Apparently 30 Pashtuns, 2 Tajiks, and an Uzbek.
Afghanistan
- Thread starter Sherzad
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Apparently 30 Pashtuns, 2 Tajiks, and an Uzbek.
Historically, Pashtuns were called "Afghans": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pashtuns
Ethnicities of Afghanistan are: Pashtun, Tajik, Hazara, Uzbek,
who speak either dari (Persian/Farsi basically) or Pashto
that's amazing thank you, I love it!... walk into a bar.
I've wondered, why not let the Tajik & Uzbek-dominated regions join Tajikistan and Uzbekistan?
There’s been no impulse on either side to do so. All ethnicities have - up to this point - been committed to Afghanistan, there have been no significant separatist movements. And there’s no indication those states have any interest in taking them on.
Furthermore, the Tajik and Uzbek regions are not homogeneous - there are Pashtuns scattered throughout the north, there are Turkmen, Aimaq nomads, and even a tiny number of Arabs.
Also, Tajiks are spread quite wide, so detaching a Tajik “region” from Afghanistan would be very messy.
Ok. In that case, I'm kinda surprised the Tajiks and Uzbeks haven't started separatist movements.
From what I understand, it’s just never been a thing. Afghans of all ethnicities are said to be extremely proud of being Afghan, despite their knowledge of the country’s economic underdevelopment. They have a shared heritage of independence and resistance to European colonialism, and a deep commitment to Islam (in which they take lessons from nobody). Robert Byron famously wrote of Afghanistan “At last, Asia without the inferiority complex”, and it’s not clear that breaking away to join what they may see as a second-rate Central Asian ‘Stan state has any appeal.
Having said that, the imposition of an exclusively Pashtun regime in the 21st century may potentially change some sentiments, however much it was accepted before 1978.
Don't know about Tajik and Uzbeks as much but Hazaras do and have wanted independence/autonomy whatever you may call it. Panjshir in this current resistance, was aiming for some level of tajik/panshjir autonomy.
Pashtuns in Afghanistan like to claim Pakistans north west province (that also has pashtuns) as their "own".
I don't think Afghanistan is all that unified, the issue is there has hardly been a dominant central force. This makes the struggle to separate not worth it if you're a warlord and law maker of your own independent village. More importantly, other countries would likely not want to take them on either.
while there are many other nations in Asia/Middle east with weird ethnic borders -- money and time has to an extend healed the differences. In Afghanistan it's just all a bit of a mess. Modern day boundaries of Afghanistan itself aren't all that recent as well.
The old comparing women to items of fruit anologies... i take it you've all heard the lollypop version?
At least he's talking about hijabs rather than burkas.
I havnt actually. But if you havn't seen the fruit of the melon, how can you know if it's worth buying?
The lollypop one goes - would you buy a lollypop that didn't have a wrapper on it?
-------
The thing I find the most problematic with these examples, it's men treating women as saleable commodities. Why can't they just say that they're going to enforce cultural and religious restrictions on the population because they consider it their religious/cultural duty to do so? The dumbing down of it really doesn't help.
Also i'd buy a slice of water melon, especailly one of those big ones - who's going to eat a whole one of those?!
Because in Bronze Age ethics women were regarded as chattle. And still are in many places in the world.
You only have to read the comments under the sidebar of shame stories on the Daily Mail to see how true that is even today.
The guy in the video might may believe what the caption is saying but in this specific clip he doesn't say that.
If he had such a belief in a democratic republic maybe he shouldn't been at the helm of a rigged election all these years? Maybe he should have pushed for an actual democratic election?
Ghani and his group are the most to blame for everything happening in Afghanistan. If the world was just he would be tried.
What does he say?
In a nutshell:
The rulers today are madrassa students who don't have advanced degrees. Because of their sacrifices for the Deen they are now respected so much, even teachers and professors aren't as respected. No matter how many degrees you have in the world, it can't surpass the respect the mullahs and Talibs have today.
My own interpretation: He's talking about how important religion is and God helps the pious. That said I'm sure this guy said a thousand other objectionable things in the rest of his speech and is likely a shithead in real life.
I'm watching it now
I was only 11 and halfway across the world when 9/11 happened but my mom was in NYC when it happened. Watching this reminds me of her stories from that wretched day.
He made someone proud there.
Sliced melons are far more expensive at my store
Long thread on Massoud senior:
A Taliban tour of Dostum’s crib:
Thread
These drone strikes... it's only "good" for some suppliers of this equipment.
9/11 ceremonies around the world. lots of tears from politicians about innocent victims and the tragedy of lives taken away. same politicians whove been quite happy to bomb the shit out of innocents in afghanistan ever since. can only imagine what it feels like being one their relatives today, seeing all the 'heartache' from politicians / commentators in the west, whilst their suffering isnt worthy of comment.
Surely the point is to continously dehumanise them, so it helps fulfil that goal?
This is disgusting. What fecking right do they have to still fly drones over the place and bomb potential civilians?
I'm not sure it is. I think they truly believe what they say. It's thier culture.
Yeah, their culture consider women to be less human than men. They think of them like lollipops or melons, things that men need to protect so that men can make use of them in the ways they decide when they’re ready to use them. Not humans that are entitled to basic things like…education.
I think there’s a place for moral relativism personally, controversial as it is, but let’s speak plainly about what those moral values are. Their analogies of women are not clumsy representations of their views, the fact that it makes them sound like saleable assets is an accurate representation of their views.
I mean Afghans do sell their daughters...
so given how many people were dependent on food and other aid... and that most of the organisations / infrastructure that delivered it have left (and even those remaining will be struggling to get supplies) just how quickly will a humanitarian crisis unfold, how bad will it be and what are the options for solving it when it inevitably does happen?... I believe there is also a drought in parts of Afghanistan making the situation in some regions a lot worse
Air drops? - probably not going to be very effective without agencies on the ground to coordinate?
Send in troops to coordinate a response?
Send load of aid to the Taliban and hope they distribute it quick enough?
Pretend its not happening and hope China sends loads of aid?
Politicly I think Biden is going to be hurt if we see loads of kids dying through lack of food but Im not sure what he can do to prevent it
Air drops? - probably not going to be very effective without agencies on the ground to coordinate?
Send in troops to coordinate a response?
Send load of aid to the Taliban and hope they distribute it quick enough?
Pretend its not happening and hope China sends loads of aid?
Politicly I think Biden is going to be hurt if we see loads of kids dying through lack of food but Im not sure what he can do to prevent it
Yes, the analogy was definitely clumsy and wrong. The guys taking over the country are not your typical University educated politicians who will choose words carefully. These are men educated in local villages and religious institutions. The language will be based on their religious upbringing and not much in the way of education as we know this in the West.
Afghanistan and other similar cultures do not consider women to be second class citizens. They consider women to have different roles. Why would they consider their mothers, daughters, grandmothers as anything but their equals or even better?
The culture is based on protecting girls from sexual predators and relationships before marriage. Similar to how women were born in the early 19th century here in the UK and Europe. They also had a role that was considered to marry young, stay home and raise a family.
Last edited: