Who Kills more? Taliban or NATO/ISAF

[JAMALUDEEN]

Some people may get to that point of emotional exhaustion whereby they seemingly choose from two options. One would be a violent response, and one would be a peaceful response.

The Bacha Khan type of resistance is not about instant results. Whether we are going to call Bacha Khan a failure or not, what is acknowledged is that he drew his strength from Islam. He carried the Qu'ran on his person and and he was by all accounts a deeply committed Muslim. May Allah be pleased with him.

I haven't surveyed whether the majority of Pashtoons in Pakistan speak Pashto or not. You obviously appear to know something more and have presented it here as a fact, but that's beside the point. Bacha Khan's remaining friends were India and Afghanistan and his legacy - which I agree was watered down - haunted Pakistan and so it wasn't allowed to remain. Hence the organised deconstruction of everything he stood for.

As for the option of armed resistance. We Pashtoons have done that and it has paid off so there's merit in that argument too. However, few would choose war as their first option. Did the Americans/NATO wreck the chance of a lasting peace by their invasion of Afghanistan? Yes. They absolutely made a mess and people are justifiably angry. To that extent I completely understand why there is an insurgency/resistance.

What has happened over the recent past is that our cause has been hijacked by others and we appear not be serving interests that benefit ourselves. Just look at the quality of life of Pashtoons in Afghanistan or in Pakistan. For more than thirty years we've been at war. With that many dead, wounded and damaged sons and daughters and with entire families/villages displaced, we're a traumatised and easily exploited people. Our emotions are easily manipulated.

We also have to be clear about our objectives. Is this an all-out Jihad between Muslims and non-Muslims? Or between some Muslims and some non-Muslims? If there is an option for peace, would you take it? Or if we are prepared to engage in an epic fight till the last man is standing? In that case forget your non-Pashto speaking Pashtoons in Pakistan, there will no Pashtoons to speak of.

At the moment, the future appears mixed, and at its worst rather bleak. Allah knows best and may Allah protect us all.

Tor Khan, while I agree that we should look for peaceful options with other muslims and non-muslims but i disagree with the notion of being peaceful to aggressors. It is everyones right to protect oneself against oppressors especially in order to protect one's honour, mind, wealth, religion, family, property, etc., in any way possible.

Would you be willing to be peaceful to someone, who is just about to beat the crap out of you or is in your house to rob you? I don't think so.

[ScimitarXEdge]

I support all Muslim resistance as long as it's not indiscriminately or deliberately murdering Muslim civilians.

Only combatants.

[کیش]

I support all Muslim resistance as long as it's not indiscriminately or deliberately murdering Muslim civilians.

Only combatants.

Where is that, where the only people dying are combatants? In all of the Muslim resistance, their unfortunately in Muslim nations. Where the civilians bear the pain. America and Euro learned to fight wars outside their borders, so civilian casualties are reduced.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Where is that, where the only people dying are combatants? In all of the Muslim resistance, their unfortunately in Muslim nations. Where the civilians bear the pain. America and Euro learned to fight wars outside their borders, so civilian casualties are reduced.

No I said I support ALL resistance as long as the Mujahideen make sure they do not kill a single MUslim civilian

if they dont do this I dont support it, doesn't matter where.

Nabi Muhammad(saw) never killed Muslims when he was fighting, neither did Khalid Ibn walid(ra)

Either do things the Islamic way or dont do it at all, agreed?

[Alchemist]

You see how this intellectual fraud skirts away from the question?

Somebody remind this douchebag that back in those days the battles were fought in the fields and soldiers met face to face.
We don't live in the "scimitar" days ...this is the ak47 and B2 bomber days..

[کیش]

No I said I support ALL resistance as long as the Mujahideen make sure they do not kill a single MUslim civilian

if they dont do this I dont support it, doesn't matter where.

Nabi Muhammad(saw) never killed Muslims when he was fighting, neither did Khalid Ibn walid(ra)

Either do things the Islamic way or dont do it at all, agreed?

Well, to a certain extent I do. But, weren't Abu Bakr and the caliphs killing "Muslims" in the apostate wars?

Modern weapons is a double edge sword. Yea, its powerful but it causes extensive damages which easily can harm civilians.

But let's say in the case of our country of Afghanistan. Shouldn't it be every Muslims job their to remove foreign forces? I'm not trying to sound like a hypocrite, but isn't resistance to an occupying force a legitimate jihad? A duty not just on Afghans, but the Muslim ummah in general?

[khushal]

khyber pakhtunkhwa is modern?


well thats news to me..

modern compare to afghanistan

[ScimitarXEdge]

Well, to a certain extent I do. But, weren't Abu Bakr and the caliphs killing "Muslims" in the apostate wars?

Modern weapons is a double edge sword. Yea, its powerful but it causes extensive damages which easily can harm civilians.

But let's say in the case of our country of Afghanistan. Shouldn't it be every Muslims job their to remove foreign forces? I'm not trying to sound like a hypocrite, but isn't resistance to an occupying force a legitimate jihad? A duty not just on Afghans, but the Muslim ummah in general?

If they were apostates how can they be Muslims? That's your logical conundrum; they openly apostated. There is no such evidence here for a Pashtun villager just wanting to feed his family

Your argument is irrelevant because there's nothing in Islam which advocates penalizing.

Also factor n that many if not most Pashtuns see the Taliban as equally a foreign invader because they're a proxy and they administer laws that contradict Shari'ah/

THis similarly would mean that helping such a force would be wrong, so in such an instance then they would be doing the Islamic thing not to fight as this would be assisting Taliban back into power


you yourself have relatives who work as translators; would you want them murdered just because they wanted to feed their families?

Fighting is only obligatory when the righteous side is clear

[Alchemist]

^ according to you there is no right side and there never was a right side since the demise of the Prophet peace be upon, so every mujahid died in vain.

[ScimitarXEdge]

show a quote that indicates that; otherwise you're interpolating your own conclusions and labeling them under me ..as usual

[Alchemist]

name one group that is in the right right now...and you will have proven me wrong...otherwise ...stop barking at me.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Your parameters for your previous statement wasn't "right right now" ...it was measured from the time of THE Prophets demise

changing goal posts. Intellectual dishonesty again?

Show a QUOTE that corroborates the statement you just made.

[Alchemist]

couldn't do it?

still barking...

typical....

[ScimitarXEdge]

you keep changing goal posts, of course no one will be able to meet the demands if you keep changing the standards

So show a quote or admit your intellectual dishonesty.

[randolph85]

this is like asking who has killed more civilians, jamiat i islami or hezb i islami.

the sooner u realize both groups, not just in that example, are evil, the better off u will be.