Naming of nuclear weapons after Afghan historical figures.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Yes ,he tried to jump off a cliff, that's NOT dumb?

No. It meant he was human and had little idea that the Divine was using him as a vehicle in the 40th year of his age. Up till then there was general stability in his married life and along comes visions and voices that are putting a weighty mission (saving all of humanity) on his shoulders. He was finding his way - realizing his destiny.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Scimitar lol you are so wrong. There is an extant copy in Peshawar, 1 of the few that survived the Russian aquisition of hundreds of copies that were sent to Moscow. I have personally viewed the document. There is 1 copy Sara Chayes was given access to that the Russians sent back to Kabul.

http://www.amazon.com/Ahmadshahi-Hok.../dp/9640350222

Above is the Iranian government's recent rendering and release

Here is an official full length name lol. Trust me on this; you confused Husaini of Zaman Khan's era with this individual.

Nope look at the picture of the front cover of the book its M.

The full name of Tarikh Ahmad Shahi's author is:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/9640350222/ref=dp_otherviews_z_1?ie=UTF8&img=1&s=books

He's known as AL-JAMI last ...not Husaini., Husaini precedes Jami ......look at the image.

Sorry my friend, you are outgunned here. I have spent much of my adult life studying Ahmad Shah Baba here and in the watan as my free time hobby.

outgunned eh? Apparently you didn't double check the photo images contained on the amazon link

check-mate

[RevolutionThroughReason]

No. It meant he was human and had little idea that the Divine was using him as a vehicle in the 40th year of his age. Up till then there was general stability in his married life and along comes visions and voices that are putting a weighty mission (saving all of humanity) on his shoulders. He was finding his way - realizing his destiny.

yes and humans do dumb stuff

case closed

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Nope look at the picture of the front cover of the book its M.

The full name of Tarikh Ahmad Shahi's author is:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/ima...&img=1&s=books


He's known as AL-JAMI last ...not Husaini., Husaini precedes Jami ......look at the image.





outgunned eh? Apparently you didn't double check the photo images contained on the amazon link

check-mate

Nice try, Munshi Husaini is clearly a part of his name. That was my original point here was my sentence:

" Munshi Husaini was the author of TARIKH E AHMAD SHAHI - the history of Ahmad Shah. The Husaini writing Zaman Khan's tarikh is not Munshi Mahmud Al Husaini."

You are really reaching here lolllll.

In most circles discussing the Tarikh, including journalist Chayes and Cambridge:
http://books.google.com/books?id=H20...20shah&f=false

He is simple called Munshi Mahmood Al Husaini and the ibn ibrahim al jami is not utilized to avoid confusing him with the multiple Al Jamis.

Here is where Cambridge draws the comma:
Mahmood Al Husaini Al Munshi, ibn Ibrahim Al Jami page 964

Here is Sara Chayes's biblio

http://books.google.com/books?id=4XM...20shah&f=false

What does she use????

Mahmood Al Husseini Al Munshi

You on the other hand said this:
Mahmud AL MUSANNA

based on wiki quote. While the attribution in the wiki article is correct... Musanna is not.

Once again you attempted to either A) confuse Munshi's work with Hussaini's where the latter covered Zaman's period and discussed Ahmad Shah without any eye witness testimony versus the former's eye witness role or B) use the latter's work as a surrogate for the formers which is completely off the mark.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

So we have the following to conclude from 13 pages:

1) You have no evidence whatsoever that Ahmad Shah Baba viewed himself as preserving Nadir Shah's empire. All you have is his utilization of the fact that Nadir Shah ruled India and Ahmad Shah used that as a pretext to invade. Using a pretext to loot and plunder at the invitation of Shah Waliullah is hardly proof positive that he viewed himself as Nadir's Vassal. In that case, Ptolemy or Seleucus ought to have been called simply Alexander's girl friends... when in fact they divided his empire up each using the notion that since they were Alexandrian generals they were going to carve up his empire. Pretexts to invade are as old as time itself and are still utilized as recently as Iraq.

2) to buttress the above you tried but failed to use Shah Rukh Shah's twice defeated status and Ahmad Shah's Alexandrian mercy as evidence of him viewing himself as Nadir incarnate. Wrong again as per Professor Gommels who clearly defines Ahmad Shah viewing Iran as HIS client state and being averse to take orders from either Safawids or Nadirids.

3) Ahmad Shah persianized Pashtunistan/Afghanistan or at least continued that policy. Hardly. He ruled in Qandahar and not Kabul and all we have is some Fofalzai alleging, based on Shah Zaman's mea cupla that Ahmad Shah had Qizilbashi at his sides to justify nearly 30% of Shah Zaman's army being from that group.

4) To prove the above you also assumed Husseini's Tarikh e Zaman was the same writer as the aforementioned author of Ahmad Shah's tarikh attempting to validate it as eye witness. This was an obvious blunder and miscalculation.

5) To furthar validate attacking Ahmad Shah Baba you said his kingdom lasted but 30 years... forgetting the untimely demise of Ghilzai rule in Isfahan and Alexander's own rule (meaning that criticism is irrelevent). For that matter the early Caliphate that was rightly guided was but a few decades too.

I think tis I that can say: Check mate.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

At the end of this, I pray and hope all of you that agree echo with ameen: God bless Ahmad Shah Abdali and reward him with paradise. Ahmad Shah, God the one and only's servant would eventually die from a wound sustained in battle which would fester and reinfect over years. May this one wound give him the honor of firdaws for he saved the Pashtuns from being scattered. In the least he slowed the disintegration of brotherly bonds just long enough to give us a chance to reunite. This one Ahmad Shah was so wise that he attempted to unite the local Muslims, even being so willing to try and get the ulemah to include reasonable shiites as a 5th madhaab. May God forgive all his human faults and return the Afghan nation to its grandeur and leadership as he left it before we squandered it.

Ameen

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Nice try, Munshi Husaini is clearly a part of his name. That was my original point here was my sentence:

"

Mahmood Al Husseini Al Munshi

You on the other hand said this:
Mahmud AL MUSANNA

based on wiki quote. While the attribution in the wiki article is correct... Musanna is not.

Once again you attempted to either A) confuse Munshi's work with Hussaini's where the latter covered Zaman's period and discussed Ahmad Shah without any eye witness testimony versus the former's eye witness role or B) use the latter's work as a surrogate for the formers which is completely off the mark.

No nice try it says JAMI as the last name on the book. I never claimed I read the book you have ......so you can get the book for all of us to see if you want

but as far as your assertion goes ...and the Al-Musannah is't me that's fro Wikipedia, even now it is different.

So as far as we know here you're incorrect. Which wouldn't matter anyways since Imamuddin is considered a primary source thus your argument holds no water anyways.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

No nice try it says JAMI as the last name on the book. I never claimed I read the book you have ......so you can get the book for all of us to see if you want

but as far as your assertion goes ...and the Al-Musannah is't me that's fro Wikipedia, even now it is different.

So as far as we know here you're incorrect. Which wouldn't matter anyways since Imamuddin is considered a primary source thus your argument holds no water anyways.

???? Concede Scimitar. We can let the mods and members judge the outcome and what I meant. If I judge your argument correctly you are saying that since I said Munshi Husseini (and most sources do site him as Munshi Mahmood Husseini) that I did not read the source? lolll. Come on man, you are better than this. Irrespective of whether Author X was named Bill, Steve, Tom, or Theodore, what we know for sure is that 2 different authors wrote two different books. What we also know is that you cited Husseini of Shah Zaman's time and his Tarikh as authoratative in response to my request for a contemporary source to Ahmad Shah. The contemporary source, Munshi Mehmood Husseini has no such information. Shah Zamaan had a motive for trying to depict his grand father in a particular light.

And The Tarikh of Zaman Shah being a primary source is the WHOLE argument here in the first place. You can call it whatever you want, but it is not a primary source to the rule of Ahmad Shah Abdali... it is from two generations later by an author in Kabul and not at the seat of power in Qandahar when Ahmad Shah ruled.

Check Mated again.

I dont understand why you are intent on proving Ahmad Shah is Karzai? There is just no evidence to buttress any comparison of the sort.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

I'd rather have truth than let your escape on appeal to popularity

we're well aware of the wounded egoes of Khushal and GOE leaping for an opportunity at some illusion of redemption


the BOOK ..ITSELF on the front cover says JAMI as the last name . there's nothing else to say.

and Imamuddin is a primary source ....the Qizilbash were put into place by Ahmad shah, he was NOT a pan-Pashtunist, he ran things the Persian way

the end ...

[RevolutionThroughReason]

At the end of this, I pray and hope all of you that agree echo with ameen: God bless Ahmad Shah Abdali and reward him with paradise. Ahmad Shah, God the one and only's servant would eventually die from a wound sustained in battle which would fester and reinfect over years. May this one wound give him the honor of firdaws for he saved the Pashtuns from being scattered. In the least he slowed the disintegration of brotherly bonds just long enough to give us a chance to reunite. This one Ahmad Shah was so wise that he attempted to unite the local Muslims, even being so willing to try and get the ulemah to include reasonable shiites as a 5th madhaab. May God forgive all his human faults and return the Afghan nation to its grandeur and leadership as he left it before we squandered it.

Ameen

God doesn't reward rapists and if he does he's not God.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

I'd rather have truth than let your escape on appeal to popularity

we're well aware of the wounded egoes of Khushal and GOE leaping for an opportunity at some illusion of redemption


the BOOK ..ITSELF on the front cover says JAMI as the last name . there's nothing else to say.

and Imamuddin is a primary source ....the Qizilbash were put into place by Ahmad shah, he was NOT a pan-Pashtunist, he ran things the Persian way

the end ...

No, a document may say President Jefferson or Thomas Jefferson or Thomas A Jefferson. A person may be called Muhammad ibn Abdallah, Abu Qasim, Muhammad Rasulullah, Nabi Swa.

What we know for sure is that author X, whether he be Munshi Mahmood Husseini as he is to Cambridge, the Russians, and Sara Chayes and myself or Mr. Al Jami, John Lennon, Bozo the Clown or whoever - was cited by you in response to requests for a contemporary source to Ahmad Shah Abdali regarding the Qizilbash.

The only story end we have from your side is Fofalzai citing the Husseini Kabul Tarikh, once again NOT the Tarikh you blatantly confused with the only Tarikh that matters, Tarikh e Ahmad Shahi.

What we have in writing from contemporary sources from Ahmad Shah's own hand, in the word of Gommels shows ambivalence at best to Nadir Shah and direct wording from the Great King that shows a disownership.

What we have is you being unable to validate Ahmad Shah's twice defeat of Shah Rukh and doublefold mercy as support for Nadirids when Gommels clearly references Ahmad Shah being intractable to Nadirids as well as Safawids and then rising to the occasion to dare to think bigger and claim Iran for his Pashtun empire.

Wazir tribesman and Balochis and a host of others would never have joined, en masse, Ahmad Shah's incursions had they viewed him as a Persian Iranian Shiite pawn.

Check Mate Yet again.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

God doesn't reward rapists and if he does he's not God.

Good, then Ahmad Shah certainly deserves his reward since he was not a rapist.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

So we have the following to conclude from 13 pages:

1) You have no evidence whatsoever that Ahmad Shah Baba viewed himself as preserving Nadir Shah's empire.

actually yes I do, I have your statement and reference that he was using Nadir Shah's claim

checkmate.

2) to buttress the above you tried but failed to use Shah Rukh Shah's twice defeated status and Ahmad Shah's Alexandrian mercy as evidence of him viewing himself as Nadir incarnate. Wrong again as per Professor Gommels who clearly defines Ahmad Shah viewing Iran as HIS client state and being averse to take orders from either Safawids or Nadirids.

Because He was Nadir Shah's servant, if he wasn't then your Alexandran Mercy clause would apply. The analogy becomes noncongruent therefore

3) Ahmad Shah persianized Pashtunistan/Afghanistan or at least continued that policy. Hardly. He ruled in Qandahar and not Kabul and all we have is some Fofalzai alleging, based on Shah Zaman's mea cupla that Ahmad Shah had Qizilbashi at his sides to justify nearly 30% of Shah Zaman's army being from that group.

dude Tarikh-i-Ahmad Shahi is in PERSIAN ....what other evidence do you need when his OWN Biography is in the very language that his rulers/masters spoke in.

He gave lands to Qizilbash, a preferential treatment. this has nothing to do with administrative faculties but his tendency to honor and appease those he favors. He favored foreigners more.

4) To prove the above you also assumed Husseini's Tarikh e Zaman was the same writer as the aforementioned author of Ahmad Shah's tarikh attempting to validate it as eye witness. This was an obvious blunder and miscalculation.

It's actually called Tarikh i Hussain Shahi, it's a primary source, even if we what you're saying as true, his source comes from the direct sources. Thus your attempt at spin doctoring won't debunk it.

5) To furthar validate attacking Ahmad Shah Baba you said his kingdom lasted but 30 years... forgetting the untimely demise of Ghilzai rule in Isfahan and Alexander's own rule (meaning that criticism is irrelevent). For that matter the early Caliphate that was rightly guided was but a few decades too.

No I said his Kingdom crumbled within 30 years, not lasted, crumbled means falling apart, not necessarily end. And well that did happen.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Good, then Ahmad Shah certainly deserves his reward since he was not a rapist.

yeah even if we suppose that's true, he doesn't reward people who coddle , motivate or enable rapes either

[BarakzaiAbdali]

actually yes I do, I have your statement and reference that he was using Nadir Shah's claim

checkmate.


Wrong. He used Nadir Shah as a pretext. Same way Bush used "nuklear" weapons as a pretext. Gommels makes sure to seal off your argument by declaring that the pretext worked well and yet the written letters confirms actual contempt. Check mate.


Because He was Nadir Shah's servant, if he wasn't then your Alexandran Mercy clause would apply. The analogy becomes noncongruent therefore

Says only you and no other valid source. Check mate.

dude Tarikh-i-Ahmad Shahi is in PERSIAN ....what other evidence do you need when his OWN Biography is in the very language that his rulers/masters spoke in.

The language his esteemed court historian wrote in. Showing that he was a meritocrat above all else, Ahmad Shah demanded that Munshi Husseini know the Quran, the hadith, and be qualified. Whether the work was in persian, hindi, english, or Pashto matters little. Ahmad Shah's personal poetry was in Pashto. Check mate.

He gave lands to Qizilbash, a preferential treatment. this has nothing to do with administrative faculties but his tendency to honor and appease those he favors. He favored foreigners more.

Still an unproven and not validated assertion relying on Zaman Khan's bio and polemic to justify his blinding of Barakzai leaders and murder of Painda Khan and replacement of these key cabinet figures that served his father and grandfather with Persians.



It's actually called Tarikh i Hussain Shahi, it's a primary source, even if we what you're saying as true, his source comes from the direct sources. Thus your attempt at spin doctoring won't debunk it.

No they dont. Direct sources? The Author in question never was a court historian for Ahmad Shah, Munshi Husseini on the other hand was.

No I said his Kingdom crumbled within 30 years, not lasted, crumbled means falling apart, not necessarily end. And well that did happen.

Doesn't negate his accomplishment. Had he not built that Pashtun kingdom including disparate tribes such as Khalil Mohmand Ghilzai Dorani Confederacy Kharoti Baloch etc we would be in worse trouble today than we even are as a divided nation.

Check mate

x