Lonewarrior
First Class Star
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2016
- Runs
- 3,419
I welcome the suggestion from US, India should send its troops to Afghanistan .....
-
Contact the PP Team
US wants India to be Involved in Afghanistan
- Thread starter Lonewarrior
- Start date
I welcome the suggestion from US, India should send its troops to Afghanistan .....
IAJ
ODI Star
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2008
- Runs
- 33,043
- Post of the Week
- 1
Why should Pakistan stop supporting Taliban if Taliban come to power in a legitimate way? Moreover why did US negotiate with Taliban in first place?
Ahmad-GERMANFC
Local Club Regular
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2016
- Runs
- 1,653
How can USA ask another country to stop relations with an organization which the US is actively in negotiations with
The Taliban can do whatever they want in their country providing they do not support terrorism in Pak. The American's are no one to lecture the Talban what to do. India would be wise not to mess with the Taliban who have defeated America. In such an event the Taliban may get involved in IoK too.
FastBowlingAllrounder
Tape Ball Star
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2018
- Runs
- 802
Provided they do not support terrorism in Pakistan OR Afghanistan.
Looks like India never took that lesson to begin with?
The last accusation I will believe about India is first/initiator of provocation. India has been purely defensive since independence to criminal levels. It keeps getting pushed by its neighbors to defend and react.
Giannis
First Class Player
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2019
- Runs
- 2,665
Indian soldiers couldn't last in a war, they haven't fought a war in 2 generations
India supported Mukhti Bahni during 1971 war. What ground does it have to talk about this 'good terrorist/bad terrorist' mantra when India itself has done the same thing?
India's support for MB has never been a secret. However, MB was never a regressive, oppressive and terrorist body like Taliban is. All of current Bangladesh (then WP) was fully behind it. Bangladesh commemorates support from India to this day.
You will not find many local Afghans asking for Taliban rule. Forget about commemoration, Afghan people hate Pakistan (the establishment) for reasons mentioned in this post.
So no, false equivalance.
Yes, they are your good terrorists. You are defending them by the parameters you have set for what you consider a good terrorist.
This is why you and India are in no place to lecture Pakistan or anyone else.
It does sound like by your own parameters the militants in Kashmir are good terrorists, but you would never acknowledge that.
You are using all sorts of deflection to not call out your country for supporting Taliban.
There have been 100s of threads on India, Kashmir, Bangladesh etc. This is not that thread. Your points have been discussed in detail.
Continuing on, you are posting some misleading arguments though. Afghani dislike for Pakistan has a lot more to do with the fact that they don't recognize the current borders. With respect to MB, you also left out the fact they killed a ton of innocent civilians.
To be clear, you are using deflection now since your initial point was proven to be hypocritical, and now you don't want anyone discussing the fact that you or India lecturing Pakistan on this is hypocritical.
No - open a thread on India & MB and India & Kashmir. Happy to discuss it there.
Not sure. Seems you are confusing them with Pakistan army.
you are mistaken about Afghans. They hate Pakistan more for taliban reasons.
Last edited:
Taliban represent the Pashtuns, who make up the majority of population in Afghanistan. The reason why Talibans still survived after all these years of US military presence is the ground level support they have in Pashtun areas of Afghanistan.
Northern alliance on the other hand is a group of outlaws and war lords like Dostam etc, who are notorious for being brutal and ruthless.
India has no relation or commonality with Afghanistan, it doesn’t even share a border. All it wants to do is to use Afghanistan to create anarchy in Pakistan. US may be calling out india to backfill their troops departure to some extent (so that they are not seen to be totally abandoning Afghanistan) but i dont think anything will come out of it.
Soon Indians will have ve to pack their bags and transport their Kalbhushans back to Bharat.
All I am saying is you are likely to get ignored unless you admit India is guilty of the same thing. Believe it or not, I have actually studied in depth what makes an argument relevant vs what does not. Being consistent in your arguments is relevant. What I am saying would be off topic if you admitted at some point that India is guilty of the same thing rather than defending India.
India are being thanked to this day in Bangladesh and Afghanistan for what we did. Pakistan is nothing but subject of hate in Afghanistan and also Bangladesh. Cant ignore that.
Last edited:
Like I said, your arguments are a mix of cherry picking, misrepresentation, and using your own parameters for what counts a good terrorist. This is why Indians generally get ignored when they make these types of arguments.
Just because you are claiming, it doesn’t make it reality.
Only the Darri speaking Afghan minority has some grievance towards Pakistan (mainly because it supported their opponents i.e Talibans). Pashtuns are cool with Pakistan and ve tribal relations with Pakistani Pashtuns. Just let the US forces leave Afghanistan and you will very quickly find out how the normal Afghanis feel about India.
Also Bangladeshis have no problem with Pakistan. I ve met many and have never come across any Bangladeshi who is anti-pakistan. On the other hand, their “love” for India was clearly visible in street protests during Modi’s recent visit.
Once the US leaves, we will find out how strong the Taliban are. I assume that the US will arm the former Northern Alliance to resist the Taliban.
It is not clear what the situation will be in a couple of years from now, the government in Kabul lasted about 3 years under Mohammad Najibullah after the Soviets left. So it is not clear that the government in Kabul will collapse immediately following the US withdrawal. Given that the Kabul government is not a pushover, an ally like India can be of some help. As India does not have a border with Afghanistan any help will have to flow through Iran or Russia/Uzbek/Kyrgyz/Tajik. Iran hates the US but it hates Taliban too (just like the Sunni Taliban hate the Shia Iran), so after the US withdrawal it is quite possible that Iran will try hard to prop up the anti-Taliban forces.
Pretty much the only source of weapons for the Taliban is Pakistan, as other major countries in the region like Iran and Russia are their enemies. Pakistan will have to make a choice. It has cultivated the Taliban for over twenty years. If the Taliban again starts expanding after the US withdrawal, there will be a lot of animosity towards Pakistan from the Western powers. Pakistan's precarious economic situation would make this rather foolhardy.
It is not clear what the situation will be in a couple of years from now, the government in Kabul lasted about 3 years under Mohammad Najibullah after the Soviets left. So it is not clear that the government in Kabul will collapse immediately following the US withdrawal. Given that the Kabul government is not a pushover, an ally like India can be of some help. As India does not have a border with Afghanistan any help will have to flow through Iran or Russia/Uzbek/Kyrgyz/Tajik. Iran hates the US but it hates Taliban too (just like the Sunni Taliban hate the Shia Iran), so after the US withdrawal it is quite possible that Iran will try hard to prop up the anti-Taliban forces.
Pretty much the only source of weapons for the Taliban is Pakistan, as other major countries in the region like Iran and Russia are their enemies. Pakistan will have to make a choice. It has cultivated the Taliban for over twenty years. If the Taliban again starts expanding after the US withdrawal, there will be a lot of animosity towards Pakistan from the Western powers. Pakistan's precarious economic situation would make this rather foolhardy.
Last edited:
All wrong. Your response is not even relevant to my point which is starring in your face.
Stewie
Test Debutant
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2008
- Runs
- 15,918
Let them do garam takor first for the bare knuckle mukkey from the Chinese army. Then they can go for a taliban administered phainti.
By the way taliban be to inhein chai bhi nahi poochni!
By the way taliban be to inhein chai bhi nahi poochni!
No need to wait for US departure to find this out. Its commonly reported (even on BBC) that the current Afghan government has not got much control beyond the boundaries of Kabul city.
There is a reason why Taliban stayed functional and intact after such a long deployment of US & Nato forces. There is a reason why US is negotiating with them and not the Northern alliance.
You can do 1+1 yourself.
Gharib Aadmi
First Class Star
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2018
- Runs
- 4,199
Why do they need to arm the Northern Alliance? They created the Afghanistan Army, which is now almost 20 years old. The Afghan Army has far more troops than the number of Taliban. If they cant beat the Taliban then that's Afghanistan's fault, not Pakistan's.
Stewie
Test Debutant
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2008
- Runs
- 15,918
The US has radicalized a generation of afghans by bombing and droning innocent civilians.
The pro Taliban sentiment in Afghanistan is severely underestimated. I hate them but those are facts. The country will be run over by mullas shortly.
The pro Taliban sentiment in Afghanistan is severely underestimated. I hate them but those are facts. The country will be run over by mullas shortly.
Russia has repositioned and compromised with Taliban. They were paying them bounties for american troops.
Afghanistan is back to stone age. Unfortunately, that sorry fate is now sealed. We should pack our bags from there.
Technics 1210
Test Debutant
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2019
- Runs
- 15,409
Amreekan government playing dirty politics again, no doubt this will be seen as a favour helping India out during the Covid pandemic.
Watch and learn folks, this is quid pro quo at the highest level.
Biden hasn't changed, he's still a warmonger at heart.
Watch and learn folks, this is quid pro quo at the highest level.
Biden hasn't changed, he's still a warmonger at heart.
Cpt. Rishwat
T20I Captain
- Joined
- May 8, 2010
- Runs
- 43,444
What is the need for India to get involved at all? Would you like it if other nations armed separatist groups in India?
Lonewarrior
First Class Star
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2016
- Runs
- 3,419
to indian posters, stick to the topic plz ..... thanks.
Cpt. Rishwat
T20I Captain
- Joined
- May 8, 2010
- Runs
- 43,444
It's possible to wish for democracy in Pakistan and leave what Afghans want up to them.
The Northern Alliance because Afghanistan isn't some modern egalitarian society in which ethnicity doesn't matter. The Tajiks, the Hazaras etc. remember what the Taliban did to them the last time they were in power. They are more likely to resist the Taliban than the Pashtuns. The loyalty of the Afghan Army to the current government is uncertain.
Justifiable if the current Afghan government asks for India's assistance in a situation where other foreign governments are supporting the opponents of the current Afghan government.
You negotiate with the enemy, not with your ally.
I said we will find out, maybe the Taliban will emerge victorious but their opponents will not be pushovers. The Taliban took 3 years to defeat Najibullah, and at that time Najibullah had no allies. They were also never able to overrun the Northern Alliance led by Masood. Also, given its precarious economic situation, it would be really stupid for Pakistan to further antagonize the West on Afghanistan.
Check back in 5 years to see this unfolds.
This was a fake story designed by the US Deep State to make Trump look on Russia prior to the elections.
Maybe, but I doubt the Taliban will be able to overcome the Tajiks in Northern Afghanistan. For one thing the Tajiks have a ready supply of weapons from neighboring Tajikistan. Russia has an interest in curbing the Taliban so that its fundamentalism doesn't spread further. Ditto for the mostly secular dictators of Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan etc. The Taliban are going to oppress the Shias like they did the last time, so count Iran in their list of enemies. Essentially the Taliban have only Pakistan in their corner, and maybe the Saudis and the Israelis (if they are thought to be a credible threat to Iran). This is the Mideast guys, countries do not decide on policies based on principles, there are all sorts of alliances to determine who is going to cut whose throat.
Even if the Taliban does secure the entire country, expect guerrilla movements from ethnicities like the Tajiks, Hazaras, Uzbeks (led by the survivor Dostum) etc.
Unfortunately for Afghanistan the war is going to continue. The difference will be that the US will be sitting on the sidelines arming its favored factions rather than having boots on the ground.
There will unfortunately be no peace as the country is fragmented on religious and ethnic lines. The Tajiks, Hazaras and Uzbeks are 40% of the population, and unlikely to accept Taliban Pashtun domination in the longer term.
Its is a risky thing to fake. Forces govt to show action against Russia. So hard to imagine US would plant this story.
Similar to how Modi would find it hard to say Pakistan involved in killing Indians - he would then be expected to follow through on counter-action which will be a lose-lose for him. Action is hard to execute and inaction would be politically untenable.
It is very risky, but they don't care.
This is what current Senate Majority Leader Schumer had to say after Trump tried to curb the Deep State early in his term.
“Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you,” Schumer told MSNBC's Rachel Maddow.
https://thehill.com/homenews/admini...ly-dumb-by-going-after-intelligence-community
Everybody who understands the way Russia works knew this was a fake story. The CIA has basically admitted it was fake.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/na...bounties-dead-u-s-troops-biden-admin-n1264215
You mean to say conspiracy theories are sometimes true?
Northern alliance is (a) In minority in Afghanistan. (b) Is not a commonality in itself. Infact its divided into fractions on ethnic basis, all of which have their divided areas in power share. (c) These ftactions were at odds with eacother before Taliban emerged.
Therefore they do not stand any chance against Talibans. Also remember that Afghanistan (esp Pashtuns) are relatively religion oriented group of people with their own tribal laws (jirga), so they are not necessarily opposed to Sharia law. Its more the case of West portraying implementation of Sharia law in a negative way.
As a matter of fact Taliban, when they were in power banned the cultivation of opium. This directly resulted in reduction of drug supply out of Afghanistan.
Source: https://www.tni.org/es/node/12050
In any case India has absolutely no stake in Afghanistan (or any genuine interest in welfare of ordinary Afghanis). If you are honest, you will admit that its just a venue for Indians to create mischief in Pakistan. Which not a good long term strategy.
India has much more commonality and shared cultural / historical / linguistic ties with Pakistani people. So in long term, its in India’s own interest to ve a better and cordial relationship with Pakistan.
cricket4all
Tape Ball Regular
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2015
- Runs
- 552
US weren’t successful so n Afghan and now want to use India to do their dirty work. If they that concerned why they legging it themselves? India can try too but full control and influence in Afghan isn’t easy. After 20 years the US have finally realised and packing shop,
India are creating mischief and terror in Balochistan, KP etc so they may try to get in bed with the so called current Afghan government to create more problems in Pakistan.
India are creating mischief and terror in Balochistan, KP etc so they may try to get in bed with the so called current Afghan government to create more problems in Pakistan.
Sure why not. It’s Afghans who will be suffering under Taliban.
Anything and everything can be dismissed as a conspiracy theory. You have to judge for yourself which one is true. If you make too many mistakes it is you who will lose the most, not someone else.
Giannis
First Class Player
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2019
- Runs
- 2,665
Pakistan already has Sharia, it's not uncommon for Islamic countries to have both a democratic electoral system and sharia law also it's funny you're asking a Muslim like [MENTION=18398]IAJ[/MENTION] if he doesn't want Sharia as if us Muslims agree with your Islamophobic definitions of Sharia.
gazza619
Test Debutant
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2012
- Runs
- 13,630
Dont think India would want its butt anywhere right now. May it be Kashmir, Balochistan, the Moon or Afghanistan.
Cpt. Rishwat
T20I Captain
- Joined
- May 8, 2010
- Runs
- 43,444
Exactly, and it's up to Afghans to get rid of Taliban if they are suffering, but if Taliban are still controlling vast swathes of Afghanistan despite the world powers trying to dislodge them, then maybe it's the govt forces Afghans feel have made them suffer.
Cpt. Rishwat
T20I Captain
- Joined
- May 8, 2010
- Runs
- 43,444
How is it justifiable? What is India's interest in Afghanistan? If you mean Pakistan when you talk about "other foreign governments" then Pakistan shares a massive border with Afghanistan and has to come to some form of co-operation with the ruling govt in Afghanistan. But that govt has to of course be representative and not some fringe regime which is propped up by alien military forces who have no common culture with the population of Afghanistan.
Generally speaking, the current government in Kabul is recognized as the sovereign government internationally, and as per the UN Charter the sovereign government of a country can request help from a foreign country like India.
"Pakistan shares a massive border with Afghanistan" doesn't matter, not supposed to interfere in internal affairs. If sharing a border would justify interference, then India would be justified in interfering in Pakistan and vice versa.
As per the UN Charter (to which Pakistan is a signatory) it is illegal to interfere in the domestic affairs of a country unless requested by its government.
"govt has to of course be representative and not some fringe regime" fair enough if that rather than the UN Charter is your standard, but a Taliban government can't be considered representative as it would be one that came to power using arms supplied a foreign country. At least 40% of the Afghan population is Uzbek, Tajik and Hazara who generally do not support the Pashtun Taliban.
In its desire to play the "great geopolitical game" Pakistan is once again causing itself damage by interfering in Afghanistan when it needs to fix its domestic economy.
Last edited:
KingKhanWC
World Star
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2010
- Runs
- 50,860
US wants to get out and leave Indian army there? lol
Indian army would be slaughtered by the resistance. Hopefully they wont be foolish enough to fall for this.
Indian army would be slaughtered by the resistance. Hopefully they wont be foolish enough to fall for this.
Its not up to the Afghans who have suffered enough in the hands of Taliban. Pakistan by supporting Taliban are indirectly pushing for Sharia in Afghanistan. If that happens, Pak will have blood on their hands. What Afghanistan need is freedom to express themselves and development. Specially for women.
Is there stoning for adultery? Are hands chopped off for thieves? We have seen enough footage of brutal punishments by Taliban. I am sure Pakistan has none of that. So why do you lie that Pakistan already has Sharia?
Colorblind Genius
First Class Captain
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2019
- Runs
- 4,208
- Post of the Week
- 3
What Happens To Afghanistan Once American Forces Leave?
In my opinion, there will be infighting for power between various groups that will lead to lots of chaos, and some sorta of a civil war.
I think it's probably obvious to many.
The question is, should Pakistan allow Afghanis once again to enter into Pakistan, freely use Pakistan's resources, and then defame Pakistan in every international venue with full vengeance and hate?
OR,
Afghanistan's old and faithful friend, India, should step up, and start taking the Afghan refugees by millions?
Is it the best time to test India Afghanistan friendship and alliance?
In my opinion, there will be infighting for power between various groups that will lead to lots of chaos, and some sorta of a civil war.
I think it's probably obvious to many.
The question is, should Pakistan allow Afghanis once again to enter into Pakistan, freely use Pakistan's resources, and then defame Pakistan in every international venue with full vengeance and hate?
OR,
Afghanistan's old and faithful friend, India, should step up, and start taking the Afghan refugees by millions?
Is it the best time to test India Afghanistan friendship and alliance?
I wonder if its the Bihar regiment, that has caught the attention of US. The have already proven their mettle against Chinese PLA in Laddakh recently.
KingKhanWC
World Star
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2010
- Runs
- 50,860
RSS regiment might be called up, those sticks along with khaki shorts & white shirts are intimidating enough.
Over 40 nations, the most advanced military alliance in the history of warfare landed in one of the most poorest nations on Earth. 20 years later, all are leaving defeated, making it the greatest victory for a resistance in hundreds of years.
Its best Indian stay home and watch Bollywood.
You do understand that the US lost in Afghanistan because they tried to fight a civilized war. Genghis Khan tamed the Afghan, but his method was to chop off the heads off all males taller than a wagon wheel.
Afghans cannot be defeated by a civilized war, only someone brutal like Genghis or Saddam can defeat them.
KingKhanWC
World Star
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2010
- Runs
- 50,860
Your ignorance is expected as an Indian. US & its allies wiped out whole villages when they couldnt fight on the ground. It was the opposite, most mass murder with huge weapons over 20 years in history.
Nobody can defeat Afghans, so asking the Indians is like asking a hamster to kill a tiger.
I think all Indians inc yourself know its best your army stays home to watch Bollywood.
Manunited18
First Class Star
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2019
- Runs
- 3,206
Agree, it's a curse for anyone who attacks the land of Afghanistan, both Ussr and the yanks have been brought to their knees
I am pretty sure if the US wiped out in Saddam's Army in a couple of weeks they could have defeated any Taliban Army. Actually they did defeat the Taliban Army in a week, with the Taliban fighting back with IEDs etc. Conquerors like Hitler, Saddam, Genghis etc. were brutal with the civilians. Hitler had a policy of executing 10 or more civilians if one German soldier was killed. Such tactics are not keeping with the US Army's standards of civilized behavior, but if they had been followed no doubt the local population would have turned against the Taliban.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kragujevac_massacre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1_May_1944_Kaisariani_executions
Such tactics enabled most areas occupied by the Germans to be "pacified".
Anyway, please continue with your delusions but don't expect any replies from me unless you have something intelligent to say.
Last edited:
KingKhanWC
World Star
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2010
- Runs
- 50,860
Did you even bother reading my post.
https://www.wired.com/2011/01/25-tons-of-bombs-wipes-afghan-town-off-the-map/
This is not civilised in any sane humans mind. But I guess those who support occupation in places such as Afghanistan or Kashmir think its fine.
40+ nations with airpower like never before and you're crying over IEDs .
There is a thread on Afghanistan, if you really want to debate the heroics of the invaders in your mind.
But Im glad you're not spouting support of any Indian army in Afghanistan, we both know the 'uncivilised' resistance will make mince meat of the 'civilised' Bharat army.
Indians have enough experience with Afghans over the centuries. You should know.
Civil
Local Club Star
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2005
- Runs
- 1,804
Agree with you. Terms like "civilized" etc should not be used in war analysis. After all it is war. People are flying into a backward country and murdering people under guise of freedom etc.
Add to that when the USSR slaughtered Afghan civilians in the millions, it still did not bend the Afghan spirit.
What always astonishes me is the radio free Europe article on how a huge number of afghans don't even know what September 11 attacks are! considering that was the justification for US entering their country and still these guys fight.
Last edited:
street cricketer
Test Debutant
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2015
- Runs
- 15,677
- Post of the Week
- 7
That Afghanistan has never been conquered by an outsider is an oft repeated line by people who are not serious readers of history. It is true to an extent from the 18th century onwards, but Afghanistan in its history has seen plenty of conquests and influences from outside since time immemorial. I know people love to think such things fuelled by ethnic or religious chauvinism, but there's not a single territory on earth than has not seen conquests from the outside, it's silly to believe so.
Also what constitutes victory and defeat is arguable. Saying Afghans successfully defeated the US and drove out the Americans is a bit like Indian nationalists saying Indians successfully defeated and drove out the Brits during independence. Unlike say the Mughals who invaded India and established their dynasty within India itself while mingling with the local population, western powers generally invaded territories for their resources and colonisation throughout their history and the Brits only left because owning a colony because unsustainable monetary wise after the world war, which is pretty much why the Americans are leaving as maintaining their army in Afghanistan has been taking a toll on them monetarily.
Both the Americans and the Soviet Union possessed weapons in the 70s that were capable of flattening nations with far powerful armies in an outright war than Afghanistan had, nevermind about now. It's even arguable though if the US ever wanted to win the war in Afghanistan, as a lot of the critics of US say keeping the war running in Afghanistan was beneficial to its military industrial complex. Just surviving after expelling the conquerors is not a sign of victory. The sign of good empire is its ability to defend itself from invasions and not expel them after decades. The Afghans don't have to look anywhere except to their east. Pakistan was a region where the Afghans generally held military superiority over through the middle ages. Yet, despite Afghanistan remaining largely independent for a long time unlike Pakistan, India or Bangladesh, Pakistan has managed to develop a modern army capable of defending itself from invasions and have achieved nuclear capabilities.
Empires always run in cycles and those empires that were powerful in the middle ages are largely irrelevant now. Babur came from what is present day Uzbekistan but it's an inconsequential country now in the larger scheme of things and certainly has a much weaker army than India and Pakistan (not sure about Bangladesh). The Mongols repeatedly routed the Chinese in the middle ages but are decades behind the Chinese in development, technological and military prowess while Mongolia is a glorified nomadic land. Afghanistan's real success would come if they're able to build (rebuild) their empire and become powerful enough to at least defend itself from outside conquests like their neighbours Pakistan and Iran.
Also what constitutes victory and defeat is arguable. Saying Afghans successfully defeated the US and drove out the Americans is a bit like Indian nationalists saying Indians successfully defeated and drove out the Brits during independence. Unlike say the Mughals who invaded India and established their dynasty within India itself while mingling with the local population, western powers generally invaded territories for their resources and colonisation throughout their history and the Brits only left because owning a colony because unsustainable monetary wise after the world war, which is pretty much why the Americans are leaving as maintaining their army in Afghanistan has been taking a toll on them monetarily.
Both the Americans and the Soviet Union possessed weapons in the 70s that were capable of flattening nations with far powerful armies in an outright war than Afghanistan had, nevermind about now. It's even arguable though if the US ever wanted to win the war in Afghanistan, as a lot of the critics of US say keeping the war running in Afghanistan was beneficial to its military industrial complex. Just surviving after expelling the conquerors is not a sign of victory. The sign of good empire is its ability to defend itself from invasions and not expel them after decades. The Afghans don't have to look anywhere except to their east. Pakistan was a region where the Afghans generally held military superiority over through the middle ages. Yet, despite Afghanistan remaining largely independent for a long time unlike Pakistan, India or Bangladesh, Pakistan has managed to develop a modern army capable of defending itself from invasions and have achieved nuclear capabilities.
Empires always run in cycles and those empires that were powerful in the middle ages are largely irrelevant now. Babur came from what is present day Uzbekistan but it's an inconsequential country now in the larger scheme of things and certainly has a much weaker army than India and Pakistan (not sure about Bangladesh). The Mongols repeatedly routed the Chinese in the middle ages but are decades behind the Chinese in development, technological and military prowess while Mongolia is a glorified nomadic land. Afghanistan's real success would come if they're able to build (rebuild) their empire and become powerful enough to at least defend itself from outside conquests like their neighbours Pakistan and Iran.
Third_Umpire
Tape Ball Captain
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2015
- Runs
- 1,290
Maybe India should be involved in India first, then worry about other countries.
It’s a sh show over there right now
It’s a sh show over there right now
Good points, the idea that the Afghans "defeated" the US or the Soviet Union is rather ridiculous.
Post-WW2 the Western countries (including the Soviet Union) have tried fighting "civilized wars" and that doesn't work. It is best not to start a war, but if you do then you should do whatever is necessary to end it on your terms.
A picture of a little girl running from a napalm bomb did great damage to the war effort by the US in Vietnam. The photo won a Pulitzer Prize, basically the US media was at war with the US government over Vietnam. There was going to be no victory for the US in this war.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phan_Thi_Kim_Phuc
Afghanistan has been serially conquered by Persians, Greeks, Mongols etc. The Sikhs under Maharaja Ranjit Singh, the Marathas and the British defeated the Afghans and captured their winter capital Peshawar and the Pashtuns have not been able to retrieve it to this day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Jamrud
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Peshawar_(1758)
Generally speaking, the reason Afghanistan has not been incorporated into larger empires is that it is a resource-poor mountainous region on the fringes of empires.
street cricketer
Test Debutant
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2015
- Runs
- 15,677
- Post of the Week
- 7
Not sure about this. Pashtuns have always lived in Peshawar and continue to do so in KPK. I'm sure you know this already.
Cpt. Rishwat
T20I Captain
- Joined
- May 8, 2010
- Runs
- 43,444
Pakistan has a similar population on their side of the border to the Afghan side, predominantly Pahstun, there has always been free movement between the two countries prior to the war on Afghanistan. Amazing that you call it interference by Pakistan despite their shared heritage with Afghans, and are in the same breath approving interference from alien bodies such as India and the Americans.
Cpt. Rishwat
T20I Captain
- Joined
- May 8, 2010
- Runs
- 43,444
Pakistan is in no position to push Sharia on Afghans, it is more likely the other way round. Just do some google image searches on both countries and tell me what you find. Do some research first otherwise I will assume you are trolling and won't be responding to any more willfully ignorant remarks.
Peshawar used to be the winter capital of the Afghans. The reason Peshawar is today in Pakistan rather than Afghanistan is that the British captured it and kept it as part of British India. Pakistan inherited it from the British.
street cricketer
Test Debutant
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2015
- Runs
- 15,677
- Post of the Week
- 7
That's true. But like Punjabis, Tamils and Bengalis, Pashtuns are an ethnic group who live in two countries separated by an international border. So it's perhaps not appropriate to say that Pashtuns lost Peshawar.
Cpt. Rishwat
T20I Captain
- Joined
- May 8, 2010
- Runs
- 43,444
It's appropriate if you don't believe Pakistan is a legitimate country. Which is fine, but then you should just say it instead of dancing round the subject because it would expose your true ideology.
The Pashtuns definitely lost Peshawar.
When we speak of the allegedly invincible Afghanistan or Taliban we are referring to the Pashtuns. It is the Pashtuns who have fought against the Iranians, Marathas, Sikhs and the British in recent times.
The Durranis were Pashtuns.
Peshawar was important to the Durranis.
Peshawar was captured by the Marathas following their victory over the Durranis in the Battle of Peshawar in 1758.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Peshawar_(1758)
The Durranis recaptured Peshawar in 1759.
Following his victory over the Emirate of Afghanistan in the Battle of Nowshera, Ranjit Singh captured Peshawar.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Nowshera
The Afghans were never able to recover Peshawar to this day, and it passed on to the British after they defeated the Sikh Empire, and to Pakistan after the exit of the British from the subcontinent.
Last edited:
The US, Pakistan, India, Iran etc. are all signatories to the UN Charter which says countries should not interfere in the domestic affairs of other sovereign countries unless asked by the internationally recognized government. "Shared heritage" is not a consideration.
The current internationally recognized government of Afghanistan wants India's help.
You may say that rather than the UN Charter we should look at heritage, ethnicity, what the people want etc. If you do that, there are still issues such as 40% of Afghanistan being Hazaras, Uzbeks and Tajiks who do not want the Taliban. If Taliban came to power in an elections it would be different, but they are committed to grabbing power by waging war.
Cpt. Rishwat
T20I Captain
- Joined
- May 8, 2010
- Runs
- 43,444
Pakistan's view as signatories will obviously carry more clout as they are the country which shares the border we are talking about. Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Iran will also have an important say re the minorites you are talking about as all those countries also share borders with Afghanistan. US and Indians can contribute to the discussion, but as outside aliens foreign to the culture of Afghans, they will need to compromise on some issues to come to an agreement. I think this is already happening and that is why Pakistan, Turkey et al are involved in peace talks.
street cricketer
Test Debutant
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2015
- Runs
- 15,677
- Post of the Week
- 7
See, if you put it like this, it makes sense. But you said the Pashtuns lost Peshawar which is not the correct way of saying it as all Afghans aren't Pashtuns and all Pashtuns aren't Afghans as well. Pashtuns still live in Peshawar like they always did centuries back, it's just that they don't have the Afghani nationality but the Pakistani nationality.
At the end of the day, issues are going to be decided by who wins the war rather than principles like the UN Charter or who has a legitimate right to interfere based on ethnicity, shared borders etc. That is the unfortunate truth about Afghanistan. Right now it appears that the Taliban is winning. However, it is likely that the victory will be pyrrhic. Within a few decades they will either destroy themselves by fighting with each other (everyone wants to be the boss), or will be defeated by the minorities who will be armed by similar ethnicity/religion neighboring countries.
I meant that if the Afghans were really invincible as some posters here believe, they would have taken Peshawar (their former winter capital) back. Yes, I think when people say invincible Afghans they are thinking of the Pashtuns.
Peshawar was fringe to empires like the Maratha Empire whose capital was in Pune, 2,000 kms from Peshawar, yet the Afghans lost Peshawar to Marathas. Though they recovered it, they lost it permanently to the Sikhs, who passed it on the British.
Given a choice, Peshawar would probably have returned to Afghanistan in 1947. But the British gave them the choice of joining either Pakistan or India. If they had the choice of joining Afghanistan or the Pashtun areas becoming an independent country, that would likely have won.
“Currently internationally recognised Afghan government”, you know what it actually is in reality!
So stop trolling, you gimmickry doesn’t change the ground reality. How ironic is it to see an indian preaching others about “grabbing power by waging war”.
Similar threads
