Afghan Taliban will support Pakistan against foreign aggression: Sami ul haq

[khushal]

How are Taliban 'ingrained in Pashtun tribal rural structure' when Taliban is alien to tribal Pashtun society and culture?

You are totally brainwashed by 'Rawalpindi' if you think Taliban is a represenation of Pashtun 'tribal structure'.

To even get a foothold the Taliban had to murder hundreds of khans and maliks all over Pashtunistan and assassinate tribal elders to create chaos and break the traditional social bonds and structures of Pashtuns so that they could come in and fill the vacuum with their way of doing things, which is not traditional to Pashtuns.

This is the exact strategy that Taliban employed in FATA over many years and to very great effect that traditional Pashtun social structures collapsed and elders were subdued by force or just outright murdered.

Taliban suppresses Pashtun culture and traditional society. It is not 'ingrained' in it, lol. It is imposed on it by force, muder and terror.

your are wrong senorita.
The Taliban have been a part of Pashtun society since Pashtuns have been around in recorded history.
The Roots of the Taliban – Peter Storey – Medium

To assume, however, that the Taliban are simply dogmatic fundamentalists is naïve. One revealing Pashtun proverb which must be kept in mind is that “Pashtuns accept half of the Koran.”[3] Where the Koran leaves off is where Pashtunwali — a set of unwritten pre-Islamic guiding principles which Pashtuns follow — picks up. The Taliban’s adherence to these principles is evident in the makeup of their leadership councils,[4] while Pashtunwali has been known to override Sharia law in certain legal areas, especially where honor is concerned.[5]
For the traditional, conservative and predominantly rural Pashtun people of Afghanistan, these two dominant aspects of their culture are largely shared with the Taliban. For rural Afghanistan, the movement were not so stringent during their rule because they didn’t have to be. In contrast, the Taliban’s rule was especially firm in cities, which were perceived by Talibs as hives of immorality[6] (especially as the more cosmopolitan non-Pashtun ethnicities of Afghanistan are in the majority in all Afghan cities apart from Kandahar).[7] Across Afghanistan, the Taliban have simply wanted to create a perfect Pashtun village on a national scale.[8]

[khushal]

Why shouldnt Afghanistan have been hostile to the creation of Pakiland? That country is fake and was put together belligerently by the British without any serious thought to it. It was a rushed job with no reference or consideration to the future of the Afghan population of British India (so called NWFP) to self determination. Their lot was tossed together with the Indian question that had nothing to do with Afghans and Baloch.

Pakiland's invasions of both Kalat Balochistan and Kashmir within the first couple of years of it's invention also signaled what kind of problem 'country' this was to be for it's neighbours. Letters were even sent to Iran and Afghanistan asking them to "confederate" with Pakiland. Of course, such an absurd idea was quietly shot down and laughed at by the leaders of Iran and Afghanistan.

Afghanistan's previously 'normal' relationship with India was also interrupted by the creation of Pakiland. Instead of showing tact and good neighbourly manners towards Afghanistan by allowing Afghanistan to remain outside of the sh!tty Indo-Paki sibling rivalry that it had nothing to do with, Pakiland has held Afghanistan's relationship with India hostage to this sh!t Paki-India conflict from day 1 by obstructing the trade routes. Obstructing trade routes and holding them hostage to politics is the act of a hostile belligerent, not a civilized neighbour.

Most of what you say in this post is correct but one thing I disagree with is that the Brits did put a lot of thought in to the creation of Pakistan. They stayed behind for many years to make sure its military and its intelligence agencies were viable. This was done by design for the reason you have already stated to prevent trade from central asia and south asia and the creation of Pakistan "kind of" forced a very naïve Afghanistan leadership that had no vision to be hostile to it.
The decision that Afghan leadership made put Afghanistan on a path to destruction and turned it into a battlefield for regional powers. Daud at the end realized his errors and wanted to make peace with the pakis but was assassinated by people that wanted to continue the hostility.

[toughpashtun]

youre committing an appeal to ignorance fallacy.

To do away with fancy words and expressions;
I'll just say that:

What you've posted has given me more insight , but it does not completely demolish my point of view.In other words we are not on two opposing ends regarding this topic.

[toughpashtun]

How are Taliban 'ingrained in Pashtun tribal rural structure' when Taliban is alien to tribal Pashtun society and culture?

You are totally brainwashed by 'Rawalpindi' if you think Taliban is a represenation of Pashtun 'tribal structure'.

To even get a foothold the Taliban had to murder hundreds of khans and maliks all over Pashtunistan and assassinate tribal elders to create chaos and break the traditional social bonds and structures of Pashtuns so that they could come in and fill the vacuum with their way of doing things, which is not traditional to Pashtuns.

This is the exact strategy that Taliban employed in FATA over many years and to very great effect that traditional Pashtun social structures collapsed and elders were subdued by force or just outright murdered.

Taliban suppresses Pashtun culture and traditional society. It is not 'ingrained' in it, lol. It is imposed on it by force, muder and terror.

That as not my claim [MENTION=19424]Firdousi[/MENTION] pointed that out and I was just quoting him.And [MENTION=1547]khushal[/MENTION] has responded to you with his evidence.
This is not my topic , so I don't know how much of what you all are saying is correct or not.

[Firdousi]

Why shouldnt Afghanistan have been hostile to the creation of Pakiland? That country is fake and was put together belligerently by the British without any serious thought to it. It was a rushed job with no reference or consideration to the future of the Afghan population of British India (so called NWFP) to self determination. Their lot was tossed together with the Indian question that had nothing to do with Afghans and Baloch.

Pakiland's invasions of both Kalat Balochistan and Kashmir within the first couple of years of it's invention also signaled what kind of problem 'country' this was to be for it's neighbours. Letters were even sent to Iran and Afghanistan asking them to "confederate" with Pakiland. Of course, such an absurd idea was quietly shot down and laughed at by the leaders of Iran and Afghanistan.

Afghanistan's previously 'normal' relationship with India was also interrupted by the creation of Pakiland. Instead of showing tact and good neighbourly manners towards Afghanistan by allowing Afghanistan to remain outside of the sh!tty Indo-Paki sibling rivalry that it had nothing to do with, Pakiland has held Afghanistan's relationship with India hostage to this sh!t Paki-India conflict from day 1 by obstructing the trade routes. Obstructing trade routes and holding them hostage to politics is the act of a hostile belligerent, not a civilized neighbour.

Stop being a bigot, dude. Pakistan is a fake country but so is Afghanistan. When you guys will realize that all these modern nation-states are fake entities created and imposed on us by the UK, France and Russia? There is absolutely no difference between Afghanistan and Pakistan: both are fake countries, with fake boundaries, with forged history, forged cultures and 100% idless. The sooner you guys realize that we are all related to each other the better.

Afghanistan has never been a friend or had a "normal" relationship with India. Historically we have been their enemies. Since the Aryan invasions every single invasions came from what is now known as "Afghanistan": Aryans, Achaemenids, Greeks, Greco-Bactrians, Kushans, Sassanids, Arabs, Ghorids, Ghaznawids, Moguls and so on. The only reason why we are getting along with India now is because we have a common enemy. We just wan to piss off Pakis. If you removed Pakistan from the equation we would have a bad relationship with India too, basically because we have always considered India as a place to plunder, loot, rape and kill and not as our equal partner.

Afghanistan had no right to be so hostile toward Pakistan. Pashtun nationalist have proved to be a bunch of retarded morons.

[Firdousi]

That as not my claim [MENTION=19424]Firdousi[/MENTION] pointed that out and I was just quoting him.And [MENTION=1547]khushal[/MENTION] has responded to you with his evidence.
This is not my topic , so I don't know how much of what you all are saying is correct or not.

Its a fact that the Taliban have some sort of support among rural Pashtuns. Its true that Talibanism is an alien to traditional Pashtun culture but nothing is forever in this life. Pashtun rural culture has morphed from a tribal-sufi-conservative paradigm into a tribal-religious fanatic one. Many urban Pashtuns haven figured this out yet.

Taliban can not be defeated military (except with genocide but I don't think thats a good idea).

[khushal]

Its a fact that the Taliban have some sort of support among rural Pashtuns. Its true that Talibanism is an alien to traditional Pashtun culture but nothing is forever in this life. Pashtun rural culture has morphed from a tribal-sufi-conservative paradigm into a tribal-religious fanatic one. Many urban Pashtuns haven figured this out yet.

Taliban can not be defeated military (except with genocide but I don't think thats a good idea).

The reason that the Taliban can not be defeated militarily is because they represent the deeply rooted rural Pashtun conservatism and tribal independence. As you said except for genocide of rural Pashtuns but that's not defeating, that's extermination.

Many learned CIA analysts have already came to this conclusion which is why they keep promoting the idea of withdrawal or some kind of peace deal with the rural Pashtuns.

Firdousi,
You keep blaming the misery of your people on Pashtun tribalism or fascism as you describe it, but all this goes back to Rabanni/Masoud/Hekmatyar waging war against the government which triggered A communist Coup and a Soviet invasion that brought the sword(force) on rural Pashtuns to force them to accept something that was foreign to them. Your own leadership(Rabanni/Masoud) had their hands all over it. We are witnessing the consequences to their actions.

[khushal]

To do away with fancy words and expressions;
I'll just say that:

What you've posted has given me more insight , but it does not completely demolish my point of view.In other words we are not on two opposing ends regarding this topic.

Its not fancy words or expressions. Don't be afraid to debate rationally.

http://encyclopedia.kids.net.au/page/lo/Logical_fallacy

[toughpashtun]

Its not fancy words or expressions. Don't be afraid to debate rationally.
Kids.Net.Au - Encyclopedia > Logical fallacy

I've been debating all this time , my friend.

[khushal]

I've been debating all this time , my friend.

You have to learn to debate rationally. When I point out your fallacy, you call it fancy expression. When I prove my point with valid sources, you say it might have errors. When a hindu says "God is great", you will say we cant believe what hindus say because they are hindu and my mama told me not to believe hindus, they dirty.

This is why I said your lost and delusional. Most pakis are.

[toughpashtun]

You have to learn to debate rationally. When I point out your fallacy, you call it fancy expression. When I prove my point with valid sources, you say it might have errors. When a hindu says "God is great", you will say we cant believe what hindus say because they are hindu and my mama told me not to believe hindus, they dirty.

This is why I said your lost and delusional. Most pakis are.

Looks like we'll have to catch up to you Afghans in the science of rationality and debate.

[toughpashtun]

You have to learn to debate rationally. When I point out your fallacy, you call it fancy expression. When I prove my point with valid sources, you say it might have errors. When a hindu says "God is great", you will say we cant believe what hindus say because they are hindu and my mama told me not to believe hindus, they dirty.

This is why I said your lost and delusional. Most pakis are.

As for your second point , let me reiterate that I did not reject your valid source .Error is possible , because it is not some divine scripture.

[khushal]

Looks like we'll have to catch up to you Afghans in the science of rationality and debate.

That would be an ad hominem fallacy which is usually committed by intellectually weak people.

[toughpashtun]

you committed that same fallacy when you said pakis are lost and delusional [MENTION=1547]khushal[/MENTION]

[khushal]

you committed that same fallacy when you said pakis are lost and delusional [MENTION=1547]khushal[/MENTION]

I already proved that you cant debate rationally which translates to lost and delusional.

You must challenge the claim. Prove that your not lost and delusional by backing up your claims with valid sources.