What do the Taliban want?

[genmirajborgza786]

Hell no, that must be a Mongoloid or Somali writer for sure..... going by your "logic".
While your comments are simply "intelligent, well-reasoned out and valid"!!!!!!!!
Now... is there any need to comment any further?

Now, back to the topic of the OP------
The main point and over-riding question is: is the Paksitan of today in line with the requirements of the Objectives Resolution of 1949?
Next question: is the Objectives Resolution of 1949 in line with the framework of his country that M.A.Jinnah envisaged?

Can the posters here, offer some answers to these two questions.....
@Norwegian, @FaujHistorian, @Syed.Ali.Haider , @TankMan , @Menace2Society , @waleed3601, @Oscar , @Hyperion, @genmirajborgza786 , @Rescue Ranger, @Cheetah786, and anybody else who wishes to enter the discussion.



Good Lord, that would then lead to just too many Goats in Paksitan then, of the four-legged and two-legged kinds.

No, the objectives resolution is not compatible with todays Pakistan, the need of the hour is a separation of church & state there is no two thoughts on that , the Pakistan of Quaid-e-Azam Md. Ali Jinnah Did not have the objectives resolution , as the resolution itself was adopted in 1949. the Quaid had past away back in 1948 , its time to go back to the original Pakistan

 

[salarsikander]

Pakistan Army soldier and a Tehrik e Taliban Scholar discuss Islam .wmv | Tune.pk
@Not Sure is it this one?

Hi,
Hum ye samjhte hum wo samjte.. Dmanit who gave you the authority to judge people and call them kafir ??

 

[Joeblow]

Ill refrain from commenting on the objectives resolution.

The Highlighted part alludes to a different issue,and somewhat supports the theory that Jinnah never really wanted to partition India but had his hand forced due to the stubbornness of Nehru in power sharing with the league. Whether correctly or incorrectly(as is also stated in the speech).. the partition of India then became a hobsons choice for Jinnah vis a vis the Muslim league and the movement.

There is another odd incident narrated today about the speech by a senior journalist.. that this speech was aired as it was and was infact censored because in the view of a bureaucrat it would "undermine the two nation theory".

The kind of loose federation that they were talking about, wouldn't have worked. They were talking administrative units divided along religious lines. It would have caused the subcontinent to break up into several little countries instead of just three. There would have been a fight over every little thing and every little argument would end with the threat of secession. Just think about what's going on today. There is a military action authorized by the Pakistani govt. and executed by the PA. If this was the govt of Hindu majority country, can you honestly say there wouldn't be a massive backlash in places like Lucknow or Hyderabad (India)? Would they look at the circumstances and agree that such an action was justified? Or would the narrative be about an all out assault on Islam? Though the partition was bloody and traumatic, in the long run, subcontinent is much better off this way.

@Capt.Popeye - When Jinnah uses the term "India", he uses it for the Indian subcontinent, not for the Republic of India. Notice he also say "400 millions souls". The total population of the subcontinent was ~400 million, not the dominion of India's.

 

[TankMan]

Hi,
Hum ye samjhte hum wo samjte.. Dmanit who gave you the authority to judge people and call them kafir ??

Not me bro, that's the Taliban right there. Supposedly their mullahs give them the authority,but those Mullahs don't even care about religion, all they care about is their political goals, money, usually even drug trade etc. Its pathetic, they can't argue with people so they prefer killing them instead.

 

[Zarvan]

What do the Taliban really want and why is it not easy for Pakistan to fight them? The Associated Press carried an article on December 17: “Peshawar Terror attack: What does Pakistan Taliban want?”

Answering the question, the report said: “The TTP has vowed to overthrow the government and install a harsh form of Islamic law.”
On CNN, Laura Smith-Spark and Tim Lister (“What do the Taliban want?”) reported: “When the siege finally ended, Pakistan was left reeling and the world wondering: Who would do such a thing? And what do they hope to achieve? The identity of the group behind the massacre at the army-run school in Peshawar is no mystery. The Pakistan Taliban — who have long conducted an insurgency against the Pakistani government as they seek to overthrow the authorities and bring in Sharia law — were quick to claim the terror attack.”
James Rush wrote in The Independent (“Who are the Taliban and what do they want?“): “The Pakistani Taliban have been fighting to topple the government and set up a strict Islamic state. Following a major army operation against insurgents in tribal areas, the group has vowed to step up its attacks.”

This same question has long been asked in the English press. Hamida Ghafour reporting forThe National in 2010 (“What do the Taliban really want?“) wrote about the Afghan Taliban: “But who are the Taliban, and what do they want? Zabiullah Mujahid, a spokesman for Mullah Omar, the one-eyed leader of the Afghan Taliban, said in an interview with CNN last year: “We ask from the beginning and we say once again: to enforce the sharia law and Islamic government in Afghanistan, to remove foreign forces from our country.”

Arthur Bright in the Christian Science Monitor in 2012 (“Who are the Taliban and what do they want?“) quoted an expert saying this of the Taliban’s funding: “A large majority … is thought to derive from wealthy individuals living in Arab Gulf states … Insurgents may also use the Hajj — the Muslim pilgrimage to Mecca — as a time to raise funds. These ties to Gulf-based militants may account for al Qaeda’s influence over some groups.”

Two things are obvious. First, what the Taliban really want is Shariah law and two, they are not a wild and isolated group but one with proper financing. The question is why they make that demand. The answer is in the law. The Pakistani Constitution’s Article 227 (Islamic Provisions, Part IX) reads: “(1) All existing laws shall be brought in conformity with the Injunctions of Islam as laid down in the Holy Quran and Sunnah, in this Part referred to as the Injunctions of Islam, and no law shall be enacted which is repugnant to such Injunctions.”

This commitment is clear and unambiguous. It comes from a promise in 1949 made by Pakistan’s Constituent Assembly under Jinnah’s successor, Liaquat Ali Khan. That text, the Objectives Resolution, reads: “Whereas sovereignty over the entire Universe belongs to Almighty Allah alone, and the authority to be exercised by the people of Pakistan within the limits prescribed by Him is a sacred trust;

And whereas it is the will of the people of Pakistan to establish an order: Wherein the State shall exercise its powers and authority through the chosen representatives of the people; Wherein the principles of democracy, freedom, equality, tolerance and social justice, as enunciated by Islam, shall be fully observed; Wherein the Muslims shall be enabled to order their lives in the individual and collective spheres in accordance with the teachings and requirements of Islam as set out in the Holy Quran and Sunnah.”

Despite this, Pakistan’s laws are mostly the same as secular India’s, which in turn are mostly the same as the colonial British under Macaulay had written them in the mid-19th century. In the 1980s, President Ziaul Haq introduced some Islamic laws. This included such things as lashing people caught with alcohol, and laws on rape and on blood money. Many of these laws are on the book but not really put into practice because the Pakistani state is unwilling to turn the clock back. The analyst Khaled Ahmed calls Pakistan an incompletely Islamised state. Meaning that the promise of full Shariah has been withheld, leading to a lack of clarity exploited by the Taliban.

To answer the question that analysts have been scratching their head over: what the Taliban really want is implementation of Pakistan’s Constitution. That is why it is difficult to fight them — because they say they are right on the question of law. No fight against them will succeed, or can even be properly started, unless the confusion over the Constitution and its promise is resolved.
What do the Taliban want? – The Express Tribune

It should be obvious by now that source of all terrorism and religious extremism in Pakistan is Liaquat Ali Khan's Objectives Resolution that was countered by Pakistani first cabinet's non-Muslim leader of the opposition in his own words:


Sris Chandra Chattopadhyaya
Objectives Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

When a majority of legislators ignore their elected opposition's rightful concern, futuristic disasters become inevitable! Such is the case with Taliban and other religious extremists in Pakistan!

@hacsan @TankMan @Etilla @Srinivas @desert warrior @pumkinduke @wolfpack @rubyjackass @A.Rafay @Ahmad1996 @airmarshal @Armstrong @arushbhai @AstanoshKhan @AZADPAKISTAN2009 @balixd @batmannow @Bilal. @chauvunist @Crypto @Dr. Stranglove @Evil Flare @EyanKhan @Fahad Khan 2 @GIANTsasquatch @graphican @Green Arrow @Guleen Ahmed @HRK @Jazzbot @Junaid B @Jzaib @Khalidr @khawaja07 @Leader @Luftwaffe @Marshmallow @mr42O @Muhammad Omar @nomi007 @Pak123 @Pakistani shaheens @Pakistanisage @Peaceful Civilian @pkuser2k12 @PWFI @raazh @Rafael @Rashid Mahmood @RescueRanger @Saifkhan12 @Sedqal @SHAMK9 @Stealth @Strike X @SUPARCO @syedali73 @Tameem @Tayyab1796 @Zarvan @AdeelFaheem @Rajput_Pakistani @Men in Green @orakzai4u @IceCold @LoveIcon @razahassan1997 @Cheetah786 @Dil Pakistan @asq @junaid hamza @Pukhtoon @jamahir @Strigon @Rafi @Ulla @420canada @sathya @HughSlaman @slapshot @raza_888 @SBD-3 @cb4 @AsianUnion @Aether @Proudpakistaniguy @WishLivePak @Waffen SS @Fracker @Ranches @ghoul @Jf Thunder @GreenFalcon @genmirajborgza786 @orangzaib @Pakistani Exile @KURUMAYA @Irfan Baloch @ali_raza @Syed.Ali.Haider @Patriots @muslim_pakistani @W.11 @Meengla @zaid butt @ajpirzada @Shoaib Rathore @CHARGER @yesboss @TheNoob @Bratva @Viny @StormShadow @suresh1773 @SOHEIL @Force-India @faisal6309 @S.U.R.B. @vsdave2302 @jarves @WAJsal @Winchester @janon @pak-marine @Donatello @Darth Vader @wolfschanzze @TheFlyingPretzel @DRAY @narcon @FaujHistorian @1000 @FNFAL @gau8av @abhi21 @naveen mishra @Kunwar Anurag Rathore @AgNoStiC MuSliM @LeveragedBuyout @MastanKhan @Agent Smith @shuntmaster @Slav Defence @sur @XenoEnsi-14 @DESERT FIGHTER @p100 @BDforever @hunter_hunted @Mav3rick @rockstar08 @asad71 @Major Sam @Faizan Memon @Spy Master @ozzy22 @Manticore @war khan @Afridistan @Razia Sultana @madmusti @ghazaliy2k @Khalid Newazi @Ammyy @bloo @Marxist @karan.1970 @thesolar65 @Not Sure @Arav_Rana @Avik274 @SamantK @Major Shaitan Singh @Omega007 @farhan_9909 @haviZsultan @Sidak @ranjeet @Yogijaat @Ravi Nair @WAR-rior @he-man @Indrani @Mike_Brando @SarthakGanguly @sreekumar @Pakistani shaheens @ChennaiDude @Akheilos @Hyperion @Soumitra @TimeTraveller @pursuit of happiness @TankMan @T-123456 @madooxno9 @scorpionx @Capt.Popeye @Tridibans @christian warrior @GR!FF!N @SpArK @utraash @Falcon29 @levina @Jf Thunder @Metanoia @halupridol @Krate M @dexter @jbgt90 @Pride @Star Wars @ROCKING @waleed3601 @ShowGun @danish_vij @manojb @Wolfhound @Koovie @KingMamba @venu309 @Pak_Sher @OrionHunter @Dr. NooB NinjA @UDAYCAMPU

The issue is clear and cut until and unless governments start the work on establishment of Shariah we may end TTP but we would end it and find out we would soon face bigger militant group. So until governments start implementation of Shariah these groups will not stop. Now for those jokers who want to ask the most dumb question of which Shariah or of whose sect for them my answer is we just need to gather 50 Ulemas from all major sects in Pakistan I mean Barelvi, Deoband, Salafi and Shias and ask them to come up with 50 to 100 common points which governments should enforce, if the can come up with more better, and I can assure you they would come up with hundreds of points which our secular traitors will not like at all. So until government comes up with something these groups are not going to end and also Muslim governments need to solve issue of Kashmir, Chechnya, and Palestine and ask USA and NATO to get lost from Afghanistan. If they do this all support for these groups or more than 90 % support for these groups will vanish if not than keep fighting for next 1000 years still war will not end.

 

[Joeblow]

The issue is clear and cut until and unless governments start the work on establishment of Shariah we may end TTP but we would end it and find out we would soon face bigger militant group. So until governments start implementation of Shariah these groups will not stop. Now for those jokers who want to ask the most dumb question of which Shariah or of whose sect for them my answer is we just need to gather 50 Ulemas from all major sects in Pakistan I mean Barelvi, Deoband, Salafi and Shias and ask them to come up with 50 to 100 common points which governments should enforce, if the can come up with more better, and I can assure you they would come up with hundreds of points which our secular traitors will not like at all. So until government comes up with something these groups are not going to end and also Muslim governments need to solve issue of Kashmir, Chechnya, and Palestine and ask USA and NATO to get lost from Afghanistan. If they do this all support for these groups or more than 90 % support for these groups will vanish if not than keep fighting for next 1000 years still war will not end.

Yeah, they could do all that just to pacify unstable extremists. Or they could try something simpler. Kill off the TTP type a-holes and put people like you on notice that unless you tow the line, PA is going to shove its boot up you a$$.

I wonder which idea Pakistani would like? Yours or mine? Your thoughts?

 

[Zarvan]

Yeah, they could do all that just to pacify unstable extremists. Or they could try something simpler. Kill off the TTP type a-holes and put people like you on notice that unless you tow the line, PA is going to shove its boot up you a$$.

I wonder which idea Pakistani would like? Yours or mine? Your thoughts?

Your statement shows your level of ignorance about this issue.

 

[Joeblow]

Your statement shows your level of ignorance about this issue.

Perhaps, but like I said, I'll let the Pakistanis decide whether they'd rather see fundamentalists take over their country or a boot up your rear

 

[salarsikander]

Not me bro, that's the Taliban right there. Supposedly their mullahs give them the authority,but those Mullahs don't even care about religion, all they care about is their political goals, money, usually even drug trade etc. Its pathetic, they can't argue with people so they prefer killing them instead.

Salam,

It was my response to the video not you actually INIT , Thanks for sharing this further strengthens my hate for this suckers keep it coming bruv

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Answer-1 -- Yes, Absolutely

Answer-2 -- No, in fact hell No

Well then; thank you for your input.
Now going by what you have said in response to my questions....... (In your opinion/considered view) Pakistan of today is in line with what was spelt out in the Objectives Resolution of 1949 but is not in conformance with the Quaid's view/intention for his country.

Which then leads to my next question: Then what are the Islamists/Sharia proponents (and other inheritors of Maudoodi's legacy; whose favorite activity was to abuse Jinnah in the most vile terms) complaining about? Have they not achieved the Pakistan of their dreams (even though it is not of the Quaid's dreams)???

 

[SQ8]

Please do not overlook this very basic difference in the view-points that each organisation had w.r.t. its very basis for existence and actions. That gap was not bridgeable and consequently rendered Partition as a "fait accompli".

Regardless of what the congress claimed.. the Muslim league had fairly little support till the elections of 35 and the emerging Congress government which was clearly communal in nature. Having a figurehead Muslim figure was not enough, and it was the ground realities that ended up ruining that image of Congress and gave the league the grass roots support it wanted. Had the Congress actually stuck to its ideals of secularism in those elections and subsequent government.. they geography of India might have been very different.

 

[Reem]

Taliban is an imposter, "power attainment" is the objective, religion is the tool they use and the language they speak.

Unfortunately many in this world leverage religion as a tool to gain might and superiority over others but TTP is the extreme of all extremes, infact they have fallen below the scale, it is hard to believe that they are humans and not devils from hell.

We recognize people from their acts and behavior, and what Taliban (TTP) has shown to us, it is no "Talib"an, the better name for such individuals is:

"Qatil", "Jahil" or "blood sucking vampire"

When we start calling them by the name they earned by virtue of their actions, that day there will be no confusion, no justification needed for their motives, no association of them with Islam, no apologists telling they are angry brothers.

They are power seeking murderes, as simple as that.

 

[Dillinger]

@Oscar Kebab between their buns. That's what the buggers want. How is it that they are still operating with such impunity? By now a very real fear of god should have been hammered into their hearts.

 

[TankMan]

The issue is clear and cut until and unless governments start the work on establishment of Shariah we may end TTP but we would end it and find out we would soon face bigger militant group. So until governments start implementation of Shariah these groups will not stop. Now for those jokers who want to ask the most dumb question of which Shariah or of whose sect for them my answer is we just need to gather 50 Ulemas from all major sects in Pakistan I mean Barelvi, Deoband, Salafi and Shias and ask them to come up with 50 to 100 common points which governments should enforce, if the can come up with more better, and I can assure you they would come up with hundreds of points which our secular traitors will not like at all. So until government comes up with something these groups are not going to end and also Muslim governments need to solve issue of Kashmir, Chechnya, and Palestine and ask USA and NATO to get lost from Afghanistan. If they do this all support for these groups or more than 90 % support for these groups will vanish if not than keep fighting for next 1000 years still war will not end.

So basically you want to 'establish Sharia' because of blackmail by terrorist groups. And if, after you establish Sharia, some other sect or religion starts doing the same until you remove the Sharia, what will you do then? And what if some group starts terrorizing people to legalize drugs or alcohol or prostitution, will you listen to them too? Oh so you want to put 50 ulemas in a room together. Have you ever seen their faces? Do you actually expect, say, Tahir Ul Qadri and Maulana Ashrafi to sit in a room and have a productive discussion?

This idea is utterly retarded, give up on it already. The groups don't want Sharia, they want money and power. Didn't you see their rule in Afghanistan? Burkas does not mean Sharia. Sharia is supposed to be justice, which there will be none if you fall into this trap.

 

[Stephen Cohen]

@Capt.Popeye

@Oscar

The problem with the Muslim League was its incessant demands and obstructionist and negative attitude
towards Congress in general and Hindus in particular

An excerpt from a good article

Jawaharlal Nehru and Vallabhbhai Patel failed the acid test of working with the Muslim League when the British put them together in the interim Cabinet of 1946-47.

Muslim League finance minister Liaqat Ali riled Congress ministers by holding up financial sanctions for even minor things they proposed. Liaqat then presented a high-tax budget in 1947 to soak businesses that had made huge profits in World War II. Congressmen interpreted this as an attack on Hindu businessmen by a Muslim finance minister.

This was an unwarranted, communal interpretation: the high taxes fell equally on Hindu and Muslim businesses. Yet, Congress stalwarts concluded it was impossible to work with Jinnah, and that a clean Partition would be better. That's how Partition happened, through the voluntary agreement of both the Congress and the Muslim League.

Source : Independence Day: Why Partition was a good thing for India - Economic Times