Martyrdom of Dr Najibullah

[AnGaaR]

Zchwand zchwand zchwand

marg ba 7 khara..
he was better than the 7 donkeys and the ISI dogs..

noshe jan dai sa Dr sahiba.. har tso chei dai mra kra noshe jan dai sa..
he killed those who wanted to ruin Afghanistan..

Lets say he welcomed russians and then said bye bye to them
but the other jihadi munafiqs welcomed 32 countries.

zip ur mouths you damn haters.. its his khairat that you people are living comfortably in West and middle east..

da pc shata nast yast aw chati da shishako khazo pa shan chighai narai mo jorai karei dei.. ka domra nar yast no warshai 32 mulkona khpal da khawrai na wobasai..
pa aram nast yai aw da marai gaidai na khabarai kawei..

Najib ka zalim woo hamoghomra insanyat ham pakai woo chei Zanana ta education,Gharibano ta coupon,mashomano ta muft school ,books and even pencils..
Kum yaw bal dasai wols mashar ra wokhayei chei domra mrasta yai karei wei..

[Shayesta]

If yes, then why support a Soviet stooge?

To prevent American, British, Pakistani, Iranian, Saudi and God knows how many other stooges who all combined destroyed Afghanistan at a much higher level than Russia; And still are.

But the Soviets would not have cared one $ for the interests of Afghanistan. It would not have been like a Canada-USA relationship.

Wait wait wait, am I hearing this right? Are you actually trying to say USA would care more for Afghan interest? Like, seriously?

Khad was also ruthless. Do you believe Khad were decent with the people of Afghanistan?

You got Khad, you got Taliban, and you had seven Hizb of the Mujahideen. Taliban would set up their own barbaric rules to oppress the minorities and destroy whatever there was left in Afghanistan. You had Mujahideen Hizbs who were fighting like a bunch of dogs within themselves for power, where eventually only innocent people suffered (I lost seven cousins because of those dogfights). And you had Khad which was allergic to both Mujahideen and Taliban and I dare you that Khad by far hasn't got into people's vein like Taliban and Mujahideen have.

Being pro-Soviet for an Afghan leader was not in Afghanistan's interests.

Then what was? Being pro-Pakistan, like some are now? Being pro-Iran, like some are now? Being pro-USA, like some are now? And can't you see how these 'three' groups keep clashing with each other?

The Soviets could not have cared less about Afghanistan.

Who does? Even if Afghans themselves cared then we wouldn't be inviting countries after countries on our land, would we?

They were there to steal minerals, oil, and gain passage to the Sea near the Persian Gulf.

That's funny because every single point right here reminds me of USA's aim as well. And for the Persian Gulf, Russia still had a friend in that regard; Iran.

Anyone who is installed into power under the eye of any foreigner whose interests are not aligned with the Afghan people are stooges.

Exactly.

You need someone like a USA-Canada relationship, not a Soviet-Afghan one.

Lemme guess, could money be a reason for that? Could it?

Najibullah became president in 1986?

My bad, I was referring it by the time Russia left and still Taliban came to so-called 'free' Afghanistan.

That was the height of Soviet interference.

While now Russian interference has finished, it's the very same US who wanted to see them broken in first place begging them to come back to Afghanistan, LOL. And today it's not Russia any more interfering; Those would be Pakistan, Iran, USA, UK, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. And Pakistan and Iran started doing that way before Russia even came to our soil! And don't forget who funded who funded all those camps in Pekhawer.

Soviets invade.

Correction; Russians were invited, they did not invade.

No Afghan sides with the Soviets since they are invaders that have come to steal.

Or instead of on Pakistan and USA's request we start taking up arms and destroy our own country on a million times bigger scale than Russians, we could have stopped those Afghans who invited them to Afghanistan, from inviting the Russians to Afghanistan.

Afghanistan prospers and the Mujahideen reeducate themselves.

Which they didn't. They became a bunch of jokers who fought like animals within themselves, harming entire Kabul, if not Afghanistan.

So you're still talking about someone who did side with the Soviet invaders.

Correction once again; Not invaders, the invited ones. And forget about the past, think about the supporters of forty countries who invaded Afghanistan nearly a decade ago, and still on full course.

The question might be did he side with them because Afghanistan had nothing anyway, and the Soviets were in the best position to heal Afghanistan at that point.

He sided Russians because he knew what will happen if his regime would fall, and just look how not wrong he was. Russians were gone and if they ever intended to come back then they still can do so and USA will be the first country to cheer up on that. At least back then it were Afghans who were figuring out their own problems, and not every single country in the world as Afghanistan today has already been visited by every single country in the world!

[roadrunner]

To prevent American, British, Pakistani, Iranian, Saudi and God knows how many other stooges who all combined destroyed Afghanistan at a much higher level than Russia; And still are.

Why support any of them?

Isn't that what the definition of a stooge is?

Why should Afghanistan have to be a stooge for anyone, be they Soviet, American, British, Pakistani, Iranian, or Saudi?

Wait wait wait, am I hearing this right? Are you actually trying to say USA would care more for Afghan interest? Like, seriously?

Did I say that? If so, point it out so I can check where I said it.

I think what I said is that the Soviets did not care about Afghanistan.

You could say the Soviets looked on Afghanistan as a lower land, much like the untermenschen of the Nazis.

You got Khad, you got Taliban, and you had seven Hizb of the Mujahideen. Taliban would set up their own barbaric rules to oppress the minorities and destroy whatever there was left in Afghanistan. You had Mujahideen Hizbs who were fighting like a bunch of dogs within themselves for power, where eventually only innocent people suffered (I lost seven cousins because of those dogfights). And you had Khad which was allergic to both Mujahideen and Taliban and I dare you that Khad by far hasn't got into people's vein like Taliban and Mujahideen have.

I'm not sure what you're saying here.

Are you saying that Khad was bad, along with all the rest of these groups?

I'd agree they probably were. So this suggests that Najibullah's Khad was ruthless?

Then what was? Being pro-Pakistan, like some are now? Being pro-Iran, like some are now? Being pro-USA, like some are now? And can't you see how these 'three' groups keep clashing with each other?

Pro-Afghan first of all.

Pro-something else that would give you a fair deal. I don't know who. Try the Chinese.

Who does? Even if Afghans themselves cared then we wouldn't be inviting countries after countries on our land, would we?

The Afghans do care. That is why they fight.

Puppet rulers are created for a divide and conquer strategy.

Lemme guess, could money be a reason for that? Could it?

A reason for what?

My bad, I was referring it by the time Russia left and still Taliban came to so-called 'free' Afghanistan.

?

You're agreeing then, that he was president during the height of the Soviet invasion?

Or instead of on Pakistan and USA's request we start taking up arms and destroy our own country on a million times bigger scale than Russians, we could have stopped those Afghans who invited them to Afghanistan, from inviting the Russians to Afghanistan.

Right. But something was very wrong in Afghanistan for the Afghans to agree to these Pakistani and US requests.

One cannot make someone do something if they do not want to.

He sided Russians because he knew what will happen if his regime would fall, and just look how not wrong he was. Russians were gone and if they ever intended to come back then they still can do so and USA will be the first country to cheer up on that. At least back then it were Afghans who were figuring out their own problems, and not every single country in the world as Afghanistan today has already been visited by every single country in the world!

It's a possibility.

Even Phillippe Petain said the same thing.

Being under Soviet rule today might have been a better outcome.

But then again perhaps all Afghanistan's mineral wealth would have been carved away from the rocks and sent to Moscow to be spent making the lives of those in Siberia, Mongolia, St Petersburg much better.

The Afghans might have less wealth at the moment, but the riches in the mountains still remain. Is this not a good thing, that Afghan riches would be spent on the Afghans?

[Shayesta]

Why support any of them?

Because that was the situation Afghanistan was brought into by Afghans themselves. And now the situation had come to this, we had to make a choice and our present proves that since we didn't choose for Russia, we have to tolerate forty plus countries on our soil.

Why should Afghanistan have to be a stooge for anyone, be they Soviet, American, British, Pakistani, Iranian, or Saudi?

Afghanistan shouldn't have been involved with Russia and Pakistan in first place but as I said, it already had happened and all we were left with was to make a choice. Tell me, what choice would you have made?

Did I say that? If so, point it out so I can check where I said it.

Nor did I say you said that, I was asking. You said Russia wouldn't care for our well-being but instead we needed a Canadian or American relationship, so I was wondering what point you were trying to make here?

You could say the Soviets looked on Afghanistan as a lower land, much like the untermenschen of the Nazis.

Back then it might have been Russia only, today it's the entire world. And through the mass killing and merciless deeds act upon the civilians, you will understand what I am talking about.

Are you saying that Khad was bad, along with all the rest of these groups? I'd agree they probably were. So this suggests that Najibullah's Khad was ruthless?

Surely the Taliban and Mujaideen were ruthless, that's why when you ask Afghans which 'group' destroyed Afghanistan, they will either name Taliban or Mujahideen. Not Khad. As far as I know about Khad, it was involved with politicians and especially strongly against the seven Mujahideen Hizbs and those people and their supporters are the ones killed by Khad, not ordinary people. Apparently there were claims against Khad that they killed innocent people in Kabul as well which I won't say was 100% false because many innocent died in war, but those people could hardly bring facts and figures forward when they are asked why Khad would kill innocent people? Surely they might have been killed during clashes, but as far as I know Khad's concern were the seven Hizbs and foreign enemies, not normal civilians.

Pro-something else that would give you a fair deal. I don't know who. Try the Chinese.

You think China (Pakistan's number one friend and India's number one enemy while with Afghanistan it's the other way round regarding Pakistan and India) would actually go against Pakistan by being allies with Afghanistan? Afghanistan had already made the mistake by choose enemy of USA a.k.a. Russia as their allies and have now repeated the same mistake by bring a gazillion other countries into the game as well.

The Afghans do care. That is why they fight.

Fight against what and whose help? Their number one enemy Pakistan? And that also a war between most two dangerous countries back then called Russia and USA? Wasn't it obvious this to be the outcome? What are we fighting against today? Maybe we should learn to understand that taking up arms is not always the best option and there are many countries which are examples to that.

A reason for what?

A reason for choosing Canada and USA over Russia? Russia at least didn't bring entire West with them to Afghanistan........

You're agreeing then, that he was president during the height of the Soviet invasion?

You are mistaken once again, not invasion but invitation. Invitation. And once again, I was talking about when Russia had already left, was there really any need for the seven Hizbs followed by the Taliban? If you had seen the shaadibazi done by the Mujahideen, you would have understood exactly why Khad became ruthless to those people.

One cannot make someone do something if they do not want to.

But another one can be excellent in bribing, convincing and twisting to make you do what they want you to do. Right?

Being under Soviet rule today might have been a better outcome.

Examples; Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. Compared to Afghanistan those two countries are much better developed and they didn't face one percent of the disaster we did, and that's because we have always made extremely bad decision on a extremely bad timing. Can you believe that once upon on a time Tajikis and Uzbekis would come to Afghanistan for better lives, but today nearly everything is being supplied from Tajikistan and Uzbekistan to North of Afghanistan?

But then again perhaps all Afghanistan's mineral wealth would have been carved away from the rocks and sent to Moscow to be spent making the lives of those in Siberia, Mongolia, St Petersburg much better.

You think Americans will seriously let those mineral wealth under Afghan hands? I am sure you remember when it was shown on the news that minerals worth a trillion Dollars was found? Now tell me, what happened to it? Where is it gone? Why isn't it being mentioned any more?

The Afghans might have less wealth at the moment, but the riches in the mountains still remain. Is this not a good thing, that Afghan riches would be spent on the Afghans?

Even if those wealth are spent on Afghanistan, you seriously believe our politicians and warlords actually won't snatch them, divide them within themselves, and flee the country when appropriate? Think about it.

[khushal]

Its useless to argue if he was good or bad. What happened to afghanistan was inevetable. Henry Kissenger planned this back when the americans were in Viatnam. They were planning the revenge against the russians for vietnam.

It was Nixon that tried to persuade Daud to let an american base be built in afghanistan in exchange for aid and funds back in the early 70's. Daud rejected the americans. So they started to give aid to Masood and Hekmatyar making the russians fear that if the rebels do take over, they would let the americans build a base in Russia's backyard, thus the reason for the invasion or invitation, whatever you want to call it, Im going to call it invasion.

When the russians invaded, The CIA pumped billions into the rebellion so they can avenge Viatnam from the russians. The ISI made sure that this rebellion would be divided into many groups, not united under a single leadership, which led to the downfall of the afghan government and the destruction of the country.

Everybody got what they wanted
America got their revenge from russia
Pakistan got their control of afghanistan
The wahabis got a safe haven
and the afghans got their misery

The question that should be asked is could this have been prevented, and how could it have.
One: If Daud let the americans build the base in Afghanistan
Two: If Masood and Hekmatyar realized that they were being used by Pakistan and compromised with Najib into some power sharing government

I dont see any other points but someone enlighten me.

[Shayesta]

^ Yes, maybe taking American support from the very beginning would have been a better option, I won't deny. But the fact is that during Najibullah's regime a lot had been changed and all of a sudden switching over to American support just wasn't an option because it was very predictable that Americans ain't man enough to involve in a war (or invasion for that matter) on their own. And NATO is a perfect example of that.

And Massoud and Hekmatyar knew damn well they are being used, otherwise to start off with they would never have gone against their own government's wish! Just look at Iranians, no matter how anti-Iranian government they are, they will never take foreign support in order to show their disagreement with their own country.

[khushal]

^ Yes, maybe taking American support from the very beginning would have been a better option, I won't deny. But the fact is that during Najibullah's regime a lot had been changed and all of a sudden switching over to American support just wasn't an option because it was very predictable that Americans ain't man enough to involve in a war (or invasion for that matter) on their own. And NATO is a perfect example of that.

And Massoud and Hekmatyar knew damn well they are being used, otherwise to start off with they would never have gone against their own government's wish! Just look at Iranians, no matter how anti-Iranian government they are, they will never take foreign support in order to show their disagreement with their own country.

Shayesta,

You could find idiots in any country on this planet to take arms agianst their country, the difference is that those people dont have the billions pumped into their organization like the way hekmatyar and masood received. If it wasnt Hekmatyar and masood, they would have found some other idiot. There are an endless supply of idiots in every country. That is why I say it was completely unavoidable.

There were too many powerfull forces and too much money involved into creating this afghan misery that we see today.