Forums

ForumsWorld Events, Politics, Religion, Etc.

Pashtunistan

Posted Dec 21, '12 at 10:55am

thepunisher93

thepunisher93

1,859 posts

seems logical. if usa keeps fighting them. they have to keep buying loads of oil.
good move of saudi there..

Key word is Supported.

 

Posted Dec 21, '12 at 11:47am

partydevil

partydevil

5,097 posts

Supported

awww, bad move. xD

 

Posted Dec 21, '12 at 9:30pm

FireflyIV

FireflyIV

3,290 posts

The lesser of two evils it seems.

What is missing from the current discussion is the semi racial element. The Taleban claim to welcome those who follow the path of Allah, but as is sadly inevitable in all exclusive doctrines, outsiders are seen as less than human. Much of the conflict which exists now is drawn upon tribal lines, but not in the way one would think. It is more similar to racism/xenophobia than tribalism in terms of the way if affects the collective behaviour of the Afghans as a whole. This is not lost upon the non Pashtun Afghans who have much to lose should the Taleban return to power. Sure, they dislike the duplicity of ISAF, and the corruption of Kabul, but at the end of the day, these institutions aren't going to chop off their feet for the simple reason of inhabiting a different region of the country. As cynical as this may sound, it might be wise for ISAF and Karzai to play on this fear in order to diminish support for Islamic fundamentalism in Helmand. If they were competent enough though, I fear they would already have done this. As it is, once the troops are pulled out in 2014, the Taleban will slowly but surely regain ground.

The troubles of Afghanistan and its people have to count as one of the greatest tradgedies of the past half century, and it seems like they may continue for another fifty years. Ultimately however, the power of the Taleban is derived from their relative cohesion in comparison to the Northern tribes, and the people's fear of them and their brutality. But fear is no way to sustain control in a country as divided as Afghanistan, and in that I can take some small comfort.

 

Posted Dec 21, '12 at 11:23pm

nichodemus

nichodemus

12,012 posts

Knight

This is not lost upon the non Pashtun Afghans who have much to lose should the Taleban return to power. Sure, they dislike the duplicity of ISAF, and the corruption of Kabul, but at the end of the day, these institutions aren't going to chop off their feet for the simple reason of inhabiting a different region of the country. As cynical as this may sound, it might be wise for ISAF and Karzai to play on this fear in order to diminish support for Islamic fundamentalism in Helmand. If they were competent enough though, I fear they would already have done this. As it is, once the troops are pulled out in 2014, the Taleban will slowly but surely regain ground.

Polls don't lie. I'm not certain whether they want them in full power, or as part of the government coalition, in a bid to reign them in. Being trapped in a constant and never ending cross fire with drones raining death down is surely a strong motivator for supporting groups who promise change.

 

Posted Dec 22, '12 at 3:32am

thepunisher93

thepunisher93

1,859 posts

What is missing from the current discussion is the semi racial element. The Taleban claim to welcome those who follow the path of Allah, but as is sadly inevitable in all exclusive doctrines, outsiders are seen as less than human. Much of the conflict which exists now is drawn upon tribal lines, but not in the way one would think. It is more similar to racism/xenophobia than tribalism in terms of the way if affects the collective behaviour of the Afghans as a whole. This is not lost upon the non Pashtun Afghans who have much to lose should the Taleban return to power. Sure, they dislike the duplicity of ISAF, and the corruption of Kabul, but at the end of the day, these institutions aren't going to chop off their feet for the simple reason of inhabiting a different region of the country. As cynical as this may sound, it might be wise for ISAF and Karzai to play on this fear in order to diminish support for Islamic fundamentalism in Helmand. If they were competent enough though, I fear they would already have done this. As it is, once the troops are pulled out in 2014, the Taleban will slowly but surely regain ground.

The troubles of Afghanistan and its people have to count as one of the greatest tradgedies of the past half century, and it seems like they may continue for another fifty years. Ultimately however, the power of the Taleban is derived from their relative cohesion in comparison to the Northern tribes, and the people's fear of them and their brutality. But fear is no way to sustain control in a country as divided as Afghanistan, and in that I can take some small comfort.

Need I remind you that they chop limbs of pashtuns too, if they are convicted of a felony?

 

Posted Dec 22, '12 at 9:03am

DSM

DSM

796 posts

How  is it so?

To say it simple, Israel owns a bit of land, they take care of the population. Pakistan owns a bit of land, they dont care about the population. Both are illegal owned land.

It proves that Pakistani Taliban are a different breed.
Tattoos are forbidden in Islam and with living things tattoos, you can't say your prayers.
If Taliban were as hardcore as they claim, even if this person was a new convert, the first thing he would have will be erasing that tattoo.
Also, I read many times that they have found uncircumcised bodies of the and gorkha bodies too, this proves that a foreign hand is involved.
There is a Policeman named aftab phlarwan, he did operations against them and wrote an auto biography.read it.

And in which way does that relate to Pashtunistan?
1. The pakistani police/military could have made the tattoo to decrease the support of Taliban.
2. It was mention the guy was a foreigner, and he could have joined Taliban without them knowing him having the tattoo.
3. He could be an ordinary person who joined Taliban because of racism/mistreatment of Pakistan soldiers/police.
In any case, if anything it just support my argument on creating Pasthunistan.

Citing this reason is turning a bling eye to the regions history.
Brits tried it, Greeks and russians tried it but they were repulsed.
In those days, resistance did not have a religious color but this time this happens to be the case, its only a coincidence.
This was not religiously motivated,   

That war wasn't religious motivated, but was for Independence and freedom. Another reason for creating Pashtunistan.

Because that is one of the most important things that they do.
Often, their tribal vendettas go over a century back.
You are mistaken to think that it is a "small" part of their culture.
Actually it is the most important part of their culture.
Its blood for blood or woman for blood.

It is a small part of their culture. It just one part of the code out of ten(1/10). The difference is, people tend to forget the good deeds people are doing, and that why they only got known for revenge.
Do you know Marcus Luttrell? He was saved from Taliban by Pashtuns, because of Pashtunwali called Nanawatai.
The team could not establish consistent communication, however, other than for a period long enough to indicate that they were under attack. Three of the four team members were killed, and the only survivor, Marcus Luttrell, was left unconscious with a number of fractures, a broken back, numerous shrapnel wounds, and later a gunshot. He would soon regain consciousness and evade the pursuing enemy, with the help of local Pashtun villagers, who would eventually send an emissary to the nearest U.S. base to secure his safe release, and ultimately save his life.
If Pakistan dont like Pashtuns that much and think they are just revenge driven so called savages, then why dont you give the land back to Afghanistan? Pashtuns are called ethnic afghans, so I doubt the afghan government would mind to take back what originally was theirs.

Firstly, it implies that the Pashtun people are themselves unified. Yes they share the same language and culture more or less, but it is that same culture that spawns violent tribal tendencies. A central government would struggle to impose statehood on a disparate people much in the same way the Karzai struggles now, only on a smaller scale.

The government would have easier to control the land, since they will be concentrating on it own people instead of everything else.

Pakistan for one would not be happy with an independent Pashtun state, which would no doubt act as a safe haven for the Mujahideen to mount further attacks on Northern Pakistan.

It is already a safe haven for them. In the other hand when Pashtuns gets independence the extremism would fade away, the same reason I have stated earlier. And beside the only reason there is attacks on Pakistan is because of their military presence in Pashtunwkha, so once it gets Independence attacks will also stop. 

Hizb-i-Gullbudin, Islamic Jihad Union, Harakat-ul-Mujahideen, Jalaluddin Haqqani Network, Mullah Dadullah Front, Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, just to name a few. Pity that most people only think they're fighting a monolithic group.

Those you mention is Pashtun groups, beside the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan. And they were all united/allied under the Taliban rule. Basically they fight for the same cause.

That is a secondary problem stemming from the immensely inept governance, that has done little for the people.

That why creating a Pashtunistan will be a good idea, since the government would have the focus on its people.

The Taliban ruled from 1996 to 2001. I don't know why it gets forgotten so easily.

What have Taliban anything to do with Pashtuns. You yourself said Taliban was in power. Talibans didnt do anything for Pashtun interest, and they were very against nationalism/patriotism. They even dedicated they victories from British Empire and Soviet union to Islam and not for afghans.

The Saudis supported the Taliban, not the Iranians.

I would like you to highlight where I wrote Iranians have supported Taliban. It seems like you keep ignoring my statements. You made up this statement, and from previous post were I explained several times that Talibans had nothing to do with Pashtuns.

Of course the millions of dollars of Saudi help pouring into madrassah and weapons does help, but this was only after the Taliban had grown in stature.

The money was used to support the extremist even before Taliban was formed. Pakistan, Saudi and USA was the one who supported them and there is plenty of documentary about that.

Mullah Omar started his own madrassah with his own resources which formed the nucleus for the Taliban.

1 religious school doesn't form a group of more then hundreds thousand fighters. Pakistan and Saudi keep supporting them even after soviet was gone.

 

Posted Dec 22, '12 at 9:11am

DSM

DSM

796 posts

What is missing from the current discussion is the semi racial element. The Taleban claim to welcome those who follow the path of Allah, but as is sadly inevitable in all exclusive doctrines, outsiders are seen as less than human. Much of the conflict which exists now is drawn upon tribal lines, but not in the way one would think. It is more similar to racism/xenophobia than tribalism in terms of the way if affects the collective behaviour of the Afghans as a whole. This is not lost upon the non Pashtun Afghans who have much to lose should the Taleban return to power. Sure, they dislike the duplicity of ISAF, and the corruption of Kabul, but at the end of the day, these institutions aren't going to chop off their feet for the simple reason of inhabiting a different region of the country. As cynical as this may sound, it might be wise for ISAF and Karzai to play on this fear in order to diminish support for Islamic fundamentalism in Helmand..

That is not true. The Taliban was very religious people and racism and nationalism was forbidden under their rule. If they were racist why would they allow al-qaeder to stay and make military training. I do agree on they were harsh against shia muslims, but when it came to suni muslims they didnt care who they were as long they followed the strict Islam they had.
They didnt just chop of hands because of race or the region they came from. The only times they chop hands was when people steal, no matter what race or where they came from. They had their strict Islamic laws which applied to all.

 

Posted Dec 22, '12 at 9:24am

nichodemus

nichodemus

12,012 posts

Knight

Those you mention is Pashtun groups, beside the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan. And they were all united/allied under the Taliban rule. Basically they fight for the same cause.

There have also been reports of clashes between members of the HIG and Taliban, and defection of HIG members to the Afghan government. Ten members of the group’s "senior leadership" met in May 2004 with President Hamid Karzai and "publicly announced their rejection of Hezb-e-Islami’s alliance with al-Qaeda and the Taliban.

Islamic Jihad Union

It’s led by Tohir Yuldashev. They split from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU); trains in Taliban and AQ camps in western Pakistan. Their goal is to overthrow the Afghanistan and Uzbekistan elected governments. They are largely a bandit operation supported by criminal activity and opium. They have overlapping but different goals from the Taliban.

As for the Haqqani Network, the group maintains a power base in the Pakistani tribal region of North Waziristan, across the border from Khost. Sirajuddin Haqqani told Reuters in March his group was under the overall command of Taliban leader Mullah Omar. U.S. officials believe the movement does not always accept Taliban authority and often acts independently.

That why creating a Pashtunistan will be a good idea, since the government would have the focus on its people.

No, the government would on paper have to focus on its own people. But most of the politicians from Afghanistan have proven utterly inept and corrupt.

I would like you to highlight where I wrote Iranians have supported Taliban. It seems like you keep ignoring my statements. You made up this statement, and from previous post were I explained several times that Talibans had nothing to do with Pashtuns.

Then you have no idea what kind of brainwashing was done in the religious schools. And by support the extremist, you are giving them bigger influence.
It actually the same thing Iran is doing in western Afghanistan. They are only supporting people who are pro-Iran. This way they increase they influence throughout Afghanistan.

What have Taliban anything to do with Pashtuns. You yourself said Taliban was in power. Talibans didnt do anything for Pashtun interest, and they were very against nationalism/patriotism. They even dedicated they victories from British Empire and Soviet union to Islam and not for afghans.

What have the Taliban got to do with the Pashtuns? The Taliban are almost completely made up of Pashtuns. Their support comes from the Pashtuns. It has everything to do with the Pashtuns. When they took over, at the national level, "all senior Tajik, Uzbek and Hazara bureaucrats" were replaced "with Pashtuns, whether qualified or not." Consequently, the ministries "by and large ceased to function.".

On the other hand, almost all Taliban are Pashtuns, but this certainly does not go the other way. Three fifths of the Afghan parliament is Pashtun and does not support the Taliban. As you yourself said, Pashtuns aren't the problem, the Taliban are.

So why the need for a homeland?

1 religious school doesn't form a group of more then hundreds thousand fighters. Pakistan and Saudi keep supporting them even after soviet was gone.

The money was used to support the extremist even before Taliban was formed. Pakistan, Saudi and USA was the one who supported them and there is plenty of documentary about that.

Course. There's no dispute about that. The dispute is your claim that the Taliban were started, not just funded, by external forces.

 

Posted Dec 22, '12 at 9:27am

nichodemus

nichodemus

12,012 posts

Knight

The Taliban was very religious people and racism and nationalism was forbidden under their rule. If they were racist why would they allow al-qaeder to stay and make military training. I do agree on they were harsh against shia muslims, but when it came to suni muslims they didnt care who they were as long they followed the strict Islam they had.

Not racist or intolerant? They blew up the Bamiyan statues for being Buddhist. Mullah Mohammed Omar, the Taliban leader, issued a special edict on Feb 26 201 ordering the destruction of all non-Islamic statues.

The ''as long as they followed the strict Islam they had'' is in itself, showing their intolerance.

 

Posted Dec 22, '12 at 11:18am

DSM

DSM

796 posts

No, the government would on paper have to focus on its own people. But most of the politicians from Afghanistan have proven utterly inept and corrupt.

The politicians may be corrupt, but the economy will be growing. And the corruption will eventually fade away to, when the people gets more educated.

Then you have no idea what kind of brainwashing was done in the religious schools. And by support the extremist, you are giving them bigger influence.
It actually the same thing Iran is doing in western Afghanistan. They are only supporting people who are pro-Iran. This way they increase they influence throughout Afghanistan.

I still cant find anywhere, where I have mention Iran supporting Taliban. I even gave link, where they says Irans support to western Afghanistan so they can increase their influence in the country.

What have the Taliban got to do with the Pashtuns? The Taliban are almost completely made up of Pashtuns. Their support comes from the Pashtuns.

As I said before they get the support from Pashtuns because Pakistan and Afghan government fail to support that particular ethnic group. The reason it is mostly made up of Pashtun is because of the poverty, since that is the main source of Taliban recruiting. Taliban dont even follow the Pashtunwali, which is the main thing to be considered a Pashtun.

So why the need for a homeland?

Because country building is not made in Pashtun areas. The economy is growing everywhere in Afghanistan and Pakistan, but not in the Pashtun areas. The only thing they ever gets from these two government and the international force is rain consist of bombs. If the government is centered in those areas then the nation building will happen in those areas.
In the other hand these people need a nation where they can speak their own language and educate themselves on their own history. A nation where they can follow their own culture and be themselves. 

The dispute is your claim that the Taliban were started, not just funded, by external forces.

I didnt say they started it. Mullah Mohammed Omar started it, but USA, Pakistan and Saudi was indirectly involved since they funded them and increased  extremist influence.

Not racist or intolerant? They blew up the Bamiyan statues for being Buddhist. Mullah Mohammed Omar, the Taliban leader, issued a special edict on Feb 26 201 ordering the destruction of all non-Islamic statues.

The ''as long as they followed the strict Islam they had'' is in itself, showing their intolerance.

I never claimed they were tolerance. I said they weren't racist. They didn't judge by race/ethnic, they judge by the religion. I agree 100% on they were intolerance.

 
Reply to Pashtunistan

You must be logged in to post a reply!