What's new

Amazing Pictures of PAF!!!

@ Kasrkin, blain2 and qsaark

Brothers what i asked was that "Do PAF still has that Bad Traditions Inherited from RAF and UK", Things which happened in the Past were really bad and these types of things must NOT HAPPEN ON PAF or GOVT Premises, Thats what i Meant.

PAF pilots must not use their PAF uniform and Pilot officer Standards To attract Women and Show OFF. They can do what ever they want to do in their personal time BUT using PAF's Grace and Standards for Personal Gain and Attracting women is not a Good thing to do.

Armed forces by their very nature are a conservative entity so show-off is not the intent. To outsiders uniform is all glamorous and as such this glamor can be exploited by some, but usually most are just carrying on doing what they need to wearing what they must. The stuff that used to happen in the open probably still goes on to a certain extent but now its indoors and out of the sight of others.

You have to understand the context of Murad sahib's post. The officers were in the PAF messes. Depending on the occasion, you are either in uniform, or flight suits or the mess kit (in case its a formal night). In the past outsiders were invited to the mess including opposite sex, this is not the norm any longer.

The armed forces maintain their customs of service and if someone is found to be too out of line, he is put in check, however sometimes people need to unwind and certain flexibility is given (however not the kind which would bring bad publicity to the armed forces).

What I am saying is that there is a difference of day and night in the outlook and conduct of the officer corps now as compared to that of the 60s and 70s (some is for the better, some is not). Even the officers who have served during these times up until recent times have changed to a degree due to the way the overall environment has changed.
 
.
I would also like to say that there were/are excellent officers in the Pakistani Armed forces from both categories (the practicing ones as well as non-practicing ones).

There is no doubt that there were/are excellent officers in pakistan armed forces, but what metalfalcon and qsaark is saying that these things r stricktly forbidden in Islam and it has nothing to do with the excellence of their skills and devotion to their country.

Regarding alcohol it is even said in Quran, the person who will trade it, store it are comitting the same kinda sins as of drinker him/herself.

But again every person has its own mindset and ethics u cant just force them to change it, if they do bad things they are the ones who will have to face the consequences.:angel:
 
.
Armed forces by their very nature are a conservative entity so show-off is not the intent. To outsiders uniform is all glamorous and as such this glamor can be exploited by some, but usually most are just carrying on doing what they need to wearing what they must. The stuff that used to happen in the open probably still goes on to a certain extent but now its indoors and out of the sight of others.

I fully agree with you on the points which you have mentioned in your post, Most of the People who wear uniform are doing what they are supposed to do and i don't have anything to do with their personal Life style, They are Human Beings after all so they have same Temptations just like us.
You have to understand the context of Murad sahib's post. The officers were in the PAF messes. Depending on the occasion, you are either in uniform, or flight suits or the mess kit (in case its a formal night). In the past outsiders were invited to the mess including opposite sex, this is not the norm any longer.

Thanks again, You just said everything there is nothing else to say. The Bad Traditions are no longer the Norm NOW.

The armed forces maintain their customs of service and if someone is found to be too out of line, he is put in check, however sometimes people need to unwind and certain flexibility is given (however not the kind which would bring bad publicity to the armed forces).

I never doubted the Rules and Regulations of Our Armed Forces. But there have been Many cases and you know more than me.

What I am saying is that there is a difference of day and night in the outlook and conduct of the officer corps now as compared to that of the 60s and 70s (some is for the better, some is not). Even the officers who have served during these times up until recent times have changed to a degree due to the way the overall environment has changed.

Everything Changes with Time, Only those People can Survive and Prosper who Manage themselves to the current Situations and adopt to the Environment and Changes are Must for development of any person or any Institution.
 
.
There is no doubt that there were/are excellent officers in pakistan armed forces, but what metalfalcon and qsaark is saying that these things r stricktly forbidden in Islam and it has nothing to do with the excellence of their skills and devotion to their country.

Now please don't derail the topic Further by starting a new debate on the Translation of Islamic Teachings and what is forbidden and what is not.

Regarding alcohol it is even said in Quran, the person who will trade it, store it are comitting the same kinda sins as of drinker him/herself.

Yes its true, So...

But again every person has its own mindset and ethics u cant just force them to change it, if they do bad things they are the ones who will have to face the consequences.:angel:

Even Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was Not Ordered By ALLAH (SWTH) to Force People to accept Teachings of Islam His Job was Just to Deliver the message and Let the People have the choice between good and bad. Everyone is responsible for his Deeds and ALLAH (SWTH) is the Best Judge.

Our Armed Forces are our Pride and whenever we are in Trouble (Natural or Man Made disaster) we look towards our Armed Forces, They are Like Ideals for the whole Nation and You have to admit that Such Acts by the Officers are not Easily Digested by our Nation due to our religious and Social Orientation.
 
.
"More liberal an officer you are, better are the chances of your promotion. This can be seen throughout 50s, 60s and 70s. Those, who were professionally good, yet practicing Muslims, were considered backwards, and generally not promoted beyond the rank of Brigadier or retired before time..."

With respect, I'm afraid you know little but presume too much. Mixing up of religion with a profession such as the armed forces is a bad idea in itself because religiosity is subjective and cannot ever be a substitute for professional merit. It is time you have the courage to acknowledge that moral credentials won’t always be proportional to outward religious projection. It is good to be a proud Muslim, but you should refrain from mixing up the two factors. Religious belief and conviction is a personal dynamic that cannot be judged by anyone except for Allah. So if the notion that outward displays of Islamic pious-ity and conviction should be taken as an indication of professional merit or competence is introduced into the Army institutionally, it would seriously undermine the social and professional fabric the Army is based on to say the least. It will also be corrosive for the purity of Islam and practicing Muslims themselves, for you see if the officers are told that they their advancement potentials will depend on their displayed religious inclinations, then do you think that the officers or jawans will be going to the mosques in front of their superiors for the right reasons? Also what will happen to the sectarian minorities in the military such as the Shias or the Aga Khanis? All of whom have served very well and constitute an integral part of our nation. By what frame of reference will their diverging ‘pieties’ and convictions be judged by? Will the personal bias of the religious evaluators not come into this?

Ayub Khan is often regarded as the father of the modern Pakistani Army and he had an inherit dislike for ‘Mullahs’ which was shared by generations of officers that would follow. The Mullahs initial hostility to Pakistan’s creation to and many other factors played a part in this. Anyone who has read Crossed Swords will know this quote from Ayub:

The fight with the mullah is political. It started from the time of Sir Syed [Ahmad Khan, a leading Muslim Reformer in the late nineteenth century]. The mullah regards the educated Muslims as his deadliest enemy and the rival for power. That is why several of them opposed Pakistan and sided with the Congress. They felt that with the help of the Hindus they will be able to keep educated Muslims out of power. So we have got to take on all those who are political mischief-makers. This battle, though unpleasant, is unavoidable. It has to been waged sometime or the other in the interest of a strong progressive Pakistan.

This puts the mind frame and ethos of the Pakistan Army into prospective doesn’t it? Ayub is right, the Islam the Mullahs try to throw at us is political and the Army treats it as such; politics. It would be foolish to introduce the ‘moral’ dynamic into all of this. These trends are fascinating and hard to explain, but they have more to do with political inclination or distrust, and social influences play an important part here too so it’s not a matter of soldiers displaying ‘weak morals’. The Pakistan Army draws its manpower from constrained if not limited territorial and social spectrums. I don’t want to use the word ‘aristocracy’ but the Army and its officer corps was heavily insulated from the main-stream civilian population. Garrisons were far away from the cities and markets so military men generally had a very offhand view of the world outside and vice versa. This class of officers were unlikely to mix religion with their day to day duties, most like Ayub had old family military traditions and culture heavily influenced by the British martial doctrine. But after the 60s, with increased urbanization and officer demands, the Army slowly started opening up its officer ranks to middle-class urbanized families where young men entered for a variety of reasons such as financial security and social prominence. Zia was the first of this generation. This class draws its identity very heavily from cultural norms said to be associated with Islam, so Zia’s ‘Islamization’ was more than just one guy calling the shots from the top. But like I take pains to point out, not everything is in the extreme. The Army is a harmonious organization, but these simmering undercurrents are hard to read for someone who has not experienced them first hand. There is a variety of opinion over everything from technical doctrine to religious matters. However it is credit to the PA that none of this has ever spilled out in the open, there has been some nasty stuff no doubt. But all those attempted coups were crushed and unpopular and properly handled. These days the Army’s cultural recruiting base is very wide-spread and diverse, now the problem is that higher society is moving away from military service. Because a lot has changed in Pakistan since the 50s (except for the politicians maybe, they are still snakes) however the Army has pretty much moved back to professional duty being the top priority. But that is not to say that Islam does not have a big place in the hearts of almost all Pakistani servicemen but it’s the Jinnah Islam as opposed to the Maulana Mudodi’s Islam.

So to say that professional officers were not granted promotions because of their basic Islamic habits i.e. offering prayers is completely uneducated BS. This has never happened and will never happen. There were a few years in the middle when secularist tendencies were frowned upon, but that is behind us now. There is no point over-exaggerating it either on this side or that side. Great officers and soldiers exist on both this side and that side of this line. And to the Pakistan Army, it not much of a line. Just a personal decision, which is as it should be.

Just thought I'd share my thoughts here...
 
.
There is no doubt that there were/are excellent officers in pakistan armed forces, but what metalfalcon and qsaark is saying that these things r stricktly forbidden in Islam and it has nothing to do with the excellence of their skills and devotion to their country.

Regarding alcohol it is even said in Quran, the person who will trade it, store it are comitting the same kinda sins as of drinker him/herself.

But again every person has its own mindset and ethics u cant just force them to change it, if they do bad things they are the ones who will have to face the consequences.:angel:

My friend,

Do you think I do not understand the question being asked? ;) I simply do not want to pass a judgment on the experiences of an individual here. I respect your convictions based on Islamic injunctions, but at the same time I am not judging anyone. I am simply pointing out how things went based on what I know/have seen.

Not everybody thinks as Qsaark or you or Muradk sahib or me. People have different backgrounds, many who served were not Muslims, some who were Muslims were liberal in their lives while others were conservative. All sorts of people join the services.

Your last paragraph is the essence of my point. Each man is responsible for his own actions. As long as the actions are not in direct contravention of the norms of the service and religion/culture, they will be tolerated. If they fall outside the limits (mind you these limits have changed over time), then people will be judged. I just think that people should be allowed to do what they want to behind closed doors.
 
.
"More liberal an officer you are, better are the chances of your promotion. This can be seen throughout 50s, 60s and 70s. Those, who were professionally good, yet practicing Muslims, were considered backwards, and generally not promoted beyond the rank of Brigadier or retired before time..."

With respect, I'm afraid you know little but presume too much. Mixing up of religion with a profession such as the armed forces is a bad idea in itself because religiosity is subjective and cannot ever be a substitute for professional merit. It is time you have the courage to acknowledge that moral credentials won’t always be proportional to outward religious projection. It is good to be a proud Muslim, but you should refrain from mixing up the two factors. Religious belief and conviction is a personal dynamic that cannot be judged by anyone except for Allah. So if the notion that outward displays of Islamic pious-ity and conviction should be taken as an indication of professional merit or competence is introduced into the Army institutionally, it would seriously undermine the social and professional fabric the Army is based on to say the least. It will also be corrosive for the purity of Islam and practicing Muslims themselves, for you see if the officers are told that they their advancement potentials will depend on their displayed religious inclinations, then do you think that the officers or jawans will be going to the mosques in front of their superiors for the right reasons? Also what will happen to the sectarian minorities in the military such as the Shias or the Aga Khanis? All of whom have served very well and constitute an integral part of our nation. By what frame of reference will their diverging ‘pieties’ and convictions be judged by? Will the personal bias of the religious evaluators not come into this?

Ayub Khan is often regarded as the father of the modern Pakistani Army and he had an inherit dislike for ‘Mullahs’ which was shared by generations of officers that would follow. The Mullahs initial hostility to Pakistan’s creation to and many other factors played a part in this. Anyone who has read Crossed Swords will know this quote from Ayub:

The fight with the mullah is political. It started from the time of Sir Syed [Ahmad Khan, a leading Muslim Reformer in the late nineteenth century]. The mullah regards the educated Muslims as his deadliest enemy and the rival for power. That is why several of them opposed Pakistan and sided with the Congress. They felt that with the help of the Hindus they will be able to keep educated Muslims out of power. So we have got to take on all those who are political mischief-makers. This battle, though unpleasant, is unavoidable. It has to been waged sometime or the other in the interest of a strong progressive Pakistan.

This puts the mind frame and ethos of the Pakistan Army into prospective doesn’t it? Ayub is right, the Islam the Mullahs try to throw at us is political and the Army treats it as such; politics. It would be foolish to introduce the ‘moral’ dynamic into all of this. These trends are fascinating and hard to explain, but they have more to do with political inclination or distrust, and social influences play an important part here too so it’s not a matter of soldiers displaying ‘weak morals’. The Pakistan Army draws its manpower from constrained if not limited territorial and social spectrums. I don’t want to use the word ‘aristocracy’ but the Army and its officer corps was heavily insulated from the main-stream civilian population. Garrisons were far away from the cities and markets so military men generally had a very offhand view of the world outside and vice versa. This class of officers were unlikely to mix religion with their day to day duties, most like Ayub had old family military traditions and culture heavily influenced by the British martial doctrine. But after the 60s, with increased urbanization and officer demands, the Army slowly started opening up its officer ranks to middle-class urbanized families where young men entered for a variety of reasons such as financial security and social prominence. Zia was the first of this generation. This class draws its identity very heavily from cultural norms said to be associated with Islam, so Zia’s ‘Islamization’ was more than just one guy calling the shots from the top. But like I take pains to point out, not everything is in the extreme. The Army is a harmonious organization, but these simmering undercurrents are hard to read for someone who has not experienced them first hand. There is a variety of opinion over everything from technical doctrine to religious matters. However it is credit to the PA that none of this has ever spilled out in the open, there has been some nasty stuff no doubt. But all those attempted coups were crushed and unpopular and properly handled. These days the Army’s cultural recruiting base is very wide-spread and diverse, now the problem is that higher society is moving away from military service. Because a lot has changed in Pakistan since the 50s (except for the politicians maybe, they are still snakes) however the Army has pretty much moved back to professional duty being the top priority. But that is not to say that Islam does not have a big place in the hearts of almost all Pakistani servicemen but it’s the Jinnah Islam as opposed to the Maulana Mudodi’s Islam.

So to say that professional officers were not granted promotions because of their basic Islamic habits i.e. offering prayers is completely uneducated BS. This has never happened and will never happen. There were a few years in the middle when secularist tendencies were frowned upon, but that is behind us now. There is no point over-exaggerating it either on this side or that side. Great officers and soldiers exist on both this side and that side of this line. And to the Pakistan Army, it not much of a line. Just a personal decision, which is as it should be.

Just thought I'd share my thoughts here...

Zia bharti needs to be looked into as well as the overall dynamics of the intake of the Army during the 80s to understand the role of religion. There was a time when even the locally born and bred Pakistani commanding officer would speak his own native urdu with a British accent to fit in with the then prevailing culture. In the times of Zia, where ever Zia went to pray, everyone from the Corps commander down to station commander would show up at the mosque to pray next to him. While praying is obligatory on us, it should be done out of conviction and not show off. This show off crept in to some extent and contrary to professionalism, people were in some cases bumped up due to the impression they gave of being very good Muslims.

I think that level of show off is what puts off people. Its just as bad as the early CO and senior commander who mimicked the Brits while speaking urdu. Fitting in at the cost of one's principles is worrisome. If someone believes in his religion then let him practice it with full conviction and there is no bar in his promotion. Praying regularly, fasting, keeping beards is a norm now in our Services. You see senior officers doing this so the issue of being held back is no longer a big one. There have been times when people of liberal leanings and at other times religious leaning have been held back, but it was a time specific deal that changed over time.
 
.
With respect, I'm afraid you know little but presume too much.

Yes of course, I don’t know each an every incident when a practicing officer was superseded by a more 'liberal' one.

except for the politicians maybe, they are still snakes

You are 100% right here.

but it’s the Jinnah Islam as opposed to the Maulana Mudodi’s Islam.

With due respect, I cant agree on this. There is no Jinnah's Islam or Moududi's Islam. There is Allah's and his Prophet's Islam. If Jinnah used to drink (which he indeed did), this doesn't make it acceptable to drink. Even if he is the father of the nation. These un-Islamic practices were not common in the armed forces because the Armed forces were practicing Jinnah's Islam, but because they were trained by the British. Colonel Mohammed Khan wrote in Bajang Amad "pehley dil par jabar kar key peena seekhtey they aur phir aisey rawan hotey they key na peeney ley liyrh jabar karna parta tha". And I personally know a number of officers (now in their 80s and 90s) who served in British Indian Army and later in Pak Army who still drink. It was just too common because of the British influence. In those days, these officers were called 'tommys'.

So to say that professional officers were not granted promotions because of their basic Islamic habits i.e. offering prayers is completely uneducated BS. This has never happened and will never happen.

I am afraid you are not right here. It has happened in the past, whether it will happen in the future, I don’t know. I am from an educated Indian Muslim (pre-1947) family. A number of my family members have served under British Raj both in the military and civilian setups. Many of them have passed away and few are still alive. My habit of spending time with the seniors has taught me more than I ever wanted to learn.

There were a few years in the middle when secularist tendencies were frowned upon, but that is behind us now.

The secularist tendencies were not in the few middle years, they have been from 1947-1977, a good 30 years. Right you are though, they are behind us now.

There is no point over-exaggerating it either on this side or that side. Great officers and soldiers exist on both this side and that side of this line. And to the Pakistan Army, it not much of a line. Just a personal decision, which is as it should be.

Again you are right here. However, being Muslims, we should make real effort to live our lives according to Islam (not Jinnah's or Moududi's but Allah's) as much as possible. We may escape from not saying our prayers regularly or not fasting or not having beard etc, but accepting 'haram' practices as a part of Islam is simply not acceptable.

These are my thoughts, and anybody is free to disagree.
 
Last edited:
.
Being a member of this forum, and a citizen of Pakistan, I have the right to share my opinion just as much as the other person. Secondly, I'm pretty sure he "Was" a senior officer. I'm proud that he served our country and all, but the comment could've been altered for obvious reasons. My concern was simply because that kind of a comment would attract a lot of puns from our counterparts. No need to make it into a big deal.

Bezerk; sir
you,have evry right to critisize him !

but also plz give him ,some credit to letting open ,,the secrets?;):D:tup:
 
.
In the times of Zia, where ever Zia went to pray, everyone from the Corps commander down to station commander would show up at the mosque to pray next to him. While praying is obligatory on us, it should be done out of conviction and not show off. This show off crept in to some extent and contrary to professionalism, people were in some cases bumped up due to the impression they gave of being very good Muslims.

Blain, the same thing can be said for Yahya Khan, A.K. Niazi, Gul Hasan and many others. Their juniors also tend to follow them in the pubs and in the parties to give an impression that they were very modern and liberal.

Tell me, what is better even if it is superficial, to follow someone in the mosque or to follow some one in the pub?

I think that level of show off is what puts off people. Its just as bad as the early CO and senior commander who mimicked the Brits while speaking urdu. Fitting in at the cost of one's principles is worrisome. If someone believes in his religion then let him practice it with full conviction and there is no bar in his promotion. Praying regularly, fasting, keeping beards is a norm now in our Services. You see senior officers doing this so the issue of being held back is no longer a big one. There have been times when people of liberal leanings and at other times religious leaning have been held back, but it was a time specific deal that changed over time.

Here you go, yes, that is a balanced analysis.
 
.
I don't like this particular discussion, it irks quite a bit of people here. Personally, I feel that our military service men/women should follow a modest code of conduct, regardless of whether they are practicing or not. However, before pointing fingers at military service men-trademark of Pakistani people-I suggest we do a bit of "soul-searching" withing ourselves.

From where are soldiers recruited from? are they recruited from Britain or the US? No, they all come from Pakistan, therefore they are a representative portion of the Pakistani population. I think its hypocritical of us to maintain a position of moral superiority complex and point fingers at people. Our own people have immersed themselves in a pool of rampant corruption and nepotism, and now actually have the nerve to think that they are practicing muslims? Do any of you know how rampant dating is in Pakistan? Have any of us ever seen what goes on in the infamous "underground parties" in Pakistan? Goodness, we have probably one of the most famous "red light" districts in the world, and we think we could judge people.

I'm not saying what people who do this are correct, no, they should not have done such a thing. the consumption of alcohol and intermingling with the opposite sex is strictly forbidden in Islam. However, I find these things to be the lesser of the evils, when I look that what the youth of Pakistan have come to. Take a trip to any park in Karachi, and please conduct a survey of the people there. You can expect 60% of the younger people to be dating-from my experience at least, I'm just giving a generalized example. There are young Pakistanis who cross the line and commit zina (fornication/pre-marital sex) , which is far worse than consuming alcohol and dancing. These people deserve death, not just because they commit zina, but because they ruined their families' entire lineage, brought shame upon the ummah for their 5 minutes of pleasure, and worst of all promote the sin and influence others to do the same which is outright fitna. this isn't the worst, you don't want me to get started on the children of politicians. I can go right now on to facebook and expose their pictures, I guarantee you will find Salman Taseer's family to be conservative.
 
.
With due respect, I cant agree on this. There is no Jinnah's Islam or Moududi's Islam.

No. This is not a matter of you agreeing or disagreeing with me. You just didn’t understand what I meant. Jinnah’s Islam was that he claimed to represent the will of Muslims of the subcontinent while Moududi claims to be an agent of Allah’s Will on Muslims. They are both servants of Islam in their own way. I don’t mind Moududi’s Islam out there in the political arena as long as it respects the ideology of Pakistan, but there is no place for it in the armed forces.

I am afraid you are not right here. It has happened in the past, whether it will happen in the future, I don’t know. I am from an educated Indian Muslim (pre-1947) family. A number of my family members have served under British Raj both in the military and civilian setups. Many of them have passed away and few are still alive. My habit of spending time with the seniors has taught me more than I ever wanted to learn.

People exaggerate. I’ve never ever heard of an incident where fundamental religious freedoms being practiced has resulted in a refusal to promote. I know of people who didn’t reach as high as they could have because of religious-affiliated controversy, but not for something as simple as being a practicing Muslim. In that regard too what ever small social pressures or prejudices might have existed before don’t exist anymore.

The secularist tendencies were not in the few middle years, they have been from 1947-1977, a good 30 years.

That was not what I said. Read my posts properly please.

Tell me, what is better even if it is superficial, to follow someone in the mosque or to follow some one in the pub?

Going to pubs was never officially given the same importance as going to Mosques in Zia’s time. 71 was a smack in the face for the excessively indulgent officer trends you can say, there was near munity in one garrison after young officers got wind of Yahya’s drinking problems. Yahya had to go.
 
. .
Tell me, what is better even if it is superficial, to follow someone in the mosque or to follow some one in the pub?.

My friend, both forms of this superficiality are equally bad in a professional setting because they encourage sycophancy. In a personal setting, obviously I would prefer the former to the latter hoping that one would realize the folly of superficiality in it and mend their ways, however in this specific case, outward show-off has had repercussions on the profession of arms.
 
Last edited:
.
Qsaark,

This thread was not following someone to the mosque or to the pub---or which one is better than the other---I mean to say---you can go to the mosque and then at your discretion go to the pub as well if that is what you want to do---.

I believe that Muradk just made a statement of how things were---we can take it just at its face value.

What happened at that time was what the officers were taught----it was cool to be drunk---that is what they learnt from the british----why do you think pakistanis indians drink so much whiskey and why not other forms of liquors---because the whiskey was the MANLY drink---the british officers drank whiskey---the pakistanis and indians wanted to look cool---so that is what they did---they didnot know any better---they don't know that you don't need to burn your throat and feel bitter----you can have a captain MORGAN and coke and have a nice smooth drink---or enjoy a SCREW DRIVER, a kamikaze shooter---or a nice tequilla---or you can go about and enjoy a nice nice bottle of red wine---a cabernet sauvignon---or just simply enjoy some champagne---let the bubbly do its thing---.

Come on guys---can we get back to the thread---can someone find some pictures.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom