Jihadists seek to open new front in Burma

[Chinese-Dragon]

Incorrect, the Jihadis fighting in Pakistan are fighting as a result of our policy to support the US in the war, as well as for the drone strikes. For Xinjiang, you don't have classic Jehadis there, even though CIA is trying to build some. Right now Chinese issue with Xingjiang is related to the legit demands of your own citizens. I am convinced that if you carry out the same sort of development you have carried out in other parts of China, these elements will lose whatever ground they have right now. No one has time to go to become an insurgent when they have a job and a family to look after.

Here is the thing, if terrorism is a result of minorities not being "included" in development, then why is it that the countries worst affected by terrorism are Muslim countries, where they are in the majority? There is no possible way to give them further "inclusiveness" since they are the majority right?

And what about rich guys like Bin Laden? They are not poor minorities being persecuted by their state, but rather adherents to a very twisted form of ideology.

Anyway, my point is that spreading violence into Burma is not going to help anybody at all, least of all the Muslims in Burma. It will just give the Burmese state the gloating satisfaction of saying "We were right" (like the Americans like to do) in order to justify further crackdowns.

My worry is that for every person saying "Burma treats Muslims badly so they deserve Jihadist violence", there will be a person saying the same thing for China, and for Pakistan, to justify more extremist violence in both of our countries. Even the most prominent Muslim politicians in the world like Erdogan have accused China of genocide in Xinjiang, how many of those guys think we deserve extremist violence in return.

 

[acid rain]

Terrorism is not the solution for anything - the only thing it will do is alienate other communities towards a particular community - the opinion is not great already.

 

[Zarvan]

Blowback for Buddhist atrocities committed towards Rohingas is long overdue,Burmese monks need to be taught a lesson, if it is not the international community teaching them a lesson,than it is going to be someone else, Jehadi,Separatist,Mujahideen,Freedom fighter,Terrorists,Militants are just titles. People facing such horrendous atrocities are going to stand up and they will accept any assistance,regardless of where it is coming from.

Yes Sir I hope this would have been done by Muslim government but they are full of impotent people that is wise these kind of groups have to to do these things on their own but hope they become really strong and destroy those who have killed Muslims and destroyed them but they should also maintain the rules which Islam has defined I meaning laws for war

 

[Dillinger]

Dillinger you have not answered my question. Do you agree or disagree that these groups trying to set up operations in Burma is because the international community and the Burmese govt, is playing spectator to these killings.

I completely disagree. They have no mandate, nor any entrusted duty to do so beyond their religious fanaticism. And by that count answer my question, since at the very beginning of the thread you've already given such actions a tacit nod, do you under any circumstances support religious fanatics who set up proxy groups and attack sovereign nations?

Oh and by that logic, since the Pakistani government itself has done nothing to stop drone strikes Pakistan too DESERVES the ttp and resultant casualties.

 

[L@eeq]

To have critical thinking and prove ourselves worthy of our creation. Blowing up innocent people is not involved though.

"I did not create the jinn and mankind except to worship Me." [51:56]
bolded part is creation of your mind so i would not answer it.
Note: every one any one who think killing a innocent person is justified .. .. he will taste this in hereafter. jehad or qital is fard in some condition. and specificaly in those condition when you are under attack. and i think its same in every religion.

 

[Kompromat]

Here is the thing, if terrorism is a result of minorities not being "included" in development, then why is it that the countries worst affected by terrorism are Muslim countries

Dynamics of terrorism vary between different societies, as a matter of fact there is no uniformed description of a terrorist. He could be an Al-Qaida terrorist, he could be a Lord's Resistance Army terrorist or a Pakistani taliban.

In Muslim countries, the two majorly affected countries are Pakistan [Where terrorism is a consequence of our flawed policies and our blind support for America], and Iraq [Where the terrorism has a sectarian nature as well as foreign elements fighting for ground].

where they are in the majority? There is no possible way to give them further "inclusiveness" since they are the majority right?

There is. You see, Muslim states are not "uniformed states", where everyone is the same. There are other divisions, ie ethnic,linguistic and sectarian. Pakistan for instance is fighting an undeclared active war. The US punishes Pakistan through different means for not playing ball, for instance not joining the China containment policy. Iraq has a sectarian conflict.

Turkey is a good example, where PKK ran an insurgency because they were not included in the state,their language wasn't recognized. The insurgency failed when Turkey started a peace and reconciliation process.

And what about rich guys like Bin Laden? They are not poor minorities being persecuted by their state, but rather adherents to a very twisted form of ideology.

I will let you watch this as my answer.

Anyway, my point is that spreading violence into Burma is not going to help anybody at all, least of all the Muslims in Burma.

100% correct.

It will just give the Burmese state the gloating satisfaction of saying "We were right" (like the Americans like to do) in order to justify further crackdowns.

Correct.

You have not answered my question. Does "non intervention" either by international community and Burmese govt as a result of these killings appreciate the killings further or it doesn't?

If Burmese govt, International community and regional civilized powers are playing spectator to this unprecedented violence,they are "inviting" these non state actors, are they not?

 

[Kompromat]

I completely disagree. They have no mandate, nor any entrusted duty to do so beyond their religious fanaticism. And by that count answer my question, since at the very beginning of the thread you've already given such actions a tacit nod, do you under any circumstances support religious fanatics who set up proxy groups and attack sovereign nations?

Oh and by that logic, since the Pakistani government itself has done nothing to stop drone strikes Pakistan too DESERVES the ttp and resultant casualties.

They have a mandate or they don't isn't what i asked. What i asked is a yes or no question which you haven't answered.

 

[L@eeq]

vietnamese fought against america.. so why do you want to go into burma, india syria and all places and fight?

yap this is a valid question. but its part of our faith if a muslim is being attacked in any part of the world all muslim should feel the pain and support them.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Correct.

You have not answered my question. Does "non intervention" either by international community and Burmese govt as a result of these killings appreciate the killings further or it doesn't?

If Burmese govt, International community and regional civilized powers are playing spectator to this unprecedented violence,they are "inviting" these non state actors, are they not?

Firstly I would say that Muslim countries combined have a LOT of diplomatic clout, and for example they control most of the world's oil/gas resources, as well as spanning several continents. They also have significant military and economic power between them. If they were determined to do something about Burma, be it military or diplomatic, they have a vast array of options by which to do so.

As for "intervention" that is a mixed bag, as we have seen in Iraq/Afghanistan/Libya and possibly soon Syria. By all accounts it will most likely increase the violence and death, look at Iraq now (one of the most violent countries in the world) compared to before the invasion, when they were moderately stable.

My big worry though, as before, is that if Burma deserves Jihadist violence for being ineffective in stopping ethnic riots, then what does China deserve? Especially when high profile global politicians like Erdogan accuse China of committing "genocide" agianst Muslims?

Then they will use that same argument against Pakistan too. They will say (as the TTP does) that Pakistan allowed America into the region to start the War on Terror, which has claimed the lives of hundreds of thousands of Muslims.

Now, who deserves to be hit with Jihadist violence? It is true that these groups have genuine grievances, but so does every group in the world, some more than others. Should every group in the world who has a legitimate grievance (basically everybody) condone violence to solve it? I'm sure you agree that the answer is no. It just multiplies the suffering, in a world where too many people are suffering already.

 

[L@eeq]

so why did pakistanis kill 3 million bangladeshis in 71, why i spakistan supporting afghan taliban who will destroy afghan people. why did pak support bahrain king to suppress shia majority?
why is pakistan not supporting uighur muslims?

first 71 is totaly propaganda against pakistan by bharat so i dont buy it.
next aghan taliban are freedome fighters . dont look it with your indian media glasses. look it with an afghans eye. what he feels. no one ever stayed in afghanistan. afghans dont want any one to dictate them nor they bare any opperessor. this is afghan history.

 

[Dillinger]

They have a mandate or they don't isn't what i asked. What i asked is a yes or no question which you haven't answered.

I already did, when they kill people and they will, the onus of that will lie on their heads rather than being the fault of the international community. So the answer is a clear NO. Is that clear enough an answer?

I don't remember any one whining about the fact that in 1947 the Jami-a-tul Ulema-e Islam organisation was started by Omra Meah? The aim was to start a mujaheddin insurgency which they did, towards the goal of merging the Mayu frontier of Arakan with East Pakistan. Have we forgotten our history lesson? The said insurgency lasted for 14 years and took a bloody toll on the Burmese. What of the Northern Arakan Muslim League which was founded just after the aforementioned organisation and started an armed insurgency to achieve their demand of merger with East Pakistan?

"Within a few years, Mujahid rebels made rapid progress and banished the Arakanese villagers. The Arakanese inhabitants of Buthidaung and Maungdaw were forced to leave their homes. In June 1949, the Burmese government's control was reduced to Akyab city only, while the Mujahids were in possession of all of northern Arakan. The Burmese government accused the Mujahids of encouraging illegal immigration into Arakan of thousands of Bengali people from East Pakistan."

READ THE HISTORY. The end of that specific insurgency was followed by three more, the last of which ended in the previous decade. SO WHAT RIGHT DOES ANY MUSLIM HAVE TO POINT ANY FINGERS AT THE BURMESE STATE?

AND pray tell, when your favorite poster boys the Taliban couldn't even tolerate a statue of Lord Buddha, instead they shelled it and blew it up with artillery then why complain? Almost all Pakistani posters here are waiting with bated breaths for the day that the Taliban reasserts its control over Af, no? Are you not cheering them on in every thread that there is? Is my assessment wrong when I state that? So if a simple statue was unbearable what would happen to a live and breathing monk one wonders? After all have not Muslims started extremist organisations and perpetrated terrorist attacks as reprisal for the demolition of a mosque? Is it not the law of equivalent exchange in operation here?

 

[L@eeq]

lolllz zzzz
a ****** supported rulled BD will also do acts like Bharat. why your s.c sacked afzal guru. and they writen that we have no evidence but we have to sacke him because of peoples sentiments.

 

[ranjeet]

I wonder why ? Oh yeah i remembered, maybe because thousands of Rohingya Muslims got slaughtered by extremist Buddhists while Burma's government are watching and even participating in the slaughter of Muslims in Burma, and the world did not do sh!t, so now the rohingya decided to defend themselves against the terror they facing in Burma.

Graphic Images of innocent Rohingya Muslims being slaughtered in Burma

Delete those fake rohingya pics, its about time you people stop faking propaganda.
Post reported !!!

 

[ranjeet]

if they follow fake people thats what will happen

Am sick and tired of their pathetic hypocrisy man.

 

[Icewolf]

so why did pakistanis kill 3 million bangladeshis in 71, why i spakistan supporting afghan taliban who will destroy afghan people. why did pak support bahrain king to suppress shia majority?
why is pakistan not supporting uighur muslims?

Is it said in your textbooks that 3 million BD's died? Search up real facts kiddo.

Afghan Taliban are funded by their poppy farms and criminal activities.

Pakistan doesn't formally support any "king".

China is taking care of Muslims, their Muslims have higher standard of living than whole of South Asia.

Am sick and tired of their pathetic hypocrisy man.

Please GTFO this forum then