What's new

Indians force Imam to denounce Cow Qurbani

Lol. Who made that rule? You?

The point raised was Afghan mujahid coming into India. As I said, by all means. Whenever you feel like. Let's see how it works out for you.

You want them in india to fight them?

The rule is an observation which has stood the Test of Time.
 
.
Dude - you don't realize that Americans, Brits and Soviets were foreigners in an unfamiliar landscape. In the scenario you are painting, the Afghan "warriors" would be in unfamiliar terrain. Doubt they would last 48 hours.
Dude,

British, Soviets and Americans - each had numerous allies on the ground in Afghanistan, and still failed. They tried everything you can think of. They were just as confident as you are right now, at the start. Slowly but surely, it dawned on them that even hybrid tactics are not working.

The so-called Mujahideen who confronted USSR were not just Afghans; many of them were foreigners. They learned how to communicate with locals (Afghanistan and Pakistan), studied the landscape and drew battlefield plans accordingly. And Pakistan extended its help in whatever ways it could. Idea is to weaken and exhaust a conventional force in a protracted confrontation, until the opponent caves in.

In no way or form I am underestimating Indian conventional strength but it simply doesn't work against the kind of forces I am alluding to.

You should study Soviet - Afghan war in detail. You will see my point.

I have seen US - Afghan war up close, and what I see today is frustration. Even myself (as a neutral observer) - am frustrated. I do not want Afghan Taliban to win, but it is happening.
 
. .
Kashmir is a province of india.
if you believe that shit, but they are muslim majority so endia should keep their hindu rules away from there or just stop being "secular" which india isnt
 
.
You want them in india to fight them?

The rule is an observation which has stood the Test of Time.

So USA wasn't a superpower from 1945 through 2001? LOL. And Soviets weren't one from 1945 through 1979? Don't make stuff up.

Look at the conversation - it started with the assertion that Zia would send Afghan warriors into India. Zia might not be around, but I reckon no one is stopping you.
 
.
So USA wasn't a superpower from 1945 through 2001? LOL. And Soviets weren't one from 1945 through 1979? Don't make stuff up.

Look at the conversation - it started with the assertion that Zia would send Afghan warriors into India. Zia might not be around, but I reckon no one is stopping you.

I cannot walk you through history.

You made tall claims not i.
 
.
Dude,

British, Soviets and Americans - each had numerous allies on the ground in Afghanistan, and still failed. They tried everything you can think of. They were just as confident as you are right now, at the start. Slowly but surely, it dawned on them that even hybrid tactics are not working.

The so-called Mujahideen who confronted USSR were not just Afghans; many of them were foreigners. They learned how to communicate with locals (Afghanistan and Pakistan), studied the landscape and drew battlefield plans accordingly. And Pakistan extended its help in whatever ways it could. Idea is to weaken and exhaust a conventional force in a protracted confrontation, until the opponent caves in.

In no way or form I am underestimating Indian conventional strength but it simply doesn't work against the kind of forces I am alluding to.

You should study Soviet - Afghan war in detail. You will see my point.

I have seen US - Afghan war up close, and what I see today is frustration. Even myself (as a neutral observer) - am frustrated. I do not want Afghan Taliban to win, but it is happening.

I do not doubt the tenacity of the Afghan warrior. At the end of the day the Brit, American and Soviet soldier had no connection to the land. That matters a lot. The Vietnamese beat the Americans in Vietnam - you think the same Vietnamese soldiers would even put up any kind of fight if transplanted to Massachusetts? They would be wiped out. That's what makes Gurkhas different to anyone else. In world wars, in civil wars in Africa - anywhere and everywhere they have earned their spurs. You think if it comes to their own land, wouldn't they be even more ruthless?
 
. . . .
They are not choosing its being forced upon Kashmiris

Whole point of Partition was that we didn't have to care about hindu crap in muslim majority areas

Here is a direct example of hindu crap being senselessly enforced upon a muslim majority state
Deal with it, always singing partition and stuff. Kashmir is there to stay with India.
 
. .
What do you expect from this India where every few years the majority group go on a mini genocide of its minorities. Including the state. A country full of this huge boiling mass poverty and sectarian politics erupting at any time. Does not surprise me one bit of them persecuting there fellow “Indians” I used thevword INDIAN. That’s what they are not Pakistanis because of religion. Indians need to grow up and be educated on this. As a Pakistani Muslim I have that connection with them my family background has nothing in common with Indian culture I don’t understand it at all. Whose going to educate these slum dwellers on treating there fellow citizens as equal?
 
. .
Poor Afghans are legendary warriors who frustrated the British, USSR and now NATO.

They've been conquered by many, e.g the Khilafah, the Rai dynasty (funnily enough these guys came from southern Pakistan), the Ghaznavids, the Kushans (I know these two groups quickly assimilated into Afghanistan, but my point still stands), etc. The only reason you get certain groups like the Farsiwans or Arabs in Afghanistan is because Afghanistan has been conquered by foreigners.

They are good fighters, but let's not over-hype them.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom