Did you read the article? It's not about Palestine.

It was an analogy, maybe a bad one.

They may or may not, but the fact is, that the taliban will be easily defeated if Pashtunistan is created. right now USA is wasting money on Afghanistan and Pakistan, since the money doesn't get to Pashtun areas. Basically what they are doing now is indirectly fighting talibans. in the other hand, if they used the same amount money to build a government in Pashtunistan, then the effort and money would go to directly fighting taliban. In that case will the defeat of taliban be assured.

How? They'll just fight over that bit of land, too.

It was an analogy, maybe a bad one.

Ah ok, thanks for clarifying.

in the other hand, if they used the same amount money to build a government in Pashtunistan, then the effort and money would go to directly fighting taliban. In that case will the defeat of taliban be assured.

Giving a group bent on the spread of radical Islam world wide is never the best of plans.

It isn't forbidden.

I dont know if it is or not, but the extremist considered it forbidden. Especially the Taliban.

On the other hand, Afghans do have a strong sense of nationalism, coming from years of invasions from various powers, Britain, the USSR, the US.

They may have it, but since they think it forbidden, they dont work on it.

A key distinguishing factors between the two Talibans is that the Afghans insist they have a strictly local agenda of liberating their homeland

exactly, a civil war will happened after USA leave Afghanistan.

In contrast, the Pakistani Taliban has embraced al Qaeda’s vision of pan-Islamic rule, and it has increasingly targeted the Pakistani state instead of helping its Afghan brethren, aiming to set up an Islamic Caliphate so to speak.

And how do you remove these people from power. By creating Pashtunistan and supporting modern Pashtuns. This way nationalism will replace extremism from Talibans.

No it isn't. The Taliban is a bizarre mix of both Pashtun tribal culture and strict Islam. Giving them a state will only allow them to consolidate power further,

Why didnt it fail in Afghanistan. I mean the support of a government. Basically USA will be doing the same thing in Pashtunistan, as they did in Afghanistan. The difference is however in the effectiveness. USA will be fighting Talibans and liberating the oppressed people directly.
In other words, the strict Islam would be replaced with Pashtun culture and modern Islam.

I seriously fail to see logic behind this

Now look it in this way. All support Afghanistan is receiving is given to Tajik, Hazara, Usbek etc. since they are the majority in the afghan government. The support Pakistan is receiving is given to punjab the same reason as above. Which make the pashtun population still live in poverty. The main source of Taliban recruiting is in fact the poor people, which is most likely send to madrassas. In other words, the amount of support Afghanistan and Pakistan is receiving isn't gone to the effort to reduce the Taliban capability, or liberating it people for that matter.

By creating Pashtunistan it will reduce the cost of war both to Pakistan and Afghanistan, and of course USA. And democracy will be secured in the entire region.

How? They'll just fight over that bit of land, too.

You do know, they are not fighting each other, right?
They already own the land and this way spreading the extremism.

Giving a group bent on the spread of radical Islam world wide is never the best of plans.

I am not saying to support Taliban, but creating a government for the modern Pashtuns, and give support to Pashtun nationalism instead of extremism. This way they can spread the nationalistic pride to the rest of Pashtuns, which will replace the Talibans and it supporters.

You do know, they are not fighting each other, right?

If that is the case, it is simply because they are not actively trying to fight over the same piece of land currently.

I am not saying to support Taliban, but creating a government for the modern Pashtuns, and give support to Pashtun nationalism instead of extremism.

Nationalist movements that are politically successful are almost always extremist and/or power hungry. If we succeeded at creating "Pashtun Nationalism" we would simply be replacing one problematic group with another.

If that is the case, it is simply because they are not actively trying to fight over the same piece of land currently.

I am beginning to think that you dont know who Taliban is...

Nationalist movements that are politically successful are almost always extremist and/or power hungry. If we succeeded at creating "Pashtun Nationalism" we would simply be replacing one problematic group with another.

You dont need to be extremist to be a nationalist. I bet any European or American is nationalist, it basically a sense of pride for the nation. So I doubt it will do any harm to give the ethnic group a national pride. The USA is doing the same in Afghanistan, and actually that is the main strategy there.

They may have it, but since they think it forbidden, they dont work on it.

It doesn't matter, one way or another, the Afghan Taliban want to drive the US out, which has always been they're stated aim. Clouding it with Pashtun nationalism is drivel.  The Pashtun at any rate have a fiercely independent tribal nature, but they're main aim, has been the ousting of NATO forces, and not a homeland.

And how do you remove these people from power. By creating Pashtunistan and supporting modern Pashtuns. This way nationalism will replace extremism from Talibans.

Nationalism is never good. And furthermore, as has been explained earlier, ever since the 1970s, Muslims have been on the whole, suspicious of these Western ''isms'', due to the failures of secular governments all around the Muslim world, including Afghanistan. When the Soviets were driven out, that sent a powerful psychological message that deeply embedded religious fundamentalism even more.

Why didnt it fail in Afghanistan. I mean the support of a government. Basically USA will be doing the same thing in Pashtunistan, as they did in Afghanistan. The difference is however in the effectiveness. USA will be fighting Talibans and liberating the oppressed people directly.
In other words, the strict Islam would be replaced with Pashtun culture and modern Islam.

Afghanistan didn't fail? Look at the state of it now. The Afghan government will never properly stay in power without NATO forces in place. Pashtun culture IS the source of such strict Islam, in Afghanistan. In fact, the Taliban's extremely strict and anti-modern ideology has been described as an 'innovative form of sharia combining Pashtun tribal codes,' or Pashtunwali, with radical Deobandi interpretations of Islam.

You dont need to be extremist to be a nationalist. I bet any European or American is nationalist, it basically a sense of pride for the nation. So I doubt it will do any harm to give the ethnic group a national pride. The USA is doing the same in Afghanistan, and actually that is the main strategy there.

To be nationalist today is generally referring not only to the love of the nation (Patriotism), but also a sense of superiority over others.

The main source of Taliban recruiting is in fact the poor people, which is most likely send to madrassas. In other words, the amount of support Afghanistan and Pakistan is receiving isn't gone to the effort to reduce the Taliban capability, or liberating it people for that matter.

You fail to see that the main reason that more and more talibans are being recruited is the presence of foreign forces in afghanistan and drone strikes in pakistani tribal areas.
These people live and die by revenge.

It doesn't matter, one way or another, the Afghan Taliban want to drive the US out, which has always been they're stated aim. Clouding it with Pashtun nationalism is drivel.  The Pashtun at any rate have a fiercely independent tribal nature, but they're main aim, has been the ousting of NATO forces, and not a homeland.

Pashtun culture IS the source of such strict Islam, in Afghanistan. In fact,

This is not true. I do agree on that Pashtun are independent tribal nature and want the NATO forces out, but Taliban doesn't represent Pashtun people. Strict Islamic laws have nothing to do with the Pashtun people. I do agree on they are religious, but there is a fine line between being religious and Talibans. The strict Islamic laws was introduced to the Pashtun people by Pakistan and USA, back when the Soviet had invaded Afghanistan. The Islamic laws was basically forced on Pashtuns. 
   
Here is a video where Pashtun people is fighting Talibans and saids after they defeat Taliban, they fight NATO troops.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EREa035NhXU

Afghanistan didn't fail? Look at the state of it now. The Afghan government will never properly stay in power without NATO forces in place.

It didnt fail, it got its motive done. It not the afghan governments fault that the USA is blinded, which results on the effectiveness of it. As I said before, if they did do the exact same thing to Pashtunistan as they did in Afghanistan, then the Talibans would have failed within 3 years, instead of 11+ years.

To be nationalist today is generally referring not only to the love of the nation (Patriotism), but also a sense of superiority over others.

I checked the word and it said it is pride/love to the nation, but no matter what it is called, what I meant with it was pride to nation and not any sort of superiority.

You fail to see that the main reason that more and more talibans are being recruited is the presence of foreign forces in afghanistan and drone strikes in pakistani tribal areas.
These people live and die by revenge.

This is so not true, there is allot more them. All their values is based on honor. Let me show a few examples from Pashtunwali

Melmastia (hospitality) - Showing hospitality and profound respect to all visitors, regardless of race, religion, national affiliation or economic status and doing so without any hope of remuneration or favour. Pashtuns will go to great lengths to show their hospitality.

Nanawatai (asylum) - Derived from the verb meaning to go in, this refers to the protection given to a person against his or her enemies. People are protected at all costs; even those running from the law must be given refuge until the situation can be clarified.Nanawatai can also be used when the vanquished party in a dispute is prepared to go in to the house of the victors and ask for their forgiveness.

Sabat (loyalty) - Loyalty must be paid to one's family, friends and tribe members. Pashtuns can never become disloyal as this would be a matter of shame for their families and themselves.

Imandari (righteousness) - A Pashtun must always strive for good in thought, word and deed. Pashtuns must behave respectfully to people, animals and the environment around them. Pollution of the environment or its destruction is against the Pashtunwali.

Ghayrat (courage) - Pashtuns must demonstrate courage. Their honour, or pride, has great importance in Pashtun society and must be preserved. They must respect themselves and others in order to be able to do so, especially those they do not know. Respect begins at home, among family members and relatives. If one does not have "Ghayrat" they are not classed as a Pashtun

Namus (protection of women) - A Pashtun must defend the honour of women at all costs and must protect them from vocal and physical harm (another prove of the main goal to liberate the women from Taliban oppression will be archived if Pashtunistan was created)

Nang (Honour) - a Pashtun must defend the weak around him.

They doesn't sound all that bad, does they...after my opinion it exactly what that region needs.