Pakistan: Haqqani Militant Network Has Ties With Government, Ambassador

[emkhan]

Capital Talk - Gen.(R) A.Qayum & Farukh Saleem - 26 Sep 2011 - Part - 3/3 - YouTube

[ScimitarXEdge]

If the pashtuns were not rebelling and trully supported the governmnet as you say, the rebellion would not last a week

I can flip your argument around on you; if the Pashtuns were rebelling then this war would have been won 8 years ago.

. The poll suggests something that defies logic.

it doesn't defy logic, it just defies certain false assummptions you present as if they're automatically valid. I.e. the Pakistani narrative.

Most NA people don't want peace with the Taliban. Most Taliban don't want peace with NA or the Afghan government. Taliban commanders that have joined the governmnet usually have second thoughts.

If that was the case then Burhanuddin Rabbani wouldn't have been assassinated trying to negotiate a peace deal with the Taliban. That guy isn't even anti Pakistani either.

One must study how the poll was conducted. How were the querstions asked. Where were they asked. Was it only educated people that werein the polls or average uneducated afghans.

That's merely a conspiracy theory by you. Unless you can show evidence of biased sampling.

.
what is happening on the ground is reliable and the facts are the ground are not promising.

well facts on the ground tat there is no majority Pashtun resistance to the Government and yet there are numerous tribes resisting the Taliban.

this poll says that afghan have no confidence in their governmnet
Afghans' Approval of Their Leadership Falls to 33%

and yet none of these pollls say they reject government authority or deny support for the Government itself

[ScimitarXEdge]

I kept putting new sources out there because there were too many sources
out there. You couldnt debunk none of them and neither could anyone else.

really? so you had plenty of sources proving it, everytime I counter responded at how flawed your the stuff you posted was

whether it was some guy who admitted to doing things to serve Israel against his people

a woman who says she has an agenda against Islam

and some very ambiguous videos.

you were responding back because you had air tight evidence? oooook

the Taliban are part of the Pashtun resistance. The resistance fight each other all the time.

You're assuming they're all Pashtuns ....which isn't true and nullifies the Pashtun resistance theory. sort of hard to be fighting for tribal rights when you have Punjabi ISI leaders ordering the deaths of tribal elders.


HIG forces clash with Taliban forces constantly. Many of the Pashtun resistance fighters only fight to get their land free from foreign forces and foreign influence and have no organization what so ever.

Even ANA forces fire on foreign forces from time to time.
Report Sees Threat in Afghan Allies - WSJ.com

I don't deny a resistance against the U.S. exists; But the Pashtun resistance angle is nonsense. And the claim that most tribes support it is also nonsense. You can't "support" the thing you're fighting against.

It is reasonable to asses that once the foreign forces leave, most fighters would return back to village life and lay down their arms much like what happened when the soviets withdrew.

Yeah and then a huge civil war ensued....and Afghanistan has even more heinous crimes occur. If history repeats. the cycle is sure to continue.

You need to visit Afghanistan Tribal areas in order to understand what your talking about because you have no clue.

Yes somehow the guy who contradicts the very tribes he claims to understand ..."knows what he's talking about"

You still haven't explained why the Tribes support the Government if they're against it.

It is exactly the Tajik narrative. They deny that pashtun have been marginalized and everything is "hunky dory" and claim that the resistance is solely Pakistans slaves which is what you preach.

If it was the Tajik narrative, then why are there Tajiks, Uzbeks and other non-Pashtuns in the Taiban, why would they care about Pashtun tribes having primacy?

That the resistance are "waton ferosh" and the Afghan government is not.

Never stated that, I just said the MAJORITY of Pashtuns are willing to accept the Government's authority.

You live in a delusional idyllic world that Pashtuns are these mystical noble warriors. MOst Pashtuns are tired, and don't want to fight anymore. Especially given the cost.

You are desperately trying to mute the resistance by labeling them as a handful of pakistans slaves but ignoring the fact that America had to send 160,000+ troops to handle these handful of slaves.

That's what the Taliban are; sorry if you don't want to admit being a Pakistani slave. , sending 160,000 troops means they sent 160,000 troops. I don't label them anything

That's what the EVIDENCE shows them to be.

Ignoring the facts is not going to solve the problem. you must embrace the facts in order to solve the problem.

then stop ignoring the facts; every single source imaginable has revealed the Taliban's subservience to Pakistani's ISI

[khushal]

really? so you had plenty of sources proving it, everytime I counter responded at how flawed your the stuff you posted was

whether it was some guy who admitted to doing things to serve Israel against his people

a woman who says she has an agenda against Islam

and some very ambiguous videos.

you were responding back because you had air tight evidence? oooook

I was using your own logic and you were arguing against your own logic.

You're assuming they're all Pashtuns ....which isn't true and nullifies the Pashtun resistance theory. sort of hard to be fighting for tribal rights when you have Punjabi ISI leaders ordering the deaths of tribal elders.

The tribal elders that are being killed are pro government. There are also tribal elders that are against the government that are also being arrested, tortured, and killed by government and NATO forces. Whats with you and the Tajik narrative, You are only revealing one side of the story.

I don't deny a resistance against the U.S. exists; But the Pashtun resistance angle is nonsense. And the claim that most tribes support it is also nonsense. You can't "support" the thing you're fighting against.

You keep insisting that I say tribes support the Taliban. I never claimed that. I have said the tribes support no one but naturally want their autonomy. What they dont support is central authority. What I keep saying is that the Taliban like the late Zahir Shah understands this and the Afghan government and NATO do not.

Yeah and then a huge civil war ensued....and Afghanistan has even more heinous crimes occur. If history repeats. the cycle is sure to continue.

The civil war was not huge. It was only in the urban centers. Most of the rural areas were peaceful after the Soviets left.

Yes somehow the guy who contradicts the very tribes he claims to understand ..."knows what he's talking about"
You still haven't explained why the Tribes support the Government if they're against it.

I never said they support the government. It was you that claimed it including claiming that support means giving up autonomy. I was arguing support does not mean giving up autonomy. You are back peddling because you have no idea what you are talking about.

If it was the Tajik narrative, then why are there Tajiks, Uzbeks and other non-Pashtuns in the Taiban, why would they care about Pashtun tribes having primacy?

I have not heard of such a thing and if tajiks and uzbeks are appart of the Taliban, they would be just a handful, extreme minority almost not worth mentioning.

Never stated that, I just said the MAJORITY of Pashtuns are willing to accept the Government's authority.

If this was the case than we would not have 160,000+ NATO forces in the country.

You live in a delusional idyllic world that Pashtuns are these mystical noble warriors. MOst Pashtuns are tired, and don't want to fight anymore. Especially given the cost.

Pashtuns are not mystical noble warriors. Pashtuns are a tribal people and because of social and economic structure of tribal societies, pashtuns are naturally forced to rebel against central authority no matter where it is from, if it is Alexander, Persian, Moghul, British, Soviet, Paki, Afghan, NATO or anyone else. You seem to not want to understand this because your goal is promoting the Tajik narrative.

That's what the Taliban are; sorry if you don't want to admit being a Pakistani slave. , sending 160,000 troops means they sent 160,000 troops. I don't label them anything

Whats the purpose of sending those troops and why are they having such a difficult time taming the nation that pakistani slaves so easily tamed. Sorry if you dont want to admit being a Tajik slave, but if the Tajiks were men enough to fight their own battle, then we would not need 160,000+ NATO troops doing the fighting for them.

then stop ignoring the facts; every single source imaginable has revealed the Taliban's subservience to Pakistani's ISI

Every single source I have provided have proven the root cause is the autonomous nature of the tribes, you just choose to ignore them because it would turn your Tajik slave mentality upside down. It is illogical to believe that a handful of paki slaves can force a superpower to beg for negotiations. Even if the Taliban join the government and lay down their arms and the autonomy of the tribes are not respected, the violence will not subside. The Taliban are not the core nor the reason of the violence, they are only taking advantage of the incompetence of the Afghan government and NATO policy makers.

[ScimitarXEdge]

I was using your own logic and you were arguing against your own logic. -

My logic didn't have sources which openly admitted to having nefarious agendas.

I was debating your strawman ....not anything of mine.I make sure I'm precise with what I state, which is why whenever you respond back you miss the mark because you neglect some crucial detail or another.

the tribal elders that are being killed are pro government. There are also tribal elders that are against the government that are also being arrested, tortured, and killed by government and NATO forces. Whats with you and the Tajik narrative, You are only revealing one side of the story.

I'm not you're just regurgitating the same bull**** I debunked to try to divert Taliban's slavery to Pakistan.

If I were giving a "Tajik Narrative" why would I say Taliban have Tajiks amongst them?

Not very good at logical thinking either; which is why you can't be using my logic because you aren't logical to begin with

You keep insisting that I say tribes support the Taliban. I never claimed that. I have said the tribes support no one but naturally want their autonomy.

you equating Taliban activities to being a "tribal insurgency" is implying the Taliban are legitimized by Pashtuns.

Maybe if you stopped defending anything and everything Talib, Real Pashtun tribals wouldnt suicide bomb (according to your logic)

What they dont support is central authority. What I keep saying is that the Taliban like the late Zahir Shah understands this and the Afghan government and NATO do not.

WHich is nonsense because the whole point of Shari'ah Law which the Taliban attempt to advocate is to subdue Tribal law. did you not see Sayyid Rahmatullah Hashemi brag about how the Taliban intruded upon tribal customs? You are blind to reality.

The civil war was not huge. It was only in the urban centers. Most of the rural areas were peaceful after the Soviets left.

If that were the case then the Taliban wouldn't have claimed autonomy and there would have been no need to claim authority on Southern Afghanistan.

logic debunks you here ....try again

I never said they support the government. It was you that claimed it including claiming that support means giving up autonomy. I was arguing support does not mean giving up autonomy. You are back peddling because you have no idea what you are talking about.

You said they support when offered money, support is support. Support of a GOVERNMENT means taking their authority.

You're back peddling because you're lost in irrational rhetoric

I have not heard of such a thing and if tajiks and uzbeks are appart of the Taliban, they would be just a handful, extreme minority almost not worth mentioning.

That's because the ignorance you accuse me of is really your own; in truth it is you who have no idea what you're talking about and this is proof

Taliban extend sphere of influence, expert says - Trend

Afghanistan's Taliban militants are expanding their influence further into regions outside their traditional power base, the Afghanistan Analysts Network (AAN) said, dpa reported.

"Their intake from non-Pashtun ethnic groups is growing, from where the Taliban hardly recruited in the past," AAN co-director Thomas Ruttig said.

That trend was particularly obvious in Kunduz province in north-eastern Afghanistan, where German troops are based, he said.

In a report released Tuesday, the AAN criticized a significant lack of understanding about the nature of the Taliban movement by the international community.

The Taliban were no longer a tribal Pashtun movement, but have turned into a political Islamist movement in which ethnicity no longer plays a role, which opened the Taliban to non-Pashtuns, Ruttig said.

An increasing number of Afghan Tajik and Uzbek commanders were joining the Taliban movement, the German analyst said.

If you really knew about Afghanistan , or anything else you discuss you'd have known this. My Pakistani fiend.

so much for "Pashtun Tribal liberation" slant to justify the Taliban; you'll never have any credibility with that again.

If this was the case than we would not have 160,000+ NATO forces in the country.

That's a non-sequitur; number of NATO troops has nothing to do with how much Pashtuns support the government

and if that the case there are 15 million or so Pashtuns in Afghanistan; if they were unanimously against the Government they'd have ousted it by now.

Most Pashtuns just dont want to fight anymore; that's why they support the government.

Pashtuns are not mystical noble warriors. Pashtuns are a tribal people and because of social and economic structure of tribal societies, pashtuns are naturally forced to rebel against central authority no matter where it is from, if it is Alexander, Persian, Moghul, British, Soviet, Paki, Afghan, NATO or anyone else. You seem to not want to understand this because your goal is promoting the Tajik narrative.

All rhetoric made by some romanticized ethnocentrist. Only a Pakistani would call it a Tajik narrative.

Whats the purpose of sending those troops and why are they having such a difficult time taming the nation that pakistani slaves so easily tamed. Sorry if you dont want to admit being a Tajik slave, but if the Tajiks were men enough to fight their own battle, then we would not need 160,000+ NATO troops doing the fighting for them.

They just like pumping their own ego is my guess.

Your Tajik slave angle loses sway when your Taliban have Tajiks in them. That's just your hurt feelings for being called Pakistani slave talking :P/

Every single source I have provided have proven the root cause is the autonomous nature of the tribes, you just choose to ignore them because it would turn your Tajik slave mentality upside down. It is illogical to believe that a handful of paki slaves can force a superpower to beg for negotiations. Even if the Taliban join the government and lay down their arms and the autonomy of the tribes are not respected, the violence will not subside. The Taliban are not the core nor the reason of the violence, they are only taking advantage of the incompetence of the Afghan government and NATO policy makers.

Which source? The Sources that show there are non-Pashtuns in the Taliban; and hence would nullify your idiotic claims, or would it be Taliban edicts flaunting how they forced people to stop listening to music and dancing and other tribal customs.

you're only fooling yourself with self delusion

and no one ever claimed that the Taliban are the "sole" reason for the violence; I am saying they're Pakistani slaves, you were defending them and then trying to use the Pashtun tribal scapegoat remember?

[khushal]

afghans mostly have a sit and wait approach to things. i believe that most don't support the taliban or the government. this mostly being to the "don't put all your eggs in one basket" when there is no guarantee attitude.

as for the poll, it looks like 44% approve of the job performance of karzai. thats better than many western leaders and their peoples perceptions.

afghans are simple people, they want physical security and some opportunity at economic growth. leaders and governments are not judged the same way in afghanistan as they are in the US.

and lets not pretend that all afghans are sharp and perceptive as we want to think they are. i could bring up that now well known poll about most afghans not knowing anything about 9/11.

Just like average Americans, Afghans are in their own world. Most young Americans(who are almost all literate) cant even find Afghanistan on the map and this is the country that they are at war with. Why would anyone be surprised if Afghans(who are mostly illiterate) would not know anything about 9/11. 90% of Afghans haven't heard of 9/11 and 90% of Americans cant find Afghanistan on a map.
Young Americans Geographically Illiterate, Survey Suggests

[khushal]

I can flip your argument around on you; if the Pashtuns were rebelling then this war would have been won 8 years ago.

smoke screen, the Afghans are fighting from a inferior position. the only thing thay can do to resist is harass the enemy. You are under a belief that the resistance is militarily equal to NATO. You live in a fairy tale.

it doesn't defy logic, it just defies certain false assummptions you present as if they're automatically valid. I.e. the Pakistani narrative.

You defy logic on every level, you believe the afghan resistance has F-16's and stealth fighters.

If that was the case then Burhanuddin Rabbani wouldn't have been assassinated trying to negotiate a peace deal with the Taliban. That guy isn't even anti Pakistani either.

Forget about your tajik hero, Rabani. The man was an opportunist who was blinded by his won selfishness. He accomplished nothing great, The only thing he was successful at was the destruction of his country.

That's merely a conspiracy theory by you. Unless you can show evidence of biased sampling.

Why dont you proved evidence of the sampling, so I can point out the biasness in it.

well facts on the ground tat there is no majority Pashtun resistance to the Government and yet there are numerous tribes resisting the Taliban.

So the 160,000+ NATO troops are manikins

and yet none of these pollls say they reject government authority or deny support for the Government itself

Yes everything is hunky dory in Afghanistan. The Paki slaves have forced a super power to beg for negotiations.
These polls also does not point out that afghans love the corruption in the government, the fact that criminal warlords run the government, And anyone speaking against the governmnet gets a little message like this.
This is what happens if you talk **** about Police in Afghanistan - YouTube

[khushal]

My logic didn't have sources which openly admitted to having nefarious agendas.

I was debating your strawman ....not anything of mine.I make sure I'm precise with what I state, which is why whenever you respond back you miss the mark because you neglect some crucial detail or another.

Your logic is nonsense. you believe people don't lie during war, you believe the Taliban are capable of doing a US style "Abotabad raid." You are under the impression the Taliban can militarily rule the world.

I'm not you're just regurgitating the same bull**** I debunked to try to divert Taliban's slavery to Pakistan.
If I were giving a "Tajik Narrative" why would I say Taliban have Tajiks amongst them?

Not very good at logical thinking either; which is why you can't be using my logic because you aren't logical to begin with

There are also Pakistanis that work for the Afghan government and NATO forces who fight the Taliban. So your idea of a pakistani narrative is also debunked. It is you who have no logic.

you equating Taliban activities to being a "tribal insurgency" is implying the Taliban are legitimized by Pashtuns.

Maybe if you stopped defending anything and everything Talib, Real Pashtun tribals wouldnt suicide bomb (according to your logic)

It is you who is defending irrationality. you have answered nothing, what are 160,000+ NATO troops doing in Afghanistan fighting a handful of Paki slaves.

WHich is nonsense because the whole point of Shari'ah Law which the Taliban attempt to advocate is to subdue Tribal law. did you not see Sayyid Rahmatullah Hashemi brag about how the Taliban intruded upon tribal customs? You are blind to reality.

The Taliban know nothing about Sharia. They were forcing pashtun tribal customs on the northern minorities.

You said they support when offered money, support is support. Support of a GOVERNMENT means taking their authority.

support in Afghanistan means, give us aid and we wont harass you. What is the reason for the 160,000+ NATO troops in Afghanistan, surely they are not there vacationing.

You're back peddling because you're lost in irrational rhetoric
That's because the ignorance you accuse me of is really your own; in truth it is you who have no idea what you're talking about and this is proof

Taliban extend sphere of influence, expert says - Trend

Afghanistan's Taliban militants are expanding their influence further into regions outside their traditional power base, the Afghanistan Analysts Network (AAN) said, dpa reported.
If you really knew about Afghanistan , or anything else you discuss you'd have known this. My Pakistani fiend.

so much for "Pashtun Tribal liberation" slant to justify the Taliban; you'll never have any credibility with that again.

That is in Kunduz, a pashtun majority province and like I said earlier, the Tajiks and Uzbeks are just a handful, almost not worth mentioning.
try again.

That's a non-sequitur; number of NATO troops has nothing to do with how much Pashtuns support the government

and if that the case there are 15 million or so Pashtuns in Afghanistan; if they were unanimously against the Government they'd have ousted it by now.
Most Pashtuns just dont want to fight anymore; that's why they support the government.

not when there is no organization which is almost impossible in a tribal society, and fighting from a inferior militarily and economic position

All rhetoric made by some romanticized ethnocentrist. Only a Pakistani would call it a Tajik narrative.

They just like pumping their own ego is my guess.
Your Tajik slave angle loses sway when your Taliban have Tajiks in them. That's just your hurt feelings for being called Pakistani slave talking :P/

Your pakistani slave loses sway when you have pakistani working for the Afghan governmnet and NATO. There is no ethnocentrism from my side, I have criticized the Taliban as well as NATO as well as the Afghan government on many occasions. I have even said that the Tajiks(especially of panjshir's) reaction to the Taliban is natural and its main fear is the repeat of what happened in 1929 but what would you know anything about that.
It is you whose hurt feelings of being proved wrong who calls everyone that disagrees with you a paki slave or calling them ethnocentric, not to mention other much worse derogatory name calling.

Which source? The Sources that show there are non-Pashtuns in the Taliban; and hence would nullify your idiotic claims, or would it be Taliban edicts flaunting how they forced people to stop listening to music and dancing and other tribal customs.
you're only fooling yourself with self delusion

Read my previous threads all the sources are listed, but you ignore them intentionally.
They only enforced these things where they could and that was only in the cities. They could do nothing in the tribal areas.

and no one ever claimed that the Taliban are the "sole" reason for the violence; I am saying they're Pakistani slaves, you were defending them and then trying to use the Pashtun tribal scapegoat remember?

No they are just taking advantage of the Afghan governments incompetence of not dealing with the tribes autonomous nature correctly. They are filling in the void which the government should have handled a long time ago.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Your logic is nonsense. you believe people don't lie during war, you believe the Taliban are capable of doing a US style "Abotabad raid." You are under the impression the Taliban can militarily rule the world.

Strawman, I never said the Taliban are capable of anything except causing instability. But that's the problem they murder more Muslims than invaders; which is why they have to go.

Of course people lien during a war; the problem I have is you use the "they are lying" card when it doesn't ideologically serve the interests of the Taliban

I have yet to see you openly criticiz the Taliban vociferously; if you have please point it out.

There are also Pakistanis that work for the Afghan government and NATO forces who fight the Taliban. So your idea of a pakistani narrative is also debunked. It is you who have no logic.

There are know known Pakistanis in the Afghan Government unless you can point to people with Pakistani citizenship working for the Government.

and Pakistanis are working WITH NATO not "for" NATO, they're also leading over Taliban at the same time, as exposed by their own NATO comrades.

It is you who is defending irrationality. you have answered nothing, what are 160,000+ NATO troops doing in Afghanistan fighting a handful of Paki slaves.
The Taliban know nothing about Sharia. They were forcing pashtun tribal customs on the northern minorities.

Your questions are absolutely irrelevant nonsense; and have been debunked by infinite regression. How many troops there are is inconsequential. Soviets had about 115,000 plus 55,000 commie afghans on their side. Yet they suffered millions in destroyed equipment and lost several times the current U.S. casualties in 8 years. If You want to play trial by numbers. Then that right there incriminates the Taliban cause as some tribal movement, because we all know that Pashtuns were more widespreadly fighting the Soviets. If the tribals were involved now then we'd see NATO blood flowing like rivers. Yet Taliban apologists only have a fallen chinook to glee over and numerous make believe stories and less than 5000 casualties in 10 years.

Even if we factor in the military inferiority factor the impact against NATO should have been much stronger than what it is. It should be on the scale of Soviets if your tribal argument were even remotely true.


The handful of Pakistani slaves are constantly being rebatched once a bunch are killed off, usually well meaning but gullible Pashtuns who are easily deceived and manipulated.

so measuring beard length was tribal law? banning attan and music was tribal law? making people go to a jama'at to pray was tribal law?

I know Taliban know nothing about Shari'ah; their idea of Shari'ah is corrupted and based on ignorant Indian Deobandi dogmatism. but their agenda was to perpetuate that narrative of Deobandi Shari'ah over the tribal laws.

support in Afghanistan means, give us aid and we wont harass you. What is the reason for the 160,000+ NATO troops in Afghanistan, surely they are not there vacationing.

Whatever support means, they expect the Government to take care of them, and they still believe in a Government over the Taliban. The statistics regarding the Government being unable to provide them security is precisely because the Taliban threaten their security,

That is in Kunduz, a pashtun majority province and like I said earlier, the Tajiks and Uzbeks are just a handful, almost not worth mentioning.
try again.

yeah that's it, sweep any evidence that thwarts your narrative. Uzbeks + Tajiks + theTaliban = Taliban not a tribal Pashtun movement.

your argument fails ....and pretending it's negligible that they have non-Pashtuns in an allegedly "tribal movement" is just short sighted logic on your part.

not when there is no organization which is almost impossible in a tribal society, and fighting from a inferior militarily and economic position

No organization? What are Mashars, Lashkars, Jirgas? All elements of organization and your military inferiority argument fails ; considering that when Tribal Pashtuns were really involved during the Soviet era, then we saw much more convincing results.

Your pakistani slave loses sway when you have pakistani working for the Afghan governmnet and NATO

Horse****; you'e mindlessly reciprocating my rhetoric to save face. Yet no Pakistani Nationals are in the Afghan government and Taliban admit to Pakistani directors.

. There is no ethnocentrism from my side, I have criticized the Taliban as well as NATO as well as the Afghan government on many occasions

Please show us an example of you criticizing the Taliban as harshly as you have NATO. I have paid my dues, in fact most of your arguments are watered down versions of my arguments against secularists when I debated their pro-NATO arguments a few months ago.

.

It is you whose hurt feelings of being proved wrong who calls everyone that disagrees with you a paki slave or calling them ethnocentric, not to mention other much worse derogatory name calling.

You're such an intellectually incompetent little kid

"I know you are but what am I"....seriously? grow up.


You're a Pakistani slave because you support the Taliban; stop supporting them and trying to legitimize them as some Pashtun tribal movement or even an Islamic movement. and you won't be deemed a Pakistani slave anymore.

Read my previous threads all the sources are listed, but you ignore them intentionally.

I have read pretty much everything you have posted about the subject; you have posted nothing that supports your arguments

My point was to highlight that the very things you're trying to defend admit everything you're saying is wrong.

if the Taliban's own Ambassador says they were trampling tribal law; now I do concede in "certain" instances they applied some warped tribal interpretations, that doesn't mean they went by "tribal law" since there's no tribal law that bans music. There's also no tribal law demanding woman's seclusion. That's pue deobandism.

They only enforced these things where they could and that was only in the cities. They could do nothing in the tribal areas.

Most of Afghanistan is rural, so villages were also imposed upon; the only women who didn't wear burqa were Kuchis , and Kuchiyan are only 3 Million , those are generous estimates.. Burqa is not a Pashtun tribal custom.

No they are just taking advantage of the Afghan governments incompetence of not dealing with the tribes autonomous nature correctly. They are filling in the void which the government should have handled a long time ago.

No they're creating the situation for people to feel like they can't find security with the government

Notice none of the Pastun tribes are speaking about tribal autonomy, but are saying they want safety and protection from their government.

That's reality; even if we're against NATO imperialism and how it exploits people to serve their agenda. That is what Pashtuns want.

[ScimitarXEdge]

smoke screen, the Afghans are fighting from a inferior position. the only thing thay can do to resist is harass the enemy. You are under a belief that the resistance is militarily equal to NATO. You live in a fairy tale.

Smoke screen of what? Afghans fought from an inferior position with 115,000 Soviets and 55,000 commie Afghans. Yet we don't see nearly the same amount of damage done to NATO as the Soviets.

The difference here is the amount of public support.

You defy logic on every level, you believe the afghan resistance has F-16's and stealth fighters.

Afghans didn't have F-16's in the 80's either, and yet were able to take down Soviet Aircraft constantly.

All your Taliban have is one chinook shot down.

Forget about your tajik hero, Rabani. The man was an opportunist who was blinded by his won selfishness. He accomplished nothing great, The only thing he was successful at was the destruction of his country.

My Tajik hero? I'm not concerned about Rabbani, but rather the ultimate consequence will be bad. A new civil war will brew, thanks to the Taliban. Everyone, including the Taliban by YOUR OWN admission are opportunists. Who they're working for is another question. Rabbani wanted an end to violence so that Muslims don't need to die needlessly anymore. Taliban killed him so they can kill more Muslims.

You do the math. What's happening now is what we should focus on.

Why dont you proved evidence of the sampling, so I can point out the biasness in it.

The Onus is On you; you made a claim of biased sampling , it's your job to prove there was bias. You're rejecting evidence based on an absurd claim.

At least when I discredit your sources, I show HOW and WHY their not credible (refer back to Hamas debate and using Nonie Darwish as a reference lol)

So the 160,000+ NATO troops are manikins

Mannequins* ....no they're there, but much like the Soviets, they think overwhelming force guarantees victory. It's about ego for them.

Yes everything is hunky dory in Afghanistan. The Paki slaves have forced a super power to beg for negotiations.

Never said it was honkey dory in Afghanistan; it never has been and probably never will be. Afghanistan will probably cease to be a country in 20 years which is fine by me. The point is however, Afghans believe that a organized government has more to offer than, a bunch of illiterates who are easily brainwashed by the ISI.

These polls also does not point out that afghans love the corruption in the government, the fact that criminal warlords run the government, And anyone speaking against the governmnet gets a little message like this.
]

They show they prefer the corruption in the Government, over their wives or children dying in suicide bombing.

Think about that ...Mister "Tribal", Suicide bombing other MUslims. Remember the Iraq war? the Sunni Triangle, and how the Sunnis were pro-insurgency, the assasinations of Sunni Tribal elders, and suicide bombing killing civilians switched them over to NATO .....replace Iraq with Afghanistan, and see a pattern here?

[کیش]

Afghans supporting the Muj in the 80's, but not the ones these days are a bunch of hypocrites. I'm not saying support the Taliban, but it's hypocritical to support the 80's version and not the current version.


Same goes for the Awghans who support American democracy, but not soviets communism.

[ScimitarXEdge]

I dont think it took much to buy over the Iraqi Arabs, suicide bombing and killing tribal elders pretty much convinced them. I wouldn't call turning against people murdering them as "buying". But I guess for Pakistani slaves like yourself you can't imagine how in the world people would reject tyranny.

and what about Pashtuns? did you not see what Khushal said? He believes Pashtuns support the Government because they were bought. And Khushal himself is Pashtun. I'm also Pashtun, and I know of Shinwaris being bought to not fight NATO. They are however a minority example. Most of the tribes don't want to fight anymore because they're tired of dying off.

Call it what you want but people generally turn against anyone who claims they're One of them and yet goes around murdering and killing them.

By the way , stick to your original ID it's not hard to figure out who you are.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Afghanistan: Sangin insurgents agree to stand up to Taliban - Telegraph

Marine Maj. Gen. Richard Mills, who commands coalition forces in the southwest, said the deal was struck between local elders in the Sangin district and Helmand Governor Gulabuddin Mangal with the consultation of coalition forces.
The Taliban stronghold has been the scene of some of the worst fighting in the war, but tribal elders have agreed to hand in their weapons and join the peace process.
However it is unlikely that the violence will cease immediately in Sangin as the die-hard Taliban leadership under the command of Mullah Mohammad Omar, which is based in the Pakistani city of Quetta, will keep fighting.

Sunni tribes turn against jihadis / The Christian Science Monitor - CSMonitor.com

Until recently, many of the Sunni Arab tribes in Anbar and local insurgent leaders collaborated with Islamic extremist groups whose funding and manpower is thought to come largely from abroad. They had a common goal: drive out the Americans.

But Mr. Zarqawi's indiscriminate killing of innocent Iraqis has alienated many of his erstwhile Iraqi allies. His shadowy militant group, known as Al Qaeda in Iraq, is believed to have assassinated four prominent Anbar sheikhs. And in January when hundreds of Anbar men turned up at an Iraqi Army recruiting depot in Ramadi, the provincial capital, a suicide bomber killed 70 would-be soldiers.

Zarqawi's brutal methods have stirred controversy beyond Iraq, as well. When he declared an "all out war" on Shiites last September, his former mentor, Abu Mohammed al-Maqdisi, publicly rebuked him and Al Qaeda's No. 2, Ayman al-Zawahiri, warned him against alienating the Muslim masses.

yeah sure sounds like they got paid alright

[ScimitarXEdge]

Afghans supporting the Muj in the 80's, but not the ones these days are a bunch of hypocrites. I'm not saying support the Taliban, but it's hypocritical to support the 80's version and not the current version.


Same goes for the Awghans who support American democracy, but not soviets communism.

In the 80's the Mujahideen weren't going around indiscriminately killing Muslims .....and even then the good Mujahideen like Muhammad Nabi Muhammadi and Yunus Khalis stopped fighting for the sake of Muslims lives

why don't the Taliban have the same sense?

[ScimitarXEdge]

It is a stated fact, now to be recorded in history. Petraues won the Iraq war by paying the Iraqis to stop fighting. This has not worked in Afghanistan.

I already debunked that in the post above.

Didn't know khushal was now your evidence, but he said nothing which shows that Pashtuns are being bought. He said that the few who have joined the Kabul government have been bought, not the the rural masses who can never be ruled over.

oh yeah? either you're blind or you're selectively reading

. Tribesmen are usually bribed to give support, as long as payment is given, the support will exist, once payment stops so will support. The British were masters at employing such tactics because of their enormous wealth.

need I say more?

Yes, the few Afghans have been bought, not the masses though. No poll tailored will convince anyone otherwise. Ample US reports show that within the rural areas of Afghanistan, there is considerable support for opposition forces (which includes the Taliban)

The few? eh? Then why aren't the majority of tribes out there fighting against NATO, we should be seeing 12 Million pashtuns fighting NATO, not a measly 20,000-30,000

Yes, it is obvious you just googled that just now, and your source(s) consist of some "scholarly" articles. it really becomes such a laugh when all you can do is site google searches. There are many Shinwaris just as there are many Popalzais who are in fact part of the resistance.

Oh yeah obviously, one of the largest Eastern Tribes with the Government is easy to neglect. Sure you can find Shinwaris and Popazai Taliban ....but do you see The Mainbody of their tribes with them? Nope.

The Taliban are losing because they're controlled by Pakistan.

This is plain lie

Prove it

Most of the tribes are fighting to get rid of the occupation.

Then why dont we see evidennce of it.

If the last decade does not tell you that the unrest is in the South and East, then I think you are being very stupid.

The last decade tells me a handful of traitors who became sell outs to Pakistan are murdering Muslims.

People have turned against the US occupation and Karzai administration for supporting the aerial bombardment of their land. You can keep spitting fibs, doesn't mean a thing. Anti-US sentiment is very high in Afghanistan, and Taliban has taken advantage of it.

Yes Anti US sentiment is very high but not Anti-Government, people are critical of their Government's incompetence, but don't want to get rid of their government.

If the animosity that you sy exists is real; why do we not see MILLIONS of Pashtuns fighting and instead only a few thousand measily conscripts. WHO I might add the Taliban also paid off to have them join

look for yourself

http://southasia.oneworld.net/todaysheadlines/joblessness-driving-afghan-youth-to-extremism

Joblessness driving Afghan youth to extremism

11 March 2010

Authorities have voiced concern about the increasing number of Afghan youth joining Taliban driven by unemployment and poverty. While ideological motivation is one of the reasons, it has become necessary for the government to reduce corruption and create job opportunities for long term growth and social cohesion.

Qala-e-Naw, Afghanistan: A year after his expulsion from Iran for not having a work permit, Abdul Majid, 26, has found paid employment in Muqor District, Badghis Province, northwestern Afghanistan.

so much for not being bought off? You try and bash another ethnicity when our own is most guilty, shame