We dont base Islam on "their" history books...
1) They are as much of muslims as we are. Havent we heard it before calling them kuffar? and yes thats what pushed them to fight against us, if you are a muslim you would stand by us else if you ask for rights you arent a muslim.
2) Who is basing Islam on their books. But yes history is going to be based on both the accounts and not one.
Mistakes were done by both sides at that time (I am not an apologist for the idiots who were running west Pakistan at that time)... as for your assertion that the west was doing things in guise of Islam... that is downright silly... the Islamic political parties like JI were never in power at that time... General Yahya was no example of Islam so they may say all that, it does nt change the fact that we were not looking at Islam rather we were talking nationalism... Its not much different from what the BLA goons are doing nowadays... what is working in our favor is that Baluchistan is geographically attached to the rest of Pakistan!!!
Bingo, you just said the magic word, GEOGRAPHICAL attachment. Thats what defines nationhood, had baluchistan been located thousands of miles away, islam would not have been enough to keep tem with us.
As for the point of the bond of religion being a weak bond... I totally agree with that... You could have a case if you could prove that I m talking about a religious bond... there is a difference between ideological and religious bond... Islam for all we know it is an ideology... not just a religion...
heard enough of that, Islam is a religion just like judaism and christianity. As a matter of fact we muslims claim that its a continuation of those religions and the followers of those religions were also muslims as were Musa and Isa. So just like them Islam is also a religion.
As for your point of clashes during the time of the Rashideen... My friend the principle you need to focus on there is that History is a very good teacher and the wise keep the lessons of history in mind... its a different thing that we keep repeating history foolishly... The reason why there was clash between Muslims is discussed in great detail... the actions of the Munafiqeen, the Khawarijeen, the Yahood, The Parsis and the corrupt amongst Muslims as well... its all there (nowadays you could add... the nationalists
)
Aint that funny? for everything bad blame somebody else. Whether its from your past or your future.
History is also a judge to ehat worked and what did not and the history of even khilafat-i-Rashida tells us something. Open another thread and we can discuss why Hazrat Usman was not allowed to be burried in a muslim cemetery and how his body lay in his house for three days. Or we could also discuss other details but this thread is about is caliphate imminent and necessary? You have not provided any sources making it mandatory.
Ask those who have lost loved ones cause of "FIRQA-warana fasadat". Or those who are killed every muharram and the list goes on and on.
And what is a Muslim?
are all muslims practicing? Yahya khan was also a muslim ;-)
There is a difference between a muslim country and an Islamic state.
You seem upset... are you alright?
Why would I be?
I m sure you have proved nothing... The Caliphate is part and parcel of Islam...
Well I alongwith many disagree unless you prove otherwise, which you haven't so far.
