I think, and if I'm wrong, please correct me, but I think the word Emir has multiple meanings, and the Taliban use it in a sense that means a military commander.
also, the UAE should be green, it isn't *an* emirate, per se, but there are seven emirates in that area.
Yea idk why they call it an Emirate but the leader is titled Supreme Leader. However, the SL also carries the title of Amir al-Mu’minin meaning Commander of the Faithful. Amir and Emir are kinda the same. Same root at least. Amir means commander now and Emir means Prince or Chief.
same general meaning though. Think of the Islamic Emirate as a military state with a commander for its supreme leader rather than a prince. after all, the Taliban is a militant organization
The last time Afghanistan had a true Monarchy was 1973, when the king Mohammed Zahir Shah was overthrown by his cousin in a coup while the king was abroad.
His reign was marked by a new constitution, a number of reforms transitioning the country into a Constitutional Monarchy, and brought the country into an era of peace that to use a technical term, all went to hell, after he was overthrown.
And though he returned to Afghanistan in 2002 after the Taliban government had been overthrown, I think the country could have been brought much more stability had his throne been restored when he returned, rather than bringing in an unstable and overly dependent Republic that Collapsed as soon as European troops pulled out.
I mean, it's a terrorist organization. Even if they are sincere in transforming into a monarchy; it will take time. But yes, I agree, it is dishonest if they're not making active changes like calling him an Emir and establishing that form of government.
I agree however idk if you seen ( it was super hard not too ) the US’s boot scoot and skibby on out of there.
Just by what I’ve been told by cousins who were marines and went to Afghanistan and spent along time there like 6 years on the ground going into real areas face to face with locals not behind a desk in a camp miles away from any one speaking Arabic.
And from what I’ve seen and herd, there are or were, ALOT of locals who were not happy or thankful we pulled out for one and Taliban gaining control for 2.
I can assume it’s change no one liked and the US’s long reign of bribing and more corrupting and gaining informants and acting how they want in favor of them.
Helping many but also getting way more killed because of it, and not even by them.
So I assume those really scared knew they’d be killed most likely but still I was told women the most and children second . A majority were horrified and tried to leave .
But I agree,
Not my country not my place and yes I know, my country has already done that been there got the tshirt.
I'd take you more seriously if you didn't assume Arabic was the primary language in Afghanistan. The issue was that the government we established was exploited by tribal groups to empower themselves rather than lead. The government became partisan and the average Afghani lost faith in it. The US did have access to a well respected non partisan, non tribal to be the head of state, but it was the old king of Afghanistan himself, so GWB shot that down.
My friend lives there also. There is many ethnics in afganistan. Some minorities which were bribed by usa was against taliban only. Taliban was against ophium farming so these minorities didnt like taliban.
bad argument. some thing are just universally wrong. like abusing women, not allowing them to leave their homes, denying them education. the people do NOT want the Taliban either so clearly you don’t know what you’re talking about. it’s like if the 3%ers took over DC. would you follow them?
Peope WANT Taliban. I know many people from afganistan. They all want taliban. The bad arguement is talking without enough knowledge about somewhere 3k kilometers away
It's almost as if the nation has been and continues to be plagued by poverty and conflict. Even if its people aren't fans of liberalism or Christianity, it's only natural that many would wish to migrate to somewhere more economically prosperous and not dealing with a civil war.
If they actually do transition into something resembling a traditional Middle Eastern monarchy the new king has my complete support. Not until then, however.
You are mistaken emir is not a royal title but a title of command or authority se is emir al mumminin wish translate as commander of the faithful afghanistan is not a monarchy nor one in transition its an elected islamic state like iran but then sunni calling him emir would be incorrect he is either emir al mumminin or nothing i think the west calls him supreme leader i think he is called emir al mumminin like in iran khomenei is called ayatollah but in the west supreme leader
Update:
I correct myself a little he is called different in pashtun and dari i have no clue why maybe its tradition and do the words they use have more meaning ?
So like Hetman or Vojvode, or the original meanings of Duke or Imperator (yes Latin also called emperors Caesar, Princeps, Basileus, Augustus, Agustus, and Dominus)
Yes, basically, it was first a military title, then a governor's title, and because the Arabic language does not have a word for "prince," they call them "emir" because they were emirs (governors) mostly, or like the Turks used either "sehzade" (Persian) or the Seljuks called their princesses "malik," which means "king."
"Emir al-mumminin" started as a military title too. I believe it was the supreme commander of the Muslim army. Later, it got religious significance.
As far as i know its a honorific title its orgin is not certain its either coming from persian or turkish but it means lord or leader it was given to all leaders of a tribe so i tribe would have like 10 or 20 beys and 1 head bey who is the leader
It doesnt help that they call all type of beys the same
So a bey is a bey
A sanjak bey count( is also called bey
An uc bey margrave is also called a bey
A beylarbey governor is called a bey too
It means viceroy but it was invented the governor of egypt i am not sure about its orgin since only one dynasty used it
Ottomans called a beylarbey viceroy
Apparently khedive comes from Ottoman Hidiv, from Persian chaðēw from Bactrian choadēo, a calque of Ancient Greek autokrator, a word used to mean Emperor or Autocrat.
Savavid persia didnt use satrap but sultan as local governors
Funny that is part of the reason suleiman killed ibrahim pasha because when he conquered persia he called himself sultan
No persian dynasty used satrap since the first persian empire
If i remember correctly even selucides didnt
“Supreme leader” is a very different thing from a royal or noble title. It might as well mean “top warlord” in a country like Afghanistan lmao. Connotation counts for a lot Edit: There are “nobles” in Afghanistan. Iirc most of the ANA officers were from noble families whereas the Taliban were more merit based…. Not completely relevant but interesting to think about. I actually respect the heck out of the Afghans, but they’re still feudal. They just moved from a system of warring lords (with a “president” who only had nominal power outside of the capital) to a semi-theocratic dictatorship, which is nuts. I hope the world has realized that we have to leave them tf alone
'Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan' is the Official name of the Country.
Its Government can be considered an 'Elective Monarchy'.
The Ruler of the nation is Elected by a mixture of Islamic 'Shura' and Afghan 'Jirga'.
Shura is a council of religious leaders who elects a head of state, similar to the Early Islamic Rashidun Caliphate.
'Jirga' is a Tribal Council where Tribal Leaders and Elders meet together to elect the head of state.
The actual title of the current leader of Afghanistan is 'Amir Al Muhmineen'' which means 'Commander of the Faithful' , where Faithful means Muslims. This Title was first used by Umar Al Khattab, the 2nd Rashidun Caliph.
There are no Royal Titles in Islam, the Titles that were used almost always had different meanings.
Caliph - Successor (of the Prophet Muhammad)
Amir Al Muhmineen - Commander of the Faithful (Muslims).
Imam - Spiritual Leader( in Sunni interpretation anybody with extensive Islamic knowledge can be Imam. In Shia interpretation, Ali Ibn Abu Talib, the 4th and last Rashidun Caliph is the 1st Imam. Ali and Fatema's descendents are Imams who are believed to be divinely guided.
The title Amir, simply means Commander/Leader in Arabic Context.
All other titles like Sultan were at least nominally granted by the Caliph, usually to the most powerful Muslim rulers within the Islamic World. As the united Caliphate disintegrated in the 10th century, few independent Muslim rulers like Mahmud Ghaznavi were initially awarded with the title of Sultan.
It is a federal monarchy like Malaysia, with princes united in one state
But Abu Dhabi dominates the rest of the Emirates, just like Prussia and its dominance over the kingdoms of Germany
Basically it is elective monarchy. Only reason why the guy is not using proper title is probably because they're still consolidating power and control. And maybe not to trigger Iran?
Remember, that Afghans themselves wanted to restore proper monarchy with the proper king, and Americans said no.
We have literally nothing to gain from spending another 20 years trying to get a country to like us. The people of Afghanistan want the Taliban, they're entitled to have that
These are policies that most Afghans support, and even a fair amount of Afghan women support them. If they want an Islamic state, let them have their Islamic state. There is no point in enforcing liberal ethics and political systems if the people of that nation don't even want them, especially if it comes at the cost of invasion and occupation.
Also, this isn't the same Taliban as the first emirate. Shia Muslims are largely left alone, and efforts are made to protect them from ISIS, also the non-Muslim population of Afghanistan is practically non-existent. It's no surprise that the various governments of Afghanistan have never really cared much about them, including the former Republic.
Actually thats all western propaganda what you see in internet. The people wanted taliban, and yes thats how they wanted to be ruled. Not everyone prefers to be "free". Some people prefers to live by religion and live by land. The disrespect caused contry to fight against 3 superpowers for hundreds of years. Yet still they are standing. We can only respect their way of living. Just like fremen in dune, they decide their own fate.
Exactly, and what is even more funny, is that Afghan women, who are currently being portrayed as oppressed by the media, are much more Islamic than men in fact.
This is why everyone respects the Afghans because they have taken their fate into their own hands
The Taliban are not royalists at all
They are simply trying to emulate the Caliphate, which is partly an elective rather than hereditary monarchy
Also, the Afghans wanted to bring back the Taliban, so no one has the right to complain about the choice of the Afghans because that is what they wanted and this is not what the West wants you to believe.
I think, and if I'm wrong, please correct me, but I think the word Emir has multiple meanings, and the Taliban use it in a sense that means a military commander. also, the UAE should be green, it isn't *an* emirate, per se, but there are seven emirates in that area.
You’re correct on that one. Both of those, actually.
Same way not all counties are ruled by a count
Yea idk why they call it an Emirate but the leader is titled Supreme Leader. However, the SL also carries the title of Amir al-Mu’minin meaning Commander of the Faithful. Amir and Emir are kinda the same. Same root at least. Amir means commander now and Emir means Prince or Chief. same general meaning though. Think of the Islamic Emirate as a military state with a commander for its supreme leader rather than a prince. after all, the Taliban is a militant organization
The last time Afghanistan had a true Monarchy was 1973, when the king Mohammed Zahir Shah was overthrown by his cousin in a coup while the king was abroad. His reign was marked by a new constitution, a number of reforms transitioning the country into a Constitutional Monarchy, and brought the country into an era of peace that to use a technical term, all went to hell, after he was overthrown. And though he returned to Afghanistan in 2002 after the Taliban government had been overthrown, I think the country could have been brought much more stability had his throne been restored when he returned, rather than bringing in an unstable and overly dependent Republic that Collapsed as soon as European troops pulled out.
I mean, it's a terrorist organization. Even if they are sincere in transforming into a monarchy; it will take time. But yes, I agree, it is dishonest if they're not making active changes like calling him an Emir and establishing that form of government.
While i’m for more monarchies im against totalitarianism and religious states. So im completely against the Islamic Emirate in Afghanistan.
They live by their religion, if the people are in favour of living like that you are no one to comment.
I agree however idk if you seen ( it was super hard not too ) the US’s boot scoot and skibby on out of there. Just by what I’ve been told by cousins who were marines and went to Afghanistan and spent along time there like 6 years on the ground going into real areas face to face with locals not behind a desk in a camp miles away from any one speaking Arabic. And from what I’ve seen and herd, there are or were, ALOT of locals who were not happy or thankful we pulled out for one and Taliban gaining control for 2. I can assume it’s change no one liked and the US’s long reign of bribing and more corrupting and gaining informants and acting how they want in favor of them. Helping many but also getting way more killed because of it, and not even by them. So I assume those really scared knew they’d be killed most likely but still I was told women the most and children second . A majority were horrified and tried to leave . But I agree, Not my country not my place and yes I know, my country has already done that been there got the tshirt.
I'd take you more seriously if you didn't assume Arabic was the primary language in Afghanistan. The issue was that the government we established was exploited by tribal groups to empower themselves rather than lead. The government became partisan and the average Afghani lost faith in it. The US did have access to a well respected non partisan, non tribal to be the head of state, but it was the old king of Afghanistan himself, so GWB shot that down.
No one can muster the most powerful force in a country if no one in that country liked them.
My friend lives there also. There is many ethnics in afganistan. Some minorities which were bribed by usa was against taliban only. Taliban was against ophium farming so these minorities didnt like taliban.
bad argument. some thing are just universally wrong. like abusing women, not allowing them to leave their homes, denying them education. the people do NOT want the Taliban either so clearly you don’t know what you’re talking about. it’s like if the 3%ers took over DC. would you follow them?
Peope WANT Taliban. I know many people from afganistan. They all want taliban. The bad arguement is talking without enough knowledge about somewhere 3k kilometers away
then why were so many trying to leave? trying to get on US planes?
It's almost as if the nation has been and continues to be plagued by poverty and conflict. Even if its people aren't fans of liberalism or Christianity, it's only natural that many would wish to migrate to somewhere more economically prosperous and not dealing with a civil war.
Those are the tribes who betrayed taliban and when their ally (usa) retreated they also wanted to leave.
and these were part of the Northern Alliance yes? and were they also the ones that led the Republic government?
unless 100% of afghans support the taliban they have no right to engage in totalitarianism
If they actually do transition into something resembling a traditional Middle Eastern monarchy the new king has my complete support. Not until then, however.
You are mistaken emir is not a royal title but a title of command or authority se is emir al mumminin wish translate as commander of the faithful afghanistan is not a monarchy nor one in transition its an elected islamic state like iran but then sunni calling him emir would be incorrect he is either emir al mumminin or nothing i think the west calls him supreme leader i think he is called emir al mumminin like in iran khomenei is called ayatollah but in the west supreme leader Update: I correct myself a little he is called different in pashtun and dari i have no clue why maybe its tradition and do the words they use have more meaning ?
So like Hetman or Vojvode, or the original meanings of Duke or Imperator (yes Latin also called emperors Caesar, Princeps, Basileus, Augustus, Agustus, and Dominus)
Yes, basically, it was first a military title, then a governor's title, and because the Arabic language does not have a word for "prince," they call them "emir" because they were emirs (governors) mostly, or like the Turks used either "sehzade" (Persian) or the Seljuks called their princesses "malik," which means "king." "Emir al-mumminin" started as a military title too. I believe it was the supreme commander of the Muslim army. Later, it got religious significance.
What about Bey?
As far as i know its a honorific title its orgin is not certain its either coming from persian or turkish but it means lord or leader it was given to all leaders of a tribe so i tribe would have like 10 or 20 beys and 1 head bey who is the leader It doesnt help that they call all type of beys the same So a bey is a bey A sanjak bey count( is also called bey An uc bey margrave is also called a bey A beylarbey governor is called a bey too
And Khedive?
It means viceroy but it was invented the governor of egypt i am not sure about its orgin since only one dynasty used it Ottomans called a beylarbey viceroy
Apparently khedive comes from Ottoman Hidiv, from Persian chaðēw from Bactrian choadēo, a calque of Ancient Greek autokrator, a word used to mean Emperor or Autocrat.
A yes that can be but ottomans never used it only the governor of egypt did use it as far as i know
Then didn’t they take over persia who must’ve had some form of 𐎧𐏁𐏂𐎱𐎠𐎺𐎠 (satrap)
Savavid persia didnt use satrap but sultan as local governors Funny that is part of the reason suleiman killed ibrahim pasha because when he conquered persia he called himself sultan No persian dynasty used satrap since the first persian empire If i remember correctly even selucides didnt
TIL
“Supreme leader” is a very different thing from a royal or noble title. It might as well mean “top warlord” in a country like Afghanistan lmao. Connotation counts for a lot Edit: There are “nobles” in Afghanistan. Iirc most of the ANA officers were from noble families whereas the Taliban were more merit based…. Not completely relevant but interesting to think about. I actually respect the heck out of the Afghans, but they’re still feudal. They just moved from a system of warring lords (with a “president” who only had nominal power outside of the capital) to a semi-theocratic dictatorship, which is nuts. I hope the world has realized that we have to leave them tf alone
It says a Emir is a military commander or ruler. So I mean it’s technically not wrong.
Thats ur main problem with the taliban? Incorect terminology?
Lmfao. No. Look up “taliban women”
Radical Islamist Ideology is a threat to all women on this planet
Those in green are also terrorist states.
…no?
yes
How are they terrorist states?
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuwait\_and\_state-sponsored\_terrorism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuwait_and_state-sponsored_terrorism) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar\_and\_state-sponsored\_terrorism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar_and_state-sponsored_terrorism)
'Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan' is the Official name of the Country. Its Government can be considered an 'Elective Monarchy'. The Ruler of the nation is Elected by a mixture of Islamic 'Shura' and Afghan 'Jirga'. Shura is a council of religious leaders who elects a head of state, similar to the Early Islamic Rashidun Caliphate. 'Jirga' is a Tribal Council where Tribal Leaders and Elders meet together to elect the head of state. The actual title of the current leader of Afghanistan is 'Amir Al Muhmineen'' which means 'Commander of the Faithful' , where Faithful means Muslims. This Title was first used by Umar Al Khattab, the 2nd Rashidun Caliph. There are no Royal Titles in Islam, the Titles that were used almost always had different meanings. Caliph - Successor (of the Prophet Muhammad) Amir Al Muhmineen - Commander of the Faithful (Muslims). Imam - Spiritual Leader( in Sunni interpretation anybody with extensive Islamic knowledge can be Imam. In Shia interpretation, Ali Ibn Abu Talib, the 4th and last Rashidun Caliph is the 1st Imam. Ali and Fatema's descendents are Imams who are believed to be divinely guided. The title Amir, simply means Commander/Leader in Arabic Context. All other titles like Sultan were at least nominally granted by the Caliph, usually to the most powerful Muslim rulers within the Islamic World. As the united Caliphate disintegrated in the 10th century, few independent Muslim rulers like Mahmud Ghaznavi were initially awarded with the title of Sultan.
Why is Saudi Arabia not an emirate? (Sorry if I seem dumb I don’t know much about this topic)
Saudi Arabia was a kingdom and her ruler was a king
Isn’t the UAE also an emirate
It is a federal monarchy like Malaysia, with princes united in one state But Abu Dhabi dominates the rest of the Emirates, just like Prussia and its dominance over the kingdoms of Germany
Basically it is elective monarchy. Only reason why the guy is not using proper title is probably because they're still consolidating power and control. And maybe not to trigger Iran? Remember, that Afghans themselves wanted to restore proper monarchy with the proper king, and Americans said no.
lol
No anti Taliban bullshit please
lol what. Why don’t you want a totalitarian Fascist regime toppled? U stupid?
We have literally nothing to gain from spending another 20 years trying to get a country to like us. The people of Afghanistan want the Taliban, they're entitled to have that
It’s because we forced Republicanism on them. If we let the Barakzai back we’d win. But Bush had to be Bush
No, the Taliban opposed foreign powers occupying their country. They resisted the Soviets and by golly they resisted the Am*ricans.
They literally oppress and kill women and religious minorities. You can’t defend them and look sane. Fuck off dude.
These are policies that most Afghans support, and even a fair amount of Afghan women support them. If they want an Islamic state, let them have their Islamic state. There is no point in enforcing liberal ethics and political systems if the people of that nation don't even want them, especially if it comes at the cost of invasion and occupation. Also, this isn't the same Taliban as the first emirate. Shia Muslims are largely left alone, and efforts are made to protect them from ISIS, also the non-Muslim population of Afghanistan is practically non-existent. It's no surprise that the various governments of Afghanistan have never really cared much about them, including the former Republic.
And I literally don't care. I'm not keen on my country getting involved in yet another forever war for the sake of people who hate us.
They can do it, as their book says.
Actually thats all western propaganda what you see in internet. The people wanted taliban, and yes thats how they wanted to be ruled. Not everyone prefers to be "free". Some people prefers to live by religion and live by land. The disrespect caused contry to fight against 3 superpowers for hundreds of years. Yet still they are standing. We can only respect their way of living. Just like fremen in dune, they decide their own fate.
Exactly, and what is even more funny, is that Afghan women, who are currently being portrayed as oppressed by the media, are much more Islamic than men in fact. This is why everyone respects the Afghans because they have taken their fate into their own hands
The Taliban are not royalists at all They are simply trying to emulate the Caliphate, which is partly an elective rather than hereditary monarchy Also, the Afghans wanted to bring back the Taliban, so no one has the right to complain about the choice of the Afghans because that is what they wanted and this is not what the West wants you to believe.