It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by justwokeup
Please respond to the point. If you don't want to negotiate with the Taliban how do you intend to proceed given that one of your 'allies' will keep the movement alive and you cannot cut them loose for fear of the repercussions.
If by "there," you mean Pakistan, we weren't there "in the first place."
If you mean Afghanistan, it was to drive the Taliban out and, in so doing, "flush out" bin Laden.
And?
Anyone who believes Pakistan is an "ally," is delusional. They are hostage-takers: "Send more money, or the nuclear country get's it." Their continual extortion is pathetic and we should let India take back what was once theirs, if they still want it. Their perceived "nuclear threat" can be dealt with, with well-directed EMPs. India knows how to do this. I don't see India playing that stupid "nuclear threat" game.
jw
jw
That action would wipe away almost every objection the West might have to Islam and it's followers. I imagine the union of Islam, Christianity, and other religions in stopping the violence of blasphemous, violent, haters.
What the Taliban had done is only to regress Islam back to barbaric tribal chauvism, and the most blasphemous of all - is to GO AGAINST the teachings of the Divine Messenger prophet Muhammad, and worst still - they committed atrocities MISUSING THE NAME OF ALLAH!!!
High time the Ummah and every true muslim to declare jihad upon the taliban, any muslim cleric and any radical militant who DARES commit such blasphemous blatant acts.
I'm not sure I subscribe to your 'Keep fighting on in Afghanistan while hoping for a Pakistan/India war' strategy for the region.
What the Taliban had done is only to regress Islam back to barbaric tribal chauvism, and the most blasphemous of all - is to GO AGAINST the teachings of the Divine Messenger prophet Muhammad, and worst still - they committed atrocities MISUSING THE NAME OF ALLAH!!!
High time the Ummah and every true muslim to declare jihad upon the taliban, any muslim cleric and any radical militant who DARES commit such blasphemous blatant acts.
I am attempting to find out what your alternative to negotiation is when the political realities in the region mean the Taliban cannot be 'defeated' conventionally.
Thats what i'm trying to get at. Your first response accused me of ignorance and your post above talked about getting india to 'take back' Pakistan using EMP weapons against their nuclear weapons. Neither of which is a realistic possibility.
I dont particularly like the idea of negotiating with them either, as they are an abhorrent bunch. However, I'm not seeing a better option given the mess we've gotten ourselves into.
Originally posted by justwokeup
reply to post by jdub297
Now that we get right down to it I don't see our positions are as far apart as it seemed.
The western purpose was to root out the Al Qaeda element responsible for 9/11. Thats been done, at least in Afghanistan. The Taliban themselves aren't really a threat to the west so we don't have to eliminate them. Only contain them.
The other factions are not strong enough to eliminate them so they will have to be accommodated to some degree. This is what will happen when we leave so it makes some sense to plan for it. I think thats whats going on now.
Originally posted by jdub297
Unfortunately, millions of "devout" Muslims disagree with your interpretation.
1.How do you "regress" from a dogma that has been in place for 2,500 years?
2.When did "barbaric chauvinism" ever leave the region; and, more importantly, who brought it back?
3.When the Taliban and others CITE the prophet's own words as "proof" of their righteousness, who in the West, or anywhere else, is to tell them they are wrong?
4.Who in the West, or anywhere else has the right to interpret the Q'uran for any of the tribes of the faithful?
5.Most importantly, if sincerely done in the names of the prophet and Allah, how are ANY deaths to be considred "atrocities?"
6.Why is it "high time," now, according to you? Hasn't the silence of the Ummah over the past 50 years spoken volumes?
7. Other than yourself, no "true muslim" has lifted so much as a finger to criticize, much less counter, the "blasphemous jihad;" or haven't you noticed?
8.What you've attempted to do is to ascribe political motivation to those things that do not keep with your perceptions, without anything else in support.
9.Isn't there another, more obvious alternative? Isn't that alternative a deep and "uncorrupted" faith and adherence to centuries-old teachings and traditions?
Attempts to "whitewash," or judge according to Western standards, conduct that has been accepted, honored and passed-down for centuries is blatantly biased and misbegotten.
None of the Taliban's beliefs or practices are the products of contemporary social syatems; they are a way of life and the path to salvation.edit on 12-5-2013 by jdub297 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Tuttle
reply to post by jdub297
You even read what I said man?
THREAD TITLE
Taliban: "Don’t accept the system of infidels called Democracy."
WHAT I SAID
Seems to me like they are pretty smart not wanting anything to do with our "democracy", I would not wish western style "democracy" on anyone.
YOUR RESPONSE
Since when is Pakistan governance "western style democracy?" Or Afghan?
What???
Never said that it was, what in the hell are you talking about? How is your response in any way connected to what I said?, what are you talking about????edit on 10-5-2013 by Tuttle because: (no reason given)
I would not wish western style "democracy" on anyone.
Rather than to spend the necessary effective time of years to re-educate you to Islam which a reply post cannot justify to your confusion and lack, which I hope you will seek counsel at your local Mosque, hopefully an enlightened one and not one that is stuffed by a village idiot posing as Iman, I will just address your core concern in your post.
Originally posted by jdub297
Wow! Iman is appearing at a local mosque? When? Can I bring a camera?
How are you to decide which mosque and which Imam are to be foolowed or denigrated?
The problem here is that wide-open interpretation invites radicalism.
You cannot seriously contend that those who've murdered in the name of Allah or Mohammed have not done so with a beleief in the righteousness of their actions.
jw
Taliban militants launched a large-scale attack involving the United Nations in the center of the Afghan capital Kabul on Friday, sparking a five-hour battle with security forces.
...
An Afghan police officer was killed and 10 other people were wounded during the attack, which began at 4 p.m. (1130 GMT) with a suicide car bomb outside a compound used by the International Organisation for Migration (IOM), Afghan police said.
...
The attack came eight days after six American soldiers and civilians and nine Afghans were killed in a suicide car bombing in Kabul.
The Taliban, fighting to expel Western forces and establish Islamist rule in Afghanistan, claimed responsibility for Friday's attack, saying a "rest house" used by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) had been attacked.
...
Such attacks reinforce concern about how the 352,000 members of the Afghan security forces will cope with the insurgency after most foreign NATO-led combat troops leave by the end of next year.
...
A Taliban spokesman, Zabihullah Mujahid, speaking to Reuters by telephone, said Friday's attack had targeted a compound used by the CIA.
Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101
There are NO clergy heirachies in Islam, as prophet Muhammad had taught Islam is a personal relationship between Allah and the submission of each man to His moral and ethical guidelines which no other mortal can come in between.
The Imams are only teachers, to reach out and teach the newly converted arabs from barbarism to Islam. After that, that relationship is personal, based upon one's comprehension of the teachings.
Cleric Omar Bakri Mohammed believes the attempt to behead a British soldier in London can be justified "under certain interpretations of Islam." Bakri Mohammed, who was banned from Britain for "extremist activities," is believed to have influenced London attacker Michael Adebolajo through his sermons.
The cleric said when he saw the video of Adebolajo holding a knife and a cleaver in his blood-soaked hands after the attack, he thought Adebolajo to be "very courageous." Bakri Mohammed added: "Under Islam this can be justified, he was not targeting civilians, he was taking on a military man in an operation."
"To people around here [in the Middle East] he is a hero for what he has done."
A ... 2007 recording of Bakri Mohammed revealed him saying, "When you meet [Westerners], slice their own necks," and "make the blood spill all over." He implied that doing so would tire out the Western enemies and force them into ending the wars.
Added Bakri Mohammed: "Use the sword and remove the head of the enemy."
... we need to freely discuss, debate with others over one's perceptions or interpretations and then find the best path to move forward within the community, without losing our moral directions while sharing our world with others in peace, just as prophet Muhammad had led his followers to live in peace and evolution with others after Mecca was won during his lifetime.
...
Those whom had committed atrocities against Allah and His children, had done so because they failed to engage and work within the community of muslims, but only allowed themselves to be misled by others, and took decisions on their own that were not reflective of the whole, and will be condemned by both Allah and muslims.
“Most…of the terrorism we face,” [Obama] said, ”is fueled by a common ideology…that Islam is in conflict with the United States and the West.” Without taking a deep breath, he hastily added that the “common ideology” was “based on a lie.” Why? Because “the United States is not at war with Islam…”
It’s typical of the president’s world-view that he would assume any such war to be instigated by us, but in this case the jihadis have it right, and he’s got it backwards. There is indeed a war, it is theirs, the jihadis’ war, and they are waging it because they firmly believe they are commanded to do so by the Almighty. They aim to destroy or dominate Western infidels and apostates. Those commands are in the Koran, and are repeated by a great mass of imams, ayatollahs and mullahs. Those thousands of Iranians or Hezbollahis who chant “death to America” mean just that. It’s the reason for their jihad against us.
But President Obama could not bring himself to mention that.
Originally posted by jdub297
Originally posted by justwokeup
reply to post by jdub297
Now that we get right down to it I don't see our positions are as far apart as it seemed.
The western purpose was to root out the Al Qaeda element responsible for 9/11. Thats been done, at least in Afghanistan. The Taliban themselves aren't really a threat to the west so we don't have to eliminate them. Only contain them.
The other factions are not strong enough to eliminate them so they will have to be accommodated to some degree. This is what will happen when we leave so it makes some sense to plan for it. I think thats whats going on now.
So, why "negotiate" with these murderers ovre what will not involve us after we leave?
Why give them any semblance of legitimacy?
Do you bargain with the mugger, even if he agrees to let you leave alive after you give up your car and wallet?
kw