Was the Afghan-Soviet war a neccessary evil for Pakistan, or were we stupidly dragged in?

[Erieye]

We wanted to get rid of Afghani ghundas. We did it. We also wanted to get rid of India, woh hamsy hoa nahi.

Sad part is that the Afghani ghunda is not finished, their story arcs continue in the form of the Taliban and TTP.

Indian ghunda is a strong ghunda, he has a powerful global network of ghundas and quite a large ghunda organisation.

Indian ghunda is recruiting other ghundas to team up against poor Pakistan

Pakistan needs the competency and governance capability like Israel has, Israeli ghunda defeats many ghundas by himself.

We must be Islamic and positive version of Israel.

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

Here's some more

https://twitter.com/x/status/1420101471224336386

View attachment 915275

View attachment 915276View attachment 915277

@Raj-Hindustani These aren't fake CIA psyops or something, they are real things which took place. The relationship was built on zero trust, and back stabbing. Afghan governments going back on their words, etc.

This is nothing less than an explicit enemy above, there's no other way to put it.

I sincerely hope that my voicing my personal ideas hasn't caused anyone to feel offended.


I have never denied that Afghans who were supported by Soviet Union were not a threat to Pakistan. However, the real query is, "What was the genuine big threat?"

Did what your leaders told you actually could happen?

"BIG NO," if you directly inquired. Threats from the pro-Soviet Afghans were existed, but not to the extent you believe. The Soviet danger to Pakistan has been exaggerated and misrepresented far too often.

Let me try to put it another way: (What If)

1. Pakistan committed to helping the USA within her constraints and requirements.

2. Might use the Iranian approach of resettling refugees.

3. Given that only specific facilities are used for arm training (not allowed to free roam).

It could be far much better approach..

Erieye

 

[Erieye]

Let me try to put it another way: (What If)

1. Pakistan committed to helping the USA within her constraints and requirements.

2. Might use the Iranian approach of resettling refugees.

3. Given that only specific facilities are used for arm training (not allowed to free roam).

It could be far much better approach..

Erieye

This is a different ball game now, i have agreed with someone above that the way of handling the execution and more minor details regarding refugees could have been handled much better.

but my point is the overall assistance and getting involved was a must.

 

[hembo]

it is because of their societal differences they waged a war for 20 straight years.

I always wondered, who supplied arms and ammunition to Talibans during these 20 years. They surely couldn't have sustained with the surplus from soviet war.

 

[kingQamaR]

Afghan leaders were encouraging them, that was part of the main driving factor, that you help us in taking Balochistan and KP.

There is documented evidence of the above. Afghanistan had been trying for a long while but failing until it turned to the Soviets.

I apologize, but I can appreciate the lessons you may have learned as a child.

Most of my Pakistani friends will disagree with me, but as I have frequently stated, I am very pragmatic. I disregard my feelings most of the times.

I'll use the American invasion of Iran as an example. How they propagated before the attack on them. The same way, usually leaders create a such situation within their own public to get support.

Since we are usually emotional and bound the follow our leadership and military. We don't question to them.

= I would say, most leaders create such virtual scenarios before such tough decisions. And usually, the public accept and follow their words.

This is was war , soviets invaded knowing the circumstances. They lost because they were stupid in starting the conflict in the first place

 

[Burger_King]

Lets put things in context.

1. Islamisation was started by ZAB who passed the second amendment, imposed prohibition and made Friday the day of sabbath

2. Primary channel for US influence in Afghanistan was Iran. Situation changed with overthrow of the Shah and assumption of power by Khomeni who certainly was not going to give Americans a route to Afghanistan.

3. Iranian revolution lit the fire of political islam.

4. Seizure of Kaaba poured fuel into the fire

5. Then the grand daddy of em all: Russian invasion of Afghanistan. Some analyst claim Americans goaded Russians into invading Afghanistan. Whatever the case, blame for the birth of modern jihadism lies with Russia. No invasion of Afghanistan and Russian empire survives for much longer and Americans don't establish jehadi infrastructure which would bite innocent Americans in the ***.

6. Need for Saudis to one-up Iran in the leader of ummah stakes. Afghanistan jehad gave Saudis the perfect platform.

7. A leader other than Zia might have withstood American pressure but no Pakistani leader could stand up to Saudi pressure

8. As we have seen recently, any leader who will say no to Americans will get replaced.


Pakistan therefore had no choice but to counter Russian invasion. Pakistan did not ask for Russian invasion nor did American response had anything to do with Pakistan. Given the circumstances, Zia did about as well as anyone could have done. Dont forgot that middle class had undergone Dubai chalo phenomena and wanted assert new found status though display of piety. So Zia's islamization had ready audience.

Problem arose in the nineties when both BB and Sharifs ran country to the ground which is what gave space to jihadis to run amuck in Pak - something which Zia never permitted.

As a kid growing up under Zia, I despised the man and what he stood for. But at the end of the day he was a patriot. And I would take him any day over current bunch of jokers in the high command.

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

This is a different ball game now, i have agreed with someone above that the way of handling the execution and more minor details regarding refugees could have been handled much better.

but my point is the overall assistance and getting involved was a must.

Okay, Then must be happy with the present-day situation.

My point is that Pakistan could have joined, especially since other countries do. By engaging in a direct-indirect conflict without the protection of armed Taliban militants, they made a mistake (Bad and Good Taliban based on the situation called by USA and Pakistan).

Who is to blame for Afghanistan's destruction is the true query.

Pakistani says, Afghans are namak haram. But, isn't Pakistan also responsible for Afghanistan's destruction?

This war only caused the destruction of Afghanistan and terrorism in south Asia including in Pakistan. And, a danger place for the world.

 

[Erieye]

Okay, Then must be happy with the present-day situation.

No, but I acknowledge it could have been much worse and it's something we as a nation must deal with.

Choosing the least worst available option doesn't mean the option still isn't bad.

My point is that Pakistan could have joined, especially since other countries do. By engaging in a direct-indirect conflict without the protection of armed Taliban militants, they made a mistake (Bad and Good Taliban based on the situation called by USA and Pakistan).

Impossible because it was exactly using the porous border and geography which allowed the plan to be successful.

It required Pakistani F-16s protecting mujahideen camps when Soviets came hunting.

Who is to blame for Afghanistan's destruction is the true query.

Pakistani says, Afghans are namak haram. But, isn't Pakistan also responsible for Afghanistan's destruction?

They themselves are to blame as they invited the Soviets themselves.

They themselves are to blame as they themselves initiated conflict with Pakistan.

Quite simple really. Pakistan reserves the right to protect its national interests and territorial integrity. You can't complain about someone defending themselves.

Ayub Khan and so many others tried to settle this issue peacefully but they refused to stop their ways. They had many chances.

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

No, but I acknowledge it could have been much worse and it's something we as a nation must deal with.

Choosing the least worst available option doesn't mean the option still isn't bad.

Impossible because it was exactly using the porous border and geography which allowed the plan to be successful.

It required Pakistani F-16s protecting mujahideen camps when Soviets came hunting.

They themselves are to blame as they invited the Soviets themselves.

They themselves are to blame as they themselves initiated conflict with Pakistan.

Quite simple really. Pakistan reserves the right to protect its national interests and territorial integrity. You can't complain about someone defending themselves.

Ayub Khan and so many others tried to settle this issue peacefully but they refused to stop their ways. They had many chances.

No, but I acknowledge it could have been much worse and it's something we as a nation must deal with.

Choosing the least worst available option doesn't mean the option still isn't bad.

Again -assumptions only.

They themselves are to blame as they invited the Soviets themselves.

They made the choice on their own. Why was Pakistan involved?

The internal political crisis in Afghanistan, which was exacerbated by outside forces (primarily the Soviet Union, the United States, and Pakistan), is mostly to blame for the downfall of that country and destruction.

Quite simple really. Pakistan reserves the right to protect its national interests and territorial integrity. You can't complain about someone defending themselves.

What took place in Afghanistan It cannot be referred to as simple self-defense.

Between the Soviet Union and the United States, with Pakistan's support, a fight to install a puppet government in Afghanistan resulted in the total destruction of Afghanistan.

Not only to protect yourself, but also to create a puppet government. The main factor causing the current scenario is the idea of exploiting Afghanistan as a backyard.

People just blame on Afghan people but forget the history, you were part of the destruction of their home.
.

 

[Erieye]

No, but I acknowledge it could have been much worse and it's something we as a nation must deal with.

Choosing the least worst available option doesn't mean the option still isn't bad.

Again -assumptions only.

They themselves are to blame as they invited the Soviets themselves.

They made the choice on their own. Why was Pakistan involved?

The internal political crisis in Afghanistan, which was exacerbated by outside forces (primarily the Soviet Union, the United States, and Pakistan), is mostly to blame for the downfall of that country and destruction.

Quite simple really. Pakistan reserves the right to protect its national interests and territorial integrity. You can't complain about someone defending themselves.

What took place in Afghanistan It cannot be referred to as simple self-defense.

Between the Soviet Union and the United States, with Pakistan's support, a fight to install a puppet government in Afghanistan resulted in the total destruction of Afghanistan.

Not only to protect yourself, but also to create a puppet government. The main factor causing the current scenario is the idea of exploiting Afghanistan as a backyard.

People just blame on Afghan people but forget the history, you were part of the destruction of their home.
.

I have made my stance clear, i don't want to continue this pointless discussion.

Judging by their past actions, their history with our nation and leaders, and intel, this is what we determined to be the best course of actions to take.

You cannot confirm to us what would have happened after the soviets had successfully taken over, but from our analysis, it would have threatened pakistan.

so simply went with being safe, rather than being sorry later. we had absolutely no reaoson to trust them, especially not with soviet backing.

 

[Raj-Hindustani]

I have made my stance clear, i don't want to continue this pointless discussion.

Judging by their past actions, their history with our nation and leaders, and intel, this is what we determined to be the best course of actions to take.

You cannot confirm to us what would have happened after the soviets had successfully taken over, but from our analysis, it would have threatened pakistan.

we simply went with being safe, rather than being sorry later.

i don't want to continue this pointless discussion.

Finally, we agreed. ...

 

[fitpOsitive]

Sad part is that the Afghani ghunda is not finished, their story arcs continue in the form of the Taliban and TTP.

Indian ghunda is a strong ghunda, he has a powerful global network of ghundas and quite a large ghunda organisation.

Indian ghunda is recruiting other ghundas to team up against poor Pakistan

Pakistan needs the competency and governance capability like Israel has, Israeli ghunda defeats many ghundas by himself.

We must be Islamic and positive version of Israel.

We dont want to mimic anyone.
Pakistan ager Pakistan ban jaey, tu dunya ko jhuka ly....

 

[Erieye]

We dont want to mimic anyone.
Pakistan ager Pakistan ban jaey, tu dunya ko jhuka ly....

bilkul mere bhai, but inspiration lena chaiye or apna ek unique pakistan banaye

 

[El Sidd]

Soviets were properly indoctrinated against Pakistan. They considered the nation state as 'artificial' and 'unnatural'.

The remnants still advocate for the same indoctrination albeit disguised under clash of civilisation.

Russians and United Kingdom should sort their own game bilaterally now.

 

[Erieye]

Soviets were properly indoctrinated against Pakistan. They considered the nation state as 'artificial' and 'unnatural'.

The remnants still advocate for the same indoctrination albeit disguised under clash of civilisation.

Russians and United Kingdom should sort their own game bilaterally now.

One of the leading US think tanks with significant influence in US policy also thinks the same

In 2019 a report by the university of Pennsylvania ranked Carnegie Endowment as the top think tank in the world. This naturally means that due to being the most influencial in the US, it will have deeper connections and influence than the others.

It has/had two Indian billionaire board trustees; Sunil Mittal Founder & Chr. of Bharti Enterprises & Ratan Tata Chr. of Tata Trusts.

in 2016 it opened an office in New Delhi.

And in 2009 it invited Selig Harrison for a seminar who is known to also hold the same stance and calls for using Pashtuns to destroy Pakistan...

A well known voice for India this guy - he is their mouth

@villageidiot @Bleek @Sayfullah @PanzerKiel @Muhammad Saftain Anjum