Split Discussion: Pro-War or Anti-War?

[khushal]

ANTI WAR

Ghundal/Ashraf,
you openly backed the Taliban movement who are one party of an ongoing war.

How can you be anti-war?

yes but they were on the verge of ending it until foreign intervention pro longed it. Without soviet foreign intervention this would never have started in the first place and without American foreign intervention this would have ended a long time ago.

[khushal]

I don't think I proved anything, to be honest. You are anti-war? Great. That means that we agree, cause in over 2700+ posts, I don't think I've once backed the US invasion of Afghanistan, the NATO war or the drone strikes in Pakistan.

I'm not sure about your name calling mind. You aught to be careful as your "journalist" friend of the "Fire and Brimstone" variety may end up writing you off as "peacenik".

With all due respect Tor Khan, I have not read anything where you think the US invasion was a good idea but you have hinted that a rebellion to the US invasion has no legitimacy by saying that without pakistani support to the resistance the war would not have lasted a decade.
So the question is do people have no right to resist an invasion that they themselves view as unjust. With that said, do people have the right to resist with outside help or they only have the right to resist without outside help.

Would the US have faired better if they had initiated policies that beneifted the Afghan people as well as US interests instead of a one way street. You cant just take, that policy does not work forever and is counterproductive in the long run. You have to give and take.

Some other questions you should ask is how did this rebellion's momentum get off the ground.
1)Why did the US sideline the majority of the population
2)why did the US use warlords and put them in power whom the afghans hated and blamed the lawlessness and the destruction of the country
3)Why allow the production of opium to balloon to its highest rate in history, how can you build a stable government whose main GDP income comes from illegal sources such as selling drugs

You cant blame pakistan for everything, it is much deeper than that. If pakistan could accomplish such great feats, than there would be no India nor Bangladesh.

[Soldat_Amir]

Dear Ghundal

You claim to be "Anti-War" and also a supporter of the "Taliban". May I ask that recently the Taliban spokesmen Mr "Mujahid" stated that even if the Taliban accept peace or peace talks in Afghanistan or with the Afghanistan government, the Jihad still will "go on".

That does not seem reasonable/peaceful or Anti War. It sounds like the Taliban are looking outside their borders, and to totally keep the region in constant war, because for the Taliban this life means nothing and to murder and kill innocent people, they will get an instant first class ticket to paradise.

I feel sorry for such people who are so misled...honestly, if you love the Taliban so much i.e AbdaliBarakzai, Ghundal,Afghanistan2010, please burn your western passports, leave your warm and cosy houses and donate yourself with your children to fight for the Afghan Taliban....OH wait, you will never do that, you just want the poverty stricken Afghans to do it for you.

[Ghundal]

With all due respect Tor Khan, I have not read anything where you think the US invasion was a good idea but you have hinted that a rebellion to the US invasion has no legitimacy by saying that without pakistani support to the resistance the war would not have lasted a decade.
So the question is do people have no right to resist an invasion that they themselves view as unjust. With that said, do people have the right to resist with outside help or they only have the right to resist without outside help.

Would the US have faired better if they had initiated policies that beneifted the Afghan people as well as US interests instead of a one way street. You cant just take, that policy does not work forever and is counterproductive in the long run. You have to give and take.

Some other questions you should ask is how did this rebellion's momentum get off the ground.
1)Why did the US sideline the majority of the population
2)why did the US use warlords and put them in power whom the afghans hated and blamed the lawlessness and the destruction of the country
3)Why allow the production of opium to balloon to its highest rate in history, how can you build a stable government whose main GDP income comes from illegal sources such as selling drugs

You cant blame pakistan for everything, it is much deeper than that. If pakistan could accomplish such great feats, than there would be no India nor Bangladesh.

Exactly what I have been trying to say.

For all talk of nationalism, it's almost as if Afghan opposition to the US war is ignored.


For example, I think a person is definitely PRO-WAR if they parrot the false narrative in which they state Afghans fights for Pakistan, or in which they compare the Afghan insurgency to terrorism. This has been completely refuted by facts.

Their Anti-Pakistan rhetoric is actually void since they support Pakistans support for the US war.

Like Barakzai said, pointing out who has the moral imperative is simply just that.

[badmash_khel]

I am pro war when its for good cause and anti war when its used to oppress people.

You can't be totally anti war, To be totally anti war is to be a coward.

[IamDZJ]

yeah.. I don't believe in turning the other cheek either.

[tor_khan]

With all due respect Tor Khan, I have not read anything where you think the US invasion was a good idea but you have hinted that a rebellion to the US invasion has no legitimacy by saying that without pakistani support to the resistance the war would not have lasted a decade.
So the question is do people have no right to resist an invasion that they themselves view as unjust. With that said, do people have the right to resist with outside help or they only have the right to resist without outside help.

Would the US have faired better if they had initiated policies that beneifted the Afghan people as well as US interests instead of a one way street. You cant just take, that policy does not work forever and is counterproductive in the long run. You have to give and take.

Some other questions you should ask is how did this rebellion's momentum get off the ground.
1)Why did the US sideline the majority of the population
2)why did the US use warlords and put them in power whom the afghans hated and blamed the lawlessness and the destruction of the country
3)Why allow the production of opium to balloon to its highest rate in history, how can you build a stable government whose main GDP income comes from illegal sources such as selling drugs

You cant blame pakistan for everything, it is much deeper than that. If pakistan could accomplish such great feats, than there would be no India nor Bangladesh.

Thank you Khushal. I guess this deserves a response. You raise some issues in your points at the end which point to specific 'wrongs' in terms of the US intervention. I think it is valid to have a dialogue about these too. Here however, I've highlighted the salient areas that I think are worthy of consideration.

To some extent we agree. The issues in the region are much deeper than Pakistan itself and there is a legitimate grievance stemming from the US/NATO presence. To that end resistance in the form of the Taliban is not surprising.

But every movement needs a lifeline and it is also important to acknowledge that there are wider players in the region - no one is totally exonerated as a result. There are specific reasons that Pakistan has backed particular groups going back to the 70s.

If Pakistan joined up with the US to back the anti-Soviet resistance, for Pakistan it started off for reasons other than outright fear of communism. Having an authoritarian communist regime on your doorstep has never really interfered in Pakistan's relationship with China for example. With foreign policies, it is often a very selective affair.

The 'problem' for Pakistan has always been the fear of being surrounded by India and India-friendly regimes. At the heart of it, partition was messy and
Pashtuns are caught up in the war on either side because of many power struggles, including the long-standing one that blights the subcontinent.

[MostafaM]

yes but they were on the verge of ending it until foreign intervention pro longed it. Without soviet foreign intervention this would never have started in the first place and without American foreign intervention this would have ended a long time ago.

That arguement doesn't sound proper.

With a formal date for the withdrawl of all NATO troops given (2014), whatś the reason to fight?

Why are the Taliban fighting if their demand has been fulfilled?

It's about tactical wins and the aim to be in a better strategic position when it comes to fight for the capital Kabul.

The Taliban movement are alien in a strategic way because a movement that fights for independence and territorial integrity shouldn't have it's strategic, economical, military and moral bases in places that are known to be "enemy territory".

Pakistan as a safe-haven and the Gulf States as the funding places aren't Afghanistan's friends. Their protege, the Taliban, too.

[Ghundal]

So now it's about geopolitics and why should an Afghan give a crap about Pakistan, India, or US interests.

This really starts to beg the question, how many more angles can one come up with?

So now it is "movements and lifelines"

Someone hit me on the head. Someone tell me that the Vietnamese resistance was invalid due to supposed assistance by China and Russia.

Someone please tell me which "movement" in the world was not backed by anyone, or did not somehow fit into other nations interests. Tell me that Gandhi was a Russian or Chinese proxy because his movement to kick the British out served their respective interests. Gandhi did it all for China? Riggggggght

At the same time, it appears there is no debate about this supposed Pakistan support for the Taliban. Is there black and white proof? Are there documents that prove this?

Why should we let this just slip as if it is pure fact?

Secondly, why no questions raised about Pakistans support for the US war? See, since you are not doing this, it is very clear that you find this non-objectional.

What is the supposed basis of Pakistan support for the Taliban? Non-enforcement of the Durrand line?

Where are the modern weapons?

So according to Mostafa, every resistance in the world is invalid .

The Vietnamese resistance was invalid due to Russian and Chinese support

?

Your spins are predictable

What's next, accordingly, I don't see you making noise about Pakistan support for the US war or the fact that Karzai is backed by a 50 nation well armed alliance, an intervention backed by Awami Fake National Party clowns
I mean the proof for FOREIGN hands behind Karzai is right there staring at you from daily news coverage ?

wHY no objection? Seriously, talking about Afghans legit grievances now- its almost like an afterthought, right, I mean if mantra of "ISI, Pakistan is behind the Afghan insurgency" is being continuously stated, AND Pakistan SUPPORT for the US war is ignored, where does one begin?

Inconsistent?

You can't start suddenly acting factual when you haven't been doing that at all.

Pakistan is supporting war and creating instability AND that is because they are SUPPORTING the US WAR.

But won't hear any objections from you? Won't hear any questioning of this?

At least Soldat is honest that he is opposed to Sharia governments.

A honest debate is needed: Sharia vs Secularism

That's ALL this is about in a nutshell, nothing else

The few of you here ( and believe me , you are FEW only) just don't want to be that obvious about it, knowing full well, that secularism is unwanted.

It is very difficult to dress up secularism as nationalism, especially, when groups like Red Hat ANP support the US and PAK war which is only effecting Pashtuns

[MostafaM]

So according to Mostafa, every resistance in the world is invalid .

The Vietnamese resistance was invalid due to Russian and Chinese support

No, resistance is invalid, if...

a) it continues although the aims of an armed conflict are already achieved

b) an armed conflict is not in the interests of the common people.

The Talibans war is invalid because their demand for full withdrawl is met AND it is not in the interests of the people they want to liberate to fight on.

It's clearly about taking the power in Kabul and for that they helped by anti-Iranian regimes (Gulf States) to containe Iran and by Pakistan to achieve their wider strategic aims.

But to understand these things, you need a moral sight on the current problem, you need national roots and a heart for the people you wanna see liberated.

The Taliban will be another imposed mercenary army on the common people and no one wants that except for some internet jihadists like Ghundal/Ashraf and others.

[Ghundal]

No, resistance is invalid, if...

a) it continues although the aims of an armed conflict are already achieved

b) an armed conflict is not in the interests of the common people.

The Talibans war is invalid because their demand for full withdrawl is met AND it is not in the interests of the people they want to liberate to fight on.

It's clearly about taking the power in Kabul and for that they helped by anti-Iranian regimes (Gulf States) to containe Iran and by Pakistan to achieve their wider strategic aims.

But to understand these things, you need a moral sight on the current problem, you need national roots and a heart for the people you wanna see liberated.

The Taliban will be another imposed mercenary army on the common people and no one wants that except for some internet jihadists like Ghundal/Ashraf and others.

Hahahasaaasaaaahaaaaa

You are PRO WAR and you want Germans to die for your ideals while you sit on your assss supporting WAR on the internet

All I want is Afghanistan to be left alone. Let them figure out their future. Only Afghans!


Let it move at its own pace.

Since you do not want Afghanistan to be left alone , why don't you go and join the German NATO army to fight the Taliban?

You support NATO war, so why don't you join them?

Are you an Internet warrior ONLY

?

[Ghundal]

Furthermore , you should be happy that there are US-Taliban talks. The end is near. Peace!

[MostafaM]

Why should I join wars?

I don't understad your logic.

You want Afghanistan to be left alone?

Why do you consider the regimes, that arm, support and equip the Taliban before 2001 and afterwards not as "foreign intervention"?

I mean if we clearly point out that the Afghan conflict has been used by powers to fight their proxy wars on Afghan soil why are the Taliban the "angles" and the rest are "foreign stooges"?

Can you clarify that?

[tor_khan]

why should an Afghan give a crap about Pakistan, India, or US interests.

They shouldn't, but clearly it would appear that the others choose to be involved/interfere in their own ways.

[JattApache]

When you have to defend yourself against a foreigner which attacking you, it's legitimate to defend yourself in my opinion ( Kargil, 1999 )