If the Taliban were ISI stooges, why did they refuse to recognize the Durand line?

[ScimitarXEdge]

In Iraq Saddam Hussein raised Kurdish Villages and gassed Hlabja, the "Arabs" of Iraq are worst to the Kurds than even the Turks.


apparently you live in old times' we're talking NOW A DAYS, because there is an Islamist Party ruling Turkey now, Kurds are becoming better and reaching improvements.

By the way do Kurds speak Kurdish in the Iraqi parliment, is Kurdish recognized in Iraq? tell me more.

The Kurds of Iraq have autonomy because the Fake Arabs like yourself were forced to stay away and stop bothering the Kurds. Not because you allowed them. And its by the same regime you call "rafida" with Nour al Maliki that did it.

The claim that Kurds supported Iran was just American propaganda, now you're defending Saddam who was America's puppet in the 80's but say you hate Saudis? See you are a fake.


Turkey in Modern times is different than Turkey even 12 years ago

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jun/13/world/la-fg-turkey-election-20110613

In addition to a solid core of pious Turks who voted for the AKP because they identify with its conservative values, voters interviewed in different parts of Istanbul expressed concern about the economy and the issue of resolving the decades-old conflict with ethnic Kurds, who account for a fifth of Turkey's 75 million people. Constitutional changes championed by the AKP and others would expand the definition of citizenship to include Kurds and other ethnic and religious minorities.

So everything you say about Turkey is no longer relevant. Where as you Arab Centric Nationalists in Iraq will never accept a Kurd as a leader. That's why they had to become autonomous.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Don't let Scimitar escape.

I simply and objectively pointed out the contradiction evident in his reasoning where he says that insurgencies that have outside support and safe havens dont have a basis.

He uses this reasoning in regards to the Afghan insurgency, but not in regards to the Syrian insurgency which enjoys safe havens in Turkey and is funded by the Saudi Wahabis ( same ones he says exports Wahabism to Afghanistan).

I have pointed out this contradiction continuously. He made me dig up a post of his to then prove the conditions he puts forth for insurgencies.

Keep in mind that I am simply pointing out his contradiction. I am passing no opinion. Also, keep in mind, we are assuming the Pakistan support for Afghan insurgency to be true for the sake of me closing this debate.



These are facts.

You can see the above posts I raise of Scimitar's about how he determines what is legitimate and what is not ( some number of posts above) In his desperate backpedaling, he forced me to fetch it.

Case closed

Your post didn't demonstrate your argument; you found a Post where I mention Pakistan and then you added your own caveat.

That's called a straw man argument.

There's nothing to "escape" from you have NO game. You lost, and stop copying my "Case Closed" thing; because the case was closed awhile ago, you just keep yelping like a wounded donkey and I have to keep kicking you back down.

[Ghundal]

Your post didn't demonstrate your argument; you found a Post where I mention Pakistan and then you added your own caveat.

That's called a straw man argument.

There's nothing to "escape" from you have NO game. You lost, and stop copying my "Case Closed" thing; because the case was closed awhile ago, you just keep yelping like a wounded donkey and I have to keep kicking you back down.

This is the same exact thing you do in all your debates. You try to keep repeating the same retort "I won" yeah "case closed" is a term for you.

You say Pakistan supports Afghan insurgency and that Afghan insurgency enjoys backing from Saudi Wahabis. Right? Do you retract this because it looks like that is what you are trying to do due to your failure to reconcile your contradicting opinions on the Afghan versus Syrian insurgency.

Syrian insurgency enjoys Turkish safe havens as well as Saudi Wahabis funding and weapons supplies. So, using your logic , the Syrian insurgency has no basis.

Saudi Arabia Wahabis (remember who export Wahabism to Afghanistan) are backing the Syrian insurgency publicly along with Qatar.

Btw,the Syrian insurgency central command is made up of hardcore Salafis according to US intelligence, but thats besides the point.

[کیش]

US secretly supporting Syrian rebels:

Fox News - U.S. Secretly Funding Syrian Opposition - Murdering Dictators - People Waking Up! - YouTube

[ScimitarXEdge]

What a stupid post by you yet again.

Yes Kurdish is still banned you fool and Kurds are still treated badly and not allowed to have political parties. Wake up your Turkish Pashtun. (even admitted so yourself today) Well done now I can call you Turkish instead of Pashtun. I know that something was very unlike real Pashtuns with you.

No because Kurds have their own autonomy so why should they speak Kurdish in Baghdad? And yes they are allowed to speak Kurdish since it is a official language in Iraq you fool.

Fake Arabs? How many times do I need to teel you that Iraq is the most populous Arab country and have the most Arabic tribes and most Sayyids? Iraq is the country next after Jordan and Saudi Arabia were most Bedouins live. The first Arabic scripture was developed in Iraq (Kufic Arabic). The first Semitic peoples lived in Iraq and Prophet Ibrahim (saw) was born in Iraq. The Adnani tribes originates from Prophet Ibrahim (saw) including Bani Hashim (Prophet Muhammad (saws) tribe)

So you fail yet again with your stupid provocations.

Why should I hate Saudis you fool when my mother is from Al-Higaz and my wife is Saudi Arabian and my father's tribe originally from Al-Higaz?

I hate the Al-Saud family not the Saudis which I have made clear several times even today. You should be able to understand this by now.

Haha but it was funny with you as always. When I write facts you only reply to one aspect of the discussion and change it. Now I bet the discussion will be about Saddam and not how Kurds are treated in Turkey, apparently an Islamic country according to our American Scimitar.

"More Islamic centered? That is why they are killing and oppresing Kurds, a Muslim group?

That is why, until the zionist attack on the turkish ship outside of Palestine, that Israel and Turkey had very close relations?

Is that in the interest of the Ummah?

Or what about the initial stages of the Syrian uprising where Turkish soldiers first deported Syrian refugees back to Syria to face certain death until they realized that Al-Asad's time is gone and quickly started to oppose the same Al-Asad regime they supported before?

How is that Islamic?"

Reply to this instead of talk nonsense.

hehe you don't even know anything about Pashtuns so how would you know real ones. Pashtuns all come from different origins. Ghilzais are originally Turks, and Scythians Abdalis Hephtalites. All you know is the Taliban and your Wahhabi Da'i in the Mosque praising them because they force people to wear a fist length beard. You think real Pashtuns worry about beards and that superficial stuff?

I don't mind being called a Turk, Turk used to rule Iraq, so your ancestors were our servants and your women were our wives, some of us is inside of you. That's great thank you!!!

You can say 100,000 times you hate the Saudsi; but the minute you say the word "Rafida" you prove that youre a liar and you're actually brainwashed by Saudi Arabian doctrine.

The Islamist Government in Turkey is new so yeah maybe the Older Regimes of Turkey who followed Kemalists were friends of Israel; but if the New Islamic Government was friends with Israel why would they send a boat to Palestine? You just disproved your own claim in the same sentence. Typical backwards illiterate Saudi slave Wahhabi thinking.

None of what you're saying is true TODAY in Turkey, you feel frustrated now because you hold on to old information about Turkey and don't have anything to combat your argument with so you keep using outdated info. If you're 3 years younger than you should know better than that, you're an adult.

You yourself is now defending Saddam, are you saying Kurdish women and children were agents of Iran and deserved to be killed with chemical weapons? Stupid mufasaq Saudi slave mentality. iT ws the American CIA who said that the Kurds were agents of Iran, and they're the ones who pushed Saddam to fight Iran. So there you proved that in fact you are the TRUE American slave, the True Saudi Slave all in one

[ScimitarXEdge]

US secretly supporting Syrian rebels:

Fox News - U.S. Secretly Funding Syrian Opposition - Murdering Dictators - People Waking Up! - YouTube

bahahahahaha Fox News, discredited.

[ScimitarXEdge]

This is the same exact thing you do in all your debates. You try to keep repeating the same retort "I won" yeah "case closed" is a term for you.

You say Pakistan supports Afghan insurgency and that Afghan insurgency enjoys backing from Saudi Wahabis. Right? Do you retract this because it looks like that is what you are trying to do due to your failure to reconcile your contradicting opinions on the Afghan versus Syrian insurgency.

Syrian insurgency enjoys Turkish safe havens as well as Saudi Wahabis funding and weapons supplies. So, using your logic , the Syrian insurgency has no basis.

Saudi Arabia Wahabis (remember who export Wahabism to Afghanistan) are backing the Syrian insurgency publicly along with Qatar.

Btw,the Syrian insurgency central command is made up of hardcore Salafis according to US intelligence, but thats besides the point.

yes but I also said WAAAAAAAAAAAAY back in the beginning of the thread, Like the first several posts that the difference is The Taliban are colluding with Pakistan who are colluding with America to KILL Afghans

the same case doesn't apply in Syria

This wasn't back peddling, because that was one of the first statements I made in this topic. You're just so self defeated you so stubbornly want to find a way to defend and apologize for the Taliban anyway you can.


When the Syrian Resistance are bombing places full of civilians just to get 2 NATO soldiers let me know because only then will their credibility be lost

Until then ....Case Closed

[khushal]

Actually not these days since the Islamists came into power

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jun...ction-20110613

read for yourself



They're reconciling, so what you say no longer applies.

You could say the same thing about pakistan. they are now allowing pashto to be mandatory in elementary education. they have renamed the nwfp. they are allowing political parties to operate in FATA. etc.

Does not mean anything.

[Ghundal]

yes but I also said WAAAAAAAAAAAAY back in the beginning of the thread, Like the first several posts that the difference is The Taliban are colluding with Pakistan who are colluding with America to KILL Afghans

the same case doesn't apply in Syria

This wasn't back peddling, because that was one of the first statements I made in this topic. You're just so self defeated you so stubbornly want to find a way to defend and apologize for the Taliban anyway you can.


When the Syrian Resistance are bombing places full of civilians just to get 2 NATO soldiers let me know because only then will their credibility be lost

Until then ....Case Closed

Please explain how the same does not apply to Syrian insurgency. The Syrian insurgency knows that Assad will bombard their areas of activity, resulting in mass civilians casualties. In Afghanistan you are putting the blame of civilian casualties squarely on the Afghan insurgency, ignoring and failing to address the question as to why ISAF operates near civilian areas


BUT hold on. Pakistan support for Afghan insurgency is not a proven fact, and non-enforcement of the Durrand line aka safe havens does not constitute support or does it? According to you, it does.

But this is another debate for another time as you are just going in circles to avoid your own contradictions.

Again, stick to the issues raised and stop goal post changing and introducing new twist or spins to avoid properly answering for your contradictions

Syrian insurgency enjoys Kurdish oppressing Turkish safe havens and Saudi Wahabis/AQ/ Qatari/US/ western support, so how come you are not denying the basis of their insurgency? The same Wahabis who export Wahabism (as you say) to Afghanistan are funding the Syrian insurgency.

Why such contradicting standards?

This is retarded since all you are doing now is changing goal posts or trying to retract your statements,

[khushal]

yes but I also said WAAAAAAAAAAAAY back in the beginning of the thread, Like the first several posts that the difference is The Taliban are colluding with Pakistan who are colluding with America to KILL Afghans

the same case doesn't apply in Syria

This wasn't back peddling, because that was one of the first statements I made in this topic. You're just so self defeated you so stubbornly want to find a way to defend and apologize for the Taliban anyway you can.


When the Syrian Resistance are bombing places full of civilians just to get 2 NATO soldiers let me know because only then will their credibility be lost

Until then ....Case Closed

There was no suicicde bombing when the dispute was domestic. the suicide bombing started when the Us invasion had introduced itself.

The difference between the Syrian insurgency, the libyan insurgency is that they are domestic and as long as they are domestic, both sides are a little more rational. In the case of the insurgency in Iraq and Afgahniatan, the matter is that there are thousands of foreign troops shooting at indegenous people. so the reaction is much different.

[ScimitarXEdge]

You could say the same thing about pakistan. they are now allowing pashto to be mandatory in elementary education. they have renamed the nwfp. they are allowing political parties to operate in FATA. etc.

Does not mean anything.

Pakistan is STILL helping Americans KILL Pashtuns t


why do you people constantly NEGLECT that in every equation; you guys care so much about rights but when you show me that is happening NOW in Turkey with the Kurds, you may have something.

[khushal]

Pakistan is STILL helping Americans KILL Pashtuns t


why do you people constantly NEGLECT that in every equation; you guys care so much about rights but when you show me that is happening NOW in Turkey with the Kurds, you may have something.

syria and turkey were allies in supressing and oppressing the kurds.

ITs you who said turkey is not like paksitan, I am trying to show they are not that much different.

[ScimitarXEdge]

There was no suicicde bombing when the dispute was domestic. the suicide bombing started when the Us invasion had introduced itself.

The difference between the Syrian insurgency, the libyan insurgency is that they are domestic and as long as they are domestic, both sides are a little more rational. In the case of the insurgency in Iraq and Afgahniatan, the matter is that there are thousands of foreign troops shooting at indegenous people. so the reaction is much different.

That just means that the Taliban are power mad; if there was no suicide bombing when the fight was domestic (which it wasn't Russia funded the N/A with India and Iran) then it should have remained so. It didn't because the Taliban are so power mad that they're resort to tactics totally disregarding the potential deaths of Afghan Muslim civilians in the process. What can be extracted from that than indifference towards Afghans, to Islam and a liust for power.

The fact a technologically superior fighting force motivated that swing in strategy only verifies that they'd stop a nothing to have power. and not for their own sake, but for Pakistan.

[ScimitarXEdge]

The Libyans were hardly rational, they're persecution of blacks in Libya, who by the way were also Muslims; the Taliban similarly were not more rational before, they happily murdered civilians; it's just with a more powerful force around them, they couldnt go unchecked in that tactic, so they had to step up with suicide attacks.

[khushal]

That just means that the Taliban are power mad; if there was no suicide bombing when the fight was domestic (which it wasn't Russia funded the N/A with India and Iran) then it should have remained so. It didn't because the Taliban are so power mad that they're resort to tactics totally disregarding the potential deaths of Afghan Muslim civilians in the process. What can be extracted from that than indifference towards Afghans, to Islam and a liust for power.

The fact a technologically superior fighting force motivated that swing in strategy only verifies that they'd stop a nothing to have power. and not for their own sake, but for Pakistan.

Its domestic when there are no foreign troops shooting guns at one side or the other. Support from a country can never be stopped.

not power mad but dont want to submit to foreign rule motivated by freedom. There is a historical pattern here.