Any Nation That EVER Tried To Conquer Afghanistan NEVER Did

[khushal]

LZ,

Its easy to convince pashtuns to go on raids in india. they viewed the indians as hindus nad they saw oppertunity to bring back loot back to their villages. even Wazir Akbar khan convinced the east of kabul pashtun tribes to raid and kill the british soldiers who were trying to make it to jalalabad from kabul in 1842. he told them that the soldiers were carrying plenty of gold and other loot.

I would hardly call that control. all these mughul and ghaznivid emperors you speak of moved their capital from afghanland to indic land because they knew that they were not safe on afghanland. Even Ahmad shaw baba son had to move th capital from kandahar to kabul because he also had trouble controling the pashtuns in kandahar. the pashtun is a free spirated person who rejects control.

[khushal]

Again you are consolidating my point indirectly, Russia and Britian were rival empires, they kept Afghanistan as buffer state to avoid direct conflict. Neither of them were interested in barren lands of afghanistan, they were not fighting over it, they kept it just as a buffer state.

so why invade it and not just keep it as a buffer state. you make no sense. why would one not tell the other you can have it we dont want it.

[Michin Khel]

so why invade it and not just keep it as a buffer state. you make no sense. why would one not tell the other you can have it we dont want it.

Because then you have to spend lot of your resources on its administration and management of such large country and it was volatile region so you have to station your forces for control, expenditure of more your resources...on such a barren country.

[khushal]

Because then you have to spend lot of your resources on its administration and management of such large country and it was volatile region so you have to station your forces for control, expenditure of more your resources...on such a barren country.

but there were many barren countries that were under the control of british. why did they spend so much resources controlling those barren countries. just to name one: Jordan. if you want me to name more let me know.

[NokiaWnW]

None of those nations successfully conquered Afghanistan. Is Afghanistan suffering from their attempts? Yes! Did they 'successfully conquer'? No. In fact, if we talk about mickey-mouse attempts at conquering --Afghanistan also conquered Iran, India(along with modern day Pakistan)etc.

Iran did conquered even Indian plains,... such dynasties and families of NON-PASHTUN BACKGROUND conquered India and parts of Iran .. nthing to do with ''Afghans'' or Afghanistan... Afghanistan did not exist 1000 or 500years ago. Arabs ruled over modern Afghanistan 250years, Iranian dynasties from 700 to 1075, than Turks, Mongols, Azarbaidjanis .... people came and went but they put a strong trace for the future generations. What was our contributions? Nothing ... lesser than mickey-mouse attempts! We have nothing to show the world like 'hey, that´s our great glorious past, based on our ancestors shoulders' ... do we have? Ahmad Shah Baba came only to power because his Turkoman master was assassinated and most of his master´s generals were on his side supporting him against other generals and family members of Nader Shah. And even after Ahmad Shah Baba non-pashtuns took the real power and during Abdurrahman Khan, Shah Juja and Dost Mohammad foreigners like Brist came and installed their puppets to rule.. all the conquered massacred Pashtuns and non-pashtuns and build pyramide with their heads. Specially Turks from ghaznavid times to Timurids were known killing Afghans wherever they could get them and enslave them or massacre them. That pushed many tribes to hills and higher valleys which just caused that we became backward while our neighbours experienced their small evolutions..

@Khushal

''evidence'', moron, go take a book and read about Ghaznavids, Seldjukes, Samanids, Ghurids, Safavids, Timurids, Kushans, Sassanians, Parthavas, Mauryans, Arab conquest ,... than you will know how many people ruled and conquered the region ...where the following people ''Afghans''? Samanids - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Tahirid dynasty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Ghaznavids - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Timurid dynasty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


ALL THESE BS ABOUT ''UNDEFEATED'' WERE CREATED TO BOOST THE NATIONAL PRIDE SPECIALLY OF PASHTUNS TO STAND AGAINST AN OCCUPATION OF POWER BY FOREIGNERS OR NON-PASHTUN AFGHANS ..lies created and we see that lies remain lies .. today, PAKISTAN IRAN INDIA UK USA GERMANY ALL OF THEM ARE IN OUR COUNTRY RULING .. TALIBAN ARE NOT WARRIORS .. they can not fight one to one or on the open battlefield ...neither against the ANA or ANP or anyone ,...so they have to come as shemales to Afghanistan to fight or fire from civilians or attack civilians ... or killing cowardly tribal elders and politicians believing their actions have any effects.. no they don´t have or have anyone see any effects when lal muhammad was kulled, the na general daud daud, the uzbek leader beig ??? no, they know they can not win but they want to show they are still there and a threath. Dropp off that lies of beeing undefeated or unconquered. The false pride destroyed us and made other peeing on our graves and doing their dances.

[Michin Khel]

but there were many barren countries that were under the control of british. why did they spend so much resources controlling those barren countries. just to name one: Jordan. if you want me to name more let me know.

British did'nt occupy and colonize any of these arab states like india. In india they installed whole administrative set up and from roads to educations system every thing was british.
like jordon, they were controlling afghanistan. Amir abdul rehman was issued pension of 12 lakh rupees per annum and foriegn policy was decided by british. Your country was able to get free from this control in 1919.

[az4er]

It is true that Afghanistan has since antiquity-in whichever way or form it has existed, has never been conquered; it has, although, been invaded (many times); and it has also had people from far and wide assimilate and form an identity which has remained solid since the 12th century.

I'm just going to paraphrase here but each "conqueror/invader" including Ghaznavi, Babar, Timur etc. heavily relied on local Pashtuns/Afghans for their military endeavors. They'd recruit rival tribesmen, arm them to the bone, and set them loose on their brethren. Who better to fight an alien foe in an alien land than their own kith and kin? That's how they consolidated whatever minimal control they had-which is quite often mistakenly perceived as concatenated.

Whenever an empire would move on to "add" more territories, whatever progress they'd made would always be threatened by the locals they'd supposedly pacified. Like a cheap peace of nylon rope bought from a Chinese wholesale retailer in Hoboken, Afghans would react by either engaging in a series of feuds against each other, wreaking havoc any which way they could, or they would just agree to become a part of the empire as long as they received a stipend and that their independence was not compromised, as was the case during Mughal rule. Remember that Babar was at one time run out of Kabul by a contingent of tribesmen who hadn't received their due for that period (a recurring theme in Pashtun history don't you think?).

With regards to the Arabs, the Omayyad and Abbasid caliphates tried for 200 years, to forcibly convert the locals, who at the time preached Greco-Buddhist polytheism. Through the use of Sufis they managed to make progress until Ghaznavi managed to convert the entire Pashtun populace-not through force mind you, but through reforms and indoctrination (Note: he supposedly wiped out all the Buddhist monks in Hazarajat and Takhtbai).

In Genghis's case, he fought hard against the Afghans, destroying whatever connection Pashtuns had to ancient Greece, etc by almost reducing Kandahar to dust. Genghis realized after losing a massive contingent and members of his family, including his grandson (who he'd handpicked to be one of his successors) that active military confrontation was going nowhere, and he offered to give economic incentives to the locals as long as they agreed not to fight.

Even today, by just looking at a map of Pakhtunkhwa and Afghanistan, you can figure out how much control their respective governments really have. FATA has no central governing authority whatsoever. It's run entirely by tribal law. Then we have PATA or the FRs, which are also seemingly out of the jurisdiction of the pakistan government. In Afghanistan, just as in Pakhtunkhwa, the rural areas are mostly governed by tribal law with either a weak or completely non-existent central authority.

The problem isn't that these places are ungovernable, its just that they happen to be unconquerable. Governing by way of force has never worked in Afghanistan. Empires employing such strategies against the Pashtuns have never ever succeeded in implementing them.

Historically, when a segment of the Pashtun populace-no matter how small-has actively rebelled or fought against a government or an empire, it has always led to mass destabilization across the entire dominion.

[khushal]

Iran did conquered even Indian plains,... such dynasties and families of NON-PASHTUN BACKGROUND conquered India and parts of Iran .. nthing to do with ''Afghans'' or Afghanistan... Afghanistan did not exist 1000 or 500years ago. Arabs ruled over modern Afghanistan 250years, Iranian dynasties from 700 to 1075, than Turks, Mongols, Azarbaidjanis .... people came and went but they put a strong trace for the future generations. What was our contributions? Nothing ... lesser than mickey-mouse attempts! We have nothing to show the world like 'hey, that´s our great glorious past, based on our ancestors shoulders' ... do we have? Ahmad Shah Baba came only to power because his Turkoman master was assassinated and most of his master´s generals were on his side supporting him against other generals and family members of Nader Shah. And even after Ahmad Shah Baba non-pashtuns took the real power and during Abdurrahman Khan, Shah Juja and Dost Mohammad foreigners like Brist came and installed their puppets to rule.. all the conquered massacred Pashtuns and non-pashtuns and build pyramide with their heads. Specially Turks from ghaznavid times to Timurids were known killing Afghans wherever they could get them and enslave them or massacre them. That pushed many tribes to hills and higher valleys which just caused that we became backward while our neighbours experienced their small evolutions..

@Khushal

''evidence'', moron, go take a book and read about Ghaznavids, Seldjukes, Samanids, Ghurids, Safavids, Timurids, Kushans, Sassanians, Parthavas, Mauryans, Arab conquest ,... than you will know how many people ruled and conquered the region ...where the following people ''Afghans''? Samanids - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Tahirid dynasty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Ghaznavids - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Timurid dynasty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


ALL THESE BS ABOUT ''UNDEFEATED'' WERE CREATED TO BOOST THE NATIONAL PRIDE SPECIALLY OF PASHTUNS TO STAND AGAINST AN OCCUPATION OF POWER BY FOREIGNERS OR NON-PASHTUN AFGHANS ..lies created and we see that lies remain lies .. today, PAKISTAN IRAN INDIA UK USA GERMANY ALL OF THEM ARE IN OUR COUNTRY RULING .. TALIBAN ARE NOT WARRIORS .. they can not fight one to one or on the open battlefield ...neither against the ANA or ANP or anyone ,...so they have to come as shemales to Afghanistan to fight or fire from civilians or attack civilians ... or killing cowardly tribal elders and politicians believing their actions have any effects.. no they don´t have or have anyone see any effects when lal muhammad was kulled, the na general daud daud, the uzbek leader beig ??? no, they know they can not win but they want to show they are still there and a threath. Dropp off that lies of beeing undefeated or unconquered. The false pride destroyed us and made other peeing on our graves and doing their dances.

listen you idiot. the "undefeated" label is not what afghans say. it s what foreigners say about afghans. the thread is baout a US congressman saying that the afghans are unconquerable and he is not an afghan you dip****.
What are you talking about calling the afghans shemales. Its is the americans and the soviets who couldnt fight one on one. they fight from safety thousands of meters above the ground. they fly unmanned drones because they fear to face the afghan on plain level fighting field. the taliban even challenged bush to a dual with mullah omar. you call the ones that resist cowards and the ones that are slaves couragous. whatever dude.
dont go into a ignoant rant because the afghans can not be controlled even with all the money in the world. I already countered those dynasties as admin khan says they were mickey mouse attempts. those countries you mention the 40+ ones are occupying not controlling. Afghanistan is uncontrolled right now, no one is ruling, there is a struggle to rule it. Once you see NATO troops roaming the streets unarmed like they do in Germany and Japan, then you have convinced me. but right now I am going to beleive the US Congressman over your idiotic claims.

[khushal]

British did'nt occupy and colonize any of these arab states like india. In india they installed whole administrative set up and from roads to educations system every thing was british.
like jordon, they were controlling afghanistan. Amir abdul rehman was issued pension of 12 lakh rupees per annum and foriegn policy was decided by british. Your country was able to get free from this control in 1919.

you are guilty of what in logic is called a red herring:
a speaker attempts to distract an audience by deviating from the topic at hand by introducing a separate argument which the speaker believes will be easier to speak to

stay with the argument, your starting a different argument which I dont agree with but you can start another thread about that. but anyways answer my question.

[Ghundal]

I'm bursting out laughing reading Nokias comments

I guess in his alternate reality, the Vietnamese were also cowards for adopting tactics of guerilla warfare

I guess in his alternate reality, the nuclear attack against Japan in world war 2 was an act of bravery? Perhaps, airstrikes are descriptive of warriors?

Does he think the Holocaust committed by the Nazi SS was an act of bravery too?

[SiiNii]

False.
Afghanistan is a wealthy country, when it comes to minerals and natural resources -- of which many are untapped. To claim Afghanistan is a land of "dust" is simply ignorance. Afghanistan has an important geostrategic location, and is home to lithium,copper and other important resources. There is a reason why Afghanistan has witnessed so many failed conquests. Had Afghanistan been "dusty" like the Arabian desert -- we wouldn't see Pakistan on her knees every time Kabul and Islamabad meet to talk about strategic ties, or the US spending MILLIONS per day to have some sort of influence in this nation. Lazh fikar waka malgara, USSR, Britain, USA aren't on cocaine when they say "We will always support and stand by Afghanistan".

False as well.

Good post, agreed on all points.

[Amir al Ghaznavi]

Actually the Mongols conquered us. The Safavids. The Mughals. Sikhs conquered half of our land. The Soviets couldve nuked us and been done with it

this pseudo historical pride does more harm then good

[Soldat_Amir]

Exactly Amir

Alexander took Kandahar very easily too. Mongols destroyed Herat in 7 days and turned Afghanistan into a Desert. Pakistan also took half of our land as a present from the British Raj.

Now we are a nation of refugees in other peoples countries.

Something some never like to bring up

[Ghundal]

^alexander could not control Afghanistan. His success was mostly in the Tajik parts (their predecessors are the Sogdhians)
Soggdians became friendly with Alexander

Our predecessors are the Parthians and Scythians. Those people chased and harassed Alexander out of Afghanistan. He terms these people as "leonine" "lion like"

I'm sure you know that famous quote.

The name Kandahar has nothing to do with Alexander. This is another myth cooked up by some drunk loser British historian.

Alexander then managed to reach India after bribing many tribes for safe passage.

It is there at the banks of the Jhelum river that he was wounded by a poisoned arrow of the Hindu Rajputs. This lead to his death.

This was per Islamic times in case you were not aware.

There was no Hamid Gul around then

[Ghundal]

Actually the Mongols conquered us. The Safavids. The Mughals. Sikhs conquered half of our land. The Soviets couldve nuked us and been done with it

this pseudo historical pride does more harm then good

Genghiz grandson who was going to be his successor was killed in battle. Genghiz's army could never control Afghanistan. It also became their graveyard and point of decline.

He lost a lot of blood and treasure and was constantly harassed with guerilla tactics (back then)

This is the reason he too bribed and negotiated his way out.

Unlike most of humanity at the time, Pashtuns did not fear him and did not care for his threats. Pashtuns were the only people who gave him a sound beating.

No glorification here but sound facts backed by the historical record

Safavids were kicked out by Mirwais neeka, and Persia was later invaded in retaliation

Same goes for the Singhs