نړيوال ښکيلاک او د لرو بر افغان دازادۍ غورځنګ

شوروي او نني امريكا

ډاکتر څپاند
06.01.2012

درنو ژبپوهانو او سياسي شنونكو،
هيله ده چى دلاندنيو استلاحاتو په اړ خپل معلومات څرگند كړئ.
د يوه هيواد دې اشغال،په هغه تجاوز يا نظامي تجاوز او نظامي مداخلې تر منح څه توپير دى؟ په پښتو ژهبه ورته څه ويل كيري؟

پخواني شوروي او نني امريكا او بياد ناتو نقش دلته څه دى؟
اشغال؟ تجاوز؟ مداخله نظامي؟ او يا مرسته؟؟؟

“Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised.”15

“[t]erritory is regarded as occupied when, as the consequence of invasion by hostile forces, the State to which it belongs has ceased, in fact, to exercise its ordinary authority therein, and the invading State is alone in a position to maintain order there”.19

“Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army.
The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised.”36

“first, that the former government has been rendered incapable of publicly exercising its authority in that area; and, secondly, that the occupying power is in a position to substitute its own authority for that of the former government.”39

“Whether an invasion has developed into an occupation is a question of fact. The term invasion implies a military operation while occupation indicates the exercise of governmental authority to the exclusion of the established government. This presupposes the destruction of organized resistance and the establishment of an administration to preserve law and order. To the extent that the occupant’s control is maintained and that of the civil government eliminated, the area will be said to be occupied.”68

“If resistance is offered, the state of invasion within any portion of a belligerent’s territory corresponds with the period of resistance. If the invasion is unresisted, the state of invasion lasts only until the invader has taken firm control of the area with the intention of holding it. Invasion is not necessarily occupation, although occupation is normally preceded by invasion and may frequently coincide with it. [...] Occupation, on the other hand, is invasion plus taking firm possession of enemy territory for the purpose of holding it [emphasis added].”69

“[s]o far as individuals are concerned, the application of the Fourth Geneva Convention does not depend upon the existence of a state of occupation within the meaning of the Article 42 [of the 1907 Hague Regulations] referred to above. The relations between the civilian population of a territory and troops advancing into that territory, whether fighting or not, are governed by the present Convention. There is no intermediate period between what might be termed the invasion phase and the inauguration of a stable regime of occupation.”119

“[O]n the one hand, clearly an area where combat is ongoing and the attacking forces
have not yet established control cannot normally be considered occupied within the meaning of the Geneva Conventions of 1949. On the other hand, where combat is not occurring in an area controlled even for just a few days by armed forces of a hostile Power, the Commission believes that the legal rules applicable to occupied territory should apply [emphasis added].”172

محمود سعيد
08.01.2012

ښاغلی ډاکټر صيب!
زه پوره باور لرم چې تاسې به له دې اصطلاحاتو سره پوره بلد ياست. خو د بحث غزولو لپاره دا سکالو بده نه ده.
ستاسو د يادوو شوو ټکو پيل ډير وخت معکوس وي: مرسته- پوځي لاسوهنه- يرغل- ښکېلاک.
دا بيا په دې پورې اړه لري چې دواړه لوري په کومو حالاتو کې قرار لري.
دا روښانه ده چې پر افغانستان باندې د روس او امريکا+ناټو يرغل ډېر توپير نه لري. روسانو يوازې د يوه لوري په مټ او مرسته يرغل ته زړه ښه کړ او امريکا بيا تقريبا دواړه خواوې په لاس کې لري.
له دواړو سره د جګړې او مخالفتونو ډول هم توپير لري. هغه مهال نږدې ټول عام ولس د شوروي ځواکونو او د هغوی د ګوډاګيانو په وړاندې ولاړ وو او اوس په ډول ډول نومونو، لارو او مخونو د مخالف او موافق توپير ګران شوی دی چې لامل ېې د انګريزانو په لاس د ناپاکستان په شان مسلمانو هيوادنو په مرسته د ناولي او دوه مخي سياست لوبول دي.