Hungry and sexually frustrated crowd is attacking girls in PTI rally of Lahore

[Aryana]

What Muslims? Get your facts right….Pakistani state is successor of British Raj for Pashtons and Afghanistan! Pakistan is not a new Islamic state for us. I would suggest you extend your rants to the great injustice served in our region by Britain 's carving out this piece of rotting pulp from the lands of India and Afghanistan . How dare they divide the Muslims in each of our countries from their ethnic kinsmen into a den of terror we all recognize as Pakistan, Go on, allow us to measure your true brotherhood to fellow Muslims.....denounce Pakistan for having dutifully served Britain's interests in south Asia.

Porkistan was an accident of British colonial expansion. The creation of Porkistan was unintended by the British, but the Muslims of South Asia wanted their own nation. Pashtuns had their own nation, Afghanistan, but the other half wanted their own nation.

[Azmal]

From a historical perspective, you're right .....but guess what? So is Modern Afghanistan.

I hate to say it but even Afghanistan was basically a product of British institutions; but instead they used our Sell-Out Kings to due their dirty work.

You mean buffer state? Afghanistan statue as buffer state signifies what was left of Afghan empire draw by blood of her own people. Afghan state did not come to being as servitude to 'Saheeb'.

[Azmal]

Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, India, Iraq,.. all of them are fake boundaries drew by Western colonialists. People here are just praising their own chains lol

Flat headed Amu Jumper,
We are talking about state not boundaries.

[Forreigner]

Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, India, Iraq,.. all of them are fake boundaries drew by Western colonialists. People here are just praising their own chains lol

Only solution is to either form a new caliphate and conquer all of south asiua and muslimize all indians and pakistanis. A muslim state/union superpower from morocco all the way to Indonesia. Or draw new lines and forn even newer nations based on ethinicity/language.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

You mean buffer state? Afghanistan statue as buffer state signifies what was left of Afghan empire draw by blood of her own people. Afghan state did not come to being as servitude to 'Saheeb'.

Ok we disagree on this issue clearly; but since this is open to debate. Can you explain to me why do we declare our Independence Day on August 19th?

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, India, Iraq,.. all of them are fake boundaries drew by Western colonialists. People here are just praising their own chains lol

And Iran, Tajikistan and so on.

[Firdousi]

And Iran, Tajikistan and so on.

Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Jordan.. and so on are included. But Iran, India, Syria, Egypt and Turkey are not fake states. They are historical nations. Afghanistan did not exist 5 centuries ago. Iran and India did (not in the modern nation-state sense but tis pretty obvious there was some sort of cultural-political entity behind those nations). Just see how Salahadin was all the time mentioning Syria, basically because there was a region, a cultural entity called like that (this took place like 1000 year ago, where was Afghanistan back then? lol). Mawlana mentions in his poems the land of khorasan but he did not say a word about the fake state of Afghanistan. DO you know why? Because Afghanistan is a fake brit-made country.

In case of Turkey most of their current territory was under previous Turk dynasties that are the roots of the modern Turkish nation: Seljuks and Osmanis. Despite being their borders drawn by Europeans in many cases (Sevran and Lausanne treats, Sykes-Pycot and so on) they are historical nations. Afghanistan used to be part of the same cultural identity as Iran. Thats why makes me laugh every time I hear an Afghan bragging about his "5000 year old history" or how Alexander was afraid of Afghans. Same thing goes for Pakis who are actually Indian Muslims.

[Firdousi]

Only solution is to either form a new caliphate and conquer all of south asiua and muslimize all indians and pakistanis. A muslim state/union superpower from morocco all the way to Indonesia. Or draw new lines and forn even newer nations based on ethinicity/language.

Caliphate is a wet dream. There are too many cultures, nationalism, ideologies, ethnic groups, sects, languages in the land of Islam. Our countries are much more diverse then Western countries. Its just imposible to bring so many different people under one banner. Muslims should rather push for an economic and political unity a la European Union. Honestly I don't want to be ruled by a man thousands of miles away from my land. We have our own identity and we should never give up on it.

[Firdousi]

Flat headed Amu Jumper,
We are talking about state not boundaries.

Nation-state is a modern European creation imposed by Brits, French and Russians on us, my uneducated caveman countryman. Same thing goes for their fake boundaries drawn randomly mixing up different ethnicities and religions.

BTW I am from Herat. We are far away from Amu Darya. Only immigrants in Herat are Pashtuns. And most of them are fascist troublemakers. No wonder why Adraskan, Pashtun Zarghun, Shindand and Torghwooindi are sh*tholes infested by kidnappers, drug dealers and terrorists. Today many of them were arrested by NDS in Herat and all of them were Pashtun immigrants. Nobody likes you, buddy lmao

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Jordan.. and so on are included. But Iran, India, Syria, Egypt and Turkey are not fake states. They are historical nations. Afghanistan did not exist 5 centuries ago. Iran and India did (not in the modern nation-state sense but tis pretty obvious there was some sort of cultural-political entity behind those nations). Mawlana mentions in his poems the land of khorasan but he did not say a word about the fake state of Afghanistan. DO you know why? Because its a fake brit-made country.

In case of Turkey most of their current territory was under previous Turk dynasties that are the roots of the modern Turkish nation: Seljuks and Osmanis. Despite being their borders drawn by Europeans in many cases (Sevran and Lausanne treats, Sykes-Pycot and so on) they are historical nations. Afghanistan for example is a fake entity. Afghanistan used to be part of the same cultural identity as Iran. Thats why makes me laugh every time I hear an Afghan bragging about his "5000 year history" or how Alexander was afraid of Afghans. Same thing goes for Pakis who are actually Indian Muslims.

To quote you:

Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, India, Iraq,.. all of them are fake boundaries drew by Western colonialists. People here are just praising their own chains lol

Khorasan is a very abstract regional reference; referring to the Eastern Regions, where the Son Rises.

Pashtuns make the same mistake when they quote Abdali's poem " da delhi takht heraum chi da ghro saroono de pashtunkhwah yadezhum"


Meaning "I forget the throne of Delhi when I remember the mountain tops of Pashtunkhwah".

He did not call his nation Pashtunkhwah because if he did, then Delhi would be included since he conquered it. It was a reference to a general region where Pashtuns had inhabited.

Iran is a very modern word; and while "Afghanistan" may have been apart of the same rulers as Iran from time to time; Iran is as manufactured as Afghanistan.

Your earlier statement that all these boundaries are manufactured by European Colonialists is more correct. This cherry picked exceptionalism isn't

I'm also a bit hesitant about your description of Turkey as well..

[Firdousi]

To quote you:


Khorasan is a very abstract regional reference; referring to the Eastern Regions, where the Son Rises.

Pashtuns make the same mistake when they quote Abdali's poem " da delhi takht heraum chi da ghro saroono de pashtunkhwah yadezhum"


Meaning "I forget the throne of Delhi when I remember the mountain tops of Pashtunkhwah".

He did not call his nation Pashtunkhwah because if he did, then Delhi would be included since he conquered it. It was a reference to a general region where Pashtuns had inhabited.

Iran is a very modern word; and while "Afghanistan" may have been apart of the same rulers as Iran from time to time; Iran is as manufactured as Afghanistan.

Your earlier statement that all these boundaries are manufactured by European Colonialists is more correct. This cherry picked exceptionalism isn't

I'm also a bit hesitant about your description of Turkey as well..

I did not mention those countries because there is no need to mention them all. You got my point: vast majority of the modern Islamic states are not historical.

Ahmad Shah Abdali never called himself "King of Afghanistan" but "King of Kabulistan" and "King of Khorasan". Ironically the last king of khorasan was a Pashtun lol.

As I have pointed out before seems you are confusing cultural-geographical Khorasan with the modern European nation-state. Khorasan was not a state nor a country but the largest province of another cultural identity known as Iran/Eranshar/Aryanam Vaejaeh (please, once again, don't mistake modern Iranian state with the historical Iran Zameen that includes modern Afghanistan as well). Basically this proves my point: Iran, India, Egypt, Syria or Turkey are historical nations. Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Pakistan,.. are not. Easy peasy, buddy.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

I did not mention those countries because there is no need to mention them all. You got my point: vast majority of the modern Islamic states are not historical.

Ahmad Shah Abdali never called himself "King of Afghanistan" but "King of Kabulistan" and "King of Khorasan". Ironically the last king of khorasan was a Pashtun lol.

As I have pointed out before seems you are confusing cultural-geographical Khorasan with the modern European nation-state. Khorasan was not a state nor a country but the largest province of another cultural identity known as Iran/Eranshar/Aryanam Vaejaeh (please, once again, don't mistake modern Iranian state with the historical Iran Zameen that includes modern Afghanistan as well). Basically this proves my point: Iran, India, Egypt, Syria or Turkey are historical nations. Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Pakistan,.. are not. Easy peasy, buddy.

The epithets like "King of Kabulistan" or "King of Khorasan" are a bit wonky, I'm not sure which references you saw them in, but even the case, It'd be hard to believe he meant he named his Administration "Kingdom of Khorasan".

I don't see any evidence that any historical nation called "Iran" or "Iran Zameen" or "EranSahr" ever existed. If you mean a generic, and I stress the word generic, reference to the people inhabiting an area, then maybe, but not an actual kingdom or magistrate or unifying identity. Bharat existed, but same deal. Masr is the only one that can say to have actually existed as a Kingdom, although it was called Kemet in ancient times I believe?

Syria most certainly didn't exist, Sham existed, because it meant they're from the North, it was a regional epithet.

So not quite so easy peasey "buddy".

[Samandri]

You will find only those Pashtuns who haven't been brought up properly doing these things, since, I'm pretty sure, if you've been brought up in Pashtun culture you would know that it's a beghairat thing to do.

May be things are different on Afghanistan side, but the Pashtuns i know care only about the respect and honour of women of their own family or of their own qaum. Pashtun men are hypocrite and selective in Ghairat..........They think that just because a girl is not wearing burqa or hijab, they are permitted to rape them with their eyes. True gentlemen are rare among Pashtuns .In Peshawar, a sin city, Pashtun men stare at Kabuli women (who are easily identified from their dress) in meaningful and vulgar manner. Pashtun youngsters from all over the Pakhtunkhwa go to PTI rallies in Islamabad and Punjab, not to listen to Imran Khan's speech but to have stares at the modern girls there. I recently attended the PTI rally in Islamabad, and i was not surprised that it were mostly Pashtun visitors from KPK who were misbehaving with local girls , not just staring at them but passing comments at them and some following them.

[Aryana]

May be things are different on Afghanistan side, but the Pashtuns i know care only about the respect and honour of women of their own family or of their own qaum. Pashtun men are hypocrite and selective in Ghairat..........They think that just because a girl is not wearing burqa or hijab, they are permitted to rape them with their eyes. True gentlemen are rare among Pashtuns .In Peshawar, a sin city, Pashtun men stare at Kabuli women (who are easily identified from their dress) in meaningful and vulgar manner. Pashtun youngsters from all over the Pakhtunkhwa go to PTI rallies in Islamabad and Punjab, not to listen to Imran Khan's speech but to have stares at the modern girls there. I recently attended the PTI rally in Islamabad, and i was not surprised that it were mostly Pashtun visitors from KPK who were misbehaving with local girls , not just staring at them but passing comments at them and some following them.

Well that's something to change. That's why they need to be educated, not only in ghairat and their culture, but also in Islam.

[Aryana]

I did not mention those countries because there is no need to mention them all. You got my point: vast majority of the modern Islamic states are not historical.

Ahmad Shah Abdali never called himself "King of Afghanistan" but "King of Kabulistan" and "King of Khorasan". Ironically the last king of khorasan was a Pashtun lol.

As I have pointed out before seems you are confusing cultural-geographical Khorasan with the modern European nation-state. Khorasan was not a state nor a country but the largest province of another cultural identity known as Iran/Eranshar/Aryanam Vaejaeh (please, once again, don't mistake modern Iranian state with the historical Iran Zameen that includes modern Afghanistan as well). Basically this proves my point: Iran, India, Egypt, Syria or Turkey are historical nations. Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Pakistan,.. are not. Easy peasy, buddy.

You do realise that all those countries (except Turkey) have been colonised by western powers. Don't get confused with Ancient Egypt, and modern Egypt. Ancient Egypt was inhabited by Ancient Egyptians, not Arabs like it is today. The same goes for Syria. As for Iran, do you know that Russia and British agreed on the current borders of Iran, since they were in control of it for a period of time? Not only that, Iran became a puppet state of the west. Turkey has only come up recently, since it was known as historically known as Anatolia. If you've read history, Turks were originally from Central Asia but after the Seljuq empire, they settled in Anatolia. Do you see your logic here? Afghanistan has always existed as a separate entity. Aryana, Khorosan etc, to say that Afghanistan hasn't been a historical nation, you'll need to disregard your claims that Iran was its own nation. "Iran Zameen" is just a term that you wannabe Persians use to try to fulfill your imperial ambitions.