Pakistan vs Afghanistan

[BlueOak]

Something being ignored in Western News.

Pakistan is striking Afghanistan, there were skirmishes last year and early this year, but there was a break until now.

Current Info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Pakistani_airstrikes_in_Kabul 
Previous Info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan–Pakistan_clashes_(2024–present)

Light summary of it:

I could not find an in-depth video of it, because its largely not being covered.

I also want to say this is how China potentially becomes the world police. Then 50 years from now people will vilify them.

Edited October 10 by BlueOak

[zazen]

It all kicked off from this earlier in the week: https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/eleven-pakistan-paramilitary-troops-killed-ambush-by-islamist-militants-sources-2025-10-08/

At the same time Afghanistans Taliban visited India to bolster ties which isn’t the best of optics:

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8exzzz5dp5o.amp

That’s not to say there’s coordination - just that India’s hostility towards Pakistan may sway Taliban to act differently, sandwiching Pakistan from the other end by getting involved in covert ops. India army chief was just sabre rattling last week against Pakistan questioning its existence on the map : https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/will-erase-from-map-wont-exercise-restraint-army-chief-warns-pakistan-9389206/amp/1

The group who did the initial attack are distinct form Taliban but are a Pakistani that are offshoot ideaologically similar called TTP (Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan). They operate cross border between Afg-Pk which is porous and go into hiding on the other side when the military clamps down to find them in hideouts etc. Not easy to handle as this becomes guerrilla territory.

There’s more fighting tonight across the border line but hard to tell who’s involved as the Taliban Gov are now responding to Pakistans strikes within their territory, which was supposedly aimed at TTP leaders/members in theirs. What a mess.

Edited October 11 by zazen

[BlueOak]

@zazen Thanks for adding some depth. With Pakistan sandwiched against two now hostile forces, I would guess it depends if China wants to intervene to stabilize it, they've given Pakistan a security guarantee, and Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are in a defensive alliance. Everyone is using this moment of high world tension to settle old grudges.

Afghanistan has made a large, multiple incursion along the border now. Allegedly, all seven Pakistani border outposts, to be confirmed. Heavy fighting, as shown in a clip here:

 

17:07, 19:20, 21:20. 23:55 etc for the actual battles.

*This is what happens when nuclear weapons are no longer an effective deterrent to war. I squarely blame Russia for overusing nuclear threats and diminishing the impact of them.

Edited October 12 by BlueOak

[Twentyfirst]

On 10/10/2025 at 9:30 AM, BlueOak said:

 

I also want to say this is how China potentially becomes the world police. Then 50 years from now people will vilify them.

It wouldn't make sense for China as a global leader to act in the same behaviors as USA when it was a global leader. Mostly because China is not USA and USA is not China

Power doesn't behave in the same way regardless of who is in power. It only behaves in the way the people wielding it want it to behave

[BlueOak]

23 minutes ago, Twentyfirst said:

It wouldn't make sense for China as a global leader to act in the same behaviors as USA when it was a global leader. Mostly because China is not USA and USA is not China

Power doesn't behave in the same way regardless of who is in power. It only behaves in the way the people wielding it want it to behave

True. 

Then X number of years from now the world will be different, and the acting authority will be overthrown. 

Any power assuming the role of authority over other countries experiences this dynamic. So the question is does China walk into this role here? Does it press its authority and power outward to stabilize the situation, or does Saudi Arabia honor its military alliance with Pakistan, and then it's a larger regional conflict?

The other possibility is the USA comes back to the airbase Trump wants so much in Afghanistan and uses it as an excuse, which I am sure will weigh into China's decision.

Edited October 12 by BlueOak

[BlueOak]

The rare earth struggle between superpowers probably explains some of this action. Pakistan contracted with the US. I don't know the exact timeline, so its either just after or just before.
 

His conclusions are somewhat exaggerated but could well explain this initial violent reaction and some of the politicizing I've seen recently around the topic.

Edited October 14 by BlueOak

[BlueOak]

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/video/rajnaths-sindoor-warning-we-gave-pak-birth-we-can-do-more-ytvd-2805123-2025-10-18

Indian Defense Minister Quote:

What happened in Operation Sindoor was just the trailer.

And that alone was enough to make Pakistan realise that if India could give birth to Pakistan, then when the time comes

You already understand the rest.

Usually authoritarian strongman garbage, threatening annexation. India is showing its colors and it's no different to anyone else. I don't know why people can't see obvious patterns, that the entire world moves the same.

People constantly tell me power behaves differently, but it doesn't seem to when the conditions for it to act are the same. Its just like looking at a rainbow and seeing slightly different colors, but its still the same direction and shape. @Leo Gura I try not to bother you but this last line, can you give me any more clarity in my perception of this bolded line, something that increases my own awareness? Obviously, i'm not showing this to myself repeatedly for no reason. - Be blunt or harsh if it helps. Cheers.

Maybe i'm just addicted to feeling meaning or purpose by arguing obvious patterns to me, that others can't see. 

Edited 14 hours ago by BlueOak

[zazen]

9 hours ago, BlueOak said:

People constantly tell me power behaves differently, but it doesn't seem to when the conditions for it to act are the same.

Maybe i'm just addicted to feeling meaning or purpose by arguing obvious patterns to me, that others can't see.

Those patterns are definitely observable - they exist because human nature is constant enough to create probabilities, but consciousness adds variance. A good way to look at it is the container vs consciousness. The container shifts odds, but doesn't always determine destiny.

Structures/systems/containers are the bones and meat suit (container) humans operate within, but it's the brain soup of the psyche, culture and consciousness that moves within it and directs towards better or worse outcomes. So a intersection of fatalism and agency.

 Structural constraints (nature) sets the stage (incentives and pressures) within which the psyche behaves (plays on the stage). Usually humans behave more similar than different, therefore patterns emerge. So I guess we could weight it more towards nature determining outcomes,than nurture shifting towards different outcomes.

For example from Chat GPT:

''The term “Thucydides Trap” comes from political scientist Graham Allison, who examined 16 historical cases over the past 500 years in which a rising power threatened to displace a ruling power, ending in war.

Here are the facts from his Harvard Belfer Center study (“Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides’s Trap?”):

Out of 16 cases, 12 ended in war, and 4 did not.

That’s about 75% war, 25% peace.''

On 01/05/2024 at 11:00 PM, zazen said:

Analogous to hardware / software = software operates within the constraints of the hardware it runs on.

Similarly it’s the conciousness (software) that maximises but is limited to the constraints of the hardware (geography, genetics) it is housed within. Reminds me of the Sadhguru thread where everyone was debating a yogi can or should over come a physical illness = elevating software to think it can transcend hardware.

The opposite end is the geopolitical analyst Peter Zeihan who elevates hardware and has been calling China’s collapse due to its poor geography -  but has high hopes for Argentina becoming a power due to its geography, or America staying top dog due to its superior geography. He overlooks the human element - the human conciousness (software) at work with the material it has (hardware).

 

On 15/05/2024 at 0:45 PM, zazen said:

A phrase I've heard before is that we are prisoners of geography. I think what this means is that geography (just like genetics) has a certain constraint and influence on what humans can do. Analogous to hardware / software = software operates within the constraints of the hardware it runs on.

The structure / hardware dictates to a extent what software / state of mind is possible. It’s the conciousness (software) that maximizes but is limited to the constraints of the hardware (geography, genetics) it is housed within. 

As a example Middle East is at a cross roads between continents and civilizations which meant there was a flow of trade and ideas compared to say Australia at the edge of the world and only accessible once naval technology took off. Similarly from a military perspective countries with mountains around it or the sea become much less likely to be invaded due to their difficulty - nature provides a moat.

India for example has the himalayas to its north and is surrounded by sea - obviously these were overcome with technological advancements. But compare this to more flat land regions where invasions are much more easier and likely where tribes/clans/groups clash like Europe or the flats Middle East.

Variance  showing not all power or positions of power are abused:

 

You can be so honourable that even your rivals respect you. That’s why there are fewer “greats” however. As you point out observable patterns show up - because nature acts out the same more often under the same conditions than not.

Exceptions get the adoration because they “transcended” nature or more so exercise it with some conscience (that separates man from animal). Man doesn’t simply default to nature but can determine and exercise will upon it - nature is the starting point not the end point. 
 

“When Saladin retook Jerusalem in 1187, he was in the same structural position as the Crusaders a century earlier: a victorious conqueror standing over a defeated, occupied city. The conditions were identical — military triumph, religious rivalry, opportunity for revenge. Yet his response could not have been more different.

The Crusaders, when they took Jerusalem in 1099, massacred Muslims and Jews indiscriminately, bathing the city in blood. Saladin, in contrast, pardoned the city’s Christians, allowed orderly ransom for captives, invited Jews back to resettle, and guaranteed protection for holy sites.”

Edited 4 hours ago by zazen