Army Op in FATA

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Abdali: *

Well said Malik, I bet given the chance both groups Talibs and the drug lords from the north will be back to where they were when the Russkies left not that the fighting is not going on. But I would still support Taliban not because they are any good but because they are lesser of the two evil.
[/QUOTE]

I agree, and Afghanistan must rid itself of foreign fighters, and concentrate on building a sovereign Afghan nation for all its peoples. Pakistan, and I am sure all Pakistani's will support them enthusiastically in this pursuit.

No they are not against Pashtuns, of course not. They are only against “cave dwellers”, “beggars”, 16th century barbarians that “lock their women” up and “blow up girl schools”. They are against naswar khor tribal “jahils”.

Though no one minded when these very “jahils” fought for Pakistan and its interests on many fronts. No one minded when hundreds of these “jahils” were programmed in many of Pakistanis madrassass to do exactly for what they are being hunted down like animals.

Which Khar-Pathan can actually convince me that these stereotypes are not directed at Pashtuns and how the majority of these people preserve them?

Are you sure? Is that really what Pakistan wants? I really hope so, I pray so.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Malik73: *
I agree, and Afghanistan must rid itself of foreign fighters, and concentrate on building a sovereign Afghan nation for all its peoples. Pakistan, and I am sure all Pakistani's will support them enthusiastically in this pursuit.
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]
No they are not against Pashtuns, of course not. They are only against ?cave dwellers?, ?beggars?, 16th century barbarians that ?lock their women? up and ?blow up girl schools?. They are against naswar khor tribal ?jahils?.
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]
Which Khar-Pathan can actually convince me that these stereotypes are not directed at Pashtuns and how the majority of these people preserve them?
[/QUOTE]

You are the only one using such words about Pashtuns so why accuse others of "directing" comments at others when you are the only one who notices the chappals and dhotis of others?

The posts are there to prove who said what and when it was said.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by mufakkar: *
You are the only one using such words about Pashtuns so why accuse others of "directing" comments at others when you are the only one who notices the chappals and dhotis of others?
[/QUOTE]

*Originally posted by camouflage: *

*This is a fact which you keep ignoring, either you follow Islam completely or you don't, most of what you are saying has no basis in Islam, so whether you use the same same logic its not going to make what you are saying right. *

exactly, and since islam says that peopel should nto kill innocent people. Those who did are thus needed to be brought to justice, no matter what sort of lame ass story they come up with to explain their action.

You may be right in the eyes of many people but to Muslims right is only that which is right according to Islam.

And part of that right means not defending murderers,

*The infighting declined, and having control of 95% of Afghanistan is proof for that. *

so it declined, the point was that it existed in large numbers and still exists, so if these people are oh so holy and doing god's work, is killing one another also god's work?

*And I asked you to define "terrorist", maybe you overlooked that post. *

I answered it and said that we should not go off on tangents because one wrong does not serve as a basis for another wrong to be considered right. That was probably not the answer you were looking for. too bad

*Originally posted by Sultan Suri: *

*Though no one minded when these very “jahils” fought for Pakistan and its interests on many fronts. *

and these jahils, as you call them, did not seem to mind that they were being helped by outsiders then, did they?

*No one minded when hundreds of these “jahils” were programmed in many of Pakistanis madrassass to do exactly for what they are being hunted down like animals. *

and yet again, these jahils, as you call them were all for it themselves. They wanted to do this, they were supported by US and Pakistan to just go do it better.

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by camouflage: *
**it only proves that the objective of the Taliban was to bring stability to Afghanistan.
*

maybe sincere objectives, but bad execution, and then being taleban became fashionable, rather unsavory characters with their bloody hands became taleban as well, dinn they

You can not escape from the fact that the Taliban sincerely tried to implement Shariah and all that they did was ask for proof before they would accept news from fasiq's which is what Islam teaches us, and that is exactly what the US is to them, a fasiq, I don't need to go in detail to prove that, the Iraqi invasion, the WMD's.

chronologically speaking, WMD and Iraq war happened..after the 9/11 deal so unless taleban had a time machine that serves so no proof.

so taleban knew beforehand that US was a fasiq?

if so, why were they so eager to work with US during the war against the soviets, same people working with same people.

Lter they made trips to US to make deals for oil stuff. At that point they had no problems dealing with a fasiq? served their interests eh?

*Tell me what is it that Pakistani leaders have done which might prove that they are sincere Muslims? Nothing, in fact all that they have done only proves that they are doing what according to Islam is hypocrisy. *

Tell me what your beloved taleban did that was considered islamic? just banning music and this and that ? what else

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Fraudz: *
*Originally posted by camouflage: *

*This is a fact which you keep ignoring, either you follow Islam completely or you don't, most of what you are saying has no basis in Islam, so whether you use the same same logic its not going to make what you are saying right. *

exactly, and since islam says that peopel should nto kill innocent people. Those who did are thus needed to be brought to justice, no matter what sort of lame ass story they come up with to explain their action.

You may be right in the eyes of many people but to Muslims right is only that which is right according to Islam.

And part of that right means not defending murderers,

*The infighting declined, and having control of 95% of Afghanistan is proof for that. *

so it declined, the point was that it existed in large numbers and still exists, so if these people are oh so holy and doing god's work, is killing one another also god's work?

*And I asked you to define "terrorist", maybe you overlooked that post. *

I answered it and said that we should not go off on tangents because one wrong does not serve as a basis for another wrong to be considered right. That was probably not the answer you were looking for. too bad
[/QUOTE]

Intentionally targeting and killing innocent people is wrong, no matter who does it, also agreed that who so ever is involved in such brutality should be brought to justice, but atleast prove your accusations. That is all the Taliban asked right? Proof of all that the Americans were claiming?

If you want those who did wrong to be brought to justice, then why aren't you being "just" yourself?

Again, first prove that they are murderers then, accuse someone for defending murderers.

The infighting declined to large extent during the Taliban control of most of Afghanistan, and FYI, most of the infighting was in between various Afghan warlords (which had nothing to do with Taliban).

In your post you seem to mix the Afghan warlords with the Taliban, which is plainly wrong.

In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful.
002.216
YUSUFALI: Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not.

There are many verses that are related to Fighting and killing, but just to answer your question whether killing one another was God's work, I am posting this verse.

Ofcourse that wasn't the answer that I was looking for, all I want is a definition of "terrorist", if you can't come up with it, then do not accuse some one for being one.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Fraudz: *

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by camouflage: *
**it only proves that the objective of the Taliban was to bring stability to Afghanistan.
*

maybe sincere objectives, but bad execution, and then being taleban became fashionable, rather unsavory characters with their bloody hands became taleban as well, dinn they

You can not escape from the fact that the Taliban sincerely tried to implement Shariah and all that they did was ask for proof before they would accept news from fasiq's which is what Islam teaches us, and that is exactly what the US is to them, a fasiq, I don't need to go in detail to prove that, the Iraqi invasion, the WMD's.

chronologically speaking, WMD and Iraq war happened..after the 9/11 deal so unless taleban had a time machine that serves so no proof.

so taleban knew beforehand that US was a fasiq?

if so, why were they so eager to work with US during the war against the soviets, same people working with same people.

Lter they made trips to US to make deals for oil stuff. At that point they had no problems dealing with a fasiq? served their interests eh?

*Tell me what is it that Pakistani leaders have done which might prove that they are sincere Muslims? Nothing, in fact all that they have done only proves that they are doing what according to Islam is hypocrisy. *

Tell me what your beloved taleban did that was considered islamic? just banning music and this and that ? what else
[/QUOTE]

Bad execution? according to whom? You and the likes of you? A Muslim doesn't need to please or appease you, who are you to judge them anyway? Most importantly, what is the basis of your judgement? your own logic?

Do ponder over this a little, can you stand in front of Allah swt on the Day of Judgement and argue about the Taliban being wrong and yourself being right? What would be the basis of your argument? Musharraf's logic? Bush's logic?

There was no such thing as WMD's in Iraq, that could have been a "smoking gun" it was all a blatant lie.

I told you earlier, but nevertheless I shall repeat myself again, a Muslim obeys Allah swt, the mujahids were doing just that, it is you who believes that they were obeying the US, because it seems to me that you are under the impression that the mujahids were in Afghanistan only because the US supported them, that is not the case dear, you will find mujahids everywhere there is oppression against Muslims, with NO US support whatsoever.

If you believe that fighting the Soviets was only US's objective, then you are wrong too, because the mujahids wanted the Soviets out more than the US did, and it was'nt the mujahids who were eager to work with the US, but the US was eager to use the mujahids to achieve their objective.

What deal did they make with the US?

They must have made trips, what's unIslamic about accepting an invitation and visiting? This further proves that their intention was to bring stability to Afghanistan, most likely the deal was benefitting the selected few and not the population at large in Afghanistan, which they apparently rejected and that probably angered the US even more.

This also answers your question about serving their interests, if the Taliban had been selfish and considered the deal which according to you would have "served their interests" things would have been much different, but since they turned out to be selfless and sincere in bringing stability to Afghanistan, the US had no other option but to eliminate them to fulfill its objectives on getting the oil and stuff.

What is it that they didn't do that was Islamic? would be easier for me to answer, they were sincere in trying to apply the shareeah and they were doing all that they could, they also humbly submitted to advice from scholars who pointed out their mistakes in the light of Quran and Sunnah, they were still learning and making steady progress in bringing stability in the country, they eliminated opium production, civil life was steadily normalizing, what more could you ask for in a country which had been used as a battlefield for decades?

Now could you answer my question about what makes our so called "muslim" leaders of a so called "Islamic" republic of Pakistan, to be considered sincere Muslims?

Your first question has been answered by camouflage.

One can't help but laugh after reading your last paragraph.

p.s. I didn’t call them jahils what so ever, I basically recalled on how you and your buddies referred to them. Now don’t shy away, be a men and stand up for your words.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Fraudz: *
*Originally posted by Sultan Suri: *

*Though no one minded when these very “jahils” fought for Pakistan and its interests on many fronts. *

and these jahils, as you call them, did not seem to mind that they were being helped by outsiders then, did they?

*No one minded when hundreds of these “jahils” were programmed in many of Pakistanis madrassass to do exactly for what they are being hunted down like animals. *

and yet again, these jahils, as you call them were all for it themselves. They wanted to do this, they were supported by US and Pakistan to just go do it better.
[/QUOTE]

I just saw a CNN report on this, and they showed prisoners, all of them looked like locals.

And why do we have idiots as spokesmen in the pak army? They have no idea what they are talking about. They showed that shaukat sultan guy holding a journalist who got to close to the prisoners by his hair and telling him he will break his camera if he has to. Horrible behaviour by sultan.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by camouflage: *
Now could you answer my question about what makes our so called "muslim" leaders of a so called "Islamic" republic of Pakistan, to be considered sincere Muslims?
[/QUOTE]

What makes al qaeda and taliban good muslims? Because they kill kaffirs?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Imdad Ali: *

What makes al qaeda and taliban good muslims? Because they kill kaffirs?
[/QUOTE]

I would suggest you read my earlier posts on this thread, you'll find the answer to your question.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by camouflage: *

I would suggest you read my earlier posts on this thread, you'll find the answer to your question.
[/QUOTE]
I read your post, but did not find the answer.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by camouflage: *

Intentionally targeting and killing innocent people is wrong, no matter who does...
[/QUOTE]

Is there any group in Afghanistan you can honestly say is not guilty of that?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Malik73: *

Is there any group in Afghanistan you can honestly say is not guilty of that?
[/QUOTE]

My best bet would be the Taliban, I have not come across any authentic news about them intentionally targetting and killing innocent people, since you've brought this up, if you are against killing innocent people, how can you justify your supporting the Pak Army? which has intentionally targetted and killed more innocent and unarmed people than they must have killed combatants.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Imdad Ali: *
I read your post, but did not find the answer.
[/QUOTE]

I suggested you read my posts, I wonder which one post did you read.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by camouflage: *

My best bet would be the Taliban, I have not come across any authentic news about them intentionally targetting and killing innocent people, since you've brought this up...
[/QUOTE]

Ok, if that is what you want to belive in. I think many, many would disagree, and no amount of "authentic" news sources will ever convince you otherwise.

13 more civilians killed.

In Ghwahkhwah, 12 miles south of Wana, 13 civilians, including five women, five men and three children, were killed when a helicopter gunship shelled a taxi and a Toyota Hiace, hospital sources in Wana said.