The morass that is Afghanistan

The people of OIC countries are the unfortunate bunch since the end of colonialism. They were first saddled with the what seemed like a progressive secular leadership with Nasser in Egypt, to Sukarno in Indonesia and quite a few in between. However, these leaders turned out to be dictators as well. Compare this with India, which though led by an atheist, progressive and a socialist Nehru was if not any thing was a steadfast democrat. The entire Secular leadership of the OIC was also opposed to the creation of Israel, partly to curry favor with their otherwise marginalized mullahs and imams. This of course and their affinity to the socialism put them squarely on the opposing side of the ex western colonialists. The then Soviet union exploited the situation and offered political help against Israel. Their poor policies and internal corruption had accumulated to the extent that their own populaces became restive and clung to their swords and the Koran. This the ever awaiting in the shadows clergy took advantage so much so the simple little people are willing to buy all the delusions and glorious past the clergy were selling them. And so it has come to this pass. Afghanistan from the beginning say for past 3 - 4 hundred has not been a nation and they certainly do not want to be living in 21st century. The world should ignore the people who want to live in the 12th century. Just like we ignore the Amish, who still want to live in what is it 14th or 16th century. If we do that would be best for rest of the world. The most truck we need to keep with these countries is trade in some international currency, like Euro, or Yen or Dollar.

The history of Afghanistan in the last three centuries is one of competing forces for control of its territory.

This has gone on from the age of the Great Game by imperialists and colonialists to the age of the Great Game of Interventions and Invasions by "well-intentioned" external third parties for their national interests.

The "interests" the imperialists, colonialists, interventionists, invasionists in the pursuit of their national interest, are with the "intent" of the the greater good, the public good of the Afghans. And the good of Afghans and Aghanistan are further fractured and seemingly subsumed to the interests of external third parties, and at great costs to Afghans and Aghanistan.

The three decades of relentless conflicts deepened and widened the differences among the various factions in Afghanistan. The Karzai administration is compromised in effectiveness in meeting the "wants" of everyone from the US to the mullahs - all with their own vision and mission to forge a stable governance and civil society in Afghanistan. The credibility of the Karzai administration is also marred by allegations of mismanagement and corruption.

The Afghans are to be blamed and at fault for what happened to them from the time of the Soviet invasion in late 1979 to now due solely to their deluded belief in God and because of their adherence to Islam. That view may be swallowed easily and wholly with wine and cheese by some here. Bon appetit.

"WE THE PEOPLE"
..
..........-..
======+o+===========================+o+==;()
...........|..o..........................................................o..|
........... #..#..#..#..#.#..#..#..#..#....:..:..:..:..:...:..:..:.:
........... #..#..#..#..#.#..#..#..#..#....:..:..:..:..:...:..:..:.:
........... #..#..#..#..#.#..#..#..#..#....:..:..:..:..:...:..:..:.:
........... #..#..#..#..#.#..#..#..#..#....:..:..:..:..:...:..:..:.:
........... #..#..#..#..#..#..#..#..#.#..#..#..#..#..#..#..#.
........... #..#..#..#..#..#..#..#..#.#..#..#..#..#..#..#..#.
........... #..#..#..#..#..#..#..#..#.#..#..#..#..#..#..#..#.
........... #..#..#..#..#..#..#..#..#.#..#..#..#..#..#..#..#.
........... #..#..#..#..#..#..#..#..#.#..#..#..#..#..#..#..#.
........... #..#..#..#..#..#..#..#..#.#..#..#..#..#..#..#..#.
..
.
.Credit From "JJ"
.. http://onwapo.com

Continued from below:

By the way, what do you do with an Alchemist, in a debate. I am sure you won't feel obligated to be gentle with her about alchmistry to avoid her feelings do you. That would be unfair to you. Or for that matter all the King fans who claim he still lives on and did not die back in 1977. So Mr. Yousufi, just grow up and make your points and defend your positions without spewing personal invective. I put down Moses or Abraham with a Jewish or Christian, they don't start insulting me they try to defend their position on Moses and Abraham. You do the same.

Now coming to Pakistan where in the law are the minorities are protected. Regarding India while from time to time religious riots happen, the culprits are quite evenly distributed among all groups, it is not like its only the Hindu parties are always at wrong, there are plenty of time when the muslim groups are in the wrong. There are ample time the Muslim miscreants get away with their atrocities. The representation of Muslims in all walks of teh society is quite even to the % of the population. You don't have to take my word for it. The international reports attest to that.

The fact that there isn't a week goes by that a Shia mosque is not bombed in Pakistan speaks volumes. I pointed out the obvious lack of concern of your founding fathers to the possible plight of the leftover Muslims volumes. Also, the Muslim population of India in the past 63 years has only grown in proportion than any mass emigration, speaks highly of the pluralism of India. The very opposite is the case in Pakistan. SO please don't tell me that muslim are discriminated in India any more than any other average non-muslim.

Mr. Yousufi, you wrote "So called Athiests like you who cannot frame a single post without ridiculing religous dieties held sacred by people of belief deserve no respect, so I dont expect me to reconsider my opinion". But of course the parties of a debate will point out the contradictions, inconsistencies of the opponents positions and ridicule them. The other party comes back and ridicules, points out the inconsistencies. All this can be done without resorting to personal invective. For instance when there is debate on national economic policy, liberal might take the position for the support of mixed economic model, whereas a libertarian might hold the brief for laiseze fair model. Each is going to ridicule each others position. But neither is going to say she is hurt and start spewing invective at the opponent.

As an atheist I am going to ridicule your delusionary concepts of god, flying horses, virgin births, Jinns etc. You need to if you can support your truth claims with evidence or statistics, etc, etc. If you insist that I don't point the incongruencies of your concepts, then what am I going to debate with you. You are asking me to surrender, because your feelings are hurt. But then that is not a proper debate, when you are allowed to make your point but keeping me from making my own arguments. What do you think the liberal would say if the libertarian says liberal attack on his model as too hurtful. See I am the liberal and you are that whining libertarian. If you wish to whine at least bring some Brie. I need to run more for some lu au to come about the rest.

Secular,

So called Athiests like you who cannot frame a single post without ridiculing religous dieties held sacred by people of belief deserve no respect, so I dont expect me to reconsider my opinion. Your invectives were unprovoked and are indicitive of your hatefulness.

Frankly I do not understand what your argument is. You do not contest my claims that muslims and other minorities are subjugated by upper class Hindus in India. You say India is not perfect so these kind of things do go on and teh facist hindu parties do get a free pass in India to continue to terrorize minorities. Same goes with Pakistan. We aren't perfect either. But as far as I can remember there has never been a wholesale murder campaign launched against any minority group in Pakistan as they are done frequently in India against Muslims, Sikhs and Christians. The examples of muslims who have been successfull in India can be counted on fingers. The fact is muslims are under-represented in relation to their population in all walks of life be it Government Jobs, Parliamentary representation, education opportunities you name it. With regards to population transfer, equal number of muslims and hindus crossed over to Pakistan and India respectively.

Every Pakistani recognizes that it was wrong not to handover the Government to Awami League in 1971. We made a mistake back then. The founding fathers were not around to make that happen and Pakistan was under military rule. The Indians were also successfull in their nefarious plans of propping up a rebellion by arming and training the terrorist group mukti bahni. But if you ask me Bangladesh should have been a separate country from the begining. It was un natural to have two parts of the country so far apart with a hostile enemy in between. Thats why Inidans were able to play all their dirty tricks in East Pakistan. But if the Inidans thought that Bangladesh would be another of its satellite states like Nepal and Bhutan they were mistaken. Bangladesh clearly has an independent foriegn policy and doesn't take dictation from the Indians. Im happy for the Bangladeshi people. They have moved on quite well since 1971 and havent let Inidans dominate them.

I dont need to hear it from an Indian about the strides Pakistan has made since independence. We are a young nation, we've made mistakes but we have also achieved a lot along the way. And we're here to stay~!

Mr. Yousufi:
What is it with you theists of all stripes can't you respond to the issues raised, without getting personal invective? Using epithets such as "loud mouthed filthy bigot","(faux) Secular" only reflects poorly on you not me.

I have not claimed that India is perfect place to live, without prejudice and justice to all. At the same time there are whole slew of examples where the Muslims and other minorities have prospered without any limitations. The very fact that one of the most renowned nuclear scientist and architect of the nuclear program, who went on to become the president speaks volumes about the opportunity offered to minorities. When it comes to prejudice, there is lot to go around in India, against even the upper caste people. If you have read my posts you, I am sure, have seen that I take on people of the books of fairy tales of all stripes, not just Islamic kind.

Coming to the founding leaders of Pakistan, I have posed a question in my preceding post about them. I also predicted that you would duck that question as before. You have proven to everyone here that I am a good predictor when it comes to you ducking the question. Here is your another chance to tackle that question.

You wrote "With regards to Pakistan, our founding fathers rightly believed that muslims should have the right to rule in the areas where they were in majority". In a democracy the majority would definitely be ruling. That's how it works all over India. Unlike in Pakistan when Awami league won the federal elections, your Khakis did not allow it. That is when the Banga Bandhus kicked the Pthans and Punjabis off of Bangla Desh. What congress and other leaders wer not willing for the majority muslim areas to be put under Sharia, just because they happened to have say 51% of the population. The past 63 years of History of Pakkistan is lot more illustrative and speaks volumes about the founding bigots of Pakistan. They did not bother to incorporate any laws affirming the rights of minorities. That is why a 80% muslim country has become what is it 99% muslims with only a little more cohesion than the tribes of Afghanistan. Case in point is the your own coreligionists Shia, Ahmedis, Sufis, etc.

As to the great strides of Pakistan, less you talk about it the better off you are. The fact that Khakis are tempted to march on to the streets speaks lot more loudly than your platitudes.

oops.......sorry about the double post!

Yasser

Mr. (faux) Secular,

You are indeed a loud mouthed filthy bigot, because you believe that somehow by insulting the holy Prophet venerated by a quater of humanity in your self righteous pompous way, it makes you big. Whereas you're just another small minded wimp.

I have never ducked any question by you. Sometimes I ignore unworthy posts. You haven't bother to respond to the facts that I pointed out in my posts. Do you believe muslims facing daily humiliation, persecution and double standards at the hands of Indian state are thrilled they're living in India. How many Hindu's responsible for the killings of muslim after the Babri Mosque Demolition, or Gujrat Masscare or in Kashmir have been taken to task. Can anyone in India dare to take on BJP, VHP, Bajrang Dal, RSS and other hindu facists parties responsile for these murders. Isn't the Indian Supreme Court powerless against the combined might of these terrorist parties?

With regards to Pakistan, our founding fathers rightly believed that muslims should have the right to rule in the areas where they were in majority. If you read the history of India, it was never one country until the British conquered the whole sub-continent. They didn't call it sub-continent instead of a country without reason. Plus the traditional small mindedness of the Hindu Leadership, led by Nehru also contributed to the creation of Pakistan. The Mulsim League right till the 1940's was OK with United India being a confederation with semi autonomous states. But Nehru didnt want to share the prize and rule whole of India alone after the British left. That was when Muslim leaders decided their positions couldn't reconcile with the hegemonistic agenda of Congress Party. They won the case for Pakistan through sheer logic, without any bloodshed. And Pakistan has come a long way in 60 years. We had no industry, no civil infrastructure back then. The Indian Government didn't even give the Pakistani Government their due share out of the finances that should have been divided between the two countries. Still Pakistan survived. Back then we couldn't even produce safety pins. Now we make super sonic jets and loads of other stuff. We have the seventh largest army in the world in addition to being a nuclear armed state. So all your rhetoric of Pakistan failing as a nation are just empty words.

My predictions with regards to India are based on my study of History. Empires like India that are a hotchpotch of different countries dont last more than 70-80 years as was the case with USSR and Yugoslavia. Sure no think tank can predic when its gonna breakup. Did you hear any think tank predicting the breakup of USSR say 5 years before it actually happened?

Mr. (faux) Secular,

You are indeed a loud mouthed filthy bigot, because you believe that somehow by insulting the holy Prophet venerated by a quater of humanity in your self righteous pompous way, it makes you big. Whereas you're just another small minded wimp.

I have never ducked any question by you. Sometimes I ignore unworthy posts. You haven't bother to respond to the facts that I pointed out in my posts. Do you believe muslims facing daily humiliation, persecution and double standards at the hands of Indian state are thrilled they're living in India. How many Hindu's responsible for the killings of muslim after the Babri Mosque Demolition, or Gujrat Masscare or in Kashmir have been taken to task. Can anyone in India dare to take on BJP, VHP, Bajrang Dal, RSS and other hindu facists parties responsile for these murders. Isn't the Indian Supreme Court powerless against the combined might of these terrorist parties?

With regards to Pakistan, our founding fathers rightly believed that muslims should have the right to rule in the areas where they were in majority. If you read the history of India, it was never one country until the British conquered the whole sub-continent. They didn't call it sub-continent instead of a country without reason. Plus the traditional small mindedness of the Hindu Leadership, led by Nehru also contributed to the creation of Pakistan. The Mulsim League right till the 1940's was OK with United India being a confederation with semi autonomous states. But Nehru didnt want to share the prize and rule whole of India alone after the British left. That was when Muslim leaders decided their positions couldn't reconcile with the hegemonistic agenda of Congress Party. They won the case for Pakistan through sheer logic, without any bloodshed. And Pakistan has come a long way in 60 years. We had no industry, no civil infrastructure back then. The Indian Government didn't even give the Pakistani Government their due share out of the finances that should have been divided between the two countries. Still Pakistan survived. Back then we couldn't even produce safety pins. Now we make super sonic jets and loads of other stuff. We have the seventh largest army in the world in addition to being a nuclear armed state. So all your rhetoric of Pakistan failing as a nation are just empty words.

My predictions with regards to India are based on my study of History. Empires like India that are a hotchpotch of different countries dont last more than 70-80 years as was the case with USSR and Yugoslavia. Sure no think tank can predic when its gonna breakup. Did you hear any think tank predicting the breakup of USSR say 5 years before it actually happened?

Continued from below:

You said "Atleast we do not have such sick minded mideval traditions". Existence of pakistan is premised on the sick evil superstition handed by an illiterate bedouin. How else do you characterize Hudood, & blasphemy laws.

Regarding the break up of India, that has been your Khakis pipe dream at least till 1971 I thought, looks like it still permeates through the body politic of Pakistan from what you have blabbed above. Why don't you take that opinion of your and pedal it to any think tank out side of the paradise of the pure and see how much currency it gets. This is not to say India does not have problems, far from it. It is the largest democracy, it has muddled through for nearly 63 years and not once absolutely not even once was the military ordered into the streets, unlike in that splendid paradise of the pure. As best as I can recall, once before Ayub Khan, the the second time by Ayub Khan, followed by the Great Yahya Khan. Then of course the veritable pious Zia ul Haq, and the most recent is of course that sly Musharaff. How long before Ashfaq Kayani, or Tariq Maji will again take over, now that it is clear the Mr. 10% Zardari just as corrupt as he always been.

Mr. Yousufi, first of all I am not a Hindu, much less a bigoted one. Pakistan started out as a geographic anomaly. In any case that did not last but 24 years, when your khakis could not tolerate the majority, the eastern half of the country. So despite the common religion it split up. The country that was born out of pretext that they would be oppressed, did not even think of the significant portion of the muslims that were going to be left behind in secular India. What of them, even a smaller minority of mulims in proportionately larger Hindu population. Your founding fathers did not care about them. They were only concerned with them being big fish in some pond. I have posed this question before and you ducked it and I am sure you will duck this time too. Besides your founding fathers who claimed that the muslims would be oppressed in undivided India, did not care to make any provisions for the minorities that would be amongst them. No wonder most of the minorities have voted with their feet and completely left the paradise of the pure.

However, abhorrent and regrettable the atrocities against Muslims are they are done by people of faith not by the secularists like me. Despite that India Boasts of 4 Muslim presidents and a few non-minority PMs and a host of CMs, Governors, and of course several high officials who are of non-majority religions, or even just atheists. In fact some of the richest folks are also from Non-majority religions. This include the Khans in the movie industry, Asim Premji is arguably the richest man in India.

When compared to Pakistan and any of the 47 OIC countries any other country in the world would be considered a bastion of secularism and democracy. Your most enlightened OIC countries, Malaysia, & Indonesia hold their minority citizens very openly as second class citizens, under law. Compared to Pakistan India is light years ahead.

Secular, I dont have to prove to the legitimacy of Pakistan to a hindu bigot. Its the ultimate fetish of every Indian to deligitimize Pakistan, your fellow Indian Aseem Shukla is a case in point.

What do you say about those muslims butchered in the streets of Mumbai after the Babri mosque demolition. Or those massacres in Gujrat, or the daily crimes against humanity by Indian Army against Kashmiris? Sure those people are just ecstatic they're living in India. Heck what about the 250 million Untouchables of India? Aren't they sick of the lives they're living in under the rule of upper class hindus? Atleast we do not have such sick minded mideval traditions. Thank God we have a country of our own however faulty it is. You should worry about your own backyard. Last time I checked out there was a full scale insurgency going on in 16 out of your 27 provinces. How long do you think your army can survive these internal battles? The Maoist rebels have said in 20 years they will break up India. I think they're being generous. 20 years is way too much.

Yasseryusofi, you wrote, "This war has caused indescribable damage to Pakistan. Before the Afghan occupation there was never any suicide bombing in Pakistan, just like there was no suicide bombing in Iraq before occupation. But after Pakistan was forced into becoming a front line ally to this war, we have suffered more than any other nation even though we didnt put our troops in Afghanistan."

Pakistan had been a failed state long, long ago. The sunni bombing of shia & Ahmedi mosques was not prompted by the invasion. It is prompted by the Sunni amongst you who don't want any diversity. Your nation was born off the most baser instincts of man. Large enough numbers of bigots were not willing to live in a majority Hindu country, so they wanted a separate country. The specious claim was they would be discriminated.

The result of their bigotry, is that Shia & Ahmedis in Pakistan now would prefer to have stayed on in India than have become pat of Pakistan.

Al-Qaida is just two guys holed out in the mountains of Afghanistan. What the Americans and the 20 plus alliance of super duper mighty millitary powers, (all of them Christian I might add) have been fighting and killing for the last whole decade are Afghanis resisting the brutal occupation of their country. Its every bit as just a resistance as was europeans fighting back nazi occupiers of their country. Either both of them are wrong or both of them are right. You cant make different rules for us because we're muslims.

Ironically a lot of these people fighting the americans were actually trained by CIA in bomb making and planting land mines. They were lionized in popular hollywood flicks as 'mujahideen' fighting against the brutal occupation of the mighty Soviets with their outdated medieval weaponry. How have the roles switched since then. Any sane person can be the Judge and decide for himself, whose policy is confused? Americans or Afghans? Afhans would fight the Iranians or Brazilians or Maritians just the same way if they came to occupy their country. They are as violently independent a race as they come.

This war has caused indescribable damage to Pakistan. Before the Afghan occupation there was never any suicide bombing in Pakistan, just like there was no suicide bombing in Iraq before occupation. But after Pakistan was forced into becoming a front line ally to this war, we have suffered more than any other nation even though we didnt put our troops in Afghanistan. For the sake of whole world, this war should end as soon as possible. You can fight against regimes but you cannot fight against nations. Vietnam should have taught you this lesson long ago.

Given the American populace's short attention span and shortsightedness I think we should never take on such tasks as nation building. I am not sure there is any nation that has really successfully and intentionally build another nation, in the entire history of human kind. It may have been an unintended byproduct, but never an intentional objective that has been achieved ever. The citizenry of any country is never patient to achieve that kind of objectives as it generally takes huge amount of financial, human, and emotional investment on part of th builder nation. This may exist in the beginning of the endeavor, but never is that willingness sustainable in the long run. Additionally nation building also needs the cooperation of the nation being built. By definition a significant fraction of the nation will defiant and hostile. The motives of the cooperating will have to be suspect. Adding to thes obstacles, there is always the cooperating quislings are generally corrupt, without any base fallowing amongst their own - Case in point Karzai.

To all those wingnuts on the right, Bush was never really committed to nation building, that claim was one of the shifting sands of objectives to going into Iraq, & Afghanistan.

Best recourse for us now is to declare victory and leave the place, along the way find a way to dis arm Pakistan nuclearly speaking and just ostracize those two countries for the next 50 years till they build their own nations. They never were nations, at best they failed states.

The recent attack on the Sufi shrine in Lahore was followed by the Pakistani Taliban claiming no involvement.

Similarly Pamela Taylor writes "Clearly Afghani women are not much better off under the Karzai government than they were under the Taliban."

There seems to be a common thread of disregard for truth among the adherents of Islam.