US reaches truce with Taliban

[The Black Forrest]

Amazing, a president that realizes the US isn’t the world’s police

Are the other nations doing the same?

If not; didn't the republicans trump party call that "cutting and running?"

[Ard al Islam]

The Land of Afghans, with Afghans in them, existed for millenia. Even Alexander the Great famously stated; "I fear for you the tooth of the tiger, the venom of the cobra, and the vengeance of the Afghans." And yes, Afghanistan ruled Persia four separate times(Samanids, Saffarids, Ghaznavids, and Hotakis).

The Samanids and the Saffarids were Persian in origin, the Ghaznavids were Turkic (Central Asian). But then again, I'm not sure if I should expect any form of understanding of history from a guy who unironically thinks that Afghanistan "has literally never been conquered".

No, they were all Afghan. They all came from Afghanistan. Mahmud Ghazni, for example, was an Afghan. You forget that Afghan is not an ethnicity. There are Turkic, Persian, and Pashtun Afghans. The Samanids and Saffarids were Afghan, and the Ghaznavids were 100% Afghan. Ghaznavid comes from Ghazni, a city in, Afghanistan. That is where Mahmud Ghazni was from. In every respect, they were Afghan.

[North German Realm]

The Samanids and the Saffarids were Persian in origin, the Ghaznavids were Turkic (Central Asian). But then again, I'm not sure if I should expect any form of understanding of history from a guy who unironically thinks that Afghanistan "has literally never been conquered".

No, they were all Afghan. They all came from Afghanistan. Mahmud Ghazni, for example, was an Afghan. You forget that Afghan is not an ethnicity. There are Turkic, Persian, and Pashtun Afghans. The Samanids and Saffarids were Afghan, and the Ghaznavids were 100% Afghan. Ghaznavid comes from Ghazni, a city in, Afghanistan. That is where Mahmud Ghazni was from. In every respect, they were Afghan.

No they weren't. Samanids trace themselves from Bahram Chobin and were considered Persian (they spoke Persian, promoted Persian identity, and may have been responsible for the fact that the Persian language even survived the Two Centuries of Silence) and the Saffarids are almost considered, almost unanimously by historians, to be one of the first Persian dynasties in Iran post-Qadisiyyeh. Mahmud Qaznavi traces his own lineage back to Sabuktagin, who's literally the most famous Turkic invader in Persia that wasn't a Seljuq.

[Rojava Free State]

So basically "after more than a decade of america promising to completely eradicate the Taliban, america says 'nah jk.'"

I really hope we dont fight another foreign war, but if we do, it'll be as disastrous and it'll be too soon

[Aureumterra]

Just a question, do you live in Afghanistan?

Not anymore.

So did you go to school there? Because I’ve heard in many countries, history schooling is borderline revisionist with all the nationalism. That’s why people from Turkey or India are sometimes taught outright lies to make their country be the winner in the end

[Rojava Free State]

Amazing, a president that realizes the US isn’t the world’s police

Curb your enthusiasm, we're still in syria stealing Assad's oil like an international burglar

[Ard al Islam]

No, they were all Afghan. They all came from Afghanistan. Mahmud Ghazni, for example, was an Afghan. You forget that Afghan is not an ethnicity. There are Turkic, Persian, and Pashtun Afghans. The Samanids and Saffarids were Afghan, and the Ghaznavids were 100% Afghan. Ghaznavid comes from Ghazni, a city in, Afghanistan. That is where Mahmud Ghazni was from. In every respect, they were Afghan.

No they weren't. Samanids trace themselves from Bahram Chobin and were considered Persian (they spoke Persian, promoted Persian identity, and may have been responsible for the fact that the Persian language even survived the Two Centuries of Silence) and the Saffarids are almost considered, almost unanimously by historians, to be one of the first Persian dynasties in Iran post-Qadisiyyeh. Mahmud Qaznavi traces his own lineage back to Sabuktagin, who's literally the most famous Turkic invader in Persia that wasn't a Seljuq.

Mahmud was an Afghan, undoubtedly. As were the others. Persian Afghans.

And even if they weren't, there's still the Hotaks. Side note: I actually know a girl who is a descendant of the great Mirwais Hotak.

[Ard al Islam]

So basically "after more than a decade of america promising to completely eradicate the Taliban, america says 'nah jk.'"

I really hope we dont fight another foreign war, but if we do, it'll be as disastrous and it'll be too soon

Is it just me, or is public sentiment in America starting to resent war?

[Ard al Islam]

Not anymore.

So did you go to school there? Because I’ve heard in many countries, history schooling is borderline revisionist with all the nationalism. That’s why people from Turkey or India are sometimes taught outright lies to make their country be the winner in the end

I schooled here, in America. My english is still bad, though(I'm using google translate). I only speak facts, though. No one has ever managed to completely control all areas of Afghanistan effectively, without facing a rebellion.

[Loben The 2nd]

So did you go to school there? Because I’ve heard in many countries, history schooling is borderline revisionist with all the nationalism. That’s why people from Turkey or India are sometimes taught outright lies to make their country be the winner in the end

I schooled here, in America. My english is still bad, though(I'm using google translate). I only speak facts, though. No one has ever managed to completely control all areas of Afghanistan effectively, without facing a rebellion.

*doubt*

[Ard al Islam]

I schooled here, in America. My english is still bad, though(I'm using google translate). I only speak facts, though. No one has ever managed to completely control all areas of Afghanistan effectively, without facing a rebellion.

*doubt*

About?

[Loben The 2nd]

*doubt*

About?

bolded.

[Ard al Islam]

About?

bolded.

If you were to research, you'd come to the same conclusion. Even if you just looked instead on Wikipedia,

"The Afghanistan area has been invaded many times in recorded history, but no invader has been able to control all of its regions at the same time, and at some point faced rebellion."

[North German Realm]

No they weren't. Samanids trace themselves from Bahram Chobin and were considered Persian (they spoke Persian, promoted Persian identity, and may have been responsible for the fact that the Persian language even survived the Two Centuries of Silence) and the Saffarids are almost considered, almost unanimously by historians, to be one of the first Persian dynasties in Iran post-Qadisiyyeh. Mahmud Qaznavi traces his own lineage back to Sabuktagin, who's literally the most famous Turkic invader in Persia that wasn't a Seljuq.

Mahmud was an Afghan, undoubtedly. As were the others. Persian Afghans.

And even if they weren't, there's still the Hotaks. Side note: I actually know a girl who is a descendant of the great Mirwais Hotak.

Mahmud was not an Afghan. He was Turkic. And there is no such thing as a "Persian Afghan". Afghan as a national identity is less than a century old. Persian as an ethnic identity is at least 2,500 years old. That said, I didn't disagree with you on the Hotaks (though we here in Iran know them by a different name). I just didn't think you'd want to take pride in that mess, impressive as it is that they took a weakened, corrupted Safavid Empire down.

[North German Realm]

So basically "after more than a decade of america promising to completely eradicate the Taliban, america says 'nah jk.'"

I really hope we dont fight another foreign war, but if we do, it'll be as disastrous and it'll be too soon

Is it just me, or is public sentiment in America starting to resent war?

"Starting to". Anti-war sentiment is just as high now as it was during WW2, and for the very same reason. There were entire political movements built on "no wars!" during the Cold War, this is not even remotely impressive.

[Ard al Islam]

Mahmud was an Afghan, undoubtedly. As were the others. Persian Afghans.

And even if they weren't, there's still the Hotaks. Side note: I actually know a girl who is a descendant of the great Mirwais Hotak.

Mahmud was not an Afghan. He was Turkic. And there is no such thing as a "Persian Afghan". Afghan as a national identity is less than a century old. Persian as an ethnic identity is at least 2,500 years old. That said, I didn't disagree with you on the Hotaks (though we here in Iran know them by a different name). I just didn't think you'd want to take pride in that mess, impressive as it is that they took a weakened, corrupted Safavid Empire down.

Dude, Afghans were around long enough for Alexander the Great to refer to them as such. And this is a fact: Mahmud of Ghazni(Ghazni being in Afghanistan, FYI) was an Afghan. Afghanistan defeated an empire that the great Ottomans could not, which is impressive.

So yes, 4 times Afghanistan conquered Persia. Do you want to talk about our victories in India as well?

[Ard al Islam]

Is it just me, or is public sentiment in America starting to resent war?

"Starting to". Anti-war sentiment is just as high now as it was during WW2, and for the very same reason. There were entire political movements built on "no wars!" during the Cold War, this is not even remotely impressive.

Why are you getting defensive?

[North German Realm]

Mahmud was not an Afghan. He was Turkic. And there is no such thing as a "Persian Afghan". Afghan as a national identity is less than a century old. Persian as an ethnic identity is at least 2,500 years old. That said, I didn't disagree with you on the Hotaks (though we here in Iran know them by a different name). I just didn't think you'd want to take pride in that mess, impressive as it is that they took a weakened, corrupted Safavid Empire down.

Dude, Afghans were around long enough for Alexander the Great to refer to them as such. And this is a fact: Mahmud of Ghazni(Ghazni being in Afghanistan, FYI) was an Afghan. Afghanistan defeated an empire that the great Ottomans could not, which is impressive.

So yes, 4 times Afghanistan conquered Persia. Do you want to talk about our victories in India as well?

That is historically false. The earliest historical mention of Afghan (of which Afghanistan is derived) is in the 3rd century (during the Sassanid period, as a way to refer to the Pashtun People, which was the norm until the revisionism in the Afghan Constitution of 1964 which gave the ethnonym to everyone living in Afghanistan).
All that said, the problem is, you're viewing Greater Khorasan as an Afghan territory, which is simply ahistorical as Greater Khorasan has been part of the Iranian Nation longer than Afghanistan as a place with a national identity has existed (that is to say, at best the 1700s, in reality the early 1900s). Mahmud was not an "Afghan", he was born in Zabulistan, again an integral part of the Iranian Nation, who traced his identity back to his Turkic father, who spoke Turkic languages, and who was in fact hated by the Afghan (Pashtun) tribes in and out of his control as well as the Iranians alike for being a Turk throughout his life. Samanids and Saffarids both identified as Persians -because "Afghan" meant Pashtun, which none of the above were. And that's ignoring the fact Samanids and Saffarids were installed as regional rulers by the Abbasid Caliph, which is a whole different topic.

[Ard al Islam]

Dude, Afghans were around long enough for Alexander the Great to refer to them as such. And this is a fact: Mahmud of Ghazni(Ghazni being in Afghanistan, FYI) was an Afghan. Afghanistan defeated an empire that the great Ottomans could not, which is impressive.

So yes, 4 times Afghanistan conquered Persia. Do you want to talk about our victories in India as well?

That is historically false. The earliest historical mention of Afghan (of which Afghanistan is derived) is in the 3rd century (during the Sassanid period, as a way to refer to the Pashtun People, which was the norm until the revisionism in the Afghan Constitution of 1964 which gave the ethnonym to everyone living in Afghanistan).
All that said, the problem is, you're viewing Greater Khorasan as an Afghan territory, which is simply ahistorical as Greater Khorasan has been part of the Iranian Nation longer than Afghanistan as a place with a national identity has existed (that is to say, at best the 1700s, in reality the early 1900s). Mahmud was not an "Afghan", he was born in Zabulistan, again an integral part of the Iranian Nation, who traced his identity back to his Turkic father, who spoke Turkic languages, and who was in fact hated by the Afghan (Pashtun) tribes in and out of his control as well as the Iranians alike for being a Turk throughout his life. Samanids and Saffarids both identified as Persians -because "Afghan" meant Pashtun, which none of the above were. And that's ignoring the fact Samanids and Saffarids were installed as regional rulers by the Abbasid Caliph, which is a whole different topic.

The earliest mention of Afghans was by Alexander the Great, over 600 years before the Sassanid period you refer to. Zabulistan is, y'know, Afghanistan. Where Mahmud of Ghazni, an Afghan hero, came from. Khorasan is, indeed, Afghanistan. And an Afghan nationality first existed in the 1700s, sure, because that's when nationality became a thing. He established an Afghan empire based out of Afghanistan, as did the Saffarids and Samanids, who were actually completely independent from the Abbasids.

My point from the beginning still stands. "The Afghanistan area has been invaded many times in recorded history, but no invader has been able to control all of its regions at the same time, and at some point faced rebellion." And this is the absolute truth.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

Great. Now the Taliban can rebuild and take over Afghanistan again, plunging it into yet another dark age with all the patriarchy, honor killings, and terrorism that comes with that.

Fucking superb, really.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

That is historically false. The earliest historical mention of Afghan (of which Afghanistan is derived) is in the 3rd century (during the Sassanid period, as a way to refer to the Pashtun People, which was the norm until the revisionism in the Afghan Constitution of 1964 which gave the ethnonym to everyone living in Afghanistan).
All that said, the problem is, you're viewing Greater Khorasan as an Afghan territory, which is simply ahistorical as Greater Khorasan has been part of the Iranian Nation longer than Afghanistan as a place with a national identity has existed (that is to say, at best the 1700s, in reality the early 1900s). Mahmud was not an "Afghan", he was born in Zabulistan, again an integral part of the Iranian Nation, who traced his identity back to his Turkic father, who spoke Turkic languages, and who was in fact hated by the Afghan (Pashtun) tribes in and out of his control as well as the Iranians alike for being a Turk throughout his life. Samanids and Saffarids both identified as Persians -because "Afghan" meant Pashtun, which none of the above were. And that's ignoring the fact Samanids and Saffarids were installed as regional rulers by the Abbasid Caliph, which is a whole different topic.

The earliest mention of Afghans was by Alexander the Great, over 600 years before the Sassanid period you refer to. Zabulistan is, y'know, Afghanistan. Where Mahmud of Ghazni, an Afghan hero, came from. Khorasan is, indeed, Afghanistan. And an Afghan nationality first existed in the 1700s, sure, because that's when nationality became a thing. He established an Afghan empire based out of Afghanistan, as did the Saffarids and Samanids, who were actually completely independent from the Abbasids.

My point from the beginning still stands. "The Afghanistan area has been invaded many times in recorded history, but no invader has been able to control all of its regions at the same time, and at some point faced rebellion." And this is the absolute truth.

Alexander the Great literally ruled all of what is now Afghanistan. What are you smoking?

[United Muscovite Nations]

That is historically false. The earliest historical mention of Afghan (of which Afghanistan is derived) is in the 3rd century (during the Sassanid period, as a way to refer to the Pashtun People, which was the norm until the revisionism in the Afghan Constitution of 1964 which gave the ethnonym to everyone living in Afghanistan).
All that said, the problem is, you're viewing Greater Khorasan as an Afghan territory, which is simply ahistorical as Greater Khorasan has been part of the Iranian Nation longer than Afghanistan as a place with a national identity has existed (that is to say, at best the 1700s, in reality the early 1900s). Mahmud was not an "Afghan", he was born in Zabulistan, again an integral part of the Iranian Nation, who traced his identity back to his Turkic father, who spoke Turkic languages, and who was in fact hated by the Afghan (Pashtun) tribes in and out of his control as well as the Iranians alike for being a Turk throughout his life. Samanids and Saffarids both identified as Persians -because "Afghan" meant Pashtun, which none of the above were. And that's ignoring the fact Samanids and Saffarids were installed as regional rulers by the Abbasid Caliph, which is a whole different topic.

The earliest mention of Afghans was by Alexander the Great, over 600 years before the Sassanid period you refer to. Zabulistan is, y'know, Afghanistan. Where Mahmud of Ghazni, an Afghan hero, came from. Khorasan is, indeed, Afghanistan. And an Afghan nationality first existed in the 1700s, sure, because that's when nationality became a thing. He established an Afghan empire based out of Afghanistan, as did the Saffarids and Samanids, who were actually completely independent from the Abbasids.

My point from the beginning still stands. "The Afghanistan area has been invaded many times in recorded history, but no invader has been able to control all of its regions at the same time, and at some point faced rebellion." And this is the absolute truth.

Afghanistan was conquered by Timur pretty easily.

[Ard al Islam]

Great. Now the Taliban can rebuild and take over Afghanistan again, plunging it into yet another dark age with all the patriarchy, honor killings, and terrorism that comes with that.

Fucking superb, really.

I believe that if America leaves, the same thing will happen to Afghanistan like when Britain left. Meaning, it would improve drastically. I doubt the Taliban would come into power again. I don't think the current government will stand, either. I believe that a third party, one that is righteous and just, will come to power, and Afghanistan will become the glory it once was, not too long ago.

[Ard al Islam]

The earliest mention of Afghans was by Alexander the Great, over 600 years before the Sassanid period you refer to. Zabulistan is, y'know, Afghanistan. Where Mahmud of Ghazni, an Afghan hero, came from. Khorasan is, indeed, Afghanistan. And an Afghan nationality first existed in the 1700s, sure, because that's when nationality became a thing. He established an Afghan empire based out of Afghanistan, as did the Saffarids and Samanids, who were actually completely independent from the Abbasids.

My point from the beginning still stands. "The Afghanistan area has been invaded many times in recorded history, but no invader has been able to control all of its regions at the same time, and at some point faced rebellion." And this is the absolute truth.

Alexander the Great literally ruled all of what is now Afghanistan. What are you smoking?

"The Afghanistan area has been invaded many times in recorded history, but no invader has been able to control all of its regions at the same time, and at some point faced rebellion."
Alexander the Great didn't control all of it, and he was constantly fought, losing his first battles there. He eventually died and the Afghans got their land back.

[Ard al Islam]

The earliest mention of Afghans was by Alexander the Great, over 600 years before the Sassanid period you refer to. Zabulistan is, y'know, Afghanistan. Where Mahmud of Ghazni, an Afghan hero, came from. Khorasan is, indeed, Afghanistan. And an Afghan nationality first existed in the 1700s, sure, because that's when nationality became a thing. He established an Afghan empire based out of Afghanistan, as did the Saffarids and Samanids, who were actually completely independent from the Abbasids.

My point from the beginning still stands. "The Afghanistan area has been invaded many times in recorded history, but no invader has been able to control all of its regions at the same time, and at some point faced rebellion." And this is the absolute truth.

Afghanistan was conquered by Timur pretty easily.

No, not at all. In fact, the Timurid Empire came from Afghanistan. But Timur was not able to control all of Afghanistan without facing rebellion, and their empire fell as Afghanistan remained independent.