Jump to content
Sindbad05

Jinnah's Ideology of Pakistan

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Those of you, who do not know Muhammad Ali Jinnah. I would like to tell you that he was the man who founded Pakistan and he loved by the people of Pakistan as Khomeini in Iran. He was not a religious scholar but a lawyer by profession and man of principles. However, his ideology of an Islamic state was not an state run by theocracy. The reason of it is are numerous which I will shortly write below to tell what he learned from the acts of scholars of India:

1. The first major reason of his difference with the scholars was due to their alienation of learning modern education which occupied great popularity among the people of India due to the hatred towards colonialism. The scholars of religion dubbed such education as worldly education and said that whoever acquired it will ruin his religion. However, it is known that as the field of scientific study progresses and if you not move with this progress, you would lag behind. This fact was known to Muhammad Ali Jinnah whose such notion was also supported by the hadith of Prophet PBUHHP: "Acquire knowledge even if you have to go to China". And quote of Imam Ali a.s: "Acquire wisdom even from infidel for it is lost treasure of Momin". Thus, in the cultural hatred, scholars of HInd preferred to live without being updated and in the violation of Prophetic traditions and one of their Khalifa of time. 

2. The second reason of this was that Muhammad Ali Jinnah knew the sectarianism which could outspread like a cancer in society. He lived in an area which was inhabited by Hindus, Muslims and among Muslims there were many sects such as Shias, Sunni and their sub-sects. Adopting the rules of fiqh belonging to anyone fiqh would be usurping the right of other which would have resulted in civil wars followed by further divisions and instability. So, he was of the belief that our society should be based on main theme of Islam that there should be neutral governance at the top level who do not support this sect or that sect but support general teachings of Islam such as that allowing every sect to decide their cases with their own Jurisprudence laws through their courts as was done in the British occupied India and for non-Muslims to have access to courts which are followed by them such as of British court system. 

3. Third major reason of Muhammad Ali Jinnah was the unwise decisions of the Sunni ulemas during that time when they begin Khilafat movement for the restoration of Turkish Caliphate. Muhammad Ali Jinnah believed that such movement would bring Muslims to the direct opposition of British who was in power and would give them way for persecuting them under the plea of mutiny or rebellion against Colonialists. This was proved true in the later years when Rowlett act under which British government was given power to sentence anyone without any conviction and at will. As a consequence of this and fleeing of Hindu congress from the non-cooperation movement, the Movement failed. This was then followed by another unwise decision of scholars that signed a fatwa asking all the inhabitants to leave the country as it was land of infidels and many Muslims suffered as they moved here and there and many to Afghanistan. 

These above points led to the conclusion that Scholars of their time were mainly responsible for molestation and sufferings of Muslims along with Britishers and Hindus. In such an state, how could a Wise person like Muhammad Ali Jinnah would provide for state to be run by class of scholars belonging to one sect. He, therefore, said: "In any case Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic State to be ruled by priests with a divine mission. We have many non-Muslims — Hindus, Christians, and Parsis — but they are all Pakistanis. They will enjoy the same rights and privileges as any other citizens and will play their rightful part in the affairs of Pakistan".

Ideology of Islam state as Muhammad Ali Jinnah desired

The opposition of rule of theocracy does not mean that Muhammad Ali Jinnah believed in the opposition of rule of Islam. He was an open supporter of Islam and believed that Pakistan should be an state which would be on the model of Prophet PBUHHP.  Muhammad Ali Jinnah said: "We do not want Pakistan simply to have a piece of land, we want a laboratory where we could experiement our Islamic principles". 

His notion was that every person has its duty and obligation according to his capability to serve in their respective areas which is manifested by his words of speech for Civil Servants: "You should have no hand in supporting this political party or that political party, this political leader of that political leader that is not your job". 

It appears from the above fact that Muhammad Ali Jinnah believed in the capability of person to be responsible for the act for which he has the merit. The duty of Civil servant is to look after Civil jobs likewise the duty of an scholar is to teach people the basic principles of Islam and Islamic values which should also be followed by supporting them economically. 

In the country of Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the job of Scholar is to look after any act which contravenes Islamic ideology and pinpoint it. However, for the same purpose, their necessities of life should also be met as religious scholars dedicate their lives for Islam and to eliminate the concern of scholars which was pinpointed by Imam Ali a.s in the following words: "Most of the scholars are poor because people do not know their value"

It could not be wrong, if in Islamic state, the scholars should be given the separate office and job for looking after morals of jobs in different departments but their power should not exceed beyond their capability that is to influence the fields in which they have no knowledge which would be contravening against the teachings of Islam such as if an scholar says, I would make Budget while he has not economic degree and does not have in depth knowledge in such field. 

This is the ideology in which I believe. And, this is the ideology of Islam and Muhammad Ali Jinnah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the bigger picture of things, Jinnah is as irrelevant as Barzani is today. Jinnah was, and Barzani is currently being, used by other players to further their interests in an international game of politics. With Jinnah's avatar the British and the Hindu nationalists managed to break the once dominant Muslim community of the subcontinent to two ineffective entities in India and Bangladesh and a terrorist one in Pakistan. Subcontinent's muslims were impoverished by his actions. Jinnah was & goes on to be bad news. Barzani likewise.

He however was the most brilliant (academically speaking) figure of the Indian independence movement. He was also very honest and worked hard & long hours for his new nation. It wouldnt be far fetched to say that he was the Only honest Pakistani leader in history.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Wahdat said:

In the bigger picture of things, Jinnah is as irrelevant as Barzani is today. Jinnah was, and Barzani is currently being, used by other players to further their interests in an international game of politics. With Jinnah's avatar the British and the Hindu nationalists managed to break the once dominant Muslim community of the subcontinent to two ineffective entities in India and Bangladesh and a terrorist one in Pakistan. Subcontinent's muslims were impoverished by his actions. Jinnah was & goes on to be bad news. Barzani likewise.

He however was the most brilliant (academically speaking) figure of the Indian independence movement. He was also very honest and worked hard & long hours for his new nation. It wouldnt be far fetched to say that he was the Only honest Pakistani leader in history.  

I completely disagree with you. The reason is that Barzani is Kurdish and is in a country which is inhabited by Muslims Kurds. However, Jinnah was living in a country which was inhabited by Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Dalits, Buddhists, Zoroastrians and so on so forth. Jinnah was always a man who wanted United India but if you could read it was Hindu extremist thoughts that convinced him that an independent land is the only solution to safeguard the interests of Muslims and other minorities. If you read the Indo-Pakistan history, you would see that this belief that HIndus looked down upon minorities, was also held by Sir Syed Ahmed Khan and Allama Muhammad Iqbal who were like Muhammad Ali Jinnah changed their such views due to anti-Muslims and anti-minorities politics of Congress.  For further, I would like you to read what Muhammad Ali Jinnah did for political unity of Muslims and HIndus such as "Lucknow Pact" after which he was given title of "Ambassador of HIndu Muslim Unity". But you should also read anti-Muslim and anti-Minorities politics of Congress such as "Congress government 1936-37" also known as "Congress Ministries 1936-1937", their position in "Round Table Conference" and many other subsequent incidents. 

Even today, if you see the Hindu political mentality, they say that Muslims are invaders. However, many of their own Hindu leaders of past were invaders such as Ashoka and Chandurgupta and Jayapala and now many countries such as Fiji has most Hindu population, so should those people be evacuated from those lands on the pretext of invasion ? Even many among Muslims of Subcontinent, a great part is the descendants of Muslim converts who were persecuted by wrong customs of Hindus. And many invaders do not live long in India except Moghuls  who even hired troops from within India and area adjoining India such as Afghanistan. 

I think that you are very much unfamiliar with the politics of Indo-Pakistan as I am unfamiliar with the politics of Kudrs but it is clear that Barzani and Muhammad Ali Jinnah lived in different countries and under different conditions and under different influence such as Muhammad Ali Jinnah was influenced by interests of his peoples but Barzani for interest of the USA and is fighting against his brothers on the pretext of nationalism among Muslims which is haram in Islam because Muslim is one nation but Muhammad Ali Jinnah's nationalism is nationalism of Quran that "Muslims and believers cannot be equal". That is two nation theory and that was Muhammad Ali Jinnah. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sindbad05 said:

 Muhammad Ali Jinnah was influenced by interests of his peoples but Barzani for interest of the USA and is fighting against his brothers on the pretext of nationalism among Muslims which is haram in Islam because Muslim is one nation but Muhammad Ali Jinnah's nationalism is nationalism of Quran that "Muslims and believers cannot be equal". That is two nation theory and that was Muhammad Ali Jinnah. 

The only one Jinnah truly served were the British and Hindu nationalists. He did so by breaking the subcontinent's Muslims and dividing them into 3 while Hindus stayed one and powerful. He further created a corrupt entity with a cruel foreign funded military at its center- Pakistan. This monster has killed, and goes on to kill and cause the death of more muslims than all of the Hindu fanatics put together. Dont believe me? Compare the number of muslims killed directly or indirectly within Pakistan or in Afghanistan through Taliban to those killed by Hindu nationalists- whether its this year, last year, or the year before....or from 1947.
I am judging Jinnah by the consequences of Pakistan which is tumour at the heart of the region and not the loftiness of his moral ideals. Furthermore, how can Jinnah's fear of Hindus be sound when Muslims went on to live in relative peace under Hindu rule than those under the Pakistani flag? Without Pakistan we would not have had ISI, Taliban, LeJ, or other terrorist organizations that have caused the death & misery of more muslims than RSS or BJP or Hindutva. Jinnah helped create a muslim eating monster for muslims and by muslims...funny, aint it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Wahdat said:

The only one Jinnah truly served were the British and Hindu nationalists. He did so by breaking the subcontinent's Muslims and dividing them into 3

Old cracked piece of thoughts.

The condition of 20 million Muslims of India is not sufficient for you. You want additional 20 million Muslims (Pakistani) to live like slaves in India.

How many Indians deficate in jungles or along the railway lines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Wahdat said:

I am judging Jinnah by the consequences of Pakistan which is tumour at the heart of the region and not the loftiness of his moral ideals. Furthermore, how can Jinnah's fear of Hindus be sound when Muslims went on to live in relative peace under Hindu rule than those under the Pakistani flag? Without Pakistan we would not have had ISI, Taliban, LeJ, or other terrorist organizations that have caused the death & misery of more muslims than RSS or BJP or Hindutva. Jinnah helped create a muslim eating monster for muslims and by muslims...funny, aint it?

I am judging Nehru by the militant Hindu nexus that has taken power in India. Oh what a failure! Should've left it to the British really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wahdat said:

The only one Jinnah truly served were the British and Hindu nationalists. He did so by breaking the subcontinent's Muslims and dividing them into 3 while Hindus stayed one and powerful. He further created a corrupt entity with a cruel foreign funded military at its center- Pakistan. This monster has killed, and goes on to kill and cause the death of more muslims than all of the Hindu fanatics put together. Dont believe me? Compare the number of muslims killed directly or indirectly within Pakistan or in Afghanistan through Taliban to those killed by Hindu nationalists- whether its this year, last year, or the year before....or from 1947.
I am judging Jinnah by the consequences of Pakistan which is tumour at the heart of the region and not the loftiness of his moral ideals. Furthermore, how can Jinnah's fear of Hindus be sound when Muslims went on to live in relative peace under Hindu rule than those under the Pakistani flag? Without Pakistan we would not have had ISI, Taliban, LeJ, or other terrorist organizations that have caused the death & misery of more muslims than RSS or BJP or Hindutva. Jinnah helped create a muslim eating monster for muslims and by muslims...funny, aint it?

I am amazed as to how you have put whole blame upon Pakistan and forgot the effects of other neighboring and foreign elements. RSS and the pioneers of BJP were involved in terrorism while Pakistan was still a dream. Read about how L.K Advani who is one of the most influential political figure was involved in the conspiracy to kill Jinnah. The pioneers of RSS were responsible for murdering people on the plea of cow slaughter and forcing minorities to learn Mandar education lolz.

You say that Pakistan is responsible for Taliban ? Pakistani government was not solely responsible for it. Remember that it was Soviet Union who crossed the roads of Central Asia and trying to impose her doctrine over others. It was during that time USA also provided equipment, Pakistan training and KSA money. Although it was a political decision but this was mainly because of Foreign influence, I know that this policy was not correct as it would have been very much better if Pakistan, USA and KSA would have supported people of Afghanistan instead of bigots but this was decision of an Army General Ziaul Haq and not Muhammad Ali Jinnah or present army. Will you impose bad decisions of Trump upon the creation of USA. This does not seem a good idea, I think you are not impartial in this discussion. And now that Pakistan has suffered such a huge loss of civilian, military personnel and assets, it has done great work against killing terrorists. But still Afghanistan is not silent lolz. 

I do not know as to why you think that India has done less atrocities, Read that since October 1948 till today millions have been killed by Indian army and by an state which is occupying a land whose people do not want her to rule upon Kashmir. Another fact is that if you read about terrorists attacks in Baluchistan and other local areas of Pakistan, all of them are being funded by Indian RAW and "Kalbhosan Yadev" is evidence of such act. 

Finally, do you think that Indian Muslims are in good state ? Read about killings in Gujarat and other provinces and burning of train that was planned by Indian army generals. Indian government is the wicked government ever who is involved in violating pacts with it's neighbor. No any country in Sub-continent has good relations with India, China, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Pakistan all have concerns with her. 

In nutshell, I am very happy that we are free from Indian influence. We are living in better conditions than Indian Muslims. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wahdat said:

The only one Jinnah truly served were the British and Hindu nationalists. He did so by breaking the subcontinent's Muslims and dividing them into 3

That is why Indians are crying over division of India. Nehru dreamed that Pakistan will soon be a failed state but Alhamdolilah, it is still existing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Brained said:

I am judging Nehru by the militant Hindu nexus that has taken power in India. Oh what a failure! Should've left it to the British really.

India remains peaceful and to a great extent independent. Unlike China the instruments of state did not cause mass starvation or mass death as was the case in Mao's China. And unlike Pakistan it did not do business with the blood of its citizen. So all in all India fared pretty good...Hindu fanatics are however doing their best to make a Pakistan of India...we are not there yet. 
I personally see similarities between Nehru & Khamenei- while Gandhi & Khomenei were the true revolutionaries, the former two strengthened the foundations of their states and ensured the survival of their ideals. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Sindbad05 said:

You say that Pakistan is responsible for Taliban ? Pakistani government was not solely responsible for it.

Pakistan, according to former ISI Chief Hamidgul, created Taliban to gain 'strategic depth' (whatever the hell that is) in Afghanistan and Central Asia. A mere cartoon of what his American masters are doing globally and quite nicely (Japan, EU are good examples). The Pakistani version was horrible, dark, and cruel.
Pakistan still goes on to be the only supporter of this regional cancer...of course by the orders of those who holds its leash for Pakistan is not allowed to act independently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Sindbad05 said:

In nutshell, I am very happy that we are free from Indian influence. We are living in better conditions than Indian Muslims. 

Pakistan was not created in Mars or in a vacuum. Its creation goes on to affect the region negatively to this very minute. Its more than a beef between Hindus & Muslims [pun intended]. You, like a Kurd, can not see the whole reality because the idol of nationalism is blocking your views to it. Nationalism divides, blinds, and makes a cartoon of a man. Be careful bro.
W'S

 

Edited by Wahdat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Brained said:

I am judging Nehru by the militant Hindu nexus that has taken power in India. Oh what a failure! Should've left it to the British really.

Why dont you  judge the condition of the muslism of Kashmir violently murdered by Indians forces on daily basis?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Wahdat said:

Pakistan, according to former ISI Chief Hamidgul, created Taliban to gain 'strategic depth' (whatever the hell that is) in Afghanistan and Central Asia. A mere cartoon of what his American masters are doing globally and quite nicely (Japan, EU are good examples). The Pakistani version was horrible, dark, and cruel.
Pakistan still goes on to be the only supporter of this regional cancer...of course by the orders of those who holds its leash for Pakistan is not allowed to act independently.

You seem making  claims from the past influence of american and his allies in the game of power for keeping themselves in Afghanistan.

Are TTP based in Afghanistan not supported by Afghanistan and Indian agencies for making terrorist acts in Pakistan these days? Why Afghanistan provides its land for terrorists activities in Pakistan?

Edited by skyweb1987

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, skyweb1987 said:

Are TTP based in Afghanistan not supported by Afghanistan and Indian agencies for making terrorist acts in Pakistan these days?

We have seen what they did in Army Public School. If you look at the history of Afghanistan, you will find that they are the actual terrorists. 

Their character is like gog-magog, the actual mufsids. Majority of Pashtoons living in Afghanistan & Pakistan are ignorants & taliban supporters. They love to kill & fight each other, play football with decapitated heads. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are the facts about Afghanistan:

"In 1974, Daoud signed one of two economic packages that would enable Afghanistan to have a far more capable military because of increasing fears of lacking an up-to-date modern army when compared to the militaries of Iran and Pakistan. Daoud hosted General Secretary of the National Awami Party led by Khan Abdul Wali Khan, Ajmal Khattak, and others like Juma Khan Sufi, in addition to Baluch guerrillas, and the like. Daoud's government and forces also commenced training Pakhtun Zalmay and young Baluchs and was sending them to Pakistan for sabotage and militancy. So much so that one of Bhutto's senior colleagues, minister of interior and head of the provincial branch of Bhutto's party of/in the then-North-West Frontier Province (renamed Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in 2010), Hayat Sherpao, was killed, ostensibly on the orders of the later-acquitted Awami Party, Afghanistan's variable relations with Pakistan further dipped. In response, Pakistan also started similar kinds of cross-border interference." (Wikipedia)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wahdat said:

India remains peaceful and to a great extent independent. Unlike China the instruments of state did not cause mass starvation or mass death as was the case in Mao's China. And unlike Pakistan it did not do business with the blood of its citizen. So all in all India fared pretty good...Hindu fanatics are however doing their best to make a Pakistan of India...we are not there yet. 
I personally see similarities between Nehru & Khamenei- while Gandhi & Khomenei were the true revolutionaries, the former two strengthened the foundations of their states and ensured the survival of their ideals. 

Wow, you have not seen million of starving people on the roads of Delhi and millions who died starving both Hindus and non-Hindus. Besides, since 1947 till today more than a million have been killed in Kashmir, million have been disappeared and million of girls rapped. You haven't gone through Indian history,I believe, otherwise, you would not have said such. Kashmir and Palestine are similar. 

Secondly, you said Khamenei and Nehru are similar. Lolz. Khamenei is a believer and Nehru unbeliever. Khamnei don't believe in rule of families like Nehru and both of them are neither similar in politics and riches. Nehru's politics was based upon deceit and usurpation of rights of minorities and disunity but khamnei's politics is based upon honesty, equality and unity. 

As for Gandhi and Khomeini, Gandhi was not bad but his ideology was worship of India but Khomeini believed in worship of God. If you read quotes of Gandhi, he said: "Dividing India is dividing the mother cow". But Khomeini said: "If for Islam Iran dies, let Iran die but islam may live". Gandhi's India is still struggling but Khomeini's Iran developed within 20 years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Wahdat said:

Pakistan, according to former ISI Chief Hamidgul, created Taliban to gain 'strategic depth' (whatever the hell that is) in Afghanistan and Central Asia. A mere cartoon of what his American masters are doing globally and quite nicely (Japan, EU are good examples). The Pakistani version was horrible, dark, and cruel.
Pakistan still goes on to be the only supporter of this regional cancer...of course by the orders of those who holds its leash for Pakistan is not allowed to act independently.

There were infamous people in every country and for such notorious acts, they had consequences. General Hamid Gul was remnant of zia regime and he died but what he did was paid by existing pakistani nation and military. 

That chapter started in 90's and ended with invasion of Afghanistan within 20 years but Indian and US sponsored terrorism is still existing. Now, if Pakistan has influence in Taliban that's just for intelligence of areas.

I don't know why you are silent on existing matters and praising India for its terrorism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Wahdat said:

Pakistan was not created in Mars or in a vacuum. Its creation goes on to affect the region negatively to this very minute. Its more than a beef between Hindus & Muslims [pun intended]. You, like a Kurd, can not see the whole reality because the idol of nationalism is blocking your views to it. Nationalism divides, blinds, and makes a cartoon of a man. Be careful bro.
W'S

 

Lolz, we and Hindus are different nations according to Quran our nationalism is due to faith and not caste or color.  Saying us like kurds is denying the facts because kurds are fighting their brothers while we oppose a group that is stranger to us in religion and culture. Kurds have not been hampered constitutionally but despite that they want a separate country but Muslims were denied their constitutional rights. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, skyweb1987 said:

You seem making  claims from the past influence of american and his allies in the game of power for keeping themselves in Afghanistan.

Are TTP based in Afghanistan not supported by Afghanistan and Indian agencies for making terrorist acts in Pakistan these days? Why Afghanistan provides its land for terrorists activities in Pakistan?

Look who is in charge of Afghanistan- Pashtun tribalists flown in from US where their American sponsors pay for even the diapers of their kids. Insensitive to the pain of majority Afghans they play foreign sponsored games with their Pashtun dominated ISI cousins & within the parameters set by their masters. They are motivated by petty & false idols of nationalism. You as well but on a layman level. I however denounce all forms of nationalism and am always the first one to declare death to Afghanistan. Because, like Pakistan, its an entity that serves foreign interests and at the cost of local people. 
I am aware of such hollow hatred of India in Pakistan or Iran in Sunni countries that are motivated by a blind sense of nationalism. But I strongly believe that India, China, & Iran are what is right with Asia to a certain extent today and not all the way...they are on the right path though...although Hindu fanatics under the leadership of Modi are hard at work to knock India off balance and turn it into another Pakistan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, skyweb1987 said:

Why dont you  judge the condition of the muslism of Kashmir violently murdered by Indians forces on daily basis?

What if Kurds in Iran decide to secede backed by the newly formed Kurdish state based on the argument that since they are both Kurds, Iran should give up its territory? What if they take up arms and face death when they clash  with the Iranian armed forces?

Pakistani generals keep the Kashmir issue alive, fuel it, amplify it so that the gravity of power in Pakistan lies with the military and not with the civilian institutions. I dont buy their stupid fabricated concern about the plight of Kashmiri muslims when they turn around and manufacture misery 1 million times worse in Afghanistan. If you have forgotten, Afghans are muslims just like the Kashmir brothers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Wahdat said:

Pakistani generals keep the Kashmir issue alive, fuel it, amplify it so that the gravity of power in Pakistan lies with the military and not with the civilian institutions. I dont buy their stupid fabricated concern about the plight of Kashmiri muslims when they turn around and manufacture misery 1 million times worse in Afghanistan. If you have forgotten, Afghans are muslims just like the Kashmir brothers.

No, it is not about using it for politics but Kashmir is critical region where source of our rivers lies and I am sure that you would not have read Indus Water Treaty which Indians have violated by constructing dams there and causing us economic problems. Secondly, Kashmiris are not HIndus but they are Muslim majority and they voted to join Pakistan which is according to the 3rd June Plan 1947 but India denied it and occupied it. Usurping someone's right is unacceptable to any country in the world and giving it another color like you are doing shows that you are biased and not impartial.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Salsabeel said:

We have seen what they did in Army Public School. If you look at the history of Afghanistan, you will find that they are the actual terrorists. 

Their character is like gog-magog, the actual mufsids. Majority of Pashtoons living in Afghanistan & Pakistan are ignorants & taliban supporters. They love to kill & fight each other, play football with decapitated heads. 

 

I absolutely agree. To give you a hindsight example of Afghan history- imagine what would happen in Syria if Asad was overthrown and instead Daesh were installed and supported for the next 250 years? What would have become of Syria? The answer is that it would become the Afghanistan of the region.

Secession of Afghanistan from the Iranian administration in West, and the weakening of Mughuls in the East provided a perfect opportunity for Ahmad Shah Durrani to form Afghanistan. This doomed anomaly would have long been corrected had they British not given them the monopoly of guns & money in the area since for the fear of Russians.
Yes those that kill in Pakistan are the same as those that kill in Afghanistan. So stop defending the Pakistani side and call the Afghan side terrorists. They are both one and the same. They are both terrorists. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sindbad05 said:

No, it is not about using it for politics but Kashmir is critical region where source of our rivers lies and I am sure that you would not have read Indus Water Treaty which Indians have violated by constructing dams there and causing us economic problems. Secondly, Kashmiris are not HIndus but they are Muslim majority and they voted to join Pakistan which is according to the 3rd June Plan 1947 but India denied it and occupied it. Usurping someone's right is unacceptable to any country in the world and giving it another color like you are doing shows that you are biased and not impartial.  

imagine.....Kurds will vote to secede from Iran, Balochs likewise  in moves sponsored by Iran's adversary. And if Iran refuses then it becomes the bad guy for not letting Kurds unite with their kurdish brothers in West and Balochs in the East...talk of tyranny!!!!

Pakistan, the womb of global terrorism , was a mistake. And so long as the regional people are naive enough to not see the real powers, interests, and motivations behind creation of this tumour, the region will be captive in the same darkness that it is today. 
And good Pakistanis will go on to defend the rights of their Muslims brothers in Kashmir, while better Pakistanis will go on the wreak havoc in Afghanistan and Iran....and maybe one day lead the Saudi Arabian Israeli NATO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Sindbad05 said:

Afghans have never been sympathetic towards Pakistan. Despite being Muslims, they were first to deny Pakistan on the eve of creation so Afghans were also responsible for bringing mess of terrorism to their lands. 

Yes because they considered 20% of Pakistan as part of Afghanistan that was gifted to them by their colonial masters the same way that the Brits gifted parts of Palestine to Israel. Its like Israelis saying Palestinians were never sympathetic towards Israel because they tried hard for the failure of the formation Israel.

Do you know that Pakistan & Israel have been the top 2 recipients of USAid since their creation? And do you even wonder why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×