What's new

Ashraf Ghani live on Geo TV

.
Ok, thanks for the link..

Still not in the mood to listen to that bald head talk..
 
. . .
What that Afghani clown safi was doing in Kabul? who care about this puppet's opinion who cant even control few streets of Kabul and giving lectures to Pakistan?

Here is the actual video. Saleem Saif was made to look like an amature :)

He is ignorant and wanna be journalist with no education/madrassa education..
 
. .
Here is the actual video. Saleem Saif was made to look like an amature :)

Anyways this video gives our friends in Pakistan what Ashraf Ghani's thinking of Pakistan and the region.


I'm afraid we can't trust what Ashraf Ghani says in front of Pakistani cameras. He has a history of exchanging niceties with NS one day, and strutting on an international platform, demanding the isolation of Pakistan the other day.
 
.
Here is the actual video. Saleem Saif was made to look like an amature :)

Anyways this video gives our friends in Pakistan what Ashraf Ghani's thinking of Pakistan and the region.


Some notes that folks may find interesting:

1. Gani sab says several times that the relationship between Afghanistan and Pakistan is an emotionless one, not of friendship but one between states -- states do not have friends.

2. Yet soon thereafter he responds, angrily, to Salem Safi that "We are proud of our friendship with India" -- I wonder if the Afghans see this contradiction or have they become so blinded in new words of "partnership", "national interest", "rationalism" that they do not see the obvious.

3. When interviewing a person of Ghani sab's stature you don't have complete leeway to ask questions -- typically the question are approved ahead of time -- But Saleem Safi should have asked Ghani sab: do you think India is building Dams and your parliament building for free: beware of Greek Bearing Gifts

4. Further on the Indian Parliament -- I have always wondered how myopic the thinking was by Afghans to let India build the Parliament. It could have been an undertaking where they could have involved multiple Muslim countries like Turkey, Malaysia (of course not the wretched Pakistanis), the US that have shed lots of blood and treasure and made it a project that reflects the best of human and muslims aspirations -- what poetry that would have been. We are the story telling animal and symbolism is essential. Pakistanis are stupid but on this count I cannot find charitable words for the Afghans: grossly stupid.

5. Back to some other key things -- he says to take back the refugees, he needs to achieve between 6% to 9% -- which means wink-wink: the refugees are your (Pakistan's) problem -- at least he is honest, or kinda honest [perhaps Afghans would argue that his Afghan pride prevents him from admitting that our enemy is where our people find refuge]

6. Further he then says that the poor state to state relationship can devolve into People to People hatred. I think this is where Ghani sab and the rest of Afghans are confused. Afghans should have always (like Pakistanis have), first built on people to people equations; emphasizing that we share with each other more than what we share with anyone else. States are artificial constructs -- they are born and die tumultuous deaths, many who are alive today have seen five Afghan state deaths and as many births of. Afghan elites have systematically spun hatred of Pakistani people and I think now they are paying the price. The danger is that now this hatred is about to metastasis in the Pakistani public -- best of luck when that happens. Imagine the state of Afghans when the statement "yeh hamaray Muslamaan Bhai Hain" become a relic of a bygone age.

7. Further if the Afghans are grateful for Pakistan's hosting of Afghan refugees they can certainly pay Pakistanis back by given them access to CARs, etc. etc. -- but No state to state relations are only a valid paradigm when Afghans want something.

All in all -- a disappointing interview by Ghani sab.
 
.
Some notes that folks may find interesting:

1. Gani sab says several times that the relationship between Afghanistan and Pakistan is an emotionless one, not of friendship but one between states -- states do not have friends.

2. Yet soon thereafter he responds, angrily, to Salem Safi that "We are proud of our friendship with India" -- I wonder if the Afghans see this contradiction or have they become so blinded in new words of "partnership", "national interest", "rationalism" that they do not see the obvious.

3. When interviewing a person of Ghani sab's stature you don't have complete leeway to ask questions -- typically the question are approved ahead of time -- But Saleem Safi should have asked Ghani sab: do you think India is building Dams and your parliament building for free: beware of Greek Bearing Gifts

4. Further on the Indian Parliament -- I have always wondered how myopic the thinking was by Afghans to let India build the Parliament. It could have been an undertaking where they could have involved multiple Muslim countries like Turkey, Malaysia (of course not the wretched Pakistanis), the US that have shed lots of blood and treasure and made it a project that reflects the best of human and muslims aspirations -- what poetry that would have been. We are the story telling animal and symbolism is essential. Pakistanis are stupid but on this count I cannot find charitable words for the Afghans: grossly stupid.

5. Back to some other key things -- he says to take back the refugees, he needs to achieve between 6% to 9% -- which means wink-wink: the refugees are your (Pakistan's) problem -- at least he is honest, or kinda honest [perhaps Afghans would argue that his Afghan pride prevents him from admitting that our enemy is where our people find refuge]

6. Further he then says that the poor state to state relationship can devolve into People to People hatred. I think this is where Ghani sab and the rest of Afghans are confused. Afghans should have always (like Pakistanis have), first built on people to people equations; emphasizing that we share with each other more than what we share with anyone else. States are artificial constructs -- they are born and die tumultuous deaths, many who are alive today have seen five Afghan state deaths and as many births of. Afghan elites have systematically spun hatred of Pakistani people and I think now they are paying the price. The danger is that now this hatred is about to metastasis in the Pakistani public -- best of luck when that happens. Imagine the state of Afghans when the statement "yeh hamaray Muslamaan Bhai Hain" become a relic of a bygone age.

7. Further if the Afghans are grateful for Pakistan's hosting of Afghan refugees they can certainly pay Pakistanis back by given them access to CARs, etc. etc. -- but No state to state relations are only a valid paradigm when Afghans want something.

All in all -- a disappointing interview by Ghani sab.


Seeing the glass half empty my friend :)
 
.
Help us harm india and we will help you save Afghanistan

Otherwise shut the hell up
 
.
Seeing the glass half empty my friend :)

mmm good question/point?

I think the myopia of the Afghans has delayed the Afghan and Pakistani people's tryst with destiny.

Roughly six hundred thousand Americans died in the US civil war -- that would be roughly equivalent to nine million Americans, today, as a percentage of US population. So the question is why did Lincoln insist on waging this war to its conclusion. The war did bring about an end to slavery in a legal sense but the situation did not change practically for the freed slaves in the South due to various reasons.

One of the reasons Lincoln knew he had to wage the war is that had the South successfully succeeded -- a future North and Confederate America would have been forever at war competing over the Western states as they were settled.

I think with the Muslim world in turmoil, the rise of newer powers, there is no option for regional Muslim powers like Turkey, Pakistan, and possibly others to create exclusive spheres of influence. Absent that they will continue to fight each other and will be at the mercy of negotiating with larger powers such as India.

I think Iqbal probably got it right. With Afghanistan one can integrate the the northern CARs and Southern Pakistan into a large economic corridor that would be able have the right scale parameters to sit at the high tables. Absent that would mean relegating (soon to be) three hundred million children of humanity to second class tables.

And I think the intellectual elite of Afghanistan and Pakistan would be better served to pursue this several decade long process than the Jurnails in GHQ.

So -- to answer your question -- the glass is always full enough if you imagine the brim low enough. As an example, 80 people died in the heinous attack but not a single world capital or monument has flown Afghan colors. Why? Do the Afghans and Pakistanis want to relegate their future to second class tables? I would hope the answer to that is not.

So perhaps I see the glass mostly empty because I image the brim to be much higher.
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom