Mr Ghani soon disqualified?

[HalloIsBack]

bitch fight

[Kushan Prince]

bitch fight

No i'm done here. This will be my last reply on this thread as i don't want to "feed" the trolls.

[HalloIsBack]

No i'm done here. This will be my last reply on this thread as i don't want to "feed" the trolls.

you don't do it
lets open own thread and troll

[khushal]

So he is himself busy in ''Tajik bachabazi'' stuff what he actually always condemns???? Damn. Since when a ''Farsi'' speaking ''Pashtun'' can represents Pashtuns or Pashtun nationalism? This is indeed laughable. The former royal house was like the same. Today, they have lost their identity somewhere between Turkey and USA. I once met Noor Noori, a ''prince'' and living now in USA or Canada. His family all are 'native Americans' married to non-Pashtuns. Irony of life...

FYI: Native Americans are the indigenous people of America.

[khushal]

He was trolling on one of my threads until i said you are herati trying to pose as a tajik calling for the partition of Afghanistan, like a coward he didn't reply back. Not to mention the writing style and the anti pashtun sentiments are the same as RTR's.

I highly doubt Azmal is tajik though considering how he calls them "amu darya jumpers."

I did not read anything from PF member Herat that was anti Pashtun and I don't think he was calling for the partition of Afghanistan, I think he was trying to convey a solution for the region, that all the different ethnic groups administer themselves much like how Europe was organized after WW2. But he was not just talking about Afghanistan, he was talking about the whole region.

RTR knows that Azmul is Tajik, they've clashed many times. Herat did not.

[Kushan Prince]

I did not read anything from PF member Herat that was anti Pashtun and I don't think he was calling for the partition of Afghanistan, I think he was trying to convey a solution for the region, that all the different ethnic groups administer themselves much like how Europe was organized after WW2. But he was not just talking about Afghanistan, he was talking about the whole region.

RTR knows that Azmul is Tajik, they've clashed many times. Herat did not.

I promised i wouldn't post in this thread again, but just for your sake i will.

Look at what he said here bro, he indeed wrote that partition is the only solution for Afghanistan.

I understand what I think you are alluding to and in fact, believe it or not, I am not particularly fond of any of the mostly evil, criminal Tajik/Uzbek/Hazara warlords and concede that many Tajik politicians (especially the ones in the current Afghan government) are frankly wastes of meat (much of their opportunistic, short-sighted political activities are actually extremely counter-productive to the legitimate interests of Tajiks) but just because many of the evil non-Pashtuns of Afghanistan endorse partition does not mean legitimate issues and reasons for ethnic paritition do not exist. Like I said before, the spectre of ethnic conflict will loom so long as there are equally sizeable competing groups in a centralized state (yes, this was not a problem in the past where the government was a virtually nonexistent entity outside Kabul for most of the time but we now have centralized states) and partition is the only solution that is consistent with the right to self determination of all the peoples of Afghanistan.

You are right that Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazaras are not so much of a cohesive group as wed like to think (except it seems in conflict with Pashtuns) but that is besides the point: when Afghanistan is partitioned, there will be one less giant competing ethnic group for the North and pretty much no competing ethnic group in future Pashtunistan. The Tajik, Uzbek and Hazara issue is our problem, we will deal with it, and I happen to think it won't be so difficult for us to get along (with the Hazara especially as they are completely Persianized and actually are culturally quite similar despite the Sunni-Shia differences).

I think you make too much too much of individual cities and actually Kandahar city is the second largest in the entire country and at least on par with Herat and Mazar, if not Kabul, in any notable measure (in fact I think it has greater potential than Herat city). Mazar, with all due respect, you guys have about as much claim on as we do on Kandahar, the main points of dispute will be Kabul and Herat; the districts will surely be partitions on basis of ethnic distribution, the cities we will have to settle fairly.

Anyways this is all just theoretical discourse, my friend. I don't really believe partition is likely to happen any time soon, the most likely scenario to me it seems will be the reestablishment of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, not too long after the foreign forces leave.

He couldn't get anymore bigoted then that, also for the icing on the cake;

Because they're tired of the idea of a one sided ethnic domination over land that belongs to their ancestors.

This is why the ethnic/nationalist angle is always faulty you'll always have people who have claims over land you consider yours.

Why should Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazaras get the short end of the stick for self centered Pashtuns? Pashtuns are the Punjabis of Afghanistan.

Well since you peddle ethnic nationalism so much. Then give those regions that are historically Farsiwan to them.

Kabul is not Pashtun, Kabul was conquered by Pashtuns but Pashtuns are not hereditary native there.

Who says Pashtuns won't be forced packing their bags to the South, ALL 3 ethnicities (Hazara, Tajik, Uzbek) have ganged up on Pashtuns before. What will stop them from doing it again?

What happens afterwards is their own business, But a galvanized Anti-Pashtun zeal with a partition backing it will certainly leave Pashtuns on the losing end. And will call Pashtuns on their bluff of being the "most undefeated people in the world". It's time the pompous fall.

Even if, it'll be fighting on their terms, not yours.

All i can say wrora, is this guy (whoever he claims to be) has WAY too much time on his hands and is playing mind games out of boredom. No surprising that he's been trolling this forum for years now.

[Herat]

Kushan Prince, I am not RTR (you can ask the Admin to compare our IPs if you want). And what exactly is bigoted about that post? In that same thread, you claimed that Tajiks "have absolutely NO history in Afghanistan", yet I am the bigot? Its you who peddles this Pashtun nationalist narrative that the entirety of the present geographic region known as Afghanistan has always been and is only the domain of Pashtuns, and that every other ethnic group are "immigrants". I, on the other hand, make no claim to Pashtun land and acknowledge every single one of the grievances of the Pashtun people. I have never and will never defend Tajik leaders who have victimized Pashtuns, in fact I will not even defend the behaviour of my peoples in the present era of the NATO occupation. I will, however, defend the right to self determination of my peoples -in fact all the peoples of Afghanistan- and once again, there is only one solution that is consistent with this principle and that is separation.
Contrary to this mythical Afghan-Pashtun nationalist narrative, there is no definitive historical evidence for a Pashtun presence in the North. The Pashtun presence in the North is the result of what would aptly be called colonization; I don't hold the Pashtun peoples responsible for what your kings did but it is what it is. I simply do not want my peoples to live with a peoples who see us as aliens in our own lands and with whom we have less in common than our Russianized kinsmen across the border anymore, compare this with your desire to break apart Pakistan for your kinsmen. Once again unlike you, I make no claim on other peoples -Pashtun- land, or even lands that were historically ours (such as the entirety of Herat or Kabul districts), just the regions where we are currently majorities, tough I am sure if you had your way that too will not be the case in the future (I will not mention names but I have been reading threads where Pashtun-nationalist members recommend further Pashtun colonization of the West and North).
The fact is that both Afghanistan and Pakistan as they currently are, are colonial legacies whose present borders make no sense. To clarify my position (I am trying to stay away from all this Afghanistan related business so I will avoid posting here), I believe that the internal problem of the region is inherently an ethnic one (it is not the only one but it is a main one) and that the only long-lasting cure will be its breaking apart into ethnically homogenous states much like what happened to Europe after the second world war (the recent Balkanization of the Ukraine is a continuation of that historical process). I am in favour of a regional union a la European Union but this is a distant scenario, we must have balkanization, and borders that reflect demographic realities, first.

[Toramana]

Kushan Prince, I am not RTR (you can ask the Admin to compare our IPs if you want). And what exactly is bigoted about that post? In that same thread, you claimed that Tajiks "have absolutely NO history in Afghanistan", yet I am the bigot? Its you who peddles this Pashtun nationalist narrative that the entirety of the present geographic region known as Afghanistan has always been and is only the domain of Pashtuns, and that every other ethnic group are "immigrants". I, on the other hand, make no claim to Pashtun land and acknowledge every single one of the grievances of the Pashtun people. I have never and will never defend Tajik leaders who have victimized Pashtuns, in fact I will not even defend the behaviour of my peoples in the present era of the NATO occupation. I will, however, defend the right to self determination of my peoples -in fact all the peoples of Afghanistan- and once again, there is only one solution that is consistent with this principle and that is separation.
Contrary to this mythical Afghan-Pashtun nationalist narrative, there is no definitive historical evidence for a Pashtun presence in the North. The Pashtun presence in the North is the result of what would aptly be called colonization; I don't hold the Pashtun peoples responsible for what your kings did but it is what it is. I simply do not want my peoples to live with a peoples who see us as aliens in our own lands and with whom we have less in common than our Russianized kinsmen across the border anymore, compare this with your desire to break apart Pakistan for your kinsmen. Once again unlike you, I make no claim on other peoples -Pashtun- land, or even lands that were historically ours (such as the entirety of Herat or Kabul districts), just the regions where we are currently majorities, tough I am sure if you had your way that too will not be the case in the future (I will not mention names but I have been reading threads where Pashtun-nationalist members recommend further Pashtun colonization of the West and North).
The fact is that both Afghanistan and Pakistan as they currently are, are colonial legacies whose present borders make no sense. To clarify my position (I am trying to stay away from all this Afghanistan related business so I will avoid posting here), I believe that the internal problem of the region is inherently an ethnic one (it is not the only one but it is a main one) and that the only long-lasting cure will be its breaking apart into ethnically homogenous states much like what happened to Europe after the second world war (the recent Balkanization of the Ukraine is a continuation of that historical process). I am in favour of a regional union a la European Union but this is a distant scenario, we must have balkanization, and borders that reflect demographic realities, first.

Herat, wise. I agree with you on that. Let the region be organized into states or units whatever one calls it and then united into a federal or con-federal superstate. Alas, Afghan, Pakistani, Irani nationalists as well as super-powers wouldn't like that.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Herat, wise. I agree with you on that. Let the region be organized into states or units whatever one calls it and then united into a federal or con-federal superstate. Alas, Afghan, Pakistani, Irani nationalists as well as super-powers wouldn't like that.

Now we are talking. This needs to be on the lips of every religionist, secularist, etc. The region needs a confederacy tied on the basis of some overlapping heritage with a devotion to uniting and sharing resources as well as permitting freedom of movement as well as a shared role in defense. The sooner the natives of these regions understand that united they stand and divided they face cultural decimation as well as at least another half millennium of war imposed by kharijaan, the better. The two disparate movements, religionism and secularism need to come to terms and find some way to not let values encroachment cause internecine conflict.

The problem is that the top of the top in these places are on the payroll of someone somewhere and do not benefit from what would benefit the people in the tangible immediate sense. Because of their shortsightedness they prefer to build up their personal wealth all the while lying to themselves that this sort of dependency is short term and that they are weaning their nation to some sort of independence.

Despite people accepting the narrative in Western sources that we are all inherently different and have been fighting for centuries before a single Englishman stepped foot on the continent - they forget that the collective peoples have also been sharing scholarship, intermarriage, and some sort of basic cultural fabric.

Why else would it be so easy for those of the East to feel somewhat comfortable with each other when they meet abroad for the first time? There is an almost immediate sense of familiarity when I begin talking to a fellow Afghan, Tajik, Uzbek, Iranian, Pakistani, Arab, and Indian. We understand some fundamental mannerisms that are across the region.

If there was no shared history of any sort how could a Pashtun named Ahmad Shah be mentored by a Turkoman named Nadir Shah and be advised by a Mendicant from Lahore named Baba Sabir Shah?

[Toramana]

Now we are talking. This needs to be on the lips of every religionist, secularist, etc. The region needs a confederacy tied on the basis of some overlapping heritage with a devotion to uniting and sharing resources as well as permitting freedom of movement as well as a shared role in defense. The sooner the natives of these regions understand that united they stand and divided they face cultural decimation as well as at least another half millennium of war imposed by kharijaan, the better. The two disparate movements, religionism and secularism need to come to terms and find some way to not let values encroachment cause internecine conflict.

The problem is that the top of the top in these places are on the payroll of someone somewhere and do not benefit from what would benefit the people in the tangible immediate sense. Because of their shortsightedness they prefer to build up their personal wealth all the while lying to themselves that this sort of dependency is short term and that they are weaning their nation to some sort of independence.

Despite people accepting the narrative in Western sources that we are all inherently different and have been fighting for centuries before a single Englishman stepped foot on the continent - they forget that the collective peoples have also been sharing scholarship, intermarriage, and some sort of basic cultural fabric.

Why else would it be so easy for those of the East to feel somewhat comfortable with each other when they meet abroad for the first time? There is an almost immediate sense of familiarity when I begin talking to a fellow Afghan, Tajik, Uzbek, Iranian, Pakistani, Arab, and Indian. We understand some fundamental mannerisms that are across the region.

If there was no shared history of any sort how could a Pashtun named Ahmad Shah be mentored by a Turkoman named Nadir Shah and be advised by a Mendicant from Lahore named Baba Sabir Shah?

Barakzai, somehow one has the feeling that the secular-Islamist, sectarian, and ethnic divide together with structurally weak and potentially unstable states suits the geopolitics of the West (read US and Britian). This way they can play one faction/group against the other while sitting atop and acting as the brokers as well as creating themselves the opportunity to influence the domestic and foreign policies of such states.

I think a regional re-organization under some agreement will benefit all groups and will prove to be a cohesive rather than divisive and destabilizing measure.

One thing that Pashtuns should also realize that their supposed centrality in the Afghan state had long overrun its course at least after the death of Taimur Shah (grandson of Ahmad Shah Baba) and could only be sustained due to the strategic necessities of the Great Game and the Cold War bipolarity and the security-strategic alliances that it generated.

Just imagine if Uzbaks were not on the side of Ghani rather were part of the Abdullah alliance what would have been Ghani,s situation.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Barakzai, somehow one has the feeling that the secular-Islamist, sectarian, and ethnic divide together with structurally weak and potentially unstable states suits the geopolitics of the West (read US and Britian). This way they can play faction against the other while sitting atop and acting as the broker as well as creating themselves the opportunity to influence the domestic and foreign policies of such countries.

I think a regional re-organization under some agreement will benefit all groups and will prove to be a cohesive rather than divisive and destabilizing.

One thing that Pashtuns should also realize that their supposed centrality in the Afghan state had long overrun its course at least after the death of Taimur Shah and could only be sustained due to necessities of the politics of the bipolarity of the Great Game and the Cold War and the security-strategic alliances that it generated.

Just imagine if Uzbaks were not on the side of Ghani rather were part of the Abdullah alliance what would have been Ghani situation.

This is exactly the case. Imagine two people in a street fight and a bunch of instigators standing on the sidelines handing each fighter weapons like a broken glass bottle and brass knuckles - this is the same situation with the majority versus minority narrative in some Muslim nations as well as Islamist versus Secularist strife. Each side has certainly done things to the other to rouse up suspicion, but if cooler heads prevail then they would understand this conflict and short sightedness is not permitting them to see their mental cage. These cages are a series of lines and loyalties to various colonizer powers (e.g. Libya to Italy and Pakistan to Britania-America, etc) and an emerging belief in the constructs hoisted upon them.

At some point if these hands can come together and achieve intellectual and physical independence then there needs to be a grand meeting on par with the Constitutional Convention of Philadelphia where weeks and months are committed to dialogue between people regarding flash points of governance. This of course would fall secondary to infrastructure development and designing ties of unity.

Perhaps the only positive outcome after these years of repression is that both diametrically opposed camps will realize that their externally mediated victories are short lived and that they must work together. If they actually achieve independence then they cannot set on each other like vultures and must realize that this sort of thing post independence is what guarantees perpetual servitude.

[Toramana]

This is exactly the case. Imagine two people in a street fight and a bunch of instigators standing on the sidelines handing each fighter weapons like a broken glass bottle and brass knuckles - this is the same situation with the majority versus minority narrative in some Muslim nations as well as Islamist versus Secularist strife. Each side has certainly done things to the other to rouse up suspicion, but if cooler heads prevail then they would understand this conflict and short sightedness is not permitting them to see their mental cage. These cages are a series of lines and loyalties to various colonizer powers (e.g. Libya to Italy and Pakistan to Britania-America, etc) and an emerging belief in the constructs hoisted upon them.

At some point if these hands can come together and achieve intellectual and physical independence then there needs to be a grand meeting on par with the Constitutional Convention of Philadelphia where weeks and months are committed to dialogue between people regarding flash points of governance. This of course would fall secondary to infrastructure development and designing ties of unity.

Perhaps the only positive outcome after these years of repression is that both diametrically opposed camps will realize that their externally mediated victories are short lived and that they must work together. If they actually achieve independence then they cannot set on each other like vultures and must realize that this sort of thing post independence is what guarantees perpetual servitude.

I hope that happens. One thing one realize is violent destabilizing revolutions for change would not do any good. Only changes through compromises and flexibility and democratic processes will gradually bring the desired change. I feel that the responsibilities more lies on the shoulders of religio-political groups because international environment is not very conducive to what they want to achieve.

They need to bring more subtlety, sophistication, inclusiveness, and mainstreaming in their views and politics particularly with regard to the social changes that last past few decades have brought into Muslim societies.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

I hope that happens. One thing one realize is violent destabilizing revolutions for change would not do any good. Only changes through compromises and flexibility and democratic processes will gradually bring the desired change. I feel that the responsibilities more lies on the shoulders of religio-political groups because international environment is not very conducive to what they want to achieve.

They need to bring more subtlety, sophistication, inclusiveness, and mainstreaming in their views and politics particularly with regard to the social changes that last past few decades have brought into Muslim societies.

I am more of a Jeffersonian in my view of the importance of revolution. The issue with the democratic process is that multiple elections which produce a result or a national figure, whether they be secular (Mossadegh of Iran) or religionist (Algeria or Egypt) end up being overturned or ignored by more powerful hands. It is not democracy per se that is the problem, but rather the notion that democratic reform and participation under colonial constructs can achieve anything at all.

Forget the Muslim states, examine even Putin's conundrum of dealing with the NGOs in his nation that worked under that title yet participated in funneling external resources to influence Russian elections:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/21/us-russia-putin-ngos-idUSBRE86K05M20120721

The same occurred in Egypt under the guiding hand of Lady Clinton:

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2013/07/2013710113522489801.html

And then what of Allende in Chile in the last century or the current interference in Venezuela where Maduro's government is clearly being destabilized by Leopold Lopez at the behest of various intelligence agencies?

Or what of their negligent attitude toward the voting patterns of the Palestinian people or their recent attempts to subvert a Palestinian unity front that I am sure an overwhelming majority desire? This would certainly fit in line with your appeal to religionists to mainstream their attitudes for the sake of some stability.

Democracy or some native form of it with some improvements on limiting the role of lobbies and money is not what one should hold as an anathema - but the current status quo and the fact that colonial old hands can insert themselves into the events of their suzerain state affairs is what will ensure perpetual decay and servitude.

Admittedly, if regional cooperative revolution as Guevara imagined it does not occur then you are correct - the Powerful hands behind the curtain impose sanctions and crushing maneuvers to isolate any new state that does not conform to their directives. In this you are correct that it is in some ways negligent and criminal to ask a denizen to sacrifice some semblance of stability for a nebulous ideological cause. Perhaps if human beings viewed dignity and independence as a commodity on par with buildings of brick and mortar then it would not be so far fetched. But most human beings follow survival logic as opposed to altruistic logic.

Latin America is closer to a regional cooperative than the Middle East and Central Asia, this is the only reason Cuba has been able to defy anyone for decades.

[vinyard80]

This is too idealistic. Pashtuns believe they are entitled to governing 100% of Afghanistan, its government, its military, its police forces, its trade routes. Conflict is guaranteed for at least 20 years more to come.

But Pashtuns should better ally themselves with powerful friends, because I do not think they can defend against a newly assertive Russia, a more dominant Iran, and an India willing to protect its interests ouside her borders. Not to mention guaranteed American support for the TajikUzbekHazaras when the BSA is signed.

The Punjabis and Arabs are desperately needed. Hamid Gul (father of the Taliban) might even come out of retirement.

You tajik nationalists are really very hilarious people. You control everything in Afghanistan: economy, culture, army, bureaucracy, your language is the first one,.. seems Abdullah is going to become afghanistans next president. WHAT ELSE YOU WANT? You have already won. You are going to far with your chauvinistic policy. Pashtuns are along to tajiks largest ethnic group in afghanistan. They deserve some respect don't they?

[Bost Bastan News]

You tajik nationalists are really very hilarious people. You control everything in Afghanistan: economy, culture, army, bureaucracy, your language is the first one,.. seems Abdullah is going to become afghanistans next president. WHAT ELSE YOU WANT? You have already won. You are going to far with your chauvinistic policy. Pashtuns are along to tajiks largest ethnic group in afghanistan. They deserve some respect don't they?

Some friends told me who you are, boy. You are no Pashtun. You are a racist Herati Farsiwan, a fat guy who lives in Spain. I just got your facebook from a friend account You coming here to fool us and playing with us your nationalist games