What's new

If India or US attack, Afg will back Pakistan: Karzai

what was the need for him to comment like this...he shud stop talking about war and concentrate more on rebuilding of Afghan which is difficult without active cooperation from India and US.

Good relationship with neighbour is good but not at cost of losing some useful allies...
 
.
He was a great military leader. He even treated those Afghans pretty well, despite what they did to the Golden temple.

The Sikhs and Soviets were defeated by the British and US arms, not by the Pushtun tribals.

He wasn't any great leader like you've Bollywoodized him as. The Sikh Empire couldn't hold onto the Pashtun areas longer than a decade or two. The resistance was comprised of Pashtuns who did defeat the Sikh Empire on their territory (supplied by the British). If they did not, there would be no reason for the Sikh leadership to leave, would there? The same applied to anyone else that went to the area. So they did defeat Ranjit Singh's army. It was no different to the other invaders.

The British didn't bother to rule these lawless people. They just made rules like collective punishment or dropping bombs from airplanes. This was because they considered them lawless and barbarians.

The Northwest and Iraq were the only places where airplanes were used to drop bombs on civilians.

The frontier region was considered a buffer zone between the British influence to the East and Soviet influence to the West. It was prized for its strategic value. Otherwise there would be no point in launching the Anglo-Afghan wars. You really don't know much about this area at all.

He also killed every last soul in Herat. Most of the army of that coward Jalal was Pushtun. So obviously Pusthuns were defeated by Genghis (and later by Babur who calls them cowards as they surrendered with grass in their mouths).

Again, completely wrong. That is the bollywood drugged version.

The Sultan was part of the Khwarizm dynasty which ruled as follows

Khwarezmian_Empire_1190_-_1220_%28AD%29.PNG


His army was not Pashtun.

This is Genghis Khan's Empire

Genghis_khan_empire_at_his_death.png


Again, he did not rule over Pashtun areas. Wrong again :cheers:
 
.
Pakistani media has misinterpreted it,” said the president’s deputy spokesman Seyamak Herawi.

“They only showed the first part when the president says Afghanistan will back Pakistan if there is a war.”

“Instead, the reference was to Afghanistan’s willingness to house refugees from Pakistan in case of any conflict, in the way that millions of Afghans are given refuge across the border in Pakistan’s northwestern frontier region.

“But in connection with the war on terrorism if there is a war on Pakistan, Afghanistan will not support that,” he further stated.

Dunya News:
 
. .
He wasn't any great leader like you've Bollywoodized him as. The Sikh Empire couldn't hold onto the Pashtun areas longer than a decade or two. The resistance was comprised of Pashtuns who did defeat the Sikh Empire on their territory (supplied by the British). If they did not, there would be no reason for the Sikh leadership to leave, would there? The same applied to anyone else that went to the area. So they did defeat Ranjit Singh's army. It was no different to the other invaders.

The Pushtuns acted as mercenaries of the British as they have done for most of history as mercenaries.

Doesn't take away anything from the greatness of the Sikhs and the Maharaja.

The frontier region was considered a buffer zone between the British influence to the East and Soviet influence to the West. It was prized for its strategic value. Otherwise there would be no point in launching the Anglo-Afghan wars. You really don't know much about this area at all.

Stating the obvious doesn't change what I mentioned. The British controlled the Pushtun areas politically. They would mete out collective punishments and many of their officers would get their training "hunting" (their words) in the tribal areas.

Pakistan continues to follow the same policies of collective punishment to the "lawless tribes" to this day. Doesn't mean the tribes are "independent".


Again, completely wrong. That is the bollywood drugged version.

The Sultan was part of the Khwarizm dynasty which ruled as follows

Khwarezmian_Empire_1190_-_1220_%28AD%29.PNG


His army was not Pashtun.

You need to read history again. The army of the Sultan was already crushed by Genghis. Jalal the coward ran to Afghanistan and built an army of Afghans by crying to them about the atrocities over the Muslim worship places and women in the mosques.

That was the army that Genghis crushed at the Sindhu. It was mainly an army comprised of the Afghans.

This is Genghis Khan's Empire

Genghis_khan_empire_at_his_death.png


Again, he did not rule over Pashtun areas. Wrong again :cheers:

He didn't bother much with the useless Pushtun areas that had nothing and that continues to this day.

He crushed the Afghans and went back.
 
.
what was the need for him to comment like this...he shud stop talking about war and concentrate more on rebuilding of Afghan which is difficult without active cooperation from India and US.

Good relationship with neighbour is good but not at cost of losing some useful allies...

we can take above as joke only...:D

and it is not misinterprated as i have seen the whole interview.........
& Mr karzai did this to gain some popularity in Pakistan or to make Pakistanis happy
 
.
Pakistani media has misinterpreted it,” said the president’s deputy spokesman Seyamak Herawi.

“They only showed the first part when the president says Afghanistan will back Pakistan if there is a war.”

“Instead, the reference was to Afghanistan’s willingness to house refugees from Pakistan in case of any conflict, in the way that millions of Afghans are given refuge across the border in Pakistan’s northwestern frontier region.

“But in connection with the war on terrorism if there is a war on Pakistan, Afghanistan will not support that,” he further stated.

Dunya News:


I knew he would say that later. Although media did not misinterpret it...
 
.
The Pushtuns acted as mercenaries of the British as they have done for most of history as mercenaries.

Doesn't take away anything from the greatness of the Sikhs and the Maharaja.

What was great about him? He was a regular invader that played on the Pashtun infighting that was occuring at the time.

For example Ranjit Singh's General, another Hari Singh, used soldiers from Pashtun tribes with loyalty to Shuja. The British financially supported the Sikhs in the Auckland agreement.

Were they mercenaries? no. The British initially supported the Sikhs as per the Auckland agreement. Circumstances led them to trade arms with the Pashtuns later but there was no invasion of other territories launched on behalf of the British.

This all backfired on the Sikh leadership during the Anglo-Sikh wars that followed.

Stating the obvious doesn't change what I mentioned. The British controlled the Pushtun areas politically. They would mete out collective punishments and many of their officers would get their training "hunting" (their words) in the tribal areas.

Pakistan continues to follow the same policies of collective punishment to the "lawless tribes" to this day. Doesn't mean the tribes are "independent".

The tribal territories were independent. They're even described as independent at the time. In fact it was more than only the tribal territories that were independent. Here is a quote from Record of Frontier Expeditions

3. The Country of the Independent Tribes. - Turning to the mountainous region between the settled districts and Afghanistan, to the extreme north lies the agency of Dir, Swat and Chitral. Chitral itself consists of a narrow valley enclosed between rugged mountains. Below Chitral are found the thickly timbered forests of Dir and Bajour, and the fertile y valles of the Panjkora and Swat rivers. Between this agency and the Khyber Pass lie the Mohmand hills, a rough country with but little cultivation, under the political control of Peshawar. West and south-west of the Khyber again is the country of the Afridis and the Orakzais. The boundary of the province here follows the line of the Safed Koh, which overlooks the Afridi Tirah and the upper Kurram valley. Dotted with towered hamlets and stately chinas groves the valley of the Kurram runs south-east from the Peiwar Kotal (below the great peak of Sikaram), past Thal in the Miranzai valley, through the southern Kohat hills to Bannu. South of the Kurram is the Tochi valley, separating it from Waziristan, an isolated mountainous district bounded on the south by the Gomal and the gorges that lead to the Wana plain. The lower ridges of the frontier mountain system are usually bare and treeless, but here and there, as in the Kaitu valley, in northern Waziristan and round Kaniguram in the south, are forest clad and enclose narrow but fertile and well-irrigated dales. In places, too, as, for instance, round Shawal, the summer grazing ground of the Darwesh Khel Waziris, aria on the slopes of Pir Ghol, there is good pasturage and a fair sprinkling of deodars. The valleys of the Tochi and Wana are both fertile, but are very different in character. The former is a long narrow valley, with a rich fringe of cultivation bordering the river; the latter is a wide open alluvial plain, cultivated only on one side, and for the rest rough stony waste. South of the Gomal the Suliman Range culminates in the famous Takht-iSuliman in the Largha Sherani country, a political dependency of Dera Ismail Khan district. The Kaisargarh peak of the Takht-iSuliman is II,300 ft. above sea-level.

You need to read history again. The army of the Sultan was already crushed by Genghis. Jalal the coward ran to Afghanistan and built an army of Afghans by crying to them about the atrocities over the Muslim worship places and women in the mosques.

That was the army that Genghis crushed at the Sindhu. It was mainly an army comprised of the Afghans.

You're so confused. Probably beyond help.

The Afghans you refer to were not Pashtuns. The Khwarizm Empire (of Sultan Jalal) extended into North and west (herat) Afghanistan only. His Empire did not extend into Pashtun areas.

He didn't bother much with the useless Pushtun areas that had nothing and that continues to this day.

He crushed the Afghans and went back.

You sound like some Pashtun made you his manservant. Stop being so emotional.
 
. .
What was great about him? He was a regular invader that played on the Pashtun infighting that was occuring at the time.

For example Ranjit Singh's General, another Hari Singh, used soldiers from Pashtun tribes with loyalty to Shuja. The British financially supported the Sikhs in the Auckland agreement.

Were they mercenaries? no. The British initially supported the Sikhs as per the Auckland agreement. Circumstances led them to trade arms with the Pashtuns later but there was no invasion of other territories launched on behalf of the British.

This all backfired on the Sikh leadership during the Anglo-Sikh wars that followed.

Of course the Sikhs used some of the Afghan/Pushtun mercenaries as well. They have always been available to the highest bidder. Even the USA bought them by the kilo during the 2001 war on the cowardly Talibunnis.

Good that you reminded me of the great warrior Hari Singh Nalwa.

Hari Singh won significant victories against the Afghans and was instrumental in capturing Multan, Peshawar, Jamrud and the Khyber pass. In fact he conquered the entire present day West Pakistan. The Pathans and the Afghans suffered a series of defeats against him. So great was his fear among the Afghan ******* that Afghan mothers would put their children to sleep with the words Raghe hari Singh( Hari Singh is coming). He was certainly the bravest of the brave.

The tribal territories were independent. They're even described as independent at the time. In fact it was more than only the tribal territories that were independent. Here is a quote from Record of Frontier Expeditions

3. The Country of the Independent Tribes. - Turning to the mountainous region between the settled districts and Afghanistan, to the extreme north lies the agency of Dir, Swat and Chitral. Chitral itself consists of a narrow valley enclosed between rugged mountains. Below Chitral are found the thickly timbered forests of Dir and Bajour, and the fertile y valles of the Panjkora and Swat rivers. Between this agency and the Khyber Pass lie the Mohmand hills, a rough country with but little cultivation, under the political control of Peshawar. West and south-west of the Khyber again is the country of the Afridis and the Orakzais. The boundary of the province here follows the line of the Safed Koh, which overlooks the Afridi Tirah and the upper Kurram valley. Dotted with towered hamlets and stately chinas groves the valley of the Kurram runs south-east from the Peiwar Kotal (below the great peak of Sikaram), past Thal in the Miranzai valley, through the southern Kohat hills to Bannu. South of the Kurram is the Tochi valley, separating it from Waziristan, an isolated mountainous district bounded on the south by the Gomal and the gorges that lead to the Wana plain. The lower ridges of the frontier mountain system are usually bare and treeless, but here and there, as in the Kaitu valley, in northern Waziristan and round Kaniguram in the south, are forest clad and enclose narrow but fertile and well-irrigated dales. In places, too, as, for instance, round Shawal, the summer grazing ground of the Darwesh Khel Waziris, aria on the slopes of Pir Ghol, there is good pasturage and a fair sprinkling of deodars. The valleys of the Tochi and Wana are both fertile, but are very different in character. The former is a long narrow valley, with a rich fringe of cultivation bordering the river; the latter is a wide open alluvial plain, cultivated only on one side, and for the rest rough stony waste. South of the Gomal the Suliman Range culminates in the famous Takht-iSuliman in the Largha Sherani country, a political dependency of Dera Ismail Khan district. The Kaisargarh peak of the Takht-iSuliman is II,300 ft. above sea-level.

They are independent even now? The same rules of collective punishments apply to the lawless tribes even now.

You're so confused. Probably beyond help.

The Afghans you refer to were not Pashtuns. The Khwarizm Empire (of Sultan Jalal) extended into North and west (herat) Afghanistan only. His Empire did not extend into Pashtun areas.

Jalal ran like a coward from his kingdom after his army was crushed and his father (the Sultan) died running from the Mongol generals. He created a new army of Afghans away from his former empire in Afghanistan. How hard is that to understand?

You sound like some Pashtun made you his manservant. Stop being so emotional.

I am fed up the fairy tales that you people try to pass as history.
 
.
Of course the Sikhs used some of the Afghan/Pushtun mercenaries as well. They have always been available to the highest bidder. Even the USA bought them by the kilo during the 2001 war on the cowardly Talibunnis.

Good that you reminded me of the great warrior Hari Singh Nalwa.

Hari Singh won significant victories against the Afghans and was instrumental in capturing Multan, Peshawar, Jamrud and the Khyber pass. In fact he conquered the entire present day West Pakistan. The Pathans and the Afghans suffered a series of defeats against him. So great was his fear among the Afghan ******* that Afghan mothers would put their children to sleep with the words Raghe hari Singh( Hari Singh is coming). He was certainly the bravest of the brave.

Is that the Bollywood version?

He did conquer some areas of modern day khyber pakhtunkhwa through good timing, infighting amongst Pashtuns, better weapons (though also lost them again very quickly), but the rest is the drugged up version.

They are independent even now? The same rules of collective punishments apply to the lawless tribes even now.

I have no idea what you're on about. You said Pashtun areas were not independent when the British were in the subcontinent. I showed they were. That was all. Now quite a few of the areas fall under FATA, though not all.

Jalal ran like a coward from his kingdom after his army was crushed and his father (the Sultan) died running from the Mongol generals. He created a new army of Afghans away from his former empire in Afghanistan. How hard is that to understand?

He wasn't a Pashtun. You don't seem to get this point.
 
.
Just to put rest to your confused mind on the last point.

This is Sultan Jalal's biography

Jalal ad-Din (or Jelal ad-Din) (Uzbek: Jaloliddin Manguberdi) Mingburnu, also known as Mengübirti[citation needed] or Manguberdi (Turkish: Mengü verdi[citation needed]; Godgiven) or Minkburny[citation needed] in the east (Persian: جلال الدین منگبرنی) was the last ruler of the Khwarezmid Empire. Following the defeat of his father, Ala ad-Din Muhammad II by Genghis Khan in 1220, Jelal ad-Din Manguberdi came to power but he rejected the title shah that his father had assumed and called himself simply sultan. Due to the Mongol invasion and sacking of Samarkand, he was forced to flee to India with an escort of only five thousand men. At the river Indus however, the Mongols caught up with him and killed his forces and thousands of refugees at the Battle of Indus. He escaped and sought asylum in the Sultanate of Delhi. Iltumish however denied this to him in deference to the relationship with the Abassid caliphs.

he took his forces from Samarkand to the Indus where he was defeated.

Neither was Jalal a Pashtun, nor were his Army Pashtuns. They were from Samarkand or the Khwarizm Empire.

(note the word India in the above means modern day Pakistan, it is the drugged up Bollywood version).
 
.
Is that the Bollywood version?

He did conquer some areas of modern day khyber pakhtunkhwa through good timing, infighting amongst Pashtuns, better weapons (though also lost them again very quickly), but the rest is the drugged up version.

You seem quite a fan of Bollywood. Even though it doesn't make Pashto or Dari movies as far as I know. ;)

They are all facts. Of course "Pushtuns have never been defeated in history" brigade doesn't like facts very much.

I have no idea what you're on about. You said Pashtun areas were not independent when the British were in the subcontinent. I showed they were. That was all. Now quite a few of the areas fall under FATA, though not all.

They were not administered directly but through the policy of collective punishments and airplane bombings as I have already said. The same policies continue now.

He wasn't a Pashtun. You don't seem to get this point.

Just to put rest to your confused mind on the last point.

This is Sultan Jalal's biography

Jalal ad-Din (or Jelal ad-Din) (Uzbek: Jaloliddin Manguberdi) Mingburnu, also known as Mengübirti[citation needed] or Manguberdi (Turkish: Mengü verdi[citation needed]; Godgiven) or Minkburny[citation needed] in the east (Persian: جلال الدین منگبرنی) was the last ruler of the Khwarezmid Empire. Following the defeat of his father, Ala ad-Din Muhammad II by Genghis Khan in 1220, Jelal ad-Din Manguberdi came to power but he rejected the title shah that his father had assumed and called himself simply sultan. Due to the Mongol invasion and sacking of Samarkand, he was forced to flee to India with an escort of only five thousand men. At the river Indus however, the Mongols caught up with him and killed his forces and thousands of refugees at the Battle of Indus. He escaped and sought asylum in the Sultanate of Delhi. Iltumish however denied this to him in deference to the relationship with the Abassid caliphs.

he took his forces from Samarkand to the Indus where he was defeated.

Neither was Jalal a Pashtun, nor were his Army Pashtuns. They were from Samarkand or the Khwarizm Empire.

(note the word India in the above means modern day Pakistan, it is the drugged up Bollywood version).

Of course Jalal was not a Pushtun! The Pushtuns have mostly fought as mercenaries and the leaders have been others.

This biography is missing the part that Jalal assembled an Afghan army after coming to Afghanistan after the death of his father. Most of his army that got slaughtered at Sindhu was made of Afghans. Of course the coward Jalal ran away from this battle as well, leaving the Afghan mercenaries to be slaughtered by the Mongols.

This coward also sacked a few Pakistani (then India, there was no Pakistan before 1947) Muslim/Afghan cities.
 
.
With given issues at hand aren't the other factions losing this battle greatly!!!!
The US is actually winning compare to your old logic, kicking out the soviets or no man can rule this land!!!!!!!!

You are boxed in and that box is becoming smaller each day, so back to the drawing board because terrorist tactics is out of the ball field now!!!!!!!!! What is the new plan???

Where have you been living? Go read up a little.......
 
.
If in the unlikely event america and pakistan got into war this karzai would get out of afghanistan pretty quickly I would say and run as far away from the region. lol
 
.
Back
Top Bottom