can AFG survive economically without USA?

[Kushan Prince]

[MENTION=5723]Kushan Prince[/MENTION]

SOmalia is partitioned into Puntland, Somaliland, Somalia, Djibouti etc.

Parts of somalia is occupied by Christian African Union soldiers, especially in the east and the south where they are there to fight al-Shabab.

Somalia is after Afghanistan, the most corrupt country. The so-called government are Ikhwani criminals like Karzai and Mursi who are paid by the West while having double nationalities.

Somalia has a very rich soil, with oil, gas and other natural resources. Its location is strategic both for economic and military reasons.

You should think of a better example.

And Afghanistan has also been partiontned in the past, (kPK, Godar) so whats your point? You proved my point on how similar these two countries are as they both corrupt and how both have extremist groups. Seriously, no country on this earth is a heaven on earth so i don't know why america is so concerned of bringing democracy there.

Don't really care what you people think, i think this was a great example.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

@BarakzaiAbdali ,

I do understand your points but could you please try to communicate a little less emotionally because talking about a problem and making the language and communication become a part of the problem is not going to be very helpfull.

Of course everyone wants to be independent but full scale autonomy isn´t possible in present times because we are hunter-gatherers but live in times of modern industries, connected economies and sociaties.
Afghanistan or any other state cannot be autonomous anymore.

Autonomous from the vantage point of being disconnected from worldwide trade matters? Sure I agree. Autonomous from the vantage point of not being dictated to by an occupying army? Absolutely. The two are mutually exclusive concepts. And beyond this, regional post colonial and neocolonial autonomy is even more paramount so that those with memes and ideologies divergent form the Afghan and Islamic realms cannot sanction-starve and hold carrots and sticks whenever they please.

What Afghanistan or any other state should try is to safeguard it´s interests and yes, the current regime doesn´t seem to have accomplished that with the Biliteral Security Treaty with the US.

Thank you. This is what is a reasonable statement.

From my perspective it´s neccessary that Afghanistan has a strong security pact with a state that has military and economical power because Afghanistan is currently not able to fill the gap if foreign aid stops.

That is why regional autonomy is all the more important, and it needs to start in Afghanistan.

Untill Afgs economy is not strong enough to provide for it´s security institutions it will be dependent on other states.

India was able to secure it´s interests with Soviet help, the taxes of hundreds of millions of citizens and by neglecting the needs of 70% of it´s population 40-35 years ago.

India never required a Soviet field army to dictate terms to it on its own soil. We saw how they viewed the Brits and their immoral approach to governance (elevating some parties at the expense of others). They responded in kind and realized that their elites could also make the excuses that they still needed the Brits around to claim the rural countryside etc needed to be developed by some imperial power. They opted for independence in an organized fashion. Their elites led from the front and suffered alongside their people instead of taking up posh London residences or frequenting mudbathes in Italy like Zahir Shah and Karzai.

Now it is at a stage to secure itself AND to provide for the needs of its people and without Soviet help India wouldn´t be what it is now.

Once again, no occupation force killing a substantial portion of the population with a different religious ideology and set of cultural values was done by the Soviets and the Indians did this from a better jockeying position. Try to see what would have happened if the opposite were true and the Soviets had tried to station contingents on Indian soil.

Afghanistan needs strategic partnerships or it will be swallowed by the regional powers via proxy wars, civil wars etc.

Every nation, even the greatest ones have had civil wars and tremendous blood loss. That is a fact of life. What one trades with the canard of "avoiding civil wars" and the other canard of proxy powers is far more precious.

If there is any other way that is logically possible, please show that way.

Regional autonomy + pooled resources. Make sure not a single western power boot is on Afghan land to dictate to an Afghan leader what is proper and what is not on its own soil. Ensure the proxies in the other istan states are also overturned. This is a long term issue. Forge proper deals from a unified vantage point of these states with Iran as well that basically tells it: we need to coexist even though our values are variant. Pool resources, realize the local cultures though they differ to a great degree are far more amenable to each other than a "chrisitianizing, secular at the barrel end of a gun when it suits it" super power that has a history of dividing, conquering, acquiring territory, and devastating occupied native culture and mores. That is completely logically possible under the right circumstances.

Otherwise, expect a future that is very much like Pakistan's.

And I strongly disagree with the notion above that you may or may not be implying that India neglected 70% of its rural populace so Afghans in the urban centers should feel comfortable overlooking the needs of the rural religious village Afghan for some greater good as well - that they should just plough forward roughshod and impose their values over all with foreign hands.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

The problem with Barakzai is that he will refer to few sources sometimes known some times unknown and if a researcher has proved a point, he will take that far granted and will declare it a forgone conclusion while ignoring the ground realities. If I do not have a reference that this computer is a computer so barakzai will not believe in it once I do not give a reference.

Wrong. It frustrates militant secularists that they lack an evidence based approach to their goals. Rather they let their goals lead in the search for supportive evidence and find none. This then leaves them naked intellectually such that they have to admit that their aspirations and goals are purely contrived to suit their own fancies and not that of autonomy. And yes I stand behind demanding evidences from militant secularists since they are the most prone to fabrications.

The way out is simple. The system where Barakzai is sitting and enjoying the life.

Nice try to reach for the last ditch canard in any argument. You prove my point for me. Its not simply Barakzai enjoying life, but Steve, Tom, Tina, Erika etc because their nation did not settle for relying on an imperium to develop their value systems and infrastructure.

What we often find within seculo militant circles is that these folks are usually the largest failures in the societies they idolize. I have yet to find a secular militant who doesn't rely on some econ or poli sci degree that is pretty much useless.

Make Afghanistan America or any G8 country. Do what these countries have done in the past

Make them as your development partners, investors and importers/exporters.

Very surface analysis typical to your ill informed approach. Partners don't leave behind hired guns and kill off 10 to 12000 of your countrymen.

Keep religion to your heart, home, family and mosque. Afghan or Pashtun culture or Pashtunwali is not a hindrance as cultural values like egalitarianism, hospitality, jirgas etc do not have clash with democracy or human rights. Afghanistan before 1979 was not bad.

Let us be honest and recommend the course of action for Afghans which will make their lives as comfortable as we ourselves have in these developed countries.

Nice try to reach for another canard. Once again you show a poor grasp of historical development of these comfortable nations. If you remove Barakzai from the autonomous nation it is still autonomous.

Let us not be hypocrites enjoying democracy and development and recommending barbarism of Taliban for poor Afghans who even do not have access to internet to tell us what they feel.

Same as above - a pseudo intellectual argument that relies on simplifications. Why not have Badlun be less a hypocrite, pick up a gun and go and kill Afghans so that the very members of the adopted society he lives in don't have to leave the society they helped to build to kill Badlun's enemies - the very same poor Afghans he claims to want to protect.

x

[Wowra]

I think we've long departed from the question of economic "survival." The question now seems to be defined by the subtext of how to make Afghanistan a contender in the world stage. That sentiment projected on a people who couldn't care less what happens in the next valley over unless it impacts the life of his own qawm. I fully believe that there needs to be a place in the world like Afghanistan. A place where a man can live without an electric bill, and only has to secure his food and water allowing the remainder of the day to contemplate God. If Afghanistan wanted a strong industrial base, it would have one. They had multiple opportunities from the time of Amir Aminullah through Daud Khan.

I think BA is absolutely correct. If there is hope for an autonomous anything, it will be devoid of foreign interference. Regional powers will have to partner to form their own interdependent economies a' la the EU. Each will be able to maintain their national identities (if there is one), and prosper in the design of their intent. Afghanistan alone would have to mimic that on a valley by valley microcosm which would allow for that national identity to emerge. The problem with national identity at this time, is it was formed in Kabul and pushed to the outlying lands. For anything to work in Afghanistan, it must be formed in those outlying lands, then connected into Kabul.

Kushan, I'm glad that you visited Kabul in 04, but believe it or not--its changed pretty drastically in the following decade. Next time when ya go, you may want to bring your mousse and DG sunglasses. And let me know if ya go--I'll arrange for an escort to show you the real Afghanistan and perhaps help you to find that identity that you're so far removed from but so desperately want to connect with.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Hello all,

There are good points raised. To me, the most striking problem is that the opposition to the government does not provide practical solutions.

This is a rhetorical device that the emigres on here resort to. Solutions have been offered and supercede the reckless, corrupt, and slipshot "solution" that is the government of Hamid Karzai. Perhaps if you folks learned to read for comprehension you would quit repeating the same question over and over and over again.

They are full of ideology, propaganda and rhetoric, but little substance.

Evidence please? This is purely an opinion. What we do have in substance though is to be able to look at governance from Kabulite Emigres about 15 years on and what we see is a narcowelfare state run by people devoid of any honor or values. The "substance" they produced has even been discussed by the likes of that bas-tard Qayum Karzai who admitted most of the construction work done has been unsustainable. Where was the "substance" when Karzai was asked by Dr. Mojadidi to save Kabul's premiere medical clinic? Rather, it is your crowd that is full of hot air, flatus, and rhetoric that involves murder of your own to attempt to salvage complete BS.

For example, how will they have an inclusive, pluralistic government?

That is their right and on their time to figure out. Who says they need or want one and who says they need to have one or not? Self determination and form of governance will be by and for Afghans, and not by the zoot suit failed in the West emigres

Do you think that once the Americans leave, the Talibs will simply sit at the table with their former rivals and talk it out?

If their former rivals and had not dishonored their khanthope in the first place and sat in Quetta tea shops munching on sugar almonds and drinking green tea while these folks fought the Russian hand to hand then they would sit down and talk it out. But instead they chose to be installed and to pretty much burden the world in general with their greed.


Will they accept that some people don't like an "Islamic Emirate"?

99% of Muslim Afghans want sharia law according to Pew. Badlun will ignorantly interject here to say that sharia's meaning varies widely. Once again Badlun, try to read a book for once and educate yourself. The Pew survey predicates its data on a subsection defining what the populace views as sharia.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...w-of-the-land/

So some people have to learn to accept the will of the majority instead of relying on foreign powers to enforce their overwhelming minority view onto the masses with brute force. That is the savagery of militant secularism.

Of course not. We all know their war will not end until they capture all of Afghanistan. On the other hand, Karzai has called for Mullah Omar to run for president.

Karzai fixed multiple local and large scale elections. Who would be stupid enough to work in Karzai's frame of mind and on his terms?

If the Talibs were not as extremist (as they are today), then we would have no need for NATO.

If militant secularists and the Karzai governmental members were not so savage as to need NATO to protect a minority opinion laced group of failed emigres then the Taliban likely would not need to exist or have enough manpower to exist. Its fascinating that these dirt bags need seven rings of security to protect them from their own people (oh I forget whenever their own people attack them they are suddenly "ISI").

x

[BarakzaiAbdali]

All countries in our region were at one point built up by foreigners.
India, Pakistan: has colonial infrastructure, military, institutions.
Central Asia: Communist Russian influence, they used to live a nomadic lifestyle but now are industrialized, urbanized, more than 95% literate.
Iran: technology, military and other institutions built up by Westerners (during the Shah period).
Arabs: same as Iran.

We should put our false pride, which is largely myths, aside us

You are citing a group of post colonial and neocolonial enterprises as examples? What does this mean? Does this mean that these are your goal posts to shoot for? Or does it mean that these dysfunctional pariah states owe something to these people for their incursions, occupation, and colonialism as well as their subsequent withdrawal and divisionism to ensure as Brzezinski said: the barbarians remain divided:

"In brief, for the United States, Eurasian geostrategy involves the purposeful management of geostrategically dynamic states and the careful handling of geopolitically catalytic states, in keeping with the twin interests of America in the short-term: preservation of its unique global power and in the long-run transformation of it into increasingly institutionalized global cooperation. To put it in a terminology that hearkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together."

And small minded, non evidence based, ahistorical people like you who rely on a poor piece of contrived rhetoric, namely: "what solution do you offer" being the parroted phrase again and again - are the harbingers of this geostrategy into Afghanistan.

[Al-Afghani]

x

If your mindset is prevalent among the Talibs, then I guess there will be another 10 years of fighting.

99% of Muslim Afghans want sharia law according to Pew.

The problem is not Sharia vs. secularism. It's simply: how will power be shared among all groups? Will there be an interim government, elections, a federal system, Taliban governors, national reconciliation?

Among the militants there are not many real solutions being brought forth. They should come to terms that Karzai's forces are very powerful, and that Americans aren't going anywhere soon.

But I guess they can only offer us more war.

So some people have to learn to accept the will of the majority

Studies have shown the militants are not popular in Afghanistan, certainly not a majority. They are by far more popular in Pakistan, however.

And I'm not defending the Americans. I'm only dealing with reality here.

[QUOTE]You are citing a group of post colonial and neocolonial enterprises as examples[/QUOTE
All the countries that were at one point a colony or part of an empire, are right now light years ahead of us. We should not even compare ourselves to them, it's like Germany and Sudan.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

[QUOTE=Al-Afghani;715166]If your mindset is prevalent among the Talibs, then I guess there will be another 10 years of fighting.

My mindset has nothing to do with Talibs. The 10 years of fighting already done, based on the evidences shows that attacks/fighting rise commensurate with the presence of ISAF. Read Robert Pape's seminal work on Afghan suicide attacks and the presence of ISAF troops themselves. So rather, its your ignorant mindset, devoid of an evidence basis and predicated on smug superiority that will ensure continued fighting.

The problem is not Sharia vs. secularism. It's simply: how will power be shared among all groups? Will there be an interim government, elections, a federal system, Taliban governors, national reconciliation?

That is an internal Afghan issue. Once again your argument is based predominantly on an assumption that power needs to be shared at all with Karzai once foreign powers are removed from the equation and the Afghans get to settle their differences internally. The US fought a lengthy and bloody civil war on its own soil and Afghanistan will find its own equilibrium as an autonomous nation.

Among the militants there are not many real solutions being brought forth.

Karzai's solution have all been false measures, steps backwards, ceding the moral high-ground, and dispensing with the treasured aspects of what autonomy means and how it goes hand in hand with development.

Your foolish request is on par with what would have been asking those in Philadelphia fighting against the Brits back in the 1700s as: Why do you fight for independence if you have not submitted a term paper documenting your future government. The fight for independence and its declaration preceded the constitution and its elaborate governmental systems. The archaic articles of the confederacy was much looser and theoretical.

The same goes for any nation seeking autonomy. There are folks like you that claim Karzai offers a solution and the insurgents do not, but you have little in the ways of evidences to show Karzai's solutions. The current trends have shown his "solutions" have been an abysmal failure, even in the context of establishing security, a basic ingredient for nation building.

So do not ask stupid questions when you know the answers.

They should come to terms that Karzai's forces are very powerful, and that Americans aren't going anywhere soon.

They don't need to. They are currently winning a war of attrition with Korean era vintage weaponry according to Dr. Scheuer and other analysts like Bacevich. Its Karzai that needs to come to terms that he cannot pacify the countryside.

But I guess they can only offer us more war.

As Karzai has offered more occupation and war? As his stupid army design has perpetuated Pashtun angst and given Fahim and the other idiots more power than ever before?

Studies have shown the militants are not popular in Afghanistan, certainly not a majority. They are by far more popular in Pakistan, however.

Nice try to deflect. A survey on the ground where night raids are a regular affair and where Zik Kandahari can raid houses and shoot bystanders in the head means nothing. Once again, this is not a case for the militancy but rather a case for the fact that there is no moral basis whatsoever to an occupation force.

And I'm not defending the Americans. I'm only dealing with reality here.

Common refrain from those that support Karzai.. its a deflection to make it seem as if choices do not exist, except watan faroshi.

You are citing a group of post colonial and neocolonial enterprises as examples[/QUOTE
All the countries that were at one point a colony or part of an empire, are right now light years ahead of us. We should not even compare ourselves to them, it's like Germany and Sudan.

That was not the point being made. The point was that you were citing them as examples. The neocolonial period ala Brzenzski has produced a different paradigm entirely and ensured chaotic discord and continue sapping up of resources at below market prices from these created vassal states. Pakistan is a perfect example of that failure to think regionally and instead is the basis of what you are promoting. Karzai's approach is really not much different than Mohammad Ali Jinnah and he too is on his way to producing the twin to his brother state.

x

[Khostai]

I think we've long departed from the question of economic "survival." The question now seems to be defined by the subtext of how to make Afghanistan a contender in the world stage. That sentiment projected on a people who couldn't care less what happens in the next valley over unless it impacts the life of his own qawm. I fully believe that there needs to be a place in the world like Afghanistan. A place where a man can live without an electric bill, and only has to secure his food and water allowing the remainder of the day to contemplate God. If Afghanistan wanted a strong industrial base, it would have one. They had multiple opportunities from the time of Amir Aminullah through Daud Khan.

I think BA is absolutely correct. If there is hope for an autonomous anything, it will be devoid of foreign interference. Regional powers will have to partner to form their own interdependent economies a' la the EU. Each will be able to maintain their national identities (if there is one), and prosper in the design of their intent. Afghanistan alone would have to mimic that on a valley by valley microcosm which would allow for that national identity to emerge. The problem with national identity at this time, is it was formed in Kabul and pushed to the outlying lands. For anything to work in Afghanistan, it must be formed in those outlying lands, then connected into Kabul.

Kushan, I'm glad that you visited Kabul in 04, but believe it or not--its changed pretty drastically in the following decade. Next time when ya go, you may want to bring your mousse and DG sunglasses. And let me know if ya go--I'll arrange for an escort to show you the real Afghanistan and perhaps help you to find that identity that you're so far removed from but so desperately want to connect with.

I have a good idea for you, why don't you bomb your own country to the stone age if you so trongly belive that there should be a place where you don't have to pay the electric bills.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

[QUOTE=Al-Afghani;715166]If your mindset is prevalent among the Talibs, then I guess there will be another 10 years of fighting.

The problem is not Sharia vs. secularism. It's simply: how will power be shared among all groups? Will there be an interim government, elections, a federal system, Taliban governors, national reconciliation?

Among the militants there are not many real solutions being brought forth. They should come to terms that Karzai's forces are very powerful, and that Americans aren't going anywhere soon.

But I guess they can only offer us more war.

Studies have shown the militants are not popular in Afghanistan, certainly not a majority. They are by far more popular in Pakistan, however.

And I'm not defending the Americans. I'm only dealing with reality here.

You are citing a group of post colonial and neocolonial enterprises as examples[/QUOTE
All the countries that were at one point a colony or part of an empire, are right now light years ahead of us. We should not even compare ourselves to them, it's like Germany and Sudan.

The other issue is cause and effect. Whether it comes to Pashtun regions of Pakistan or Afghanistan proper, I view the insurgency as the effect. That is why I am not saying these are charter points or advocacy ideologies to propel them forward. These groups are the cumulative response of a series of failures initiating at the outside of the Russkey invasion where the educated and elite decided they would view the conflict from the sidelines and not lead their people. This created a vacuum and left "militants" to wage a successful war of attrition. The whole "Pakistan" centric automaton argument thrusted out by Karzai and his acolytes is nonsense.

If tomorrow the Afghans collectively decided to adopt Bangraism, Taoism, Brahamanism, Bahaism, Shiism, Sunnism, Communism etc so be it.. that is their choice.

But the weight of evidence shows that the militants fight and attack in greater concentration not because of some stupid conspiracy theory related to Pakistan, but more often related to the presence of Kharij forces themselves.

So to stop the militancy permanently, the very motivator for its creation and sustenance needs to be removed. Otherwise, that is why 10 more to 20 more years of fighting is bound to occur. I refuse to entertain the ridiculous ahistorical nonsense regarding how the minute Pakistan disintegrates so will the insurgency. That disregards centuries of Pashtun history that is a cross border phenomena.

Karzai simply has to accept that his manner of governance and his ceding ground and autonomy simply to sustain him and his friends is a recipe for disaster. He has to be willing to cede control and let the chips fall where they may so that a conclusion is reached faster instead of prolonging the pain.

I think the American Military, based on the commentary in this article and below shows that Americans understand this formula and that the average American, service members included, are hoping the BSA does not get signed:

Agreement emerges on U.S.-Afghan security pact - News - Stripes)


Immunity of post-2014 U.S. presence in Afghanistan remains unresolved - Middle East - Stripes

[Shah-i-Kot]

Yes Admin, I think one thing he has got here is the Iran Israel paradigm...

Basically look at the difference between Israel (Netanyahu) and that fool Karzai.

Iraq creates a threat to Israel in the 90s ---> US goes to war
Israel wants Saddam out ---> US goes to war
If Iran and Israel go to war ---> US will certainly back up Israel with great might

There is NOT EVEN A BILATERAL SECURITY AGREEMENT for godsakes in the written record yet if any mid east nation farts in the direction of Tel Aviv the US will go to war (they even proved this back when Kissinger was in power).

Yet I can tell you clearly that Pakistan can continue, will continue, and will not stop to continue its transgressions. Instead, Karzai's strategic balancing crap will cause them to escalate because frankly, Karzai is stupid.

And will the US do anything other than get them to "talk it out?" No it wont. It certainly wont go to war to help Afghanistan against Pakistan.

So that is the clear example

Israel: No written BSA ---> Netanyahu farts---> unwillingly more often, America does the bidding

Afghanistan: BSA having none of what Karzai claims he won the Afghan people ---> Pakistan shells (an overt act of war) ---> US shrugs shoulders

OR take Turkey:

Syria shells Turkish border ---> US puts patriot systems in place

Basically, this is all a farcical sham for Karzai to rob the American people and his own people and to think that history will judge him better.

In short, Israel tells the US to jump, and the US has to fly even if it falls down.

[Wowra]

Accidental Alchemy: Forging the Taliban into Effective Governance by Default | Foreign Policy Journal

I have a good idea for you, why don't you bomb your own country to the stone age if you so trongly belive that there should be a place where you don't have to pay the electric bills.

Accidental Alchemy: Forging the Taliban into Effective Governance by Default | Foreign Policy Journal <--- That is my official stance. If you care to formulate an intellectual argument against it, I would love to hear it.

[Toramana]

I have gone through all that is in this thread. Barakzai as usual has a bizarre or naive or crooked explanation of things with large gaps and big question marks e.g. when he says "when Afghans will sort out the matters internally" by which he definitely implies Taleban slaughtering the rest and implementing their one-eyed vision for Afghanistan.

And he pours scorn over Karzai and others of his comrades who are currently busy re-building Afghanistan (from the scratch) but forgets or cunningly ignores that even if there is some mismanagement in Karzai governance, at least these guys are on the ground exposing themselves to the threat and enduring all the hardships that characterize the formative phases of any state. At least Karzai was brave enough to risk his life to travel on a motor-bike to Kandahar and help civilization to return to Afghanistan unlike Barakzai who is sitting in one of the most advanced countries on the face of earth pursuing a financially rewarding degree in medical sciences instead of fighting in Afghanistan for his convictions like Karzai and his comrades are doing but dreaming Aimen Al-Zawahiri will make a comeback on the back of Mullah Omar and Mursian Akhwani mission will be completed elsewhere in Afghanistan.

Barakzai is bondaged to Al-Zawahiri and global Akhwan instead of the dignity and freedom of ordinary Afghans. His heart throbs for Al-Zawahiri not in reality for Mullah Omar who is a fellow Afghan as well no matter how a bigot. Obviously, in Akhwani vision, Mullah Omar can be a tool and other Afghans sacrificial goats in the grand utopia of realizing Pan-Islam project.

Anyhow, the best thing for Afghans would be the BSA as earlier as possible. Rather the range of bilateral security agreements should be increased to as many powerful countries as possible. Right now Afghans have only two options; either go forward and consolidate what they have gained in the short span of just one decade or loose whatever is earned along with their dignity, honour, and freedom to the ruthless Talban proxies and their cunning controllers including non-state actors like Al-Qaueda and Akhwan and state actors like Pakistan and Wahabi monarchies of UAE and Saudi Arabia.

It should be remembered that there is no freedom in absolute sense. If there were any such thing, Barakzais would have extricated himself from want of a lavish life as a doctor and return to Afghanistan to become a martyr or a Ghazi. Even the most powerful state like America is not free in the absolute sense.

Lives of ordinary Afghans are more important than Akhwani utopia of absolute freedom from the West or whoever.

[Toramana]

And he has found a good audience with Wowra. Don't know what mutual interest or commonality tie both to each other.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

I have gone through all that is in this thread. Barakzai as usual has a bizarre or naive or crooked explanation of things with large gaps and big question marks e.g. when he says "when Afghans will sort out the matters internally" by which he definitely implies Taleban slaughtering the rest and implementing their one-eyed vision for Afghanistan.

Nice try to gloss over the evidences and history. I can tell you are frustrated by the lack of being able to deal with air tight case

And he pours scorn over Karzai and others of his comrades who are currently busy re-building Afghanistan (from the scratch) but forgets or cunningly ignores that even if there is some mismanagement in Karzai

Some mismanagement? Are you mentally retarded? That is like saying Mount Everest is just some mountain

governance, at least these guys are on the ground exposing themselves to the threat and enduring all the hardships that characterize the formative phases of any state.


Soft hands Karzai surrounded by seven rings of security being exposed to risk? Even Ahmad Wali Karzai tooker bigger risks than this male hooker.

At least Karzai was brave enough to risk his life to travel on a motor-bike to Kandahar

Air dropped and assisted by the most advanced technology in the world and surrounded once his original insurrection flopped.

and help civilization to return to Afghanistan unlike Barakzai who is sitting in one of the most advanced countries on the face of earth pursuing a financially rewarding degree in medical sciences instead of fighting in Afghanistan for his convictions like Karzai and his comrades are doing but dreaming Aimen Al-Zawahiri will make a comeback on the back of Mullah Omar and Mursian Akhwani mission will be completed elsewhere in Afghanistan.

Typical drunkard pekora eating ANPiite argument.... lazy yourselves and unable to win elections you try the age old canard of claiming that those living in the West cannot have common sense which you lack. What of Scheuer and Ron Paul and Becevich and a host of others? Oh, I forgot they dont fit in your ridiculous paradigm.

Barakzai is bondaged to Al-Zawahiri and global Akhwan instead of the dignity and freedom of ordinary Afghans.

I have no love lost for Zawahari who apparently shot an Afghan at point blank range for the supposed crime of homosexuality without trial or any other evidences.

His heart throbs for Al-Zawahiri not in reality for Mullah Omar who is a fellow. Obviously, in Akhwani vision, Mullah Omar can be a tool and other Afghans sacrificial goats in the grand utopia of Pan-Islam.

Anyhow, the best thing for Afghans would be the BSA as earlier as possible. Rather the range of bilateral security agreements should be increased to as many powerful countries as possible. Right now Afghans have only two options; either go forward and consolidate what they have gained in the short span of just one decade or loose whatever is earned along with their dignity, honour, and freedom to the ruthless Talban proxies and their cunning controllers including non-state actors like Al-Qaueda and Akhwan and state actors like Pakistan and Wahabi monarchies of UAE and Saudi Arabia.

THe stupidest advice you have given to date despite the aforementioned quadries Karzai himself has found troubelsome.

It should be remembered that there is no freedom in absolute sense. If there were any such thing, Barakzais would have extricated himself from want of a lavish life as a doctor and return to Afghanistan to become a martyr or a Ghazi. Even the most powerful state like America is not free in the absolute sense.

Nice try, I think the pub whiskey is getting to your senses again. Its rather you that relies on the guns of foreign hands to try and terminate the ground level adversaries you hate so much Mr. Paracha. Please go and leave the safety of Canada and send one of its native sons back in your place so that you can find Mullah Omar and kill the heir apparent Fazlullah.

Lives of ordinary Afghans are more important than Akhwani utopia of absolute freedom from the West or whatever.

Still upset that Nabeela proved your skank Farhat Taj Andersen was wrong in her estimate of 0 civilians killed by drones?

In summary Toramana you still lack the reasoning needed for leadership and solid evidence based science or argument. I think you should stick to the losing politics of ANP where the Parachas find refuge.