Any Nation That EVER Tried To Conquer Afghanistan NEVER Did

[Admin Khan]

You are also not backing your arguement with sources. Also it is not a research, we are doing reviews and analysis.

I haven't made any claims Luffy, all I am doing is contesting your claims. When you make a claim, the burden of proof lies on you.

Please re-read my posts above. I say the aforementioned with utmost respect.

[Michin Khel]

Luffy, you said this:

The statement above, without evidence, is equivalent to "Thomas Jefferson was born in Lakki Marwat, and he left Lakki Marwat because he realized it's useless and there is no room for growth".

The above, requires evidence since those are some serious alleged claims. You may, however, state your opinion as long as you want, albeit under your own title not past leaders

If you think i am wrong then you are trying to say that afghanistan was rich agricultural land at those times? If yes then provide sources.

[Admin Khan]

If you i am wrong then you are trying to say that afghanistan was rich agricultural land at those times? If yes the provide sources.

Luffy, my goal is never to prove you "wrong". We are grown ups here, and we are trying to educate each other. At the end, hopefully we have learned from each other.

Now back to the topic:
I disagree, and have contested your claim that Mughuls found Afghanistan to be what you said it was. That's all I am saying. An analysis doesn't mean you associate your thoughts with a past empire to solidify your claim.

[Michin Khel]

Luffy, my goal is never to prove you "wrong". We are grown ups here, and we are trying to educate each other. At the end, hopefully we have learned from each other.

Now back to the topic:
I disagree, and have contested your claim that Mughuls found Afghanistan to be what you said it was. That's all I am saying. An analysis doesn't mean you associate your thoughts with a past empire to solidify your claim.

No first answer my question. You mistaken my analysis and thoughts for some research that you are asking me for provision of sources?..if we go through your process , then prove it to me that afghanistan was rich agricultural country at that time?. Because obviously you denied my post in which i said that india was generating more revenue than afghanistan in those times.

[Admin Khan]

No first answer my question. You mistaken my analysis and thoughts for some research that you are asking me for provision of sources?..

Yes indeed. You made this claim;

" when from east india company or mughals point of view afghanistan was a useless area as revenue from this area was negligible. "

I asked for evidence.

if we go through your process , then prove it to me that afghanistan was rich agricultural country at that time?. Because obviously you denied my post in which i said that india was generating more revenue than afghanistan in those times.

I do not have to prove something I never said.

[Michin Khel]

Sources should be asked to be provided for claim like " mullah omar is an athiest", not for claim that "mullah omar is a religous person"

[Admin Khan]

Sources should be asked to be provided for claim like " mullah omar is an athiest", not for claim that "mullah omar is a religous person"

No. Sources are required for BOTH. If you claim he is religious, I'd ask for a source that backs up your claim. As simple as that. Critical thinking, unfortunately, is not taught in Pakistan in most of it's schools, which is why Pakistan ranks low in innovation and progression. Due to someones prior knowledge, they might know that Omar Hotak is indeed religious. However, if someone doesn't know that and asks for evidence, you aren't pardoned -- so you must provide a source. As simple as that andawala.

Ratification, and useless memorization is what prevents critical thinking in countries like Afghanistan and Pakistan.

[Michin Khel]

Yes indeed. You made this claim;

" when from east india company or mughals point of view afghanistan was a useless area as revenue from this area was negligible. "

I asked for evidence.

I do not have to prove something I never said.

I would indeed provide sources, for that i have to visit public library, you have to wait for it.

But i did'nt claim any thing. It is a "fact" that in old times main source of revenue in old times was from taxes. And the main revenues were generated from agriculture. India was called "golden sparrow" by british because of its richness which was due to its fertile lands, british came for spices of india. If afghanistan is not an agricultural land today then i am safe to claim that it was also not fertile country during mughal times. Now do u agree with me on this?

[Admin Khan]

I would indeed provide sources, for that i have to visit public library, you have to wait for it.

But i did'nt claim any thing. It is a "fact" that in old times main source of revenue in old times was from taxes. And the main revenues were generated from agriculture. India was called "golden sparrow" by british because of its richness which was due to its fertile lands, british came for spices of india. If afghanistan is not an agricultural land today then i am safe to claim that it was also not fertile country during mughal times. Now do u agree with me on this?

You did claim what I highlighted earlier, which is thus far your opinion.

Yes, I agree that Afghanistan wasn't as agricultural as India.

[Michin Khel]

No. Sources are required for BOTH. If you claim he is religious, I'd ask for a source that backs up your claim. As simple as that. Critical thinking, unfortunately, is not taught in Pakistan in most of it's schools, which is why Pakistan ranks low in innovation and progression. Due to someones prior knowledge, they might know that Omar Hotak is indeed religious. However, if someone doesn't know that and asks for evidence, you aren't pardoned -- so you must provide a source. As simple as that andawala.

Ratification, and useless memorization is what prevents critical thinking in countries like Afghanistan and Pakistan.

How can you and me prove that mullah omar is a religous person. We can "assume" that he is a religous person on the basis of fact that he is a head of religous organization..this is called reasoning and logic, it is rare quality. And it is not associated with blindly asking for sources

[Admin Khan]

How can you and me prove that mullah omar is a religous person. We can "assume" that he is a religous person on the basis of fact that he is a head of religous organization..this is called reasoning and logic, it is rare quality.

Luffy, define logic. That's not logic, in fact, you are abusing the term reasong & logic. What it is indeed is its your opinion, and assumption. That's all.

And it is not associated with blindly asking for sources

Of course it is. Facts are backed up with evidence, not assumptions which you just said is logic. I can't sit here and state Obama was born in Quetta, and in response tell you "well, it is logic. He looks just as dark as an ordinary Quettawal from Chalu bowri".

[Michin Khel]

You did claim what I highlighted earlier, which is thus far your opinion.

Yes, I agree that Afghanistan wasn't as agricultural as India.

If you agree that india was more fertile and agricultural than afghanistan at that time, then why did refute my post at that time and asked for sources. You cant ask for sources when you agree with a simple fact.

[Admin Khan]

If you agree that india was more fertile and agricultural than afghanistan at that time,

I said I agree with your opinion.

then why did refute my post at that time and asked for sources. You cant ask for sources when you agree with a simple fact.

Because at that point -- it wasn't your opinion. You were attempting to act like a spokesperson for the Mughul empire, and you made an outrageous claim(which I already highlighted) which obviously required evidence. I politely asked for evidence, that's all. You can't simply associate something with an empire to solidify your claim.

I have no right(without evidence) to say "Mughul Dynasty considered Chinese to be inferior and backwards" . That is no long an opinion, it's a CLAIM. I could've, however, said "In my opinion, xyz abc".

[faye]

'geostrategic' appears to be the key word in this debate. if afghanistan was so 'useless' it would not have been invaded so many times. i imagine (have no source for this)afghanistan would not have been as useful for the 'natural resource' of servants and slaves as india either.

[Michin Khel]

Luffy, define logic. That's not logic, in fact, you are abusing the term reasong & logic. What it is indeed is its your opinion, and assumption. That's all.

Of course it is. Facts are backed up with evidence, not assumptions which you just said is logic. I can't sit here and state Obama was born in Quetta, and in response tell you "well, it is logic. He looks just as dark as an ordinary Quettawal from Chalu bowri".

Why not stick with one example to avoid messing up discussion. You asked me to prove that mullah omar is a religous person. I said we cant prove that mullah omar is a religous person. For this we have to observe him personally which is not possible. So we have to assume that he must be a religous person as he was a leader of religous organization, he studied from a madrassa and he implemented sharia in country..this is logic
But if you can prove that mullah omar is a person then i am interested to know how you prove it (dont dodge it this time)