Afghanistan belongs to Pakistan.

[Khostai]

Afghanistan belongs to Afghans and this bitch is just daydreaming.

[Michin Khel]

Zaid Hamid is a wannabe Alex Jones or Webster Tarpley. His stories change with each passing event. First off Afghans, from Pakhtunkhwa and mainland Afghanistan fought off the Soviets. It doesn't matter where the guns came from, most of which didn't exceed your everyday run-of-the-mill AK-47, as opposed to the Soviets with their tanks and fighter jets. You can give a monkey a screwdriver, but will it know how to use it?

He is right about the ISI presence in Afghanistan but he fails to mention the reason they were there in the first place, i.e. to overthrow the communist Afghan government at the behest of the US government. He fails to mention that there were CIA/ISI bases all over FATA and Quetta from which attacks were launched on Soviet bases and development projects before and after the killing of Daoud Khan.

The rest of his diatribe is pretty much nonsense. As for the TTP, there is no doubt that the Americans were passive (as were the pakistanis) in its development, but to say outright that they created it is just stupid and dangerous, and illustrates the kind of ignorance that would have you institutionalized. The TTP, as most of us know came into existence when the pakistan army invaded North Waziristan to "eliminate" AQ; they went in after being pressured to go in by the US and without consulting the tribes or utilizing political agents. If anything pakistan created the TTP more than anyone else could have because they knowingly let members of AQ and other militant groups settle there, so they could sell them back one at a time to US government for "dallars".

They only properly invaded after musharraf himself escaped two attacks on his person by AQ. And when they did go in (2004), they conducted it so terribly that it led to the creation of the TTP and spawned a militant ideology which still persists. Also, rigging the 2002 elections and bringing the MMA into power didn't help either.

Excellent post , i agree with most of it.

[Michin Khel]

you are talking about kunar issue , i do not recognize pakistan at whole , i see it as no mans land til TTP captures it and declare it as islamic state.

Alhamdulillah the people of haq has defeated your napak army and your ISI and killed man ISI agents and other apostates.

Hahahahahahah I dont know why but your post made me laugh.

[Khaak]

I'm pretty sure you have no family at all in Afghanistan. This is why it is easy for you to support US war

People like you only care about their own family. As long as their family is ok, they can support anything they want
What you should do is stop yapping away like a dog online.

Since you are a supporter of war, you should go and fight against the Taliban

You and others have no right to sit and type away on your laptop as cowards

The ridiculous thing is people like you who support US war are so pathetic that they continue to hope others fight their battle

Is it no wonder that their ideas are always left in the dark? Since when did the world move forward with losers

Again you and others who support war have no right to be typing away on your PC.

Here some clarifications on your mentality and ideals which are expressed in absence of realities!

First:
When the topic under this thread is Pakistani claim they won the war against soviet and Afghanistan with its all richs belong to them and this is why they support Taliban to enslave Afghanistan…you cannot give a different interpretation to it as might suit your hopes!

Second:
Who cares if you oppose the war or not. I talk about a real thing here which does not need my agreement or your disagreement. The issue is not your agreement or disagreement with me. I am not here to lobby for collecting votes to start or stop the war. You and I are here to confirm our positions in regards to realities in Afghanistan. You are supposed to agree with the realities of Afghanistan. You cannot disagree with me that Christmas was celebrated on December 25th in the US! You might like its celebration on that day or you might not be in agreement with the whole concept of Christmas but you cannot deny its occurring on that day.

Third:
Am I for war?
I thought you and I were busy talking on Pashtun as independent people. The pashton people needs to stand firm against those who are for its destruction. If the foundation is laid on firm and solid ground, then my role for war and destruction becomes null and void and your support in mottoes for such a baseless concept takes you or other long ears nowhere!
Talk on Afghanistan as a country and present a suggestion so it can stand firm in defense of itself against all odds, including Khaak or Americas or this and that evil factor. You base your ideas on your hopes but you fail to understand that a country cannot be defended or destructed through simple hopes of individuals such as you.

Khaak

[Khaak]

Actually torkham i do clarify my identity from time to time in my posts that i am pakistani by nationality and pashtun by ethnicity...
Whether i incline towards national or ethnic identity? To which camp i belong? It is a difficult question...i believe blood is thicker than water, i have seen it manifested on several occasion...if a punjabi and afghan are fighting, a lar pashtun would rush to support afghan...also generally we dont like punjabis that much unless he proves to be a nice person...now if i am asked to choose between good punjabi A and good Afghan B then i would naturally choose Afghan B. But if Afghan B is not good, insults me, look down upon me, call me paki dhaalkhor, slave of punjabi etc etc then i would'not choose him, i would kick his a$$.

You must be kidding! For 60+ years Lar Pashton is spearhead the Punjabi attack against Afghanistan.

[Ghundal]

"Pakistans support for the US war was simply due to lack of leadership and fear. They lacked the courage to take a defiant stand after Bush said "with us or against us."

No. Even Musharaf would tell you that that is wrong. The US government would've never in their wildest imaginations attacked pakistan, because it happens to be massive and very well armed. As I said, it was for "dallaray". Just as in the Soviet War, there was no need for pakistan to meddle with Afghan affairs, its as simple as that.


"This is why Imran Khan's escalating candidacy is sending shivers down these clowns spines well because they know that he seeks to end Pak support for the war which is critical, and their position oddly enough depends on this support too."

LOL. Imran is the only political candidate right now that is backed by the ISI. Who do you think encouraged Masood Sharif, Shah Mehmood Qureshi and Javed Hashmi to join the PTI? Did you know that super-bureaucrat Owais Ghani was among the founders of the PTI? Or that ISI media mouth-piece Shireen Mazari is his key foreign policy adviser? Also, did you know that Hamid Gul was one of Imran's original handlers under his "perfect-pakistan" scheme, and that Zia-ul-Haq promised Imran a key role within the pakistani political arena?

Musharraf promised him the office of PM; an offer which Khan reneged on when Musharraf refused to let ultimate authority reside with the office of PM, otherwise he was more than happy to take a handout from a "dictator". The PPP buried itself with memo-gate. The PML-N got into it pretty bad with the army after the Sharif brothers cut off the army's funding from Saudi Arabia. Wanna know more about pakistani politics?


"Point is, convergence of interests have always existed. I don't know how conspiracy theories can be crafted out of plain facts."

I should ask you the same thing. You tend to generalize, distort and go on different tangents. Your reading of history is selective. You see only what you want to and nothing else.


"No Afghan, especially a Pashtun needs some whiskey drinking Pakistani general to tell them about Islam."

That's why they have Madrassas, which are run by Pashtuns! Why do you think I keep mentioning the MMA?


"What is being constantly done here is this continuous and implicit thought that Pashtuns are encouraged to act more in accordance to Islam than others.

This is rubbish.

Even before Islam, Pashtuns continuously defeated those who acted against them. I don't think Hamid Gul's grandfather was alive then, instructing the resistance. Maybe Brezinksi was?"

First of all, who said what they were being "encouraged" to do is Islamic? I never denied that Pashtun's have defeated many a foe. I specifically talked the "influencing" of people's minds, i.e. manipulation and indoctrination, something I think you've been exposed to.


"The Pashtunistan issue can not be resolved by the ones who have been falsely drumming for the cause. Their credibility went out the window when they started a continuing trend of supporting foreign wars against the very people they claim to support. Hence, their nationalism is a complete farce."

I too can throw leaves in the air and call them butterflies, what're you saying? And who are the "ones" that you so callously seem to refer to? The ANP? Just because you say you can sing doesn't really mean you can. Once again you're seeing everything in black and white.

"For example, so if someone told some Afghan that fighting the Soviets will benefit the US and Pak, what is then expected? That the guy will call it a day and accept Soviet occupation for the simple reason of going against US/Pak interests??

Once again generalizing. Don't know how you even came up with that one?


"So then the question is who is to assume what are Afghan interests, which nations does it share current convergent interests with?"

The people?! If it was that way from the start, the mess we see today wouldn't exist.

"Why do people assume that Afghans are clueless?"

Afghanistan isn't homogeneous. Different interests and factions are at play. If you quit generalizing (word of the day) you might see that.

"This is the most striking implicit message of these redundant debates."

Kind of like the "implicit message" of your "redundant" statements?


Anyway, its been fun. I'll pick up on this tomorrow.

you continue to ignore militant communist activity before the assassination of Daud Khan. This is wild

Secondly, Pakistan served US interests out of no choice at first, this is a fact

Your version of events appears to attribute some measure of American regard for Pakistan- it was "with us or against us" and Pakistan lacked the courage to take a defiant stand. This is not some discovery I have made here. It is well known and That puppet Musharraf mentions this in fact.

Actually, what you are doing is generalizing and revisionist history that appears to paint the Soviets as innocent bystanders. I imagine the same reasoning is used by you today?

But everything you say, it is not facts, predicates on the notion that Afghans are clueless individuals.

As if it somehow matters that Afghan opposition to foreign occupation serves other nations interest. As if some Afghan would have simply stopped fighting because the fight benefits some whiskey drinking Pak General.

So the continued indifference to the Afghan interest, and focus only on external interests of other nations is called generalizing.

Not yesterday, and not today, it doesn't matter if some homosexual Chinese has interests in a free Afghanistan?

Also what you consider weak can be considered a strong nation by others.

Logically, a strong nation is FREE and Independent, nothing else, nothing more.

I don't know what other interpretations there can be for that, and no people serve as anyone's proxy. People, whether communist or Islamic, believe in their cause. If it do happens that their causes interests converge with the interests of other nations, it is irrelevant

[Ghundal]

You must be kidding! For 60+ years Lar Pashton is spearhead the Punjabi attack against Afghanistan.

Buddy,

Pakistan has supported the US war with supply routes and airbases

It has also helped prop up the illegal karzai gov in Kabul

[Ghundal]

Here some clarifications on your mentality and ideals which are expressed in absence of realities!

First:
When the topic under this thread is Pakistani claim they won the war against soviet and Afghanistan with its all richs belong to them and this is why they support Taliban to enslave Afghanistan…you cannot give a different interpretation to it as might suit your hopes!

Second:
Who cares if you oppose the war or not. I talk about a real thing here which does not need my agreement or your disagreement. The issue is not your agreement or disagreement with me. I am not here to lobby for collecting votes to start or stop the war. You and I are here to confirm our positions in regards to realities in Afghanistan. You are supposed to agree with the realities of Afghanistan. You cannot disagree with me that Christmas was celebrated on December 25th in the US! You might like its celebration on that day or you might not be in agreement with the whole concept of Christmas but you cannot deny its occurring on that day.

Third:
Am I for war?
I thought you and I were busy talking on Pashtun as independent people. The pashton people needs to stand firm against those who are for its destruction. If the foundation is laid on firm and solid ground, then my role for war and destruction becomes null and void and your support in mottoes for such a baseless concept takes you or other long ears nowhere!
Talk on Afghanistan as a country and present a suggestion so it can stand firm in defense of itself against all odds, including Khaak or Americas or this and that evil factor. You base your ideas on your hopes but you fail to understand that a country cannot be defended or destructed through simple hopes of individuals such as you.

Khaak

I am merely presenting facts. It's not my fault you can't accept it and choose anti-reality

Your prefernces, what you want, does not make what you don't want any less credible.

In fact the people who are most insignificant and lack the most credibility are those false nationalists who support foreign war on the very people they claim to work for

So buddy, you can keep your anti-reality and ahistorical version of events to yourself.

I am presenting facts. The historical record shows that it was secular/militant communists who started all this with their subversive activity and their assassination of Daud Khan because he was not secular enough for them.

Buddy, don't blame the wars caused by them on the reactionary Mullahs

That's in fact insincere and dishonest

Pakistan supports the US war , a support that has caused it many problems, and people like Imran Khan have realized this

So I really don't know what ahistorical crap you will spew out now

Oh buddy, that Imran Khan is ending Pak support for this war, and diplomatically intends to end the war and occupation all together

[Khaak]

Zaid Hamid is a wannabe Alex Jones or Webster Tarpley. His stories change with each passing event. First off Afghans, from Pakhtunkhwa and mainland Afghanistan fought off the Soviets. It doesn't matter where the guns came from, most of which didn't exceed your everyday run-of-the-mill AK-47, as opposed to the Soviets with their tanks and fighter jets. You can give a monkey a screwdriver, but will it know how to use it?

Dear friends and foe,
When you play football you proceed according to related rules. When you play tennis you use related rule too. You cannot shoot the tennis ball with your foot because that is not the rule. Why are we throwing sand our own eyes? Afghans could not even make a needles how can they fight war? Logistic of war was provided by Uncle Sam and half the money by Arabs, the planning was carried out by Pakistani general. We Afghans were and nothing but pawns…from both side our blood were shed for nothing.

[Ghundal]

Oh so did Hamid Gul's grandfather assist Mirwais neeka when he defeated The Persians
?

Right?

Afghans had nothing to do with the defeat of the Soviets?

The Poles defeated Nazi Germany and put up a fierce resistance, right?

[Khaak]

I am merely presenting facts. It's not my fault you can't accept it and choose anti-reality

Your prefernces, what you want, does not make what you don't want any less credible.

Dear Ghundal,
When you talk about fact, you need to present them wisely. You cannot pull out stuff from your Keshtak and then claim them as fact.

In fact the people who are most insignificant and lack the most credibility are those false nationalists who support foreign war on the very people they claim to work for

So buddy, you can keep your anti-reality and ahistorical version of events to yourself.

Sometimes the effect of 'nawshador' make you too hasty but most of the time you seem to be in sleep! You badmouth Nationalist while it was secular nationalist like Amanullah that brought freedom to Afghanistan…its nationalism that is bringing freedom to oppressed people all over the world.

I am presenting facts. The historical record shows that it was secular/militant communists who started all this with their subversive activity and their assassination of Daud Khan because he was not secular enough for them.

The problem is you continue to pull your facts from your underwear. The Islamist spaags were in lap of Pakistan way before PDPA take over..in 1973. This paki guy 100% right when he states ISI involves in Afghanistan pre-soviet and PDPA take over.
http://terrorism.about.com/b/2007/01/02/al-qaeda-and-the-us-a-longer-relationship-than-we-might-have-thought.htm

Buddy, don't blame the wars caused by them on the reactionary Mullahs

That's in fact insincere and dishonest

Pakistan supports the US war , a support that has caused it many problems, and people like Imran Khan have realized this

So I really don't know what ahistorical crap you will spew out now

Oh buddy, that Imran Khan is ending Pak support for this war, and diplomatically intends to end the war and occupation all together

I am ready to send you some napkin to clean your face from the smell of your dog here!

Where are you? Your Islam is fkd by the Pakistani Zaid Hamid, but still you are hiding under the scarves of your ladies!
Show up and chain your dog to avoid further losing face.

[Ghundal]

Dear Ghundal,
When you talk about fact, you need to present them wisely. You cannot pull out stuff from your Keshtak and then claim them as fact.




Sometimes the effect of 'nawshador' make you too hasty but most of the time you seem to be in sleep! You badmouth Nationalist while it was secular nationalist like Amanullah that brought freedom to Afghanistan…its nationalism that is bringing freedom to oppressed people all over the world.



The problem is you continue to pull your facts from your underwear. The Islamist spaags were in lap of Pakistan way before PDPA take over..in 1973. This paki guy 100% right when he states ISI involves in Afghanistan pre-soviet and PDPA take over.
http://terrorism.about.com/b/2007/01/02/al-qaeda-and-the-us-a-longer-relationship-than-we-might-have-thought.htm






I am ready to send you some napkin to clean your face from the smell of your dog here!

Where are you? Your Islam is fkd by the Pakistani Zaid Hamid, but still you are hiding under the scarves of your ladies!
Show up and chain your dog to avoid further losing face.

Buddy,

The start point for the recent Afghan wars is the assassination of Daud Khan by militant communists/secularists , and the subsequent communist revolution

This is the historical record

[az4er]

you continue to ignore militant communist activity before the assassination of Daud Khan. This is wild

Secondly, Pakistan served US interests out of no choice at first, this is a fact

Your version of events appears to attribute some measure of American regard for Pakistan- it was "with us or against us" and Pakistan lacked the courage to take a defiant stand. This is not some discovery I have made here. It is well known and That puppet Musharraf mentions this in fact.

Actually, what you are doing is generalizing and revisionist history that appears to paint the Soviets as innocent bystanders. I imagine the same reasoning is used by you today?

But everything you say, it is not facts, predicates on the notion that Afghans are clueless individuals.

As if it somehow matters that Afghan opposition to foreign occupation serves other nations interest. As if some Afghan would have simply stopped fighting because the fight benefits some whiskey drinking Pak General.

So the continued indifference to the Afghan interest, and focus only on external interests of other nations is called generalizing.

Not yesterday, and not today, it doesn't matter if some homosexual Chinese has interests in a free Afghanistan?

Also what you consider weak can be considered a strong nation by others.

Logically, a strong nation is FREE and Independent, nothing else, nothing more.

I don't know what other interpretations there can be for that, and no people serve as anyone's proxy. People, whether communist or Islamic, believe in their cause. If it do happens that their causes interests converge with the interests of other nations, it is irrelevant

I am not ignoring communist activity during Daoud Khans reign. It was a domestic problem that would've remained domestic had the Soviets not been riled by the antagonizing forces across the border. What I don't see is that you having a hard time believing that the US would do something like that, even though there is a tonne of irrefutable evidenced pointing towards such. In addition that look up the Gulf of Tonkin incident or Operation Northwood.

I never talked about American regard. I spoke of pakistans military capacity. Two completely different things. Musharraf was not by any means a puppet. He saw the ultimatum by the US as a way to profit off the war. During the Soviet invasion, as we all know, funds and weapons were funneled to the pakarmy in order to keep the resistance armed and running. Problem was the pakarmy kept most of the weapons and funding for itself. This period may have been the start of the extremist ideology present today, but it was also what many in the pak army refer to as the "Mercedez zamana".

Generals profited off the war in ways you can never imagine. Also, in 1988 the CIA sent an inspection team over to pakistan to check up on the weapons stockpile. The pak-army panicked, thinking they'd drastically reduce funding, so they set a massive stockpile of weapons at a military camp called Ohjri ablaze, which led to the killing of over a thousand innocent people. So it wouldn't be the first time the pakistan army has entered a war or conflict simply for the sake of profit.

If it really was a "lack of courage" on the pakistan army's behalf to oppose US pressure, then tell me this, why would they waltz into Kargil with out any provocation and potentially risk a nuclear war against india? I don't know what you call "courage", but that must mean something.

The Soviets weren't "innocent bystanders", as you so eloquently put it. They were working on development projects in and around the country and benefitting of Afghanistan's natural reserves; once again, why is it so hard for you believe that the US would seek to cripple the Soviet Union. What were they doing Vietnam, Laos, Korea, Cuba, Chile, Venezuela, etc? The Soviets just as the US would've resorted to anything to forward their interests, however when it comes to Afghanistan, it did not seek to benefit them to go into a country which is fractured along ethnic lines and lacks a central authority, as is mentioned in many a CIA document (Jesse Venturas book is a good place to start).

Not every general in the pak army drinks. I'm not too fond of the institution myself, but as I mentioned there is a massive faction in the army that holds an extremely warped religious mindset.

Here you might learn something, Brezinski on record; although "open" funding and support started under Reagan, he clearly states Carter signed the order to destabilize Afghanistan and alludes to luring the Soviets into the "Afghan trap":

CRG -- The CIA's Intervention in Afghanistan

[az4er]

Dear friends and foe,
When you play football you proceed according to related rules. When you play tennis you use related rule too. You cannot shoot the tennis ball with your foot because that is not the rule. Why are we throwing sand our own eyes? Afghans could not even make a needles how can they fight war? Logistic of war was provided by Uncle Sam and half the money by Arabs, the planning was carried out by Pakistani general. We Afghans were and nothing but pawns…from both side our blood were shed for nothing.

Uhhh friend?

Uncle Sam and his Arab friends did no more than sign the paychecks and distribute the guns. Everything else was left to the pakistanis whose role was limited to training fighters; and embezzling a great deal of their financial and military aid (Ohjiri Camp).

Although it is sad that the war was unnecessary and was the cause of so much bloodshed but the Afghans fought of their own accord. They could have just sat there and allowed the Soviets to remain, but it compromised their values. Though they were subject to manipulation via pak army's training centers, they still fought against an enemy who was of Goliath proportions and on their own. Anyone can operate a weapon, but can they operate it to deadly effect? Pawns they may have been, but at least they fought for their freedom.

[Ghundal]

No one is disputing that Pak Army are the slaves of the US and the rest of the West, what is inaccurate is that Pak willingly jumped to join and assist the US war just to make money.

again, Bush famously stated "with us or against us."

And Armitage further threatened to put Pakistan back into the stone age.

Keeping with the stereotypes, Pakistan bent down and joined the US war

It was a complete lack of leadership and spine

The money was meaningless. majority of it was never even disbursed, and Pakistan lost billions more due to its support for the US war which created unrest within.

Secondly, over 40,000 people died as a result of Pakistan support for the US war.

To say that Pakistan had a choice to make is partially correct. They could either have a full scale war with the US or do what they know best to do which was to fall in line and obey the US

The problem now is that their interests conflict with US interests, and this is the real reason there is a breakdown in ties

Musharraf was a puppet, there is no contention about that, but to assume Pak could peacefully not be a part of the US war betrays the open threats which were made at the top level.

The reason why the US got so used to kicking Pakistan around was because of the subservience Musharaf institutionalized

This is why the breakdown in ties is coming as a shock to US officials

The issue at hand is, Pak is not going to work against their own interests. This is not some discovery, but is understood. The recent events which go hand in hand with Imran's escalating candidacy appear to show a complete divestment out of the war