Pakistani Muslims are Naive

[Khanate]

I know about this I've read the history, Musharraf and the Pakistani generals had a 9 hour long discussion before they decided to aide America as they were in quagmire over this decision. What I don't understand is why they had to aide them, they could've remained neutral. When Turkey was in the same position as Pakistan when it came to the invasion of Iraq, America asked for aide to use their harbors, but they refused and decided to remain neutral.

However, I do agree that the blame is not completely on Pakistan, the Taliban delegates had all agreed to hand over Osama, but only Mullah Omar refused because of Pashtunwali code, and that it was not a Muslim thing to do, he called for a trial and if he was proved guilty then he would hand Osama over, the blame over here is 50/50.

Turkey was part of the ISAF though Turkish troops didn't engage in combat operations so not entirely neutral.

Could we?

Consider these two factors:
1- Presence of AQ leaders on Pakistani soil
2- Exodus of AQ from Afghanistan and their arrival in Pakistan through the porous border.

Either we had to take them out or wait for the US to attack them on Pakistani soil; either way, we would've been forced to pick a side - it was damned if you do and damned if you dont.

Staying neutral was easier said than done; in both wars.

Criminal negligence on part of civil and military establishment after Zia who didn't get rid of these elements and allowed the build up.

 

[H. Dawary]

Could we?

Consider these two factors:
1- Presence of AQ leaders on Pakistani soil
2- Exodus of AQ from Afghanistan and their arrival in Pakistan through the porous border.

Either we had to take them out or wait for the US to attack them on Pakistani soil; either way, we would've been forced to pick a side - it was damned if you do and damned if you dont.

Staying neutral was easier said than done; in both wars.

AQ leaders went inside Pakistan anyways, and so did many Taliban after the US offensive in 2001. Many Taliban of Pakistani Pashtun origins returned backed to their homes, Taliban such Nek Mohammed, Baitullah Mehsud and many others, they started targeting Pakistani state and institutions because of Pakistani support towards America which is why Pakistan had a TTP problem. Imran Khan himself said that if Pakistan remained neutral then all of the unnecessary violence could've been prevented as they would have lacked reason to do so.

The decision to aide America was abrupt and made in haste, however part of the problem was from our side as well, our leaders should have played it like Iran is playing it right now and used the media to their advantage, but we made mistakes, however we learned from those mistakes. Once US leaves, never again are we going to allow foreign forces into our homeland, and we will be wiser this time InshAllah, and hopefully we can be more closely allied to Pakistan, as we both know how dangerous it is to have a foreign force lurking around our neighbourhood.

Turkey was part of the ISAF though Turkish troops didn't engage in combat operations so not entirely neutral.




Criminal negligence on part of civil and military establishment after Zia who didn't get rid of these elements and allowed the build up.

Turkey was part of the ISAF though Turkish troops didn't engage in combat operations so not entirely neutral.




Criminal negligence on part of civil and military establishment after Zia who didn't get rid of these elements and allowed the build up.

Turkey played it very smart, however that isn't the issue. Real issue is that Pakistan must decide whether it wants a true ally or just pretend allies which it can drop at any time. A true ally will have your back at all times as we did during the years of 1996-2001, we must be willing to aide one another. If you are going to sell your real allies as soon shit hits the fan, then I agree with OP's thoughts about dropping the Ummah.

 

[Psychic]

AQ leaders went inside Pakistan anyways, and so did many Taliban after the US offensive in 2001. Many Taliban of Pakistani Pashtun origins returned backed to their homes, Taliban such Nek Mohammed, Baitullah Mehsud and many others, they started targeting Pakistani state and institutions because of Pakistani support towards America which is why Pakistan had a TTP problem. Imran Khan himself said that if Pakistan remained neutral then all of the unnecessary violence could've been prevented as they would have lacked reason to do so.

The decision to aide America was abrupt and made in haste, however part of the problem was from our side as well, our leaders should have played it like Iran is playing it right now and used the media to their advantage, but we made mistakes, however we learned from those mistakes. Once US leaves, never again are we going to allow foreign forces into our homeland, and we will be wiser this time InshAllah, and hopefully we can be more closely allied to Pakistan, as we both know how dangerous it is to have a foreign force lurking around our neighbourhood.

You clearly missed the point I made.

Forget low tier fighters like Nek M and Abdullah Mehsud. I was not talking about them. Abdullah was released from Gitmo and given a prosthetic leg by the CIA before he launched a full scale rebellion.

Due to the presence of senior AQ leadership on Pakistani soil, staying neutral was no longer an option. US would've chased AQ right into our territory despite our neutrality.
Regarding AQ on Pakistani soil, we had to choose from three options:
1- We take them out ourselves
2- Let the US take them out
3- Stop the US from taking them out.

After Tora Bora; AQ leaders crossed the border and went inside Pakistan. Pak army requested airlift from the US so that it could quickly seal off the borders but the request was denied. Thus, the deployment took a long time; not that it would've helped in totally shutting the border because that was not possible at all.

Imran Khan himself said that if Pakistan remained neutral then all of the unnecessary violence could've been prevented as they would have lacked reason to do so.

And, we would've observed Mr Khan taking a U-turn on this as well had he been running the country at that time.

Politicians say a lot of things. They have big mouths and small brains.

Imran Khan can say anything he wants and then take U-turns at will. I doubt our state policy would've been any different had Imran, Nawaz or Benazir been in power at that time.

Mistakes were made in the implementation of that policy, no doubt about that. We could've preserved our interests by not putting all our eggs in the American basket; But the basic policy would have been the same. Personally, no one in Pakistan (except the self proclaimed liberals) supported the US invasion and no one liked our state become America's lackey in the region; but personal feelings had little to do with any of it. We want to believe that neutrality would have been a better course of action; in reality, however, neutrality was not even an option. It is easy to delude ourselves into believing that both parties in the conflict would have honored our neutral status. Our position was not similar to that of Switzerland in WW2 but to Belgium.

 

[H. Dawary]

You clearly missed the point I made.

Forget low tier fighters like Nek M and Abdullah Mehsud. I was not talking about them. Abdullah was released from Gitmo and given a prosthetic leg by the CIA before he launched a full scale rebellion.

Due to the presence of senior AQ leadership on Pakistani soil, staying neutral was no longer an option. US would've chased AQ right into our territory despite our neutrality.
Regarding AQ on Pakistani soil, we had to choose from three options:
1- We take them out ourselves
2- Let the US take them out
3- Stop the US from taking them out.

After Tora Bora; AQ leaders crossed the border and went inside Pakistan. Pak army requested airlift from the US so that it could quickly seal off the borders but the request was denied. Thus, the deployment took a long time; not that it would've helped in totally shutting the border because that was not possible at all.

And, we would've observed Mr Khan taking a U-turn on this as well had he been running the country at that time.

Politicians say a lot of things. They have big mouths and small brains.

Imran Khan can say anything he wants and then take U-turns at will. I doubt our state policy would've been any different had Imran, Nawaz or Benazir been in power at that time.

Mistakes were made in the implementation of that policy, no doubt about that. We could've preserved our interests by not putting all our eggs in the American basket; But the basic policy would have been the same. Personally, no one in Pakistan (except the self proclaimed liberals) supported the US invasion and no one liked our state become America's lackey in the region; but personal feelings had little to do with any of it. We want to believe that neutrality would have been a better course of action; in reality, however, neutrality was not even an option. It is easy to delude ourselves into believing that both parties in the conflict would have honored our neutral status. Our position was not similar to that of Switzerland in WW2 but to Belgium.

Brother your whole argument does not make any sense.

Your whole premise is based off of many assumptions, the biggest being that US would have entered a nuclear armed state that remained neutral, all of that for what, to hunt ghosts? Forget about drone strikes, we are talking here about putting soldiers, building bases in Pakistani soil, risking a nuclear strike all for... AQ ghosts?

If that's the case, then my question to you is why haven't they done this already? US has accused Pakistan of being in cahoots with the Taliban, and AQ leadership has pledged allegiance to the Taliban, first to Mullah Omar and later to Mullah Haibatullah, why haven't they entered Pakistani territory already? And besides, you are telling me Pakistan with one of the top 15 Armies in the world, and one of the top intelligence agencies in the world could not have dealt with AQ militants?

Your line of argument is based on many false assumptions, a little bit of history check would prove that. Pakistan barely had security threats from 1979 till 2001 until the advent of 9/11. And that security threat only happened because Bin Laden and many other Mullahs declared Jihad on the state of Pakistan for allying with their enemies, which necessitated the fencing of the border to prevent those angry with that decision from crossing over.

This is simply a criticism of mine, I am not saying whether what Pakistan did was right or wrong, because if I were put in that situation then I probably would have made the same choices as Musharraf and the other generals. However, the biggest criticism I have is that they did not think the decision over and made a very hasty decision. Delaying and using a wait and see approach as well as utilising politicians to lengthen the decision making process would probably have helped Pakistan.

Here I urge that you read this, its written by a Pakistani Academic Khalid Aziz, he explains the reason behind why Insurgency happened in Pakistan, its only 28 pages, even if you can't read it all, I urge if you can to read from pages 5 to 18.

https://waterinfo.net.pk/sites/default/files/knowledge/Genesis of Insurgency in FATA & KPK.pdf

 

[DarkPrince]

Exactly and one thing these naive people intend to support the Muslims Palestine, Kashmir and balkans but when an ally country treat its Muslims Badly like China they try to be neutral. They can’t mix the umma with a nation state they have to choose. Those Pakistanis who were attacking Arabs for not saying anything about the Muslim suffering they themselves are quite what China and its treatment of Muslims.

They pretend to be religious. Because Pakistan is Indian land and Pakistan was created for Muslims of India. So they have to prove the world why Pakistan should exist as a country.

 

[dani92]

They pretend to be religious. Because Pakistan is Indian land and Pakistan was created for Muslims of India. So they have to prove the world why Pakistan should exist as a country.

Not the entire land of Pakistan belonged to India because there are Pashtuns and baloch

 

[Psychic]

And besides, you are telling me Pakistan with one of the top 15 Armies in the world, and one of the top intelligence agencies in the world could not have dealt with AQ militants?

Dealing with those militants would've ended our neutrality right there---there starts the rebellion.

Don't know which neutrality you keep on talking about.

Or are you suggesting that we should've allowed AQ to roam freely in our country and tell the US to shut up when it demanded action from us? Or take on the US military when it decided unilateral action since we are a nuclear armed state?

What you are saying was not even a possibility.

Allowing AQ to roam freely in our country saying that we are neutral wouldn't have worked. Action against AQ would've caused a rebellion and ended our neutrality. And I won't even comment on taking on the US claim.

 

[Proudpakistaniguy]

Ummah is not political concept i.e all muslims living under single rule or living within same country or geographic location . Ummah also dont mean bearing abuse, insults, injutsice and racism from fellow Muslims. Ummah dont mean hating non Muslims and dont treat them with fairness and justice but denying this concept is denying Islamic verses and hadits

Concept of Ummah is not something created by Pakistani Muslims but this concept exist in Islamic literature and Islam talk about ideological bond between two muslims irrespective of their race, nationality , colour etc

Should Muslims reject these verses of Quran and saying of Prophet Muhammad(PBUH)?

“The believers are nothing else than brothers (in Islam). So make reconciliation between your brothers, and fear Allah, that you may receive mercy.”

(Aayah No. 10, Surah Al-Hujurat, Chapter No. 49, Holy Qur’an).


"Hold firmly to the rope of Allah all together and do not become divided. Remember the favor of Allah upon you, when you were enemies and he brought your hearts together and you became brothers by his favor"

Surat Ali Imran 3:103

"The believing men and believing women are allies of one another. They enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and establish prayer and give charity and obey Allah and His Messenger. Allah will have mercy upon them, for Allah is Almighty and Wise."

Surat al-Tawba 9:71

They say: Our Lord, forgive us and our brothers who preceded us in faith and put not in our hearts any resentment toward those who have faith. Our Lord, you are kind and merciful.

Surat al-Hashr 59:10

Do not hate each other, do not envy each other, do not turn away from each other, but rather be servants of Allah as brothers. It is not lawful for a Muslim to boycott his brother for more than three days.

Source: Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 5718,

The parable of the believers in their affection, mercy, and compassion for each other is that of a body. When any limb aches, the whole body reacts with sleeplessness and fever.

Source: Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 5665

The Muslims are like a single man. If the eye is afflicted, then the whole body is afflicted. If the head is afflicted, then the whole body is afflicted.

Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 2586

Beware of suspicion, for suspicion is the most false of tales. Do not seek out faults, do not spy on each other, do not contend with each other, do not envy each other, do not hate each other, and do not turn away from each other. Rather, be servants of Allah as brothers.

Source: Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 5719,

 

[flameboard]

Growing up I heard that all Muslims are "brothers" and ummah I seen mostly Pakistanis hark on it sure once in a while I would hear a Afghan, Turk,Arab or any non Pakistani Muslim.Turks,Arabs, and Persians pratically hate each other you see it everyday here and in their politics before we blame the Yanks, or west yes they are guilty but we gotta understand one thing they have differences in mindset,culture and way of how their countries project power I am not saying Muslims are not brothers or ummah does not exist but we have to be more realistic in that

The ummah is very much still alive the rulers of countries may play politics but internationally I have found Muslims civilians understanding at least that they have a special connection with other muslims. I have benefited from this and others have benefited from me due to this at least for the sake of the Almighty

 

[Ritual]

They pretend to be religious. Because Pakistan is Indian land and Pakistan was created for Muslims of India. So they have to prove the world why Pakistan should exist as a country.

So even Bangladesh should not exist according to your logic because that is ‘Indian land’ according to their Hindutva brigade, would that be a good solution to be absorbed by an even bigger bullying India?

 

[H. Dawary]

Dealing with those militants would've ended our neutrality right there---there starts the rebellion.

Don't know which neutrality you keep on talking about.

Or are you suggesting that we should've allowed AQ to roam freely in our country and tell the US to shut up when it demanded action from us? Or take on the US military when it decided unilateral action since we are a nuclear armed state?

What you are saying was not even a possibility.

Allowing AQ to roam freely in our country saying that we are neutral wouldn't have worked. Action against AQ would've caused a rebellion and ended our neutrality. And I won't even comment on taking on the US claim.

Did you read the link I posted, just read from pages 10-15 if you can't read the whole thing, it explains why insurgency even happened in Pakistan. Osama and many other Mullahs declared Jihad on Pakistan because of aiding USA, where would that reason have been if Pakistan remained neutral?

You are blatantly ignoring the proofs at hand and making assumptions without anything to back it? Explain to me why AQ militants would have turned against Pakistan? Explain to me how US was going to enter Pakistani territory if it hasn't done so already right now, especially when they see Pakistan as a strategic threat within the region? Explain to me how AQ militants were going to evade ISI?

And even by some minimal chance AQ militants started jihad against Pakistan, who would have backed them? The whole reason Taliban turned against Pakistan was because of American backing, and they gave people their justifications and got their support, but explain to me what justification would be there without that?

 

[Psychic]

Did you read the link I posted, just read from pages 10-15 if you can't read the whole thing, it explains why insurgency even happened in Pakistan. Osama and many other Mullahs declared Jihad on Pakistan because of aiding USA, where would that reason have been if Pakistan remained neutral?

You are blatantly ignoring the proofs at hand and making assumptions without anything to back it? Explain to me why AQ militants would have turned against Pakistan? Explain to me how US was going to enter Pakistani territory if it hasn't done so already right now, especially when they see Pakistan as a strategic threat within the region? Explain to me how AQ militants were going to evade ISI?

And even by some minimal chance AQ militants started jihad against Pakistan, who would have backed them? The whole reason Taliban turned against Pakistan was because of American backing, and they gave people their justifications and got their support, but explain to me what justification would be there without that?

The presence of AQ on our soil meant that we couldn't stay neutral. Simple as that ! Either we attack them, or we don't. In case of the latter choice, it invites US attack.

I already explained each and every thing in detail. I do not think I need to explain any more.

 

[Kaleem.61]

Should we follow logic or ISLAM!

Why we got PAKISTAN? Look this is an Islamic state if you don't like Islam you should not live here just go some where and openly express your hate about ISLAM.
I don't know where from this sh*t thinking originates and how stupid people follow it.

Exactly and one thing these naive people intend to support the Muslims Palestine, Kashmir and balkans but when an ally country treat its Muslims Badly like China they try to be neutral. They can’t mix the umma with a nation state they have to choose. Those Pakistanis who were attacking Arabs for not saying anything about the Muslim suffering they themselves are quite what China and its treatment of Muslims.

Ok, we are not silent but the politicians. How can you compare chinese Muslims with kashmiries and Palentinese.
Arabs are investing in Anti Muslim countries and having direct relationships with israeil.

The very concept of ummah comes into play when they are in need at that time they will sell certain aya'h of Quran as proof, other wise it is just derogatory remarks or blatant racism.

What do you mean to sell verses..?
How cheap will you go in anti Islamic agenda..?
Let's say one is using Islam for self benefiting; That means all are same...?
Liberals like you are on the agenda to separate our lives from Islam and brotherhood in between Muslims.
Girls being raped on daily basis, Muslims being killed like ants and Non Muslims are attacking and in the way to cut the roots of Islam. And here these **** are not even letting people talk about.

Concept of Ummah is not something created by Pakistani Muslims but this concept exist in Islamic literature and Islam talk about ideological bond between two muslims irrespective of their race, nationality , colour etc

Appreciated!

The ummah is very much still alive the rulers of countries may play politics but internationally I have found Muslims civilians understanding at least that they have a special connection with other muslims. I have benefited from this and others have benefited from me due to this at least for the sake of the Almighty

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

People aren't naive, they're forward thinking. They realise that being small vassal states of world powers won't bring any dignity or security.

Of course you boys who don't like what they have to say automatically equate that with meaning they want to be vassal states of Saudi/Iran or whoever.

Having a principled stance isn't weakness, not everything in life has to be a trade. Of course in our current political status across the world we have to look after number one, but there is no harm in wanting to work towards a political existence were countries with shared interests work together, including countries with shared religious backgrounds.

This is what I believe as well. Pakistanis are ahead in this way of thinking, other Muslims will have to come to this conclusion on their own.

It is only when we follow Islam properly and live by justice, will we recover Allah's swt full favor.

If you are going to sell your real allies as soon shit hits the fan, then I agree with OP's thoughts about dropping the Ummah.

I agree with everything that you have written brother.

Pakistan made serious mistakes because we had open traitors like Musharraf as leaders. We are still suffering from his spineless treachery as a result of his NRO.

I was very much against this poor short-sighted decision and its a shame that because of it, the US, India, and allies used it to recruit and build a whole ecosystem dedicated to promoting terrorism to target us.

We need to face the fact that we have been duped and set up as a scapegoat. Just like Muslims all around the world being accused of being responsible for actions we have not committed nor have any means to prevent.

Alhamdulilah, our faith in Allah swt and our unity in Islam has prevented more harm from coming to our country.

 

[ps3linux]

Should we follow logic or ISLAM!

Why we got PAKISTAN? Look this is an Islamic state if you don't like Islam you should not live here just go some where and openly express your hate about ISLAM.
I don't know where from this sh*t thinking originates and how stupid people follow it.



Ok, we are not silent but the politicians. How can you compare chinese Muslims with kashmiries and Palentinese.
Arabs are investing in Anti Muslim countries and having direct relationships with israeil.


What do you mean to sell verses..?
How cheap will you go in anti Islamic agenda..?
Let's say one is using Islam for self benefiting; That means all are same...?
Liberals like you are on the agenda to separate our lives from Islam and brotherhood in between Muslims.
Girls being raped on daily basis, Muslims being killed like ants and Non Muslims are attacking and in the way to cut the roots of Islam. And here these **** are not even letting people talk about.


Appreciated!

Wow already intimidated by you exalted presence and your kindness of heart in granting an audience to this commoner, your grand sir.

Who are you again, oh a nobody, talk to me when you have proved your worth on the board, when you have become something in life have a few articles published in international reputed journals, by the looks of your start I think by the time I get back to Pakistan you would've proved yourself worth of earning few negatives and probably a ban too.

Shooo go be part of the Nazim's group of morality squad go destroy public universities and intimidate poor student. Read my signature again, last sentence particularly if you can understand English otherwise google translate can help you.