What's new

Taliban have a major insurgency on their hands, many attacks in the past 2 days

Oom

FULL MEMBER
Feb 8, 2022
182
0
234
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
So these attacks are actually two prong
1- Resistance front- former Northern Alliance, warlords, ANA, NDS- they aren't a unified group, just sporadic attacks without them being coordinated
2- ISIS- basically right now a serous threat to the IEA-

Pakistan needs to protect its interest and eliminate the TTP- this means do whatever it takes to strong arms them as well as cross border ops to degrade and diminish TTP

but we also need to be wary against preventing the complete collapse of IEA- as that would lead to more space for ISIS-

At the same time the resistance front led by Masoud is a good option to back- have them take a few provinces- keep the pressure on IEA-
 

Bleek

SENIOR MEMBER
Dec 21, 2021
4,236
4
5,400
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United Kingdom
So these attacks are actually two prong
1- Resistance front- former Northern Alliance, warlords, ANA, NDS- they aren't a unified group, just sporadic attacks without them being coordinated
2- ISIS- basically right now a serous threat to the IEA-

Pakistan needs to protect its interest and eliminate the TTP- this means do whatever it takes to strong arms them as well as cross border ops to degrade and diminish TTP

but we also need to be wary against preventing the complete collapse of IEA- as that would lead to more space for ISIS-

At the same time the resistance front led by Masoud is a good option to back- have them take a few provinces- keep the pressure on IEA-
We need a group who takes control that won't allow TTP to operate or keep them permanently occupied
 

Shaheen123

FULL MEMBER

New Recruit

Mar 25, 2022
92
0
162
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
if IS-K or ISIS emerges to be a big threat, which seems like it will happen, expect US drone strikes from Pakistani airspace, the IEA might even cooperate because they want ISIS gone too.
 

satyamev

FULL MEMBER
Oct 26, 2021
564
-30
615
Country
India
Location
India
dont understand some countries and their culture at all.
Hardly a murmur when its muslims killing muslims on a daily basis, just brushed under the carpet.
Whats the endgame for the people perpetuating more violence in Afghanistan ?
its all guess work here. No one really knows what the demands or aim of these people killing innocents is.
Ar this point its just killing for the sake of killing.
 

Khan_21

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 8, 2014
2,793
-6
4,893
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Zia ul Haq didn't poke his nose in until the Afghan communists invited their Russian communist comrades in to threaten our borders.
I hate General Zia for a lot of things but his response to the Russians in Afghanistan was exactly what he needed to do in order to protect the integrity of Pakistan.

Our participation in Afghan jihad brought Kalashnikov culture /drugs/criminals and instability to the country.

Not to mention thousands of unregulated madrassas that were used to train militants. An entire generation was radacalized the effects are still felt today.
 

airmarshal

ELITE MEMBER
Jul 28, 2010
9,026
10
12,025
Country
Pakistan
Location
Canada
There is a deliberate move afoot to destabilize Afghanistan again. Its a tested recipe for chaos. Target Hazara minority, children.

It seems odd that terrorists have money and resources while Taliban are effectively sanctioned. This is a classic imperialist model for destabilization which will become an excuse for some form of intervention.

Seeing children killed in terror attack is heart rending. Children should never be targeted. But then the terrorist who kill them and the Americans who encourage these terrorists have no morals. Americans have several times attacked children medressahs through drone strikes.

I wish and pray Afghanistan is stable. It has suffered too long and this tragedy must come to an end.
 

kingQamaR

SENIOR MEMBER
Sep 14, 2017
3,852
-5
3,763
Country
United Kingdom
Location
Pakistan
Oh there are many Jamahirs. The SPA has 30,000 of them in Afghanistan. In Libya there are many, so in Russia, Palestine, Bangladesh, Pakistan, India, Turkey, Britain etc.



So, why did Zia ul Haq and the Saudis poke their noses in Afghanistan in the 1980s when the Afghans had made their own decision to allow a progressive governance system for their country ?

No, it had no choice.

The soviets were clearly influencing India. This alone is enough to tell you they didn’t like Pakistan. They needed a port to the Arabian sea, specifically Gwadar or Karachi. And Afghanistan’, desperate to fulfill its Pashtunistan fantasies, would happily accept the soviets. The PAF actually shot down Soviet planes. With India doing brasstracks in the east and the soviets invading in the west, Pakistan had no choice but to protect its existence.

It played a major role in the breakup of the USSR and India was a side thought, kept in check by threats of nuclear annihilation.

Of course, such an offensive stance isn’t ideal but that’s how the world can be at times.
 

Goritoes

SENIOR MEMBER
Jan 20, 2021
5,559
-2
8,595
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Taliban did not in past nor in future be able to bring peace in Afghanistan, yes some areas which were under their strict rule might have seen peace but now its not possible because of their superiority complex and ego, they are fighting the only country which despite their back stabs supports them and now harboring TTP and BLA like terrorists, so its a open season for everyone in AFG, and Taliban will not be spared from that onslaught as well. ISIS-K will attack them, sooner or later their differences with BLA/TTP will emerge (most likely on money) and they fight each other, then there are secret NA supporters who will eventually kill those Taliban fighters with every chance they get, and then there will be Pakistan who will be killing their commanders who support TTP/BLA , and Indians will be using their agents to take out any Taliban who try to make peace with Pakistan, last but not the least there will be CIA assets which will make sure that ISIS/Taliban remain in a constant battle so they just kill each other instead of creating troubles for the rest of the world.
 

SD 10

SENIOR MEMBER
Sep 27, 2019
2,882
0
3,291
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Our participation in Afghan jihad brought Kalashnikov culture /drugs/criminals and instability to the country.

Not to mention thousands of unregulated madrassas that were used to train militants. An entire generation was radacalized the effects are still felt today.
it happens...... but that was necessary at the time.....
 

jamahir

ELITE MEMBER
Jul 9, 2014
27,517
2
24,101
Country
India
Location
India
The jamahirs are a marginal presence in the Muslim world. Maybe you should learn Spanish and come to Latin America. Jamahirs run like half the governments, it might be like jannah for you.

1. Well, the diminished presence of the Jamahirs among Muslims today is because of the spreading of the India-origin accursed Tableeghi Jamaat ritualists. As with all mullahs the TJ destroy Muslim society from within and work for NATO. Their latest work was being the gun-arm of CIA in the CIA plot to overthrow the Kazakhstan government early this year.

2. It is too late for me to learn another language :) but I do intend to collaborate with the Latin American Jamahirs. Venezuela actually is implementing its adaptation of the Libyan Jamahiriya direct democracy political system and it is called the Communa system. Once I have my company established I will re-establish contact with one of the Communist groups in India and collaborate with it to spread my adaptation of the Libyan political system and my simplification of a new Communistic socio-economic system. Some years ago I had met the leaders of some progressive political groups in my city including the state secretary for my state of one of the Communist groups. My idea was to set up an umbrella movement of all progressive political groups at least in my city and then expand. The meetings with the state secretary happened IIRC three times and I wanted to join that group but somehow it didn't happen. And those days I hadn't jotted down my ideas for the political system for a society and the socio-economic system. I am more ready now.

You could be like the Bengali who came to Mexico around the 1910's and ended up being the founder of the Mexican Communist party.

Wow ! I didn't know that. So this was before the Communist Party of India was established in 1920.

As much criminal stuff as the US has done- no reasonable person wants communism. It's pretty understandable to have collaborated with the US in the Cold War days. Islam is inherently at odds with Communism. Back then US to some extent stood for anti-Communism, these days it pretty much just stands for homoism.

1. Below is Google result for "Communism" as can be understood in simple words :
Communism is a philosophical, social, political and economic ideology and movement whose ultimate goal is the establishment of a communist society, namely a socioeconomic order structured upon the ideas of common ownership of the means of production and the absence of social classes, money and the state. Wikipedia
Any rational person if gives time will not reject Communism because it calls for a humane and harmonious society. Additionally, a humanity without the artificial national borders and militaries that needlessly exist to protect either oppressive Capitalist systems or to protect stubborn egos.

2. No, Islam is not inherently at odds with Communism because modern Communism is the result of historic progressive philosophies including of Hazrat Isa and Hazrat Muhammad. I quote from my thread from 2016 whose OP is an article by Pakistani journalist Nadeem Paracha and is about participation in modern Socialist and Communist activism by Muslims since the early 1900s :
During the same period (1920s-30s), another (though lesser known) Islamic scholar in undivided India got smitten by the 1917 Russian revolution and Marxism.

Hafiz Rahman Sihwarwl saw Islam and Marxism sharing five elements in common: (1) prohibition of the accumulation of wealth in the hands of the privileged classes (2) organisation of the economic structure of the state to ensure social welfare (3) equality of opportunity for all human beings (4) priority of collective social interest over individual privilege and (5) prevention of the permanentising of class structure through social revolution.

The motivations for many of these themes he drew from the Qur’an, which he understood as seeking to create an economic order in which the rich pay excessive, though voluntary taxes (Zakat) to minimise differences in living standards.

In the areas that Sihwarwl saw Islam and communism diverge were Islam’s sanction of private ownership within certain limits, and in its refusal to recognise an absolutely classless basis of society.

He suggested that Islam, with its prohibition of the accumulation of wealth, is able to control the class structure through equality of opportunity.

Basically, both Sindhi and Sihwarwl had stumbled upon an Islamic concept of the social democratic welfare state.
If Imran Khan in Pakistan had unbiasedly and intellectually considered for some time in his quest to build a Riyasat-e-Madina welfare-based society in Pakistan he would have realized the above.

Sharam karo. Celebrating martyrdom of a few Muslim brothers? If it was TTP then it would have make sense. Afghan taliban ne Hamara kia bigaara hai?

The TTP is the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan. It wants to establish in Pakistan what the Afghan Taliban did across the border. :) The AT is providing TTP sanctuary and you ask kya bigaada hai ?

Zia ul Haq didn't poke his nose in until the Afghan communists invited their Russian communist comrades in to threaten our borders.
I hate General Zia for a lot of things but his response to the Russians in Afghanistan was exactly what he needed to do in order to protect the integrity of Pakistan.

No, it had no choice.

The soviets were clearly influencing India. This alone is enough to tell you they didn’t like Pakistan. They needed a port to the Arabian sea, specifically Gwadar or Karachi. And Afghanistan’, desperate to fulfill its Pashtunistan fantasies, would happily accept the soviets.

1. To establish the argument's base what was Zia ul Haq's objection in collaborating with the progressive Afghan Communists and the USSR ? The left-wing Afghan government had an Afghan citizen sent to space to stay aboard a USSR space station and Zia ul Haq sent Pakistani citizens to stadiums to be flogged on stupid charges of doing something called "Fahaashi" ? It was rightful that rational and progressive Pakistanis opposed the NATO-supported criminal regime of Zia ul Haq. You can read some of that opposition in this post from 2011 by @pak-marine.

2. Contrary to your belief about India and the USSR the Indian government of the mid-1980s under PM Rajiv Gandhi saw Zia ul Haq's Pakistan as the buffer which would protect Rajiv's India from increased USSR presence in India which could possibly enable the Indian Communists from politically taking over India at some point though with possible opposition by the military. Rajiv Gandhi was ready to assist Zia to get back into power in case Zia was toppled by USSR-assisted Pakistani leftists which would enable USSR to use their presence in Pakistan to extend their influence into India. From my 2015 thread :
Rajiv Gandhi regarded Pakistan as 'strategic buffer' against USSR: CIA document

Sep 01, 2015
  • Rajiv Gandhi was the seventh Prime Minister of India (Photo: PTI/File)
Washington: Contradicting perceived proximity to the Soviet Union in the Cold War era, India under the then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi had toyed with the idea of supporting anti-Russian civilian groups in Pakistan if the then Zia regime was thrown out by Moscow, a recent declassified CIA document has claimed.

According to CIA documents of the era, which were recently declassified and posted on the CIA website under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), which is similar to India's Right to Information Act, Gandhi wanted non-interference from both the United States and the then USSR. "Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi would like both the USSR and the United States to end their involvement in South Asia," noted the 31-page CIA document titled 'The Soviet Presence in Afghanistan: Implications for the Regional Powers and the US'.

While taking note of the historic India-USSR relationship in particular in the defence field, the CIA report of April 1985 noted that India is likely to become increasingly concerned about long-range Soviet intentions in the region and could find itself moving towards confrontation with the Soviets if Pakistan was effectively neutralised.

"New Delhi regards Pakistan as a strategic buffer against the USSR and would oppose Moscow's effort to dominate Pakistan. New Delhi and Moscow would find themselves supporting rival factions within Pakistan," said the report, according to which Moscow had plans to change the regime in Pakistan and extend its influence beyond Afghanistan. In that case, the report said, "The Indians would seek to significantly reduce their dependence on Moscow and reorder their strategic relationship with the USSR, the United States and China if they perceived Soviet ambitions as extending beyond Afghanistan toward the subcontinent."

According to the report, the Soviets tried to heighten India's suspicion about Pakistan's intentions and its security relationship with the US in order to foster Indo-Pakistani tensions and heighten New Delhi’s dependence on Moscow. "In Soviet view, conflict between India and Pakistan would work toward solving Moscow's Afghan problem and would give Moscow opportunities to strengthen its position in South Asia," the report said.

"If (Gen) Zia (Ul Haq) regime were to fall, the Indians might try to prevent Soviet attempt to dominate Pakistan by supporting rival Pakistani political factions, Soviet military moves against an already neutralised Pakistan could even result in military confrontation with India," it added.

Six months later when Gandhi was planning to meet General Zia on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly meeting in New York, the CIA analyzed that the then Indian Prime Minister, despite his strong public views on Pakistan's nuclear weapons program, was unlikely to push him hard on it. "Gandhi is unlikely to push Zia hard about the Pakistani nuclear program, although he probably will at least mention his continuing concern," noted the top secret CIA document dated October 21, 1985.

"For his part, Zia is also likely to propose ideas on ways to improve the bilateral relationship. He may suggest regular high-level diplomatic talks in addition to the formal Joint Commission sessions that focuses on trade, communications and cultural exchanges," the report said. "Zia may also solicit Gandhi's views on whether as the Pakistanis believe the Soviets are becoming serious about a negotiated settlement in Afghanistan," it said.


It's time for the Taliban to kick the Indian sponsored terrorists out,

So the NATO-sponsored Taliban should kick out which India-sponsored terrorists ?

The PAF actually shot down Soviet planes.

It wasn't like the Soviet planes were bombing Pakistani cities. You really think the Zia ul Haq government could have taken on the USSR ?

It played a major role in the breakup of the USSR and India was a side thought, kept in check by threats of nuclear annihilation.

Some Pakistanis should stop believing in the mythology that Zia ul Haq had anything to do with the dissolution of the USSR.

Yours is too small ..no SPA can help you.

Yes, congrats for your big one. Can't say that about your brain. No mullah can help you.
 
Last edited:

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom