Filtered Posts

New US Strategy Needed in Afghanistan and Pakistan some a-hole is redflagging every post of mine...must be tahmed, his guru hamid or their chaprasee...

New US Strategy Needed in Afghanistan and Pakistan Tahmed peon of the West writes "While all of the above is true - it is also true that the US had every legal and moral right to break the terrorist nest in Afghanistan that killed 3000 innocent people in the US."

After deliberately failing to break the "terrorist nest" in its own country, coming up on the details of who the hijackers were with photos and biographies less than 24 hours after the attack without any witnesses present, and then using that to launch an unreleated global war on terror, even the war on the entire country of Afghanistan to get a couple of people who were not rulers of Afghanistan does not translate into either "legal" or "moral" right to do anything. Regarding Bush showing concern for Muslims, that is his well known hypocrisy as he and his fellows were butchering Iraqis- through the first gulf war and the sanctions regime, planning a widescale new invasion of it, and bombed prisoners in Afghanistan because of a "riot", and then sacntioned things that led to Abu Ghraib not to mention Falluja and Haditha and the near million Muslim civilians they have butchered and made life miserable for the over billion by their WOT methodology- this to tahmed translates as "care for the Muslims" beacause the SOB said so on national television.

Then he writes "This narrow focus on US alone detracts from the serious problems facing Pakistan.."

It does not detract from the problems facing Pakistan. The domination of Pakistan's dominant institution by the US, an institution that determines the life-fate of the people of Pakistan, as well as US interference through that institution of all facets of this society is no detraction. Without tackling that you can never fix the problems of this country or make it advance for the people in any way. Only a fool and a spineless worshipper of the West, like you, will try to downplay it because you wish for US overlordship in our region, you wish that our people remain at the very bottom, you wish that Pakistan remains a whore of the West. That will no longer be allowed to happen, the people will reject it, and have rejected it, it is only a matter of time before they will go after your kind in every house and in every street- then will the people be liberated.

New US Strategy Needed in Afghanistan and Pakistan Guru writes "Dharma (societal = not harming others) is intrinsic to human nature because living means learning and reaching to higher consciosness"

Spare us the BS please, there is nothing intrinsic to "human nature"- whenever two come together the foundations of society are laid, and thereafter everything is socially determined within the confines of environment.

Then he writes "european colonization has been "Asuric" and Muslim one is Rakshashi "

Spare us more of your BS. There was no Muslim colonization, except for the Hindus nobody describes the conquests of old as "colonization" for the simple fact that those conquests some more brutal than others never achieved the level of concentration to destroy a colony at the expense of the home front. At the heels of the British colonization India was one of the most developed among the nations of the world and the disparity in world development that British and other european colonization created was non existant in the medieval world.

Majumdar, a while back I linked to an article, don't remembe the URL now (search my interacts) that is a comprehensive study on Muslims in India- that will tell you about institutional exclusion. When you try to compare Muslims with other minorities in India the effects and the rejection by the ruling majority is not the same because their history has been different in that country, regarding the MAJ- whom you bring up for no reason, my problem with him is the catastropic conseqence of what he did to the Muslims of the subcontinent, as well as colonial/feudal desires in whose hands this played into. The condition of the Muslims of India are the consequence of British colonization as well as post partition blow back. What plays to the advantage of the other group within the Muslims that you mention is their exclusivity based social solidarity and small numbers involved, they are neither seen nor treated as the mass of the mainstream Muslim and they have had a resource advantage that the mass never had to counter the effects of discrimination. Muslims in Pakistan haven't fared much better they escaped the double jeapordy of Hindu blowback and hate but they remained within the colonial subordination model, and their suffering, except for the psychological one)equals that of the Indian Muslims. Were it not for your leftists whom you rail against, as peons of the West you would now be equalling the infrastructure of Afghanistan with a law and order situation like that of Somalia- they gave you a base on which you can now trip over each other in wiping the white man's a$$.

New US Strategy Needed in Afghanistan and Pakistan Pardon this long copy paste but this classic (written by me) from 2006 with which I "busted" the dimwit bigotry of Ali Sina needs to be reproduced here:

---------------

The “Islamic” Threat
Real or Imagined?

M. Asadi

Reproduced under in summary debate format, after several hours of argumentation with those that consider this “threat” real are reproduced the arguments of both sides. We will call the person I am debating with “A.S”, not to be confused with any A.S, real or imagined that you know. Other participants in the short debate are Darius,YZV and HM2, once again not to be confused with any Darius, YZV or HM2 that you might know, real or imagined. Masadi, represents my words

Debate Begins:

A.S : The Islam threat is real, the Islam threat is real! The world is in danger!

MAsadi : what threat? Sounds like unwarranted alarmism to me

A.S : Terrorism is not an ideology, it is a tool; but the terrorists kill for an ideology. They call that ideology Islam.

MAsadi: Not all terrorism is garbed with Islamic rhetoric, in fact a very small percentage of what can be described as terrorism is done by those labeled Muslim, or done in the name of Islam.

Darius: , you cannot call an ideology evil because of the tools used by people purporting to follow that ideology. People are the ones who are “evil” not ideas on their own. Ideas are benign.

A.S : We are a group of ex-Muslims who have seen the face of the evil and have risen to warn the world.

MAsadi : And what evil is it that you have seen? And what kind of random sampling have you done to decipher the effects of this “evil” on people.

A.S : Islam, and the Muslim mind is the evil effect of Islamic ideology. I used to be a Muslim and I know.

MAsadi : And how is that? Where is your random sample and scientific study about the Muslim mind? How many Muslims did you come in contact with when you were a Muslim out of the over one billion in the world? Can you form a non- stereotypical generalization based on such a non-random, non-representative sample and introspection alone?

A.S : Terrorism: In the front page of this site I have placed a dynamic link to thereligionofpeace.com As you can see every day there are more terrorist attacks somewhere in the world. Every day tens or hundreds of people are bombed, beheaded, killed and their bodies are torn into pieces by the followers of this “religion of peace”.

MAsadi : Those are not random samplings of either terrorism or what goes on in the “Muslim mind”. What about the “threat” posed by those that embark on wars on fake pretenses and lay whole countries to waste in the name of “freedom and democracy”?

A.S : those are really for freedom and democracy, it is no terrorism. The American leadership does it so it must be good.

MAsadi : Using your rhetoric, instead of tens or hundreds, tens or hundreds of thousand innocents are killed for “freedom and democracy”. Therefore whatever ideas are represented by “freedom and democracy” are evil.

A.S : that’s a cop out

MAsadi : How come? I’m using your logic of assigning labels of “evil” and “threat”. For example look at this scenario: the FBI estimates that around 19,000 Americans are murdered every year, not by Middle Eastern terrorists but by fellow Americans, so let’s talk about the “American as your neighbor threat” etc.

A.S : you want us to ignore the killings done by Muslims.

MAsadi : not at all, simply showing the world that you are deliberately confusing the causes of terrorism and thereby helping to perpetuate it. You are masking the true causes and hiding the mass killings by everyone that cannot fit under your hate label for Islam. You are therefore helping to keep the cycle of violence going and thereby benefit from a portion of it by supporting your hate agenda.

A.S : I don’t think this argument really needs any response. Basically what he is saying is: “close your eyes to Islamic terrorism and forget about it so we can continue killing you, bombing you and massacring your children.”

MAsadi : Not so, and masking its causes, like you are, while treating the symptoms of a small percent of global criminals will prevent those? Are you dumb?

A.S : I don’t want to argue with thugs and name callers.

MAsadi : Because you have been stumped?

A.S : The Islam threat is real! I don’t debate thugs.

MAsadi : And those that possess the greatest weapons of destruction the world has ever seen and have used them on innocents, they are the voice of peace?

A.S : cop out!

MAsadi : The “lynch-mob” mentality of alarmism, of Islamic ideology as a global threat, that was (and is) commonly portrayed in such writings, (as the “Sword of Islam” or “Islamic Threat” etc), is not at all justified: the number of terrorist acts committed by those who claim to be Muslims and in the “name of Islam” as a percentage of the total number of Muslims, even as a percentage of the total number of crimes committed in the world, are statistically insignificant as cause. The numbers of people harmed by such acts (of criminals) are also far less than the number that have been killed in the name of “democracy and freedom” and free markets: a look at the military adventures of the U.S. elite in the post World War 2 era should suffice as empirical evidence. Rhetoric of freedom has been abused to kill and maim, so has rhetoric borrowed from Islam, both represent abuse of sets of ideas that have no bearing in the purpose for which they were being used.

HM2: [MAsadi] Please don’t forget the Black Widows, blowing themselves up and one being pregnant. Bloodthirsty and Evil is Islam

MAsadi : Really and the mass murderers that are advertised on the US media at the rate of several a year, all non-Muslims like the Jeffrey Dahmers and (other) murderers whose crime is deeply intertwined with religious rhetoric, in frequency much greater than any suicide bombings done by “Muslims”, what religion or ideology do they condemn? Would you place a blanket condemnation on all Americans or all Christians because they happened to belong to their group? All you all can do, is take a few cases, spin your own interpretation on the causes of the events (without any scientific research) and then over generalize to the entire world population of Muslims and Islam- there is no logical or scientific connection to your conclusions.

YZV: read what this mullah said in Egypt of this one in Saudi Arabia or what this person did in the name of Allah

MAsadi : how many news stories of crimes that non-Muslims do every single day, for their multiple reasons, garbed in all kinds of religious rhetoric, do you want me to copy paste for you?
YZV: Here have a look at the timeline of Mr. Muhammad’s crimes!

MAsadi : Where are your witnesses about those alleged crimes? And what relation does the messenger’s morality have to do with the message that he was commissioned to convey, a message that proclaims separation between author and messenger?

YZV: Ghazali, Bukhari, Ibn ishaq….ibn Kathir…Mullah Nasruddin

MAsadi : None of them were witnesses, their reports in the earliest are removed over 200 years and you have not answered my second question.

YZV: Mr. Muhammad was …..

MAsadi : Can it. I have not asked for your psychiatric evaluation of the prophet or your judgment based upon no witnesses. The Quran states, if the prophet did anything wrong God will judge him, and we shouldn’t concern ourselves with what earlier generations that have passed away might have done or not done, their judgment is the domain of God alone.

YZV: here have a look at this news article about a follower of Mr. Muhammad. Here is another copy paste of the timeline of what Mr. Muhammad did

MAsadi : It is sad to note how disabled you have become in your ability to reason and decipher the truth. I pity your wasted lives, for all lives without the light of reason are, in my opinion, wasted. And you want to risk eternity based on such flimsy reasoning and absolutely zero credible proof?

---------------------------------

New US Strategy Needed in Afghanistan and Pakistan later...

New US Strategy Needed in Afghanistan and Pakistan nkg writes "If Indians were brutal, they could have easily eleminated these beasts"

The rest of your BS aside where you highlight the religious label of the perpetrator to soothe your bigotry, genocide of the past kind is not tolerated unless it is done by the power state and that also under a heavy dose of the propaganda of war. India would be no more if it decided to undertake a large scale ethnic cleansing of the Muslims, so it has decided to take the polite route by keeping them out of all institutions as aliens at unequal par with the Hindus...

New US Strategy Needed in Afghanistan and Pakistan in 494 read "so that they did blend into the culture of the conquerors "

as "so that they did not blend into the culture of the conquerors "

New US Strategy Needed in Afghanistan and Pakistan majumdar writes

"Are you suggesting that imperialism is OK if the rulers are kind?"

These points have already been argued here no need to repeat them. European conquerors when they decided to settle in an area as against Muslim conquerors eliminated or cause a genocide of the indigeneous population in almost all cases. Disparities of the kind we find among the Muslim/Hindu population in India today mimicks the disparity among African American/White populations in the US, no such disparity among the Hindu/Muslim population of India at the time of colonization has been documented, for one thing it was a lot more autonomous than either under colonization or under Hindu domination today. Imperialism is not justified, neither am I trying to justify it, if you had read my comment carefully before jumping on it it referred specifically to them being kind to the nkg types.

Then he writes "You have quoted India's population statistics to suggest that Muslim rulers were kind people. By the same yardstick Muslim population has shown an increase since 1951"

It is not the same yardstick, you need to talk to people who know something about demography. The population boom in developing countries in the post colonial world has causes other than "kindness", it has more to do with socio-structural reasons and medical science- no such boom was taking place when Muslim conquests occurred, if populations survived and prospered and grew to outdo the conquerors it means two things i) the conquerors did not eliminate them through genocide ii) The conquerors gave them enough autonomy so that they did blend into the culture of the conquerors in other words no cultural imperialism or conversion by the sword was taking place...

Anath writes "Mr. Masadi…….. it’s the “stockholm syndrome” making you talk on behalf of your arab controllers"

No "stockholm syndrome". You are reading your biases into my reply. Nothing in my posts ever defends ethnicity or the religious label worn by the ruler, otherwise I would never have been as hard as I am on the military dictators of Pakistan or the Taliban types. I do not defend the saudi rulers, who are more in the pocket of the American elite than even the Pakistani military...The syndrome that I suffer from is "bust the dimwit arguments of the bigots" syndrome, and so far you all haven't been able to cure it...

New US Strategy Needed in Afghanistan and Pakistan zee writes "Sorry tahmed, but masadi seems to have been right all along about you. "

As I have been documenting for a while now, this guy (tahmed) is a shallow, conniving snake who pushes the immoral agenda of the US elite and then when cornered in his usual spineless manner, like O'reilly asks the person accusing him of copy pasting his words from years back, even when that is done in his usually coward way he diverts the discussion trying to fool the people. Well, guess what, people aren't that easily fooled. Not only was he pushing for the Iraq war, he supported the Israel/US line of justifying the lebanon carnage by Israel to the extent that he was accusing the Hizb of deliberately going into civilian areas to draw Israeli bombings to justify Israeli carnage of the lebanese civilians. I have challenged him several times to condemn the US invasion and occupation of Iraq, to condem Israeli carnage in Lebanon but he never does it and will never do it. This more than any copy pastes (of which many were provided from his famous article cheerleading for the Iraq war) proves where his loyalties lie and what kind of morality he possesses- the morality of pigs and hamid- little difference between the three...

New US Strategy Needed in Afghanistan and Pakistan #49 majumdar writes "But why station own troops?"

The US troops in Afghanistan compared to Iraq are quite nominal, the mercinaries and CIA types work behind the scenes, the troops are just the public face of the war, mercinaries cannot be made the public face of a World War that the US wants to pursue well into the middle parts of this century...the answer is the same as why it is still in Afghanistan when it can leave, nothing worse would happen than what happened already after the withdrawl of the Soviets and US after the earlier war, what keeps them there is ulterior motive on an international level and not anything indigineous to Afghanistan....what these "Afghanistan is dangerous" types want to suggest is that the US suddenly developed a care and an understanding of Afghanistan and didn't have a clue about what might happen after their proxy cold war ended and what was allowed to occur. No, they are not that innocent or sincere and certainly not as dumb as what some of these "analysts" would have us believe...

Pakistan: The War of Drones In #839 read "the period when they became a problem for Pakistan, and what global evens and international interference that coincides with"

as

"the period when they became a problem for Pakistan, and what global events and international interference that coincides with that period

Pakistan: The War of Drones ana writes "You don't think that anyone besides Hamid would contest the "absolutely nothing objectionable" in this statement?"

I have been civil with you thus far but dont push it. There was nothing in that post that according to Chowk guidelines would require a redflagging. The bakwas is from your end, look at the short history of this country and the period when they became a problem for Pakistan, and what global evens and international interference that coincides with....

New US Strategy Needed in Afghanistan and Pakistan majumdar writes "So why is USA interested in occupying A'stan and Pakistan whereas its economic interets lie in occupying Iraq and its oil? Can it simply not declare a victory in A'stan and walk out?"

Its economic interests lie in pursuing the WOT into the long term, in that regard if you had read my post, you don't abandon the opening front, especially when the ground zero of the WOT is going to be that general region in the near furture of this "war without end".

New US Strategy Needed in Afghanistan and Pakistan pavo writes "About strategy I expect to interact with some one who has burnt his midnight oil and knows what he is talking about"

Pavo man you need to learn how to argue, what you wrote above is a cheap excuse and a shallow escape, present reasons not your "authority", arguing needs some intelligence of which you seem to have none...

Pakistan: The War of Drones Some fool has redflagged my post # 830 even though it has absolutely nothing objectionable. I am guessing Hamid because that idiot is trying his level best to get me banned for no reason...

New US Strategy Needed in Afghanistan and Pakistan tahmed writes "They are there to protect themselves from future taliban making Afghanistan a safe haven for terrorists"

Nonsense on both sides. The US never undertakes military adventures to "win hearts and minds" though that is the popular sloganeering the preceeds the invasions, neither was the campaign against Afganistan to "protect themselves"- they know those people cannot do anything to harm the US, in fact they knew it full well when they abondoned Afghanistan after the Soviets left, leaving out of full knowledge of what would happen, a vacuum that would be exploited by ultra right wing loonies and then they implicitly handed it over to Pakistan and the Pakistan Army and we got the same loons rebranded into the Taliban, with which the US and its allies were quite comfortable.

The US is in Afghanistan because it chose it, to distract its own people, as the opening front of the War on Terror, close to the area in which it has long term strategic goals, it was at this moment that in collaboration with the Pakistan Army, that the war was shifted to Pakistan; Contined US presence in Afghanistan is simply for the reason that you do not lose the opening front and then continue with a farcial war without end, the US has no interest in Afghanistan, it will just as soon fly away from there like it did after the Soviets left if keeping this farce of the WOT alive was not a factor.

p.s. Very unfortunate that HP has started keeping the company of fools like hamid and tahmed...