the lying filth who plot suicide bombings

Are not only hypocrites and evil sedition planning assholes of the highest degree, but they simply are not remotely anything truly resembling Muslim.

The very Sharia most of these guys claim to uphold actually calls for the execution by summary crucifixion of people carrying out these horrible crimes.

But enough of village idiot pseudo-Molvis in turbans that hide their real reality.

I wrote a several page post on a few topics here, but then decided to erase the whole thing, as prudence overcame me.

So I will simply suggest a few things, and invite you to consider a few things in greater depths, possibilities not conclusions.

I think that as we think things over, and watch the state of our country and world over the next few years, it will increasingly occur to us that few things are ever what they seem to be, on the surface. It’s not unlikely that 20 years from now, information may emerge about some matters in the world today that will make the few of us still around, and still paying attention, actually cry when we realize what our action, and our inaction, allowed to be brought forth.

No one realizes the threads they are spinning are going to be woven into a noose in the next room, and that at the end of the day it’s possible our own necks may fit into it.

This analogy must be thought through with some care.

I think that all of us sometimes have the impression that we are, all of us, simply pieces laid out on a chess board – a game far larger than any of us are comfortable imagining, played for stakes that most people are simply unable to imagine by their very constitution.

Through most of life our imaginations, and worldviews, are rather small and even when we try to broaden our horizons certain things escape us.

Contentions to consider:

-The ISI and RAW both, far from being stakeholders in the game, are actually just pieces themselves, more akin to Rooks. Unable to see off the board, though each side essentially does its job – being seeing to the geo-strategic imperatives of the nations they serve. In dialectical opposition both RAW’s and ISI’s operations actually fit into a larger logic.

– The CIA and FSB, possibly, and other similar agencies may have a larger view of the board than the ISI or RAW – but again are serving what they perceive to be the interests of their respective Nation States in a narrow sense, and are more like Bishops in the game, wider range of operation and a wider view of the field, as their movements suggest, but still operating in a certain set of dialectical constraints limiting the vision of larger ends.

– All agencies and institutions worldwide serve larger ends by the very operative logic dictated by their structure and history, the bigger picture is often harder to see when you are inside the box.

-Anyone may want to consider a small hint, just a bare hint not even covering details or depths, of what might be behind the scenes of some things. Just a suggestion, contemplate the phrase “strategy of tension’ very, very, carefully.

And then NOT jumping to conclusions, just explore various ideas that surface when considering the phrase, one after the other, and in your head check off what seems likely, what seems unlikely, what seems preposterous, what seems realistic. Dance with multiple scenarios and see how they fit all visible players at work here.

– The Taliban are not whom others claim them to be.

– Mullah Umar is not what others claim him to be. And it is quite likely that if anyone happened to guess what his real role was, they would simply dismiss the thought from their heads as too fantastic.

-The Left with its facile and simple (though not without a degree of truth) party line of “it’s about the oil” is wrong. So too with the lies of the Right’s party line (though again, with some echo of truth as well).It’s not about democracy or oil, or freedoms, or several other shibboliths, a more complex set of geostrategic set of equations are at play.

Consider multiple options and see if you can start to see an angle, consider the distinct possibility that both you and I have been had, and played for fools – but not by the usual suspects that we’d normally rise up and blame.

Open your mind to consider multiple scenarios, who benefits, on what level, on what degree, are tehir open actions commensurate with the payoff we see them benefiting from, if not then what is missing from the picture?

What is not being spoken of by either side, left or right?

What terms are missing from the discourse but leaving an imprint whose rough, and fuzzy, outline can be barely felt, but not fully perceived?

Questions to think over.

Pashtunistan and Kurdistan

This is a hypothetical exercise. Do not misconstrue it. It’s a mental exercise fleshing out some controversial ideas, that are very open to criticism.

I am considering the idea that a formal greater Pashtunistan should be considered among geo-political thinkers.

The same with Kurdistan, for while I do not think turkey’s territorial integrity should be compromised, I do think there should be a formal Iraqi and Iranian Kurdistan as its own state ruled by the Kurds.

I’m an odd ball of course, I believe the Ertugrul Osman Khan (Sultan Ertugrul II), the last Ottoman scion, should have been given a formal honorary position by the Turkish government. Sadly he has passed on so this position is simply academic.

Of course there is still His Imperial Highness Bayezid Osmanoglu Khan, may the house of Osman continue to bloom. Adding to his distinction, Osman Khan is a US Army vet. I have a feeling he would be good in Turkish politics. In any case, I stray from the point.

In any case, back to the Pashtuns. There has always been a lived reality of a geographic area dominated by the Pashtuns – this was historically known as Pakhtunkhwa and modern Afghanistan and Pakistan’s North West Frontier Province(very recently re-named Khyber Pakhtunkwa) are newer veneer on top of the region.

It is my opinion that Pashtuns and Kurds both should have their own respective States. In the Pashtun case, roughly encompassing the NWFP as well as a substantial portion of Southern Afghanistan. Modern Afghanistan itself is an artificial state, a substantial core of which is Pashtun.

While the Northern areas are heavily Tajik and Uzbek Southern Afghanistan is substantially Pashtun and always has been. In fact the word Afghan has been used as a synonym for Pashtun centuries ago.

I think that the map of the region should reflect this reality.

Swat, Chitral, Gilget, even some (not all but some) of Baluchistan should be part of it since these areas all historically have had a heavy Pashtun component.

This should be done while instituting a Jirga based form of government.

Terrorists and brigands should be executed due to their many vile and cowardly crimes against the people, sowing instability and corruption against the people.

Of course those terrorists working for States are harder to deal with, but that’s for another day.

Exception should be made for those brigands and terrorists who agree to be reconciled and peacefully settle and support the new regime prior to their capture. That is, they demobilize and pledge allegiance to the State of Pashtunistan and turn themselves in voluntarily. They should be reconciled with peacefully and with honor – those who reconcile and atone for their crimes and subject themselves to the authority would be subject to Pashtun justice and retaliation, or forgiveness, by the relatives of the people their crimes affected, as their tribes see fit.

But there should be talk and discourse, it is always better to be talking to a former enemy who is now your friend, sometimes former enemies make the best friends and those who realize this not have no insight into matters of strategy, and they typically have no sense.

Every attempt at integration of all discontent elements into a new society under a responsible Pashtun leadership should be allowed, and by jirga they should collectively determine the form of government the new region of Pashtunistan would take. Expecting a Western style democracy to work in Afghanistan is the height of naive stupidity

If this can be done without oppression or endangering the rights of historic minorities there it should be done.

Will it be done? No. This is a hypothetical exercise.

Look, I think one factor complicating the current wars in the East lies in the fact that the people typically looked at as black hat “bad guys” have very deep roots in the area and far from xenophobia, simply see themselves as offended parties defending the lands of their grandfathers, great grandfathers, and great great grandfathers.

There are multiple groups, and individuals, with competing and multiple agendas, some reconcilable others not, what they want primarily is freedom to practice their own religion and follow their own leaders on their own land without foreigners manipulating them as proxy war fighters, which is what has been going on for 30 years now – multiple foreign governments have been using Afghanistan as a site of proxy warfare. The far too facile way in which our media is accustomed to labeling complex realities should be resisted.

A gretaer Pashtunistan is a far more sensible idea than the “Mughalstan” idea floated around in some quarters. Mughalstan was an imposed entity, however successful it was for centuries, by a Turki dynasty on a mostly Indic populace. Pashtuns however have been in their region from the earliest ages of civilization in the region.

The Pashtuns have been in their region for thousands of years, they are the remnant of the original Indo-Iranian tribes who migrated to the sub continent millennia ago. These are the people Alexander the Great had to fight to get to India, they see themselves as having a deep connection with their land, a land watered both by their blood and the blood of their enemies.

They do not respect the current borders and geopolitical realities and see the wars there not only as matters of life or death but as matters of honor. Honour is something that looses a lot of currency in the modern world today, but among the Pashtuns their honor, their ancestors honor, and their religion’s honor, are literally life or death. Their code of honor, Pukhutnkhwa, is probably more than 3000 years old, their way of life not only pre-dates Islam but predates Western Civilization in its oldest sense.

It is unwise to not consider these facts, I believe that the Pashtuns are a people among whom are elements who will not stop fighting as long as their honor is slighted and the destiny of the lands their great grandfathers tread is under their control.

It is unwise to fail to consider these points.

The Kurds are a similar case, though honestly I have far less tolerance for many of the Kurdish parties, who have made themselves into utter a-ses for decades. But the basic idea of a Kurdistan, if done in a way that does not destroy Turkish territorial integrity, is an idea that should be explored and considered. The Kurds and Pashtuns are nations unto themselves, not just ethic groups. They should have nation states if this is their desire.

Of course the situation is far more complex than this, again this is simply a hypothetical exercise on my part, more of amusing out loud.

_EOF