• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Afghan attack: Babies killed as gunmen storm Kabul maternity ward

Cooky

Veteran Member
A pretty big point really. Terrorism is not choosy

It is a pretty big point. What's not a big point is that this was a maternity ward with women and children. That part is not very important.

...We should be focusing our attention on what Christians and white nationalists have done in the past.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
It is a pretty big point. What's not a big point is that this was a maternity ward with women and children. That part is not very important.

...We should be focusing our attention on what Christians and white nationalists have done in the past.


Its important to the family and friends of those people murdered.

Christians have a very poor rep for peace in the past, and in the present time, a story that many christians try to cover up.
 

Cooky

Veteran Member
Its important to the family and friends of those people murdered.

Well sure, but it's not really something we should think about. What's more important is reminding Christians about how awful their religion has been in the past.
 

Cooky

Veteran Member
Let's talk about how awful those Crusades were. That's the real take-away from this story we should be focused on.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
Its important to the family and friends of those people murdered.

Christians have a very poor rep for peace in the past, and in the present time, a story that many christians try to cover up.
It does appear, however, that you are covering up the thousands that are currently being murdered under muslim hands by mentioned the relative recent history of some hundreds of Christians in very few areas,.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
It does appear, however, that you are covering up the thousands that are currently being murdered under muslim hands by mentioned the relative recent history of some hundreds of Christians in very few areas,.

Nope, you asked a question, i answered it.

You want Muslim terrorism and atrosities then ask the about boko haram, al shabaab, the taliban and i.s.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
You're saying that Pakistan wants to use the Taliban to gain power in Afghanistan, but they would not allow them any peace if they did? It makes it sound like Pakistan is wishy-washy and doesn't know what side to take.
I can see where the US might use Pakistan as some kind of proxy to keep Afghanistan under control, but why wouldn't Pakistan go along with that? If they truly want to hold hegemony over Afghanistan, then having US support to do so would work to their advantage.
But from what you're saying, it appears Pakistan is a large part of the problem, that they're instigators or something.
Still, I can't see how attacking maternity wards and killing babies would bring them any closer to achieving power.
Once the US is out, the competition will be between Taliban (IS, Al-Quaeda types) and Pakistan (ISI, Bajwa). That competition is there even now in Pakistan with Fazal-ur-Rehman leading the opposition against Imran Khan and the army. The religious extremists want an Iran-type Islamic revolution in Pakistan though of a Sunni shade.
Pakistan army wants their hegemony in Afghanistan without US interference because their plans do not stop with Afghanistan. Pak Army has no desire to be used by US because they have their own desires - hegemony in Central Asia (to be bigger / stronger against India, with Chinese help). They want a "Khorasan Vilayet" not for IS or Al-Quaeda, but for themselves. That is only side where they can expand (Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, etc.).
Pakistan has been the base of the Afghanistan problem. IMHO, US sees it but can't do much about it, now even less, with Pakistan being in cahoot with China. If the US had not provided F-16s to Pakistan, Pakistan would have got its equivalent from China.
As for who dies, that is never a worry for Islamic terrorists and power seekers. Allah controls births and deaths. If Allah did not want it, the babies would not have died.
I think no one understands Pakistan better than Indians. :D
 
Last edited:

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Once the US is out, the competition will be between Taliban (IS, Al-Quaeda types) and Pakistan (ISI, Bajwa). That competition is there even now in Pakistan with Fazal-ur-Rehman leading the opposition against Imran Khan and the army. The religious extremists want an Iran-type Islamic revolution in Pakistan though of a Sunni shade.
Pakistan army wants their hegemony in Afghanistan without US interference because their plans do not stop with Afghanistan. Pak Army has no desire to be used by US because they have their own desires - hegemony in Central Asia (to be bigger / stronger against India, with Chinese help). They want a "Khorasan Vilayet" not for IS or Al-Quaeda, but for themselves. That is only side where they can expand (Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, etc.).
Pakistan has been the base of the Afghanistan problem. IMHO, US sees it but can't do much about it. If the US had not provided F-16s to Pakistan, Pakistan would have got its equivalent from China.
As for who dies, that is never a worry for Islamic terrorists and power seekers. Allah controls births and deaths. If Allah did not want it, the babies would not have died.
I think no one understands Pakistan better than Indians. :D

I don't know if Pakistan could move into former Soviet Republics like Uzbekistan or Turkmenistan. The Russians may have something to say about that.

I'm not sure if their goals are realistic considering the current state of the world. It's not the same as it was during the Cold War, although there are still similarities. The major powers can't fight it out openly, but they're involved in an elaborate chess game using proxies and economic power to achieve their ends. The leaders and economic elite of smaller countries have benefited from this, as long as they play ball with one of the big shots.

But if they have grandiose visions of conquest or some kind of nationalistic holy war, then it seems to have the makings of a continued decades-long rat war.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
Yeah, Pakistan army knows that it will take decades. They have been at it since 1949. They are a patient lot. Even Afghanistan itself will be a prize.

"In 1953, he was replaced as Prime Minister by Mohammed Daoud Khan, the king's cousin and brother-in-law. Daoud looked for a closer relationship with the Soviet Union and a more distant one towards Pakistan. However, disputes with Pakistan led to an economic crisis and he was asked to resign in 1963." Wikipedia - History of Afghanistan

"Khan supported a nationalistic reunification of the Pakistani Pashtun people with Afghanistan*, but this would have involved taking a considerable amount of territory from the new nation of Pakistan and was in direct opposition to an older plan of the 1940s whereby a confederation between the two countries was proposed. The move further worried the non-Pashtun populations of Afghanistan such as the minority Hazara, Tajik, and Uzbek, who suspected his intention was to increase the Pashtuns' disproportionate hold on political power. Border skirmishes with Pakistan began in 1949." Wikipedia - Mohmmad Daud Khan

*That was his (Daud's) vision, Pakistanis have their own vision (Punjabi dominenece).
 
Last edited:
Top