Pakistani Residents Attacked in Bahrain

[r3alist]

yes it is. They are thre because shia Bahrainis aren't considered worthy enough. The slaves are taking back their own lands. If you're gonna play with fire, be ready to get burned.

btw, don't count on the Arabs to send in their people to save your people. They couldn't care less.

this sometimes persian vs arab, or sometimes sunni vs shia rivalry is what is killing the islamic world.

each side is as stubborn as the other and each side is guilty of killing muslims.

most worryingly, neither side is trying for peace.

you arabs and persians have a lot to answer for the troubles and lack of unity in the islamic world.

 

[A1Kaid]

I think Iran may be behind in fomenting the violent protests surely they must have sent agents to start riots. Luckily, Bahraini police are cracking down on those miscreants.

 

[silko]

If Pakistanis were trying to enslave me and my family in my own country I would do a million times worse.

well, they are innocent people who didn't harm a single one of the bahraini citizens, and where do you get enslave from?

have you watched the link posted?

they where there a long time before the protests began, and look at them. do they look like military personell to you?

What is the diff between Pakistani merceneries and African merceneries in Libya?

again, mercenaries? where do you get that from. somethimes i wonder if your sick government injected you with their daily dose of propaganda and BS stuff.

And don't tell me these are civilians.

well, what do they look like then? they look just like me and a lot of other members here, CIVILIANS!!!

If the Pakistni govt cared about these civilians, then it would ban Pakistani citizens from going over there to fight for the regime

fight for the regime or fight for their job and family to get a future for them by earning money from NORMAL jobs, and dont from the army.

why would they bann them, there where turkish people in libya who was accused of being the same, but luckily they were saved by the turkish governemt in time. but it wasn't the "rebels" who did it. it was gaddafi loyal people.

don't come here and tell me that Shia muslims are the only one getting tortured and looked down to, what about shias in pakistan hu? are they being treated as terrorists?

the iraqi government looks down on their sunni citizens, why don't you talk about that?

 

[BATMAN]

yes it is. They are thre because shia Bahrainis aren't considered worthy enough. The slaves are taking back their own lands. If you're gonna play with fire, be ready to get burned.

btw, don't count on the Arabs to send in their people to save your people. They couldn't care less.

What fire are you talking?
What have we done to fire your äss? and your threats are not going to work on Pakistanis!
eventually you'll be frustrated like others.

We don't long for any Arab support, but they always have come to help us and we'll go to help them as we did in past.

 

[RazorMC]

what is Basijis??? Can someone explain?

Basij - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

=======

I don't think that these attacks on Pakistanis are an isolated incident. Looks more like actions of a mercenary force who is trying to destabilize Bahrain.
Seems some members are worried about Iran's plans that have been put in danger by the expanding might of Bahrain's law enforcement.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

our einstine govt and army sent mercenaries and commissioned forces to help the bahrain govt

That is not any sort of justification for violence against innocent civilians. The residents they are attacking had nothing to do with the Bahraini government's decision to hire Pakistanis and other nationalities for the security forces. Also, the Bahrainis have been hiring Pakistanis for jobs in their security forces for years now, this is not something new, and the recent surge in hiring is merely a continuation of the program that was in existence already.

These are not 'mercenaries' - these are Pakistanis (often retired security people) being hired for jobs in the Arab world, as are millions of other Pakistanis.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

So do you think bahrain must be labelled a racist country

Aren't the Gulf State Arabs pretty racist towards South Asians in general any way?

I would argue that there are plenty of examples preceding the violence in Bahrain against the Pakistani community to justify the allegations of 'racism' against many Gulf State Arabs.

 

[BATMAN]

Aren't the Gulf State Arabs pretty racist towards South Asians in general any way?

I would argue that there are plenty of examples preceding the violence in Bahrain against the Pakistani community to justify the allegations of 'racism' against many Gulf State Arabs.

Indians were not attacked and you have to go back to first post and play the video.

Pakistanis were targeted upon identification, their is no room of your general south Asian victim card and Pakistan is not in south of Asia.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

That is not any sort of justification for violence against innocent civilians. The residents they are attacking had nothing to do with the Bahraini government's decision to hire Pakistanis and other nationalities for the security forces. Also, the Bahrainis have been hiring Pakistanis for jobs in their security forces for years now, this is not something new, and the recent surge in hiring is merely a continuation of the program that was in existence already.

These are not 'mercenaries' - these are Pakistanis (often retired security people) being hired for jobs in the Arab world, as are millions of other Pakistanis.

Ref the underlined:
mercenary noun (pl. mercenaries) a professional soldier who is hired to serve in a foreign army.
source: Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford University Press.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Ref the underlined:
mercenary noun (pl. mercenaries) a professional soldier who is hired to serve in a foreign army.
source: Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford University Press.

Right, while being technical on definitions, per Geneva Conventions:

The Protocol Additional GC 1977 (APGC77) provides the most widely accepted international definition of a mercenary, though not endorsed by some countries, including the United States. The Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts, (Protocol I), 8 June 1977 states:

Art 47. Mercenaries

1. A mercenary shall not have the right to be a combatant or a prisoner of war.
2. A mercenary is any person who:

(a) is especially recruited locally or abroad in order to fight in an armed conflict;
(b) does, in fact, take a direct part in the hostilities;
(c) is motivated to take part in the hostilities essentially by the desire for private gain and, in fact, is promised, by or on behalf of a Party to the conflict, material compensation substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar ranks and functions in the armed forces of that Party;
(d) is neither a national of a Party to the conflict nor a resident of territory controlled by a Party to the conflict;
(e) is not a member of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict; and
(f) has not been sent by a State which is not a Party to the conflict on official duty as a member of its armed forces.

All the criteria (a – f) must be met, according to the Geneva Convention, for a combatant to be described as a mercenary.


Given that the recruitment of Pakistanis into the Bahraini security forces was a program put in place long before any conflict began, I do not see how it meets the definition of 'mercenary' per the Geneva conventions.

Also see below additional points from the Geneva Conventions applicable to the Bahraini attacks on Pakistani civilians:

Articles 51 and 54 outlaw indiscriminate attacks on civilian populations, and destruction of food, water, and other materials needed for survival. Indiscriminate attacks include directly attacking civilian (non-military) targets, but also using technology such as biological weapons, nuclear weapons and land mines, whose scope of destruction cannot be limited.[5] A total war that does not distinguish between civilian and military targets is considered a war crime.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Indians were not attacked and you have to go back to first post and play the video.

Pakistanis were targeted upon identification, their is no room of your general south Asian victim card and Pakistan is not in south of Asia.

I fail to see how this changes the fact that the Arabs look at 'Afghans/Pakistanis' as inferior and treat them like slaves when employing them as laborers.

Don't include India in it and call Pakistan a part of whatever you wish - does not change the fact that many Gulf State Arabs treat certain 'races' as inferior.

 

[Majnun]

I think Iran may be behind in fomenting the violent protests surely they must have sent agents to start riots. Luckily, Bahraini police are cracking down on those miscreants.

This is a well-known fact by now. Iran has long had its eyes on the Arabian Peninsula's Gulf regions, trying to compete for control with Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Right, while being technical on definitions, per Geneva Conventions:

The Protocol Additional GC 1977 (APGC77) provides the most widely accepted international definition of a mercenary, though not endorsed by some countries, including the United States. The Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts, (Protocol I), 8 June 1977 states:

Art 47. Mercenaries

1. A mercenary shall not have the right to be a combatant or a prisoner of war.
2. A mercenary is any person who:

(a) is especially recruited locally or abroad in order to fight in an armed conflict;
(b) does, in fact, take a direct part in the hostilities;
(c) is motivated to take part in the hostilities essentially by the desire for private gain and, in fact, is promised, by or on behalf of a Party to the conflict, material compensation substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar ranks and functions in the armed forces of that Party;
(d) is neither a national of a Party to the conflict nor a resident of territory controlled by a Party to the conflict;
(e) is not a member of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict; and
(f) has not been sent by a State which is not a Party to the conflict on official duty as a member of its armed forces.

All the criteria (a – f) must be met, according to the Geneva Convention, for a combatant to be described as a mercenary.


Given that the recruitment of Pakistanis into the Bahraini security forces was a program put in place long before any conflict began, I do not see how it meets the definition of 'mercenary' per the Geneva conventions.

Also see below additional points from the Geneva Conventions applicable to the Bahraini attacks on Pakistani civilians:

Articles 51 and 54 outlaw indiscriminate attacks on civilian populations, and destruction of food, water, and other materials needed for survival. Indiscriminate attacks include directly attacking civilian (non-military) targets, but also using technology such as biological weapons, nuclear weapons and land mines, whose scope of destruction cannot be limited.[5] A total war that does not distinguish between civilian and military targets is considered a war crime.

Going strictly by the letter of the law, criteria (a-f) seems to be fulfilled. Since their involvement in conflict/hostilities could be logically postulated as part of their duties at the time of recruitment. And if this program was initiated earlier in time, then ipso facto they attract the definition of mercenary then as well as now. Passage of time neither negates or mitigates their status.

However, this view of them is likely to be shared by the agitators (the other side). And that is possibly the reason that there is a backlash impacting on one section of the residents of Bahrain by another.

 

[BATMAN]

I fail to see how this changes the fact that the Arabs look at 'Afghans/Pakistanis' as inferior and treat them like slaves when employing them as laborers.

Don't include India in it and call Pakistan a part of whatever you wish - does not change the fact that many Gulf State Arabs treat certain 'races' as inferior.

Honestly, I lived in various countries of middleast but never had any such feeling.
Where ever I worked, i was owned by young arab colleagues based on my nationality.
We ate, smoke and prayed together.
It may not happen in all cases but i started to learn that Arabs possessed with Indians tend to greet us less than those who are not possessed by Indians.
My neighbors were Saudis, Lebanese and Pakistani as well.

I think unfortunately the kind of problem you are mentioning is inherit in human nature, considering their riches.
It is also true to some extent that our countrymen misrepresent themselves.. living in infamous neighbor hood and behaving cheap.
How can you expect to date a Lebanese chick in dirty chapal and poorly stitched shalwar kameez, it is easy to raise victim card but this will not help.

there is another twist to it.. aka 'hindis' are considered inferior as you described and again due to their deeds and ways of living.
Some times Pakistanis also got treated in same way but this really is a problem for those who think they are inferiors.

Now, I do not visit middle east that often but few months back i happen to fly out of new Dubai airport and the immigration officer was a lady she was so nice.
After stamping my Pakistani passport, she farewell me with words 'faddal ya shabab' and a pleasant smile which i don't even get in Pakistan.

 

[DV RULES]

What a pathetic reaction from Iran for Pakistan & Pakistanis, Iran should be in limit & not to play war games with Muslim countries. If they are used to give death their own people by useless political games then it doesn't means that any other country also will bear desired messes of Iran in his country.
If he so much keen playing games then go ahead with US & Israel but not for Islamic countries.

Such kind of senseless attitude only will result in loosing more allies in Islamic world or international community.
What next Bahrain should do is pushed back covert elements of Iran from opposition.