban???

The reverse then must be true in regions where the Americans have control right? Or where Dostum has control right? All armed men must then belong to to them?

Once again you have to prove that any armed man in the province that committs a crime is Talib.

Otherwise, its just you saying: I SXE do not like Taliban and am willing to pin any crime onto them that I can.


3. The Detroit example rings true regardless of what America is or isnt... the issue is that you assign all crimes comitted in an area to having been committed by the dominant power or the supposed dominant power. You still have to prove to me, per your logic... that any shooting in Detroit tonight has not been comitted by Detroit's finest (the men in blue). Dispensation of justice has nothing to do with the act of comitting crimes brother. Thats a nonsensical forced assumption... the logic is severely faulty.


4. You need to brush up on Vietnam's history.. it was divided into a North and a south and countless civilians under Dhiem's governance were killed by the Vietcong. The Veitnemese populations and refugees in the US were the ones that hung off of helicopters as they left Saigon for exactly that reason. Proof of massacres even within North Vietnam, in their jurisdiction, that occured during the Tet offensive follow:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_at_Hu%E1%BA%BF

You ought to also read on Cambodia's role in the conflict is more akin to that of Pakistan in terms of logistical support for an insurgency. The Prime Minister had attempted to depose the sitting King to support the US.

5. Once again, the whole crux of the argument rests on you proving that the Taliban shura take all marching orders from Islamabad... their take on the durand line does you no justice in this pursuit.

I dilineated the holes in the Hamid Gul goes to Waziristan wikileaks that came from the NDS... but you have not addressed it... you simply said: it said so there must be a hint of truth there... the same NDS also said that Omar was dead 5 weeks ago, but hes not.

The intransigence of their TTP arm also appears to defy this logic. What you offered in return was a conspiracy theory where H Mehsud is basically an ISI operative of some sort. His involvement in the Khost bombing and the aftermath which involved an intensification of the drone campaign, nearly killing him, makes no sense in the attempt to prop up such a story. If anything the escalated drone campaign is destabilizing FATA.. something that Islamabad would not be keen to see.

6. You defined the parameters and moved the goal posts. First you said the article cited the relatives... then you moved the goal posts when it appears that the supposed victims were nowhere to be found in the article and said that the elders can stand in and speak for the relatives when no existing article can either give us a deeper detail of events to overcome this 1 bullet theory or provide us more detail of how the sons managed to develop powers akin to Clark Kent. I reassert that Nawa barakzai and Nawa are huge districts... quoting a single elder is like saying: an elder in Jalalabad said the Taliban are hated... there are countless villages in Jalalabad and the province. The article makes no claim that the elder, involved in the government, has any direct contact with the family.

[unknownprince]

Otherwise, its just you saying: I SXE do not like Taliban and am willing to pin any crime onto them that I can.

6. You defined the parameters and moved the goal posts. First you said the article cited the relatives... then you moved the goal posts when it appears that the supposed victims were nowhere to be found in the article

The funny thing is he does this, and continues to have his NEW points REJECTED.

Whats next? Dr. Schuer is a Talib? MK Bhadrakumar is a Talib?

[khushal]

It's not a straw man because I never said that this was your argument; these are what the Taliban themselves claim, they claim they run Helmand. So armed men must be under their directive or supervision. i.e. Talibaan

no it's not because America isn't a totalitarian state (yet at least) and there's no due process of Law (hence the extrajudicial killings of the Taiban) The Taliban are the Law (at least they think so) and they operate under the banner of strict controlled authority. Apples and Oranges if there ever was one.

Doesn't compare with a Totalitarian group like the Taliban.

.

Helmand is not run by the Taliban. Armed men can include NATO forces, ANA forces, Militia created by the US, Taliban forces, criminal elements and local villagers. You are forgetting that Afghanistan has an armed population, there are guns everywhere.

Also what reasons do you have to claim that the Taliban are totalitarian.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Regarding Nawa and Nawa Barakzai that was my point, but I see you are making the same one so no need to readdress it. The issue here is the village... I do not know whether the small village cited falls into Nawa Barakzai or Nawa as NATO reports have gotten people, provinces, and locations completely wrong to the point of killing politicians they were not supposed to. Its irrelevent to the rest of the discussion thoug.

It's referring to the same Nawa in Helmand, in the News Nawa i Barakzai in Helmand is often reported as just Nawa. You're just trying to draw straw hairs again, when you had the entire scheme completely wrong. This is called back peddling.

1. How do they run Helmand when it took them this long to activate a sleeper agent to take out Wali Karzai? You're basically saying that you acknowledge war propaganda exists [i.e. the Taliban and its supporters saying that they control swathes of areas when they clearly melt away the second NATO enters it and pop up else where (hence why McChyrstal called Afghanistan a game of hungry hungry hippos)].

This is a red herring; time binding isn't something that runs by some constant. I'm just using Taliban's own claims against them, if this is the truth then it logically follows that the consequent is true.

2. Then you use admitted war propaganda to demand two potentially independent issues be linked via a claim that any armed man is ipso facto Taliban. Do you understand that the statistical considerations are against you here? Helmand province has millions of people in it with arms. Abdul Razzaq's men are also armed, as are others. They have been armed to the point where they killed hundreds of Nurzai tribesmen not too long ago. Where these armed men Taliban???

It isn't that independent when you understand how a totalitarian regime operates on every scale of society. They claim control.....the villages are under their dictates, weapons confiscated, hence the stoning rather than the shooting.

Your question poses two cases; if Abdul Razzaq operates while Taliban claims control, then they operate under the Taliban sanction or the Taiiban are incompetent in ruling. The Taliban would never relinquish authority so whatever Abdul Razzaq does is under Taliban sanction, which still would not exonerate the Taliban

If it were a local dispute the stoned persons own tribe would cry foul and demand badal/retaliation

furthermore tribal battles are done with guns, NOT stoning, stoning is a penalty which is promoted by Islamic Groups in Afghanistan, even though I wouldnt consider Taliban legitimate Islamists, they still want to dawn the facade; Pashtuns don't traditionally use stoning. So the stoning method verifies the Taliban relationship with the act.

Conclusion; Taliban got clobbered and rightfully so.

The reverse then must be true in regions where the Americans have control right? Or where Dostum has control right? All armed men must then belong to to them?

America isn't totalitarian they're just imperialists; they just care if their institution is in place to exploit and psychologically degrade Muslims.

Once again you have to prove that any armed man in the province that committs a crime is Talib.

Just did

Otherwise, its just you saying: I SXE do not like Taliban and am willing to pin any crime onto them that I can.

I don't like the Taliban and proved my point; you're welcome.

3. The Detroit example rings true regardless of what America is or isnt...

No it doesn't; totally different cultural systems and modes of operation. apples and oranges to the Nth degree.

Argument loses merit based on False Analogy, sorry bro.

4. You need to brush up on Vietnam's history.. it was divided into a North and a south and countless civilians under Dhiem's governance were killed by the Vietcong.

We're talking about killing THEIR OWN CIVILIANS, not opponents civilians.

The Veitnemese populations and refugees in the US were the ones that hung off of helicopters as they left Saigon for exactly that reason. Proof of massacres even within North Vietnam, in their jurisdiction, that occured during the Tet offensive follow:

Even if we that Vietkong massacred their own civilians , it doesn't nullify the other points regarding the vast difference between the Taliban and Pakistan and China and Vietnam; which makes the China-Vietnam comparison totally unanalogous

BUT if we admit that they massacred their own civilians then that would show that both the Taliban and Vietkong were evil in their agendas. Rather than help legitimize the Taiban, it discredits them more.

When you start murdering your own people; you're no longer fighting for them.

5. Once again, the whole crux of the argument rests on you proving that the Taliban shura take all marching orders from Islamabad... their take on the durand line does you no justice in this pursuit.

That has long been demonstrated by Wikileaks and Taliban members saying Pakistan was giving them orders; that doesn't happen unless Taliban Shura approved, and that doesn't happen unless Taliban Shura was themselves under such instructions.

I dilineated the holes in the Hamid Gul goes to Waziristan wikileaks that came from the NDS... but you have not addressed it... you simply said: it said so there must be a hint of truth there... the same NDS also said that Omar was dead 5 weeks ago, but hes not.

Your holes were generally logically fallacious/red herrings. Even if they're from U.S. sources, they're sources which aren't meant for public consumption, thus there would be no legitimate argument of propaganda. It's the real deal.

The intransigence of their TTP arm also appears to defy this logic. What you offered in return was a conspiracy theory where H Mehsud is basically an ISI operative of some sort.

No conspiracy theory; Pakhtuns dead, Pakistan lives, simple.

His involvement in the Khost bombing and the aftermath which involved an intensification of the drone campaign, nearly killing him, makes no sense in the attempt to prop up such a story. If anything the escalated drone campaign is destabilizing FATA.. something that Islamabad would not be keen to see.

Sure it does; it's called being a patsie; I never claimed he's an agent, just a stooge. Stooges are cannon fodder.

6. You defined the parameters and moved the goal posts..

No goal posts were moved, the crime happened in Nawa, villagers of that same locale had confimed what happened, if anything you're trying to Poison The Well by commenting on the Village Elder's name.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Helmand is not run by the Taliban. Armed men can include NATO forces, ANA forces, Militia created by the US, Taliban forces, criminal elements and local villagers. You are forgetting that Afghanistan has an armed population, there are guns everywhere.

Also what reasons do you have to claim that the Taliban are totalitarian.

They claim to have control of Helmand, Taliban aren't totalitarian? so Laws about beard length IS NOT Totalitarian? If they're that knit picky on that then their level of social control is very stringent.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

It's referring to the same Nawa in Helmand, in the News Nawa i Barakzai in Helmand is often reported as just Nawa. You're just trying to draw straw hairs again, when you had the entire scheme completely wrong. This is called back peddling.




This is a red herring; time binding isn't something that runs by some constant. I'm just using Taliban's own claims against them, if this is the truth then it logically follows that the consequent is true.



It isn't that independent when you understand how a totalitarian regime operates on every scale of society. They claim control.....the villages are under their dictates, weapons confiscated, hence the stoning rather than the shooting.

Your question poses two cases; if Abdul Razzaq operates while Taliban claims control, then they operate under the Taliban sanction or the Taiiban are incompetent in ruling. The Taliban would never relinquish authority so whatever Abdul Razzaq does is under Taliban sanction, which still would not exonerate the Taliban

If it were a local dispute the stoned persons own tribe would cry foul and demand badal/retaliation

furthermore tribal battles are done with guns, NOT stoning, stoning is a penalty which is promoted by Islamic Groups in Afghanistan, even though I wouldnt consider Taliban legitimate Islamists, they still want to dawn the facade; Pashtuns don't traditionally use stoning. So the stoning method verifies the Taliban relationship with the act.

Conclusion; Taliban got clobbered and rightfully so.




America isn't totalitarian they're just imperialists; they just care if their institution is in place to exploit and psychologically degrade Muslims.


Just did




I don't like the Taliban and proved my point; you're welcome.


No it doesn't; totally different cultural systems and modes of operation. apples and oranges to the Nth degree.

Argument loses merit based on False Analogy, sorry bro.



We're talking about killing THEIR OWN CIVILIANS, not opponents civilians.


Even if we that Vietkong massacred their own civilians , it doesn't nullify the other points regarding the vast difference between the Taliban and Pakistan and China and Vietnam; which makes the China-Vietnam comparison totally unanalogous

BUT if we admit that they massacred their own civilians then that would show that both the Taliban and Vietkong were evil in their agendas. Rather than help legitimize the Taiban, it discredits them more.

When you start murdering your own people; you're no longer fighting for them.






That has long been demonstrated by Wikileaks and Taliban members saying Pakistan was giving them orders; that doesn't happen unless Taliban Shura approved, and that doesn't happen unless Taliban Shura was themselves under such instructions.



Your holes were generally logically fallacious/red herrings. Even if they're from U.S. sources, they're sources which aren't meant for public consumption, thus there would be no legitimate argument of propaganda. It's the real deal.



No conspiracy theory; Pakhtuns dead, Pakistan lives, simple.


Sure it does; it's called being a patsie; I never claimed he's an agent, just a stooge. Stooges are cannon fodder.



No goal posts were moved, the crime happened in Nawa, villagers of that same locale had confimed what happened, if anything you're trying to Poison The Well by commenting on the Village Elder's name.

Sorry my comrade, the red herrings riddle the response:

1. Abdul Razzaq is governmental. He was armed by the US and put in place by Karzai. So now, you are saying crimes comitted by Razzaq are Taliban crimes? Let me reiterate: the taliban can say whatever they want... about controlling wherever they want... its assumed to be propaganda. When you have gharib people with Korean era weaponry fighting a super power... the Super power is in control until it leaves the country. The minute the US decides to the send a contingent to Kandahar/Helmand, the insurgency shifts to East Afghanistan and vice versa. Thats hardly called control of a region. The US controls Detroit... there is no way, no how that the Taliban will ever cause the US to melt into the country side there. That is called control.

So its really unreal that you are saying any Ghil, any prostitute, any good deed or bad deed done belongs to the Taliban or was done by them. So if Mr. Karzai goes and shoots someone in the head in Kandahar... is that the Taliban having done it? This is now just you being stubborn.

2. You unmasked your own point my friend... it was villagers that reportedly stoned the "Taliban" (emphasis on the quotes are mine). So did the Taliban then give orders that the taliban be stoned? If so then you have three issues (or two issues and C is a more reasonable explanation):
A) The Taliban are supremely just and are willing to self stone (laughable)
B) The shura ordered their stoning and are just
C) Its an unreliable report relating to something somewhere sometime that requires confirmation.

3. The civilians were hit by the Vietcong on the North's side in that report. I referenced the south's casualties as well. It shows that you need to read up on how wars are fought. There is no 10,000 saints under Abu Bakr coming to take Afghanistan my friend. There is the invader and there is the invaded... two options, just as there were in Vietnam. Your offers of folks that operate under the defunct constitution that NATO itself refuses to honor is a nonstarter option. It legitimizes them completely as insurgencies are messy affairs.

The crux of your Pakistani argument need not be addressed because it rests on wikileaks... so the China Vietnam analogy is completely appropriate. The Cambodia Vietnam analogy is spot on.

4. As i stated, wikileaks documents, teh original one you confirmed, pull it up... the one about Hamid Gul traveling to waziristan... it is a DIPLOMATIC cable. That means squat. Its like saying Susan Rice saw Belhaj making romantic gestures at Condaleeza Rice and Libyan intelligence confirmed it. Your isnaad here is weak... it goes: Diplomat (who is a nonintelligence and non military trained operative) gets info from source (unnamed) who got info from NDS that some source (it must be a source or an NDS agent) witnessed Hamid Gul barking orders in Waziristan to some random guy to take our Karzai. This is the same NDS that also said Omar was dead 5 weeks ago (weakness of isnaad point 1) and it takes into no account that Khalid Khwaja and the Colonel were both found in pieces when they attempted to enter waziristan. So midline obesity hamid gul is now some sort of James Bondesque character that made it to where those guys couldnt? Why would he go all the way to waziristan when the militants are being found in Charsadda, Karachi (Baradar), Abbatobad, etc?

Repeating that wikileaks accuses the Talibs of being baddies amounts to no evidence except that you are able to repeat that claim.

5. "Your holes were generally logically fallacious/red herrings. Even if they're from U.S. sources, they're sources which aren't meant for public consumption, thus there would be no legitimate argument of propaganda. It's the real deal"

Your whole hamid gul and Taliban link rests on wikileaks which turn this statement right back against you.

Where the diplomatic cables meant to be publically consumed?

In the least this set of Army Slides, by YOUR standards, not mine, are MORE reliable since the Army provides the soldier who supervised the effort's name... and said individual also revealed the info to reporters.

7. Nawa is a part of a DISTRICT... as I said, its not a straw man to confirm that the village itself exists in Nawa Barakzai in helmand... or did they make a mistake and does it exist in Nawa Ghazni. You have to confirm that the elder comes from the village. The elder of one village is not necessarily and very probably NOT the elder of a village 3 miles down the road.

Case closed my friend. The Central Taliban is one of many legitimate armed resistances.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Sorry my comrade, the red herrings riddle the response:

1. Abdul Razzaq is governmental. He was armed by the US and put in place by Karzai. So now, you are saying crimes comitted by Razzaq are Taliban crimes? Let me reiterate: the taliban can say whatever they want... about controlling wherever they want... its assumed to be propaganda. When you have gharib people with Korean era weaponry fighting a super power... the Super power is in control until it leaves the country. The minute the US decides to the send a contingent to Kandahar/Helmand, the insurgency shifts to East Afghanistan and vice versa. Thats hardly called control of a region. The US controls Detroit... there is no way, no how that the Taliban will ever cause the US to melt into the country side there. That is called control.

Well you said yourself Taliban have infiltrated, and I'm not here defending the Government, I know they are corrupt. But this only reinforces the corrupt network of the Taliban if anything. Since they claim control

If it is Taliban propaganda, you admit they're as bad liars as you claim the government are. Hence it becomes infinite regression and you end up committing a logical fallacy.

So its really unreal that you are saying any Ghil, any prostitute, any good deed or bad deed done belongs to the Taliban or was done by them. So if Mr. Karzai goes and shoots someone in the head in Kandahar... is that the Taliban having done it? This is now just you being stubborn.

We're talking about Helmand 2011, not their entire history.

2. You unmasked your own point my friend... it was villagers that reportedly stoned the "Taliban" (emphasis on the quotes are mine). So did the Taliban then give orders that the taliban be stoned? If so then you have two issues:
A) The Taliban are supremely just and are willing to self stone (laughable)
B) The shura ordered their stoning and are just

Actually my point stressed two things

a.) Villagers didnt have firearms; if any were taken it was probably confiscated, why would Taliban want armed villagers who can rise up as a mass and revot?

b.) since Taliban punish people by stoning and this was done for revenge, and since they don't have firearms, the stoning seems to be consistent with a "tit for tat" approach to Taliban tactics.

There is no 10,000 saints under Abu Bakr coming to take Afghanistan my friend. There is the invader and there is the invaded... two options, just as there were in Vietnam.

there is no clause that says you need to have attained sainthood to not butcher and tyrannize your own people to "fight the enemy"

get real.

3. The civilians were hit by the Vietcong on the North's side in that report. I referenced the south's casualties as well. It shows that you need to read up on how wars are fought.

It also shows based on this information that using the Vietnamese scapegoat as you usually do loses merit ad shows only its ilegitimacy, even if fighting american imperialism is legitimate, it doesn't make people who massacre their own less evil than American imperialists.

Your offers of folks that operate under the defunct constitution that NATO itself refuses to honor is a nonstarter option. It legitimizes them completely as insurgencies are messy affairs.

We're talking about Massacreing YOUR OWN PEOPLE WHO YOU CLAIM TO BE liberating.

This is simply a logic issue now; you don't liberate your own people by oppressing them.

The crux of your Pakistani argument need not be addressed because it rests on wikileaks... so the China Vietnam analogy is completely appropriate. The Cambodia Vietnam analogy is spot on.

Wikileaks is whistle blower and even the U.S. confirmed its documents, and hence why they want to silence it. If that isn't a testimony of credibility, nothing is.

The Chinese analogy is wrong , for reasons already mentioned in previous posts which I wont reiterate

and Cambodia analogy maybe "spot on" but after revealing that Vietkong butchered their own ...the legitimacy issue is tossed out the window.

4. As i stated, wikileaks documents, teh original one you confirmed, pull it up... the one about Hamid Gul traveling to waziristan... it is a DIPLOMATIC cable. That means squat

These aren't the times of Nabi(saw) where you need to have identities of individuas and know who said what, there is something called reconissance now.

no need to peddle horse doodee and tell us it is roses.

Your isnaad here is weak...

your analogies are weak, if the isnad was weak Pakistan wouldn't be all angstful about it.

weak isnads dont get such adamant responses

gets info from source (unnamed) who got info from NDS that some source (it must be a source or an NDS agent) witnessed Hamid Gul barking orders in Waziristan to some random guy to take our Karzai.

These aren't the days of Nabi(saw) where you need chains of narrations; intelligence reports that are secretive are there for a reason, they'e hidden...because they have direct access to this information.

This is the same NDS that also said Omar was dead 5 weeks ago (weakness of isnaad point 1)

That's Afghanistan's intelligence, a little less up to date and sophisticated in technology. so such a point is red herring.

So midline obesity hamid gul is now some sort of James Bondesque character that made it to where those guys couldnt? Why would he go all the way to waziristan when the militants are being found in Charsadda, Karachi (Baradar), Abbatobad, etc?

It doen't take that many chapatis and pakoras to take a trip to Waziristan.

Repeating that wikileaks accuses the Talibs of being baddies amounts to no evidence except that you are able to repeat that claim.

You haven't debunked the evidence ...you have "denied" it ....please understand the distinction; ANYONE can deny something. As you are.

you have given no solid practicable evidence it's false. There's plenty it is real

PLUS if wiileaks was reliable; the Taliban wouldn't have thanked wikileaks for exposing the "callaborators".

nice try; what you're doing is what they call scapegoating.


5. "Your holes were generally logically fallacious/red herrings. Even if they're from U.S. sources, they're sources which aren't meant for public consumption, thus there would be no legitimate argument of propaganda. It's the real deal"

Your whole hamid gul and Taliban link rests on wikileaks which turn this statement right back against you.

because you say so? Come on ....that's not a meritable rebuttal; you're charting AshrafGhaljay level of intellectual incompetence here.

Where the diplomatic cables meant to be publically consumed?

If they were, why would they be claimed as fiction by Hamid Gul?

In the least this set of Army Slides, by YOUR standards, not mine, are MORE reliable since the Army provides the soldier who supervised the effort's name... and said individual also revealed the info to reporters.

but you fail to understand the diplomatic cables are intelligence controlled by military as well; hence the unnamed soldier you're referring to is facing a court martial.

7. Nawa is a part of a DISTRICT... as I said, its not a straw man to confirm that the village itself exists in Nawa Barakzai in helmand... or did they make a mistake and does it exist in Nawa Ghazni. You have to confirm that the elder comes from the village. The elder of one village is not necessarily and very probably NOT the elder of a village 3 miles down the road.

]

Case closed my friend. The Central Taliban is one of many legitimate armed resistances.[/QUOTE]


there's no Nawa that's apart of the district; you were just wrong that. they just shortened Nawa i barakzai into Nawa, they weren;t talking about Nawa in Ghazni because they have referred to it in other news if you google Nawa Helmand.