Why Islam took a violent and intolerant turn in Pakistan

[53fd]

That was not out of any love for the Palestinians. It was for the support that the Arabs gave Pakistan during the 1965 war and will give in the 1971 war !. A kind of Payback.

And not to forget what a certain 'Brigadier' did to the Palestinians which eventually came to be known as Black September.

Did Palestine provide Pakistan support for the 1965 war? Why should Pakistan be responsible for Palestine? And btw, the 'Black September' I think you're referring to are the events that transpired in Jordan, right; which the PLO groups started?

 

[53fd]

Dear Bilal, how can you say this? do you want proofs of atrocities of the Taliban against civilians? they comitted genocide against everybody who was not like them. they killed and dragged civilians in large numbers and completey destroeyed their villages and cities. Since paksitan consider them as their assests, we shouldnt turn a blind eye on their wrong doings and atrocities.

Who said Pakistan considers them assets? Why are they fighting them now? Why have they killed more Taliban, arrested more; laid down more lives & achieved more success than the NATO forces in Afghanistan?

 

[Vinod2070]

Pakistanis have helped Palestinians before. A Pakistani Airforce pilot shot down Israeli aircrafts in air combat in 1973 War I believe, & also in the 1967 war:

The Role of Pakistan Air Force Volunteer Pilots in Arab Israel Wars in Air Combat Against Israel

So a few pilots flying Arab planes in a losing war! Is that all you could do?

That is enough help?

Pakistan was not ethnically cleansed. There were killings on both sides in 1947, & if you remember, it was the Sikhs that started the killings in East Punjab; & sent dead bodies on the train to Lahore. After that, the Muslims went crazy, & there were killings on both sides. It wasn't a massacre on either side, just killings. Most of the Hindus, Sikhs left voluntarily, there was no ethnic cleansing. And this mainly accounted for the decreasing % of minorities there. Also at the time of independence, East Pakistan was also a part of Pakistan, & they had a large number of non-Muslims as well. This is also a reason why you see the decreased number of minorities today, along with the fact that Muslim populations grow faster than non-Muslim ones.

This is pretty self serving and not really true. No one "left voluntarily" leaving all their property and life belongings!

Also you are wrong that it was started by Sikhs. It was started by Muslims in the Rawalpindi division, thinking that coward Hindus will not retaliate. Like many times before and since, the calculation didn't really work as they expected.

The Taliban was fighting to get into power with its rivals. It wasn't targeting civilians. The reason why Taliban first came into power was because of the popular support of people, who appreciated their system of justice as compared to the previous warlords who ruled Afghanistan. The previous warlords in Afghanistan were always fighting each other on the basis of tribes, they were corrupt, they fought other ethnicities as well, they cultivated huge amounts of poppy & destroyed their own country because of it, & even neighboring countries. The Taliban came, they destroyed the poppy, and had a quick system of justice. People were happy with them. With Karzai in power, he has brought the same warlords back into power with him. The people who resulted in the Taliban in the first place. And that is why Karzai's regime is a puppet government, he only has the backing of the warlords.

The Taliban was not so great, despite your obvious fascination with them.

Forgotten Massacre: The Hazara of Afghanistan

Taliban Genocide of Hazara Muslims

Taliban treatment of women - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Mujahideen in 1979 are not the same as the Afghan Taliban or the TTP. The Afghan Taliban is an off-shoot of the Mujahideen, but its not the same thing. The Mujahideen were heralded as heroes both by the US & the Afghan people, as well as the rest of the world.

Were you not calling them warlords just now? USA used them to their ends. That doesn't take away from their real character that came out when the Russians left.

They were a genocidal bunch, nothing more.

Not really. I think you need to follow the news a little more. I can go into that in a lot more depth as well.

It all happened in front of us. I followed it daily on news.

Let's see what else you got!

 

[Vinod2070]

It is well known. Read the 'House of Saud', or the countless books written by British writers & historians of the time. Also, look at who Abdul Wahab was, who started the Wahabism movement. He was not a religiously inspired man. Also, look up why Wahabism was created, & what effect it had on the Ottoman Empire at the time. These are well-established facts my friend.

Wahabism is a creation of the imperialists, & theologically, it is nothing but a distortion of the original Hanbali school of thought. Hanbali school of thought is one of the four school of thoughts in the Sunni sect. Another synonym for Wahabism is today's Salafism & Ahle-Hadis. Originally, Salafism was also different, but it became distorted into Wahabism. Today's Al-Qaeda group is associated with Wahabism.

Deobandism is ideologically & theologically a bit different from Wahabism/Salafism, but it has a lot of common aspects as well. I don't want to confuse you right now, but if you're interested, I'll let you know of their similarities and their differences. Deobandis are associated with the Taliban today. Deobandism comes from the Hanafi school of thought, the second school of thought out of four schools of thoughts in the Sunni sect. I believe Deobandism is a distortion of the original school of Hanafi thought, just like Wahabism is a distortion of the original school of Hanbali thought. Wahabism is in fact a purposeful distortion, as it is nothing like what the Hanbali school of thought ascribes to.

Yet they are able to claim all of Islam and you are not able to do a thing?

Is that what you are saying? Is Islam so easy to hijack?

 

[Ahmad]

Who said Pakistan considers them assets? Why are they fighting them now? Why have they killed more Taliban, arrested more; laid down more lives & achieved more success than the NATO forces in Afghanistan?

Arent they not considered?

but anyways, please dont say they didnt commit crimes and atrociies, because they did with a massive scale. the same warlords as they are called nowdays, were true mujahideen once upon a time to both the US and pakistan.

 

[Vinod2070]

Who said Pakistan considers them assets? Why are they fighting them now? Why have they killed more Taliban, arrested more; laid down more lives & achieved more success than the NATO forces in Afghanistan?

It is common knowledge.

Pakistan is fighting (????) the Pakistani Taliban, the Afghan Taliban is still sheltered and allowed to attack Afghans.

 

[Bhairava]

Did Palestine provide Pakistan support for the 1965 war?

Doesnt matter. You quoted the Pak pilots role in Arab-Israeli wars as a support to Palestine. I proved it is not.

It was a payback for the Arab support in 1965 and nothing else.

And btw, the 'Black September' I think you're referring to are the events that transpired in Jordan, right; which the PLO groups started?

So what does it matter who started. The crux was a Pakistani Brigadier with the official sanction of his Govt killed about 10000 Palestinians which included mainly civilians and effectively ended Palestinians credible resistance towards Israel.

It doesn't matter to me why Pakistan did what it did. But it was certainly not out of any love towards the Palestinians.On the contrary it helped destroy a potent Palestinian resistance towards Israel.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

None to decide who is a Muslim or what a Muslim is and should be!

You know if you read Quran Hadis and Sunnah you can win your argument by proving Muslims wrong by the same scriptures they follow.

 

[Ahmad]

Quoting a few examples of their atrocities would not mean they did not have the popular support of the Afghan people at the time. Are you saying they did not have the popular support of the Afghan people when they came into power?

off course they had and still have support in sepecific areas, why not. have i denied that? but that doesnt mean they are right for what they do. dont forget that the mujahideen as you call them warlords also had and still have popular support among the people. The TTP and other factions of the Taliban in pakistan also have support of the locals,otherwise they woudnt stand a chance against the might of paksitan army with huge number in taht area, sso support doesnt always mean someone is right.

anyways, lets not deraill the threead.

 

[Vinod2070]

Doesnt matter. You quoted the Pak pilots role in Arab-Israeli wars as a support to Palestine. I proved it is not.

It was a payback for the Arab support in 1965 and nothing else.


So what does it matter who started. The crux was a Pakistani Brigadier with the official sanction of his Govt killed about 10000 Palestinians which included mainly civilians and effectively ended Palestinians credible resistance towards Israel.

It doesn't matter to me why Pakistan did what it did. But it was certainly not out of any love towards the Palestinians.On the contrary it helped destroy a potent Palestinian resistance towards Israel.

I think it was 25000 Palestinians killed by Zia.

 

[Bhairava]

So a few pilots flying Arab planes in a losing war! Is that all you could do?

That is enough help?

No Vinod ! Not even that was help. It was a payback to the Arab kings who helped Pakistan during the 1965 especially Jordan which had helped PAF with its Starfighters.

I think it was 25000 Palestinians killed by Zia.

Lets take it on a conservative estimate !

 

[Pride]

Who said Pakistan considers them assets? Why are they fighting them now? Why have they killed more Taliban, arrested more; laid down more lives & achieved more success than the NATO forces in Afghanistan?

Yes, Pakistan considered them as assets and infact build them as an asset during Cold war.. Now the war was over and ally US was on the way (Leaving Afghanistan + Taliban whole as a liability) Then Pakistan (or to be specific Pakistan Army + ISI ) tried to utilize them as an assets for building a hypothetical Islamic regime with all Sharia and other tantrum.. but when the same gun misfired back then suddenly taliban became Liability again and this time not only for US but Pakistan also... Hence whenever you say that what is happening against Muslims in Afghanistan..First think you as a major responsible for the same...

We did the same in past and faced the heat too..

 

[53fd]

This is pretty self serving and not really true. No one "left voluntarily" leaving all their property and life belongings!

Whether they left voluntarily or involuntarily, they left in millions; & that accounted the decreased % of minorities in Pakistan, not because they were ethnically cleansed.

Also you are wrong that it was started by Sikhs. It was started by Muslims in the Rawalpindi division, thinking that coward Hindus will not retaliate. Like many times before and since, the calculation didn't really work as they expected.

Read this, it was started by Sikhs in Amritsar:

http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/The_Battle_for_Amritsar,_1947

The Taliban was not so great, despite your obvious fascination with them.

I have no fascination with them, I'm a Shia. I have no love for extremist ideologies. But I was giving you the reason why they got into power in the first place, they didn't terrorize the people then, & came in through popular support of the Afghans. Their brutality later has been seen by the world, but most of it is as a result of the post 9/11 events.

Were you not calling them warlords just now? USA used them to their ends. That doesn't take away from their real character that came out when the Russians left.

They were a genocidal bunch, nothing more.

There is a difference between the Mujahideen and the warlords of the 1990's. Only a few of the Mujahideen were warlords, many of the Mujahideen 'off-shooted' & formed their own groups, such as Mullah Umar, Haqqani forming the Taliban, Ahmed Shah Masood forming the Northern Alliance, Hekmetyar forming the Hizb-e-Islami Gulbudeen, all rivals of one another.

 

[53fd]

off course they had and still have support in sepecific areas, why not. have i denied that? but that doesnt mean they are right for what they do. dont forget that the mujahideen as you call them warlords also had and still have popular support among the people. The TTP and other factions of the Taliban in pakistan also have support of the locals,otherwise they woudnt stand a chance against the might of paksitan army with huge number in taht area, sso support doesnt always mean someone is right.

anyways, lets not deraill the threead.

Do you know why the TTP came into power Ahmad? It has completely different dynamics to the ones of the Afghan Taliban.

 

[Ahmad]

I have no fascination with them, I'm a Shia. I have no love for extremist ideologies. But I was giving you the reason why they got into power in the first place, they didn't terrorize the people then, & came in through popular support of the Afghans. Their brutality later has been seen by the world, but most of it is as a result of the post 9/11 events.

the Taliban brutality has 2 pahses, post and before 9/11. I was talking about their atrocities/brutalites against civilians before the 9/11 since we rarely talk about it here. thier post 9/11 atrocity/brutality is today's news and we all know it.