Militants capture Kalam in Swat Valley

[QADRI]

o man this is a simple problem send one or two f-16 and do some sort of carpet bombing on them ....so that they may taste that...my view is that now its time to use ARMY.

 

[shaikh_spair]

o man this is a simple problem send one or two f-16 and do some sort of carpet bombing on them ....so that they may taste that...my view is that now its time to use ARMY.

wow very well goooooood suggestion, i think you have forgotton your brain in freezer, plz, try to have it, while posting comments on this sublime portal. whole world visits these forums, what they are supposed to infer from your comments.

 

[Spring Onion]

Dear Jana,

What about the weapons and the APC's they handed over alongwith the 'empty police station' ?

Abay Qudrati

the kinds of weapons POLICE carry here in Pakistan all know that.
They carry an old rifles and some assult rifles.
APCs are not much in use there in that troubled area.
So almost all the police stations and check-posts the militants occupied were vacated much before they arrived so saying they had captured the entire valley is such a stupid thing.

Even then seeing the lukewarm response of the locals towards arrival of the militants, they (militants) had vacated Kalam and handed over all the empty police stations and check posts to local jirgas.
As people there told them they want sharia imposition.

What about the militants imposing Shariah ?

What about them bringing down the Pakistan Flag ?

well imposition of Sharia is not something horrible if done in its real sense but not the kinds of sharia they want which has nothing to do with Islam.
As far removing the flag well they had to be taken to task in due course.

The Chapter will be closed when all the above is reversed. Its not going to be easy to take back these towns as using gunships and tanks if feasible will lead to immense collateral damage. Lets wait and watch.
Regards

Qudrati these towns are not with the enemies so i dont consider it taking back.

The only thing which i see and feel these militants by roaming and removing national flag, freely in empty towns of Swat (As most of the people have migrated to safer places) making it easy for forces to flush them out using air and ground operation and i see the government is doing right thing to give them a loose run up .

Let them roam free so that common and innocent people vacate the area and there will be very low fear of killing of civilians in the attacks.

 

[Always Neutral]

Abay Qudrati

the kinds of weapons POLICE carry here in Pakistan all know that.
They carry an old rifles and some assult rifles.
APCs are not much in use there in that troubled area.
So almost all the police stations and check-posts the militants occupied were vacated much before they arrived so saying they had captured the entire valley is such a stupid thing.

Even then seeing the lukewarm response of the locals towards arrival of the militants, they (militants) had vacated Kalam and handed over all the empty police stations and check posts to local jirgas.
As people there told them they want sharia imposition.

well imposition of Sharia is not something horrible if done in its real sense but not the kinds of sharia they want which has nothing to do with Islam.
As far removing the flag well they had to be taken to task in due course.





Qudrati these towns are not with the enemies so i dont consider it taking back.

The only thing which i see and feel these militants by roaming and removing national flag, freely in empty towns of Swat (As most of the people have migrated to safer places) making it easy for forces to flush them out using air and ground operation and i see the government is doing right thing to give them a loose run up .

Let them roam free so that common and innocent people vacate the area and there will be very low fear of killing of civilians in the attacks.

Dear Jana,

Please give me some credit. I only post what I have seen and find credible. I have seen on BBC as well as the Telegraph photos of the militants standing guard in a police station where there is White Flag flying, A blue APC standing and an armoury of AK's.

Anyway see something from Pakistan as the western press is not appreciated by you.

Best Regards

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan

'Meanwhile, the militants took over two police stations on Saturday after police abandoned them and seized weapons and an armoured personnel carrier, Iqbal Khattak reported '

 

[Spring Onion]

Dear Jana,

Please give me some credit. I only post what I have seen and find credible. I have seen on BBC as well as the Telegraph photos of the militants standing guard in a police station where there is White Flag flying, A blue APC standing and an armoury of AK's.

Anyway see something from Pakistan as the western press is not appreciated by you.

Best Regards

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan

'Meanwhile, the militants took over two police stations on Saturday after police abandoned them and seized weapons and an armoured personnel carrier, Iqbal Khattak reported '

Dear Qudrati
you do deserve the credit

I did agree that they went to the empty police stations indeed.

And i also told you what kind of weapons police have wich these militants got.
As far APCs well these are not in abondence.

Let them have these as i earlier told that it would be easy for us to cope with them once the fear of civilian catualities become much lesser after only having these militants left in the area.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Interesting. Are you suggesting some silent understanding wrt to stepped up ops in NW Pakistan? Or was this move in the works for a while?

Can't comment as I don't know.

But, if it is true, I am glad that it is so.

It is not in the interest of India, as I see it, to have a chaotic Pakistan.

I know that people like Dabong and Dimension will not believe it, but that is the reality.

Irrational Hate is not the answer.

Coexistence is!

Seen the Mohali cricket match where Pakistan won with a fighting win? It was a marvellous match and well won!

 

[HAIDER]

SWAT, Nov 7: Militants vacated the scenic Kalam valley in Swat on Wednesday apparently in view of a lukewarm response from the local people to their advance. At the same time there are reports that security forces have left the area.

Armed supporters of Maulana Fazlullah had moved to the valley in the morning after capturing the towns of Bahrain and Madyan.

They hoisted their flags on a police station which had been vacated by law-enforcement personnel.

“About 60 militants with heavy weapons arrived in the town in 10 vehicles and captured the abandoned police station,” a resident of the area told Dawn.

However, he said, elders of the Kohistani tribe immediately convened a jirga and asked the militants to leave because they themselves could control the area.

After the departure of the militants, a committee was formed to take care of the police station and public and private property.

Sources said that militants had consolidated their positions in Madyan and Bahrain.
Militants vacate Kalam valley -DAWN - Top Stories; November 08, 2007

 

[Ababeel]

The govt must consult the local jirgas as soon as possible and make arrangements for the implementation of Sharia laws there as it is the ultimate solution for the recurring problem of militancy there as the common people there love Islam as well as want to live peacefully. Secondly the moderate Islamists like MMA who had there govt there must use their clout there to bring the peace back and balance the Extremists and govt Secularist and some Athiest in govt allergic to Islamic rule or Sharia in these areas and all of Pakistan.

 

[Always Neutral]

The govt must consult the local jirgas as soon as possible and make arrangements for the implementation of Sharia laws there as it is the ultimate solution for the recurring problem of militancy there as the common people there love Islam as well as want to live peacefully. Secondly the moderate Islamists like MMA who had there govt there must use their clout there to bring the peace back and balance the Extremists and govt Secularist and some Athiest in govt allergic to Islamic rule or Sharia in these areas and all of Pakistan.

Dear Ababeel,

I had asked this question earlier to my friend Dabong who avoided answering the same so i ask again ?

How can you implement shariah only in parts of the country ?
What happens to Jinnah version of a muslim majority country where all religions are free to practice ?
What happens when a good muslim practising Shariah has to fight another muslim soldier sent in to enforce the law ?
Who takes precedence the Shariah Court or the Supreme court ?
What about the deep relations between USA and PArm.Forces ?

Unless you answer them you will have a repeat of SWAT every year.

Regards

 

[blain2]

Dear Ababeel,

I had asked this question earlier to my friend Dabong who avoided answering the same so i ask again ?

How can you implement shariah only in parts of the country ?
What happens to Jinnah version of a muslim majority country where all religions are free to practice ?
What happens when a good muslim practising Shariah has to fight another muslim soldier sent in to enforce the law ?
Who takes precedence the Shariah Court or the Supreme court ?
What about the deep relations between USA and PArm.Forces ?

Unless you answer them you will have a repeat of SWAT every year.

Regards

How can you implement shariah only in parts of the country ?

Its been done. The precedence has been set in Nigeria. Half of the country has Sharia and the other half does not.

What happens to Jinnah version of a muslim majority country where all religions are free to practice ?

Nothing happens to Jinnah's Pakistan as far as other's right to practice their religion. Sharia allows full accommodation for churches, synagogues, temples etc. and open leave for all to practice what they choose to.

What happens when a good muslim practising Shariah has to fight another muslim soldier sent in to enforce the law ?

If Sharia is understood properly then Muslims practicing sharia would not take up arms against the state. The act of violence against the state is not allowed to the "ahle-sunnah wal-jamaa'" Muslims (the largest group of Sunni Muslims). The state must also ensure that it does not usurp the right of the people.

Who takes precedence the Shariah Court or the Supreme court ?

The Sharia court in essence becomes the Supreme court if sharia is implemented government wide.

What about the deep relations between USA and PArm.Forces ?

Nothing they go on if everyone was mature and realistic about it. The relations are hinged on the need to stabilize the region. The US has to come to terms with the fact that sooner or later, a sharia based entity will come to power and like the Persians, Romans etc. have come to terms with it and talked and traded with such entities in the past, the west of today and future will also have to do the same.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

What exactly constitutes Shariah anyway? How is government selected, run, means of arbitration etc.

I think most moderate Muslims have a very different understanding of what Shariah entails than those who are the most vociferous in advocating for it. Also would a "constitution" (local or national) have fail proof provisions in it regarding the rights of minorities, freedom to worship (or not) etc?

Even the MMA would say that Shariah allows for equality and freedom, but the policies they advocate represent something completely different. I think that dichotomy would have to be guarded against with explicit clauses, right at the beginning, that do not have any ambiguity associated with them that could allow for misinterpretation.

However, I don't think that the people demanding it right now have any intention of allowing those kinds of freedoms - just look at the bombings of Music/video centers, barber shops, defacement of Buddhist relics, violent threats to schools etc. In such a situation, granting Shariah will turn the areas into something akin to Afghanistan under the Taliban. And then every other nut job in the rest of Pakistan will pick up a gun and start demanding Shariah!

This is not the time for Sharah, if only because it is being demanded at the barrel of a gun. Vote legislators in who share your beliefs, and if you have enough, they can amend the constitution to allow for "shariah". If you cannot get enough, that obviously means the people don't want it. Respect their wishes then.

 

[HAIDER]

Is it shariah or Pashtun tribal law...?..i would say its all Pashtun law, because before implementing shariah, society need to do lots of homework. Otherwise chopping necks and cutting hand is very famous form of shariah...

 

[Always Neutral]

Dear Blain,

Thanks for taking the time to explain. While what you say may work in a perfect world its unlikely to work in Pakistan view the history of the last 10 years.

Its been done. The precedence has been set in Nigeria. Half of the country has Sharia and the other half does not.

Nigeria is not a majority muslim country like Pakistan but has only 50 % muslims followed by 40 % Christians and 10 % Animisms & others. Shariah is in 9 provinces only. However please see the number of riots and unrest taking place there.

Nothing happens to Jinnah's Pakistan as far as other's right to practice their religion. Sharia allows full accommodation for churches, synagogues, temples etc. and open leave for all to practice what they choose to.

Well again the people who imposed Shariah in SWAT first blew up a 35 foot 1000 year old statue of Buddha after taking down the Pakistan flag and raising a white flag so Jinnah's Pakistan will not exist.


If Sharia is understood properly then Muslims practicing sharia would not take up arms against the state. The act of violence against the state is not allowed to the "ahle-sunnah wal-jamaa'" Muslims (the largest group of Sunni Muslims). The state must also ensure that it does not usurp the right of the people.

Well they have taken up arms to support foreigners against the FC and PA.


The Sharia court in essence becomes the Supreme court if sharia is implemented government wide.

Sorry Sir in Nigeria the example you quote the highest court is the Nigerian Supreme court which uses English law and stepped in to stop the Shariah courts order to stone a woman to death.

Nothing they go on if everyone was mature and realistic about it. The relations are hinged on the need to stabilize the region. The US has to come to terms with the fact that sooner or later, a sharia based entity will come to power and like the Persians, Romans etc. have come to terms with it and talked and traded with such entities in the past, the west of today and future will also have to do the same.

Trading is onething but being allies in WOT against the Taliban is what is causing the problem. It will worsen if you implement shariah there. The problem facing Pakistan now will re-occur every year.

Regards

 

[blain2]

I did not say anything about now or 10 years.

If sharia is enforced in some Muslim country (or lets say Pakistan) then the entire rules of the game change. Maybe the occupation of Afghanistan does not remain an option for ISAF and US...I mean there are very many other things that could change.

While what you say may work in a perfect world its unlikely to work in Pakistan view the history of the last 10 years.

That is not true. Sharia was the mode of governance in the Muslim world for 12 centuries. Sharia led Muslim empires co-existed with theocratic Christian empires and life went on. They had wars and problems, but so do we in the age of nation states.

The world as we live in is not a utopia, I think we all agree. Muslims espousing to follow Sharia will try to do the best they can, but to err is human. The current yardstick to measure Sharia is Taliban or the Iranian government. In the case of former, their lack of education is what causes their failures. In the case of latter, its US hard-headedness. Saudis have had sharia implemented for the past 70 years and all and sundry in the West deal with them. So not sure why similar and even more open Sharia led societies cannot exist?

All I am saying is that there is ampe evidence that sharia embracing societies have co-existed with others and have been very accommodating of non-Muslims living there, however the difference between those Muslims and the Taliban has been the quality of the understanding of Islam as well as secular education. Due to a very narrow outlook, the Taliban can't possibly represent what a sharia-following Muslim society really is like.

 

[Always Neutral]

I did not say anything about now or 10 years.

If sharia is enforced in some Muslim country (or lets say Pakistan) then the entire rules of the game change. Maybe the occupation of Afghanistan does not remain an option for ISAF and US...I mean there are very many other things that could change.


That is not true. Sharia was the mode of governance in the Muslim world for 12 centuries. Sharia led Muslim empires co-existed with theocratic Christian empires and life went on. They had wars and problems, but so do we in the age of nation states.

The world as we live in is not a utopia, I think we all agree. Muslims espousing to follow Sharia will try to do the best they can, but to err is human. The current yardstick to measure Sharia is Taliban or the Iranian government. In the case of former, their lack of education is what causes their failures. In the case of latter, its US hard-headedness. Saudis have had sharia implemented for the past 70 years and all and sundry in the West deal with them. So not sure why similar and even more open Sharia led societies cannot exist?

All I am saying is that there is ampe evidence that sharia embracing societies have co-existed with others and have been very accommodating of non-Muslims living there, however the difference between those Muslims and the Taliban has been the quality of the understanding of Islam as well as secular education. Due to a very narrow outlook, the Taliban can't possibly represent what a sharia-following Muslim society really is like.

Most of your post is utopian and maybe right that in olden days religions co-existed. Since I have not seen it first hand I cannot agree or disagree. While doing business with a Shariah state will never be a problem, however Saudi A is the worst example of Shariah rule. It is not only extreme in its view points of human rights nor does it care two hoots about minorities who work there, why even fellow muslims from other countries are treated like dirt.

Regards