Unironically: Could declaring Sharia Law in Pakistan solve it's insurgency problem?

[Indos]

In Canada, where he is? Or UK where you are? That alone tells us all much about your lip servicing hot air.

Yup, people must commit on what they preach

 

[VCheng]

Yup, people must commit on what they preach

And yet these mal'oons live in the West themselves while preaching sharia to Pakistanis. Endlessly.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Nope, you cannot justify that. That kill this and kill that is not Islamic.

---------------------

The Battle of the Camel, also known as the Battle of Jamel or the Battle of Basra, took place outside of Basra, Iraq, in 36 AH (656 CE). The battle was fought between the army of the fourth caliph Ali (r. 656–661), on one side, and the rebel army led by Aisha, Talha and Zubayr, on the other side. Ali was the cousin and son-in-law of the Islamic prophet Muhammad, while Aisha was a widow of Muhammad, of whom Talha and Zubayr were both prominent companions. Ali emerged victorious from the battle, Talha and Zubayr were both killed, and Aisha was sent back to Hejaz afterward. The triumvirate had revolted against Ali ostensibly to avenge the assassination of the third caliph Uthman (r. 644–656), although Aisha and Talha are both known to have actively opposed him. The three also called for the removal of Ali from office and for a Qurayshite council (shura) with Talha and Zubayr to appoint his successor.

Battle of the Camel - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

----------------------------------------------

If there is differences within Muslim people then non violence way should be the solution, not through war like what we see with first Muslim civil war, or other example is Taliban way when they dont agree with former Afghan government.

Other example are

ISIS dont agree with Taliban version of Islam and they make a war against Taliban

TTP doesnt aggree with Pakistan government and they wag war against Pakistan government

ETC, ETC, ETC SIMILAR THINKING

Killing another Muslim will get huge Punishment

The solution for differences should be solved in peaceful way and Democracy is one of them

It's not about justification but explaining the reality.

Yes, you're right, Muslims shouldn't engage in violence with each other. It's not allowed.

However, this had happened and will continue to happen whether we like it or not. Muslims aren't angels, but human beings, and we're susceptible to making errors in judgment and inflicting violence.

That said, even when a civil war happens, we want to ask, is fighting Muslims ever an excuse to collude with your enemy? When Ali (RA) and Mu'awiyah were at war, the Byzantines offered to help Mu'awiyah. Mu'awiyah told them to bugger off. So, in itself, the civil war between the Sahaba (RA) did not fundamentally weaken the Khilafat as, say, the TTP mess is doing to Pakistan.

In other words, treachery against the Muslim nation is the red line because it puts you on the opposing side. This was the line that no early Muslim crossed, yet we saw more of as the centuries went by, and those line-crossing leaders and nations disappeared (e.g., the emirates in Spain).

It's very simple to understand why: If you collude with a power wanting to destroy you, chances are, they'll destroy you. If you don't take foreign money and tie yourself to foreign interests then, chances are, foreign interests won't do much to you.

Today, in Pakistan, the issue of the day isn't our leaders knocking each other out, but rather, colluding with outside entities in various ways to serve their selfish interests. Every actor in Pakistan, from the parties to the institutions to the TTP has a foreign hand. So, the problem we have is that we don't even have real leadership, much less Islamic or otherwise.

Even if Pakistan was 100% secular, with sincere leaders, it probably wouldn't have as many internal problems as it does today. The world runs according to a natural rule: When you get sh!t done, sh!t gets done. If you study skills in demand by the market, the market will pay you. If you can run a country in a competent way, the country will do relatively well. We can't even trust Pakistani leaders to competently run a smoke shop, or a lemonade stand, or heck, to even recite Surah al-Ikhlaas.

 

[Ssan]

Mentioning anything close to sharia law is giving absolute power to the mullahs.
Why do you think JUI and JI are vouching fot it.
Its a political tool for them, used for elections nothing else.

Pakistan is already an islamic law, its constitution is based on fundamentals of sharia.

These mullahs clans exactly the same as the popes and cardinals of the roman church. As soon as they were thrown out of governance Europe started to see good days.

I’m not suggesting a theocracy if that’s what you have in mind. I think as state like Iran went too far. But you will have to excuse me when I say that what we have is neither modern or functional. In most cases, it is the leftover British common law from the colonial period. It makes no sense to have the judicial system that we do where cases are dragged on forever and people don’t get justice in the end either.

 

[SQ8]

And how many go to war over what day Eid is on?

They go to war over the length of beards and you are stuck at eid - live in Pakistan for a bit and see the mutated zombie monster its culture is before proposing anything

 

[Ssan]

Also it matters what the foundational principle of your legal system is. In the west it is based on two contradicting philosophies based on Kant and Miller- and less acknowledged custom.

Why they heck should we in Pakistan care about Kants moral imperative? I speak from someone who has actually read through German philosophy- and let me say that it makes no sense for us to adapt that as the foundation of our legal or justice system.

 

[Maula Jatt]

Says the American

I am Pakistani

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Also it matters what the foundational principle of your legal system is. In the west it is based on two contradicting philosophies based on Kant and Miller- and less acknowledged custom.

Why they heck should we in Pakistan care about Kants moral imperative? I speak from someone who has actually read through German philosophy- and let me say that it makes no sense for us to adapt that as the foundation of our legal or justice system.

That's true. Ultimately, the institutions Pakistan inherited at Partition were, by design, meant to exclude the many for the benefit of the few. It might not show in the text, but the spirit of that mentality exists to this day. No one in Pakistan, be it the leaders or the average guy, knows or cares for Kant.

Again, it goes back to the point that our leaders were so unread that they didn't even think about these issues. It just shows that there's a lack of interest in nation-building at the top.

I suspect that had we gotten some sincere secular leaders, they would've actively tried shaping Pakistan into something similar to Japan or South Korea. If we had sincere religious leaders, they may have tried Khilafat (in the sense of continuing the Khilafat Movement). Heck, the two sides might have even clashed for control over Pakistan, like the Communists and Nationalists in China did and, in turn, leave you with 2 powerhouse states (e.g., China and Taiwan).

But in either case, the same status-quo group would lose out, i.e., the feudal lords, the British-backed families, the institutional gatekeepers, etc. These guys had a vested interest in keeping real change out, regardless of how it looked.

As I said, the issue here isn't solely ideology or system, but the ones at the top. The ones at the top don't want to leave, so they'll logically speaking, prevent any type of change that threatens them. In the worst case, they'll bastardize and corrupt it.

This question of having shariah or not is fine for sincere human beings, but not our rulers. For them, the real question is, "will shariah keep me in power?" and that is a bad, bad sign. If they bite, we'll regret it.

 

[Indos]

Not at all, it is a very relevant question to this thread, Pakistanis, and Muslims in general!

How can you believe your creator was sufficient enough to set highly calculated mathematical and physical laws that organize planets in orbit but wasn’t sufficient enough to create laws that organise human society??

There must be a reason for rejecting the latter or lack of true belief

@Indos Would you not agree?

God law in Quran is basically not that difficult, but many Muslim nations who apply Shariah Islam has point of view that all Islamic Law should be enforced despite it is actually for private thing like praying jumah, wearing Hijab and so on where freedom of religion is basically respected by Islam with the verse saying there should not be any compulsion in religion.

They makes thing difficult and make Islamic system uninteresting and hard. While in reality the enforcement that should be done in state level is only for criminal action and Zinah if we really read Quran and Hadith.

Islam is quite forgiving if we keep away from major sins (Zinah, Sirik, Killing, Stealing, etc)

 

[Genghis khan1]

#1. Let suppose you implement sharia under Hanafi school of thought and You somehow able to bring bralvis, Deobandis and Ahl-hadees on the same page with carrots n stick, some give n take. Still you need to figure out where are you going to fit Shias in sharia law. Shias will oppose this because it will land them in hot water.

#2. Without the mind set of swift justices and accountability even Shira law will be useless to make any change. Sharia or no sharia, if there exists a robust punishment and reward system in any society it will thrive.

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

God law in Quran is basically not that difficult, but many Muslim nations who apply Shariah Islam has point of view that all Islamic Law should be enforced despite it is actually for private thing like praying jumah, wearing Hijab and so on. They makes thing difficult and make Islamic system uninteresting and hard. While in reality the enforcement that should be done in state level is only for criminal action and Zinah if we really read Quran and Hadith.

Islam is quite forgiving if we keep away from major sins (Zinah, Killing, Stealing, etc)

What happens if people commit Zina in the open? Like, someone comes out and says he or she is a zani'?

 

[Indos]

What happens if people commit Zina in the open? Like, someone comes out and says he or she is a zani'?

Duh Zina should be punished. It is inside Quran.

What is hard in Islam is this thing since loving something more than God is part of Sirik (Biggest Sin)

 

[Bilal Khan (Quwa)]

Duh Zina should be punished. It is inside Quran.

What is hard in Islam is this thing since loving something more than God is part of Sirik (Biggest Sin)

View attachment 914531

Okay, so we agree that Islam isn't liberal. It does impose limits on personal freedom and, when transgressed, responds with criminal punishment, right?

 

[Indos]

Okay, so we agree that Islam isn't liberal. It does impose limits on personal freedom and, when transgressed, responds with criminal punishment, right?

You live in Canada and your definition of Liberal is tooo liberal.

As I said many times, Killing, Stealing, Zinah should be punished. The punishment are written in Quran.

But state doesnt need to enforce Hijab rule, policing men who dont pray Jumah, banning women to watch football, etc

 

[Ahmed_Bhai]

Please hear out my explanation below and then give your opinion.

The main insurgent groups in Pakistan are the TTP, followed by minor ethnonationalist groups like the BLA network. The TTP especially finds a lot of sympathy and support within Pakistani society, and is the most powerful destabilising element.

The reason for this can be linked back to Pakistan sitting on the fence with it's Islamic identity, it claims itself to be an Islamic state while having a practising Muslim majority population > 96%, but doesn't have have an integral governance structure of Islam. The Sharia Law.

So when a militant group comes along claiming to want to implement Sharia Law, people are subconsciously sympathetic towards them, because that's what an Islamic state inherently requires, and they don't see it present in Pakistan, no matter how much they are pro-state.

(A lot of the time this militant group has covert goals unrelated to Islam, for example the TTP is more of a Pashtun tribal insurgency hence it focuses on the FATA merger reversal, and is also labelled as a criminal organisation which extorts locals for money. The Sharia Law aspect is only used a selling point in society to gain support, but many people don't realise this)

So my question is, if Pakistan fully embraces it's Islamic identity without sitting on the fence, and makes Sharia Law official, it could fully gain back control and the state narrative would reign supreme.

Instantly any group that picks up arms against the state can confidently be labelled as Khawarijs, it will have the full support and trust of the people and their sympathies towards any militant groups will disappear immediately.

The state will have regained full control and the narrative will completely be on it's side against any group, including ethnonationalist groups.

Should Pakistan implement Sharia Law to get rid of all these destabilising elements and have the ability to crush down on them hard with a powerful narrative? Any insurgent group would become powerless in it's narrative.

If you're a Muslim, which the majority of Pakistan is, this should not be as a problem to you should it? If you believe in Islam then surely you believe in your God's governance system.

@Sayfullah @Mirzali Khan @villageidiot @Menace2Society @SaadH @kingQamaR @Areesh @Signalian @epebble @_NOBODY_ @PanzerKiel @hussain0216 @R2D2 @Al_Muhannad @akramishaqkhan @AZMwi @Great Janjua @Olympus81 @COOKie LOOkie....

The type of content I'm seeing on pdf after couple years. It seems this forum is not what it used to be. I've seen a massive purge in the last few years especially under Bajwa. And now this forums seems to have been highjacked by suspicious "Pakistanis" profile who are bending over backwards to support American interests in the region/world like Ukraine and reigniting the bogus WoT in Afghanistan. $2+ Trillion is too big of a windfall for American and Pakistani civmil infrastructure to miss out on.