DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - The Islamic 'state' an oxymoron (contradiction in terms)

**BopeDolaNeone** · 09-04-2012, 03:57 AM

I only saw the propaganda on British TV regarding the Taliban, so my views might well be wrong. But my impression was that they were trying to impliment the Shariah in all matters, stopping men from shaving or trimming their beards, punishing people for listening to music in the areas that they controlled. Yes they were still fighting a war and trying to establsih peace in many areas of Afghanistan, however had they not tried to force people to grow beards etc. they may have won peoples hearts and minds, and they may have got widespread support from the common people. The US may have found it very difficult, even more that they are now to get Afghan people to support them against the Taliban. I know I am making judgements on people I have no right to judge from the comfort of my nice secure home...and it was a very difficult situation and I might be wrong.

i'll answer both this point and your OP (which i had promised) simultaneously.

i agree with the notion that the population has to be taught about Islam first so that the general society becomes receptive to islamic laws when they are implemented.
but my question is how long should this preaching last so that we can get on with the ban on shaving beards, implementation of hadd of zina, theft, apostasy etc which are vital for ending of corruption, fahashi, anti-islamic sentiments and conductive to growth of islam, peace, harmony among different sects, religions etc.
or should the preaching and implementation of said laws be done in parallel?

the taliban imho and reading from various sources and mullah zaeef's book tried the second approach. yet they did not fail because of it. you see when the US attacked it was immaterial whether some people supported them or not. they bombed the country extensively.
what i have seen is that there is little or no widespread dissatisfaction for the taliban from the religious circles in afghanistan. the secular/liberals obviously hate them. they would support anyone who leaves them alone to live the lives they wish for and to earn haram and spend their lives in living against islam and preaching that to others. so they have no case. and they are a small vocal minority that sits on the web. we only have web sas our source so it seems to us that they represent majority of afghans (or a significant block) but thats not the case.
in afghanistan what matters is whether the tribes are with you. the northern alliance was always a thorn in their side. the mujahideen during the afghan jihad of 80s were divided into many factions. the factions that were islamic lay their allegiance to the taliban. but then what about the older factions?i do not think that those who didnt support them then or after 2001 were doing it because of religious differences. Allahualam.

i think their social hudood laws were condemned by liberals/seculars in afghanistan and other muslim countries and obviously by the kuffar-owned international media. it has little impact on their support inside pakistan or afghanistan. you will be surprised mullah zaeef ran a very extensive public relations campaign in pakistan. i didnt know about it till i read his book.

so it is incorrect as far as i can tell to blame the taliban's parallel approach. i personally think the first idea is good. but how long should one preach to the masses? and how can one tell whether masses are receptive or not?.

09-04-2012, 03:57 AM	#19
BopeDolaNeone Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 402 Senior Member	I only saw the propaganda on British TV regarding the Taliban, so my views might well be wrong. But my impression was that they were trying to impliment the Shariah in all matters, stopping men from shaving or trimming their beards, punishing people for listening to music in the areas that they controlled. Yes they were still fighting a war and trying to establsih peace in many areas of Afghanistan, however had they not tried to force people to grow beards etc. they may have won peoples hearts and minds, and they may have got widespread support from the common people. The US may have found it very difficult, even more that they are now to get Afghan people to support them against the Taliban. I know I am making judgements on people I have no right to judge from the comfort of my nice secure home...and it was a very difficult situation and I might be wrong. i'll answer both this point and your OP (which i had promised) simultaneously. i agree with the notion that the population has to be taught about Islam first so that the general society becomes receptive to islamic laws when they are implemented. but my question is how long should this preaching last so that we can get on with the ban on shaving beards, implementation of hadd of zina, theft, apostasy etc which are vital for ending of corruption, fahashi, anti-islamic sentiments and conductive to growth of islam, peace, harmony among different sects, religions etc. or should the preaching and implementation of said laws be done in parallel? the taliban imho and reading from various sources and mullah zaeef's book tried the second approach. yet they did not fail because of it. you see when the US attacked it was immaterial whether some people supported them or not. they bombed the country extensively. what i have seen is that there is little or no widespread dissatisfaction for the taliban from the religious circles in afghanistan. the secular/liberals obviously hate them. they would support anyone who leaves them alone to live the lives they wish for and to earn haram and spend their lives in living against islam and preaching that to others. so they have no case. and they are a small vocal minority that sits on the web. we only have web sas our source so it seems to us that they represent majority of afghans (or a significant block) but thats not the case. in afghanistan what matters is whether the tribes are with you. the northern alliance was always a thorn in their side. the mujahideen during the afghan jihad of 80s were divided into many factions. the factions that were islamic lay their allegiance to the taliban. but then what about the older factions?i do not think that those who didnt support them then or after 2001 were doing it because of religious differences. Allahualam. i think their social hudood laws were condemned by liberals/seculars in afghanistan and other muslim countries and obviously by the kuffar-owned international media. it has little impact on their support inside pakistan or afghanistan. you will be surprised mullah zaeef ran a very extensive public relations campaign in pakistan. i didnt know about it till i read his book. so it is incorrect as far as i can tell to blame the taliban's parallel approach. i personally think the first idea is good. but how long should one preach to the masses? and how can one tell whether masses are receptive or not?.
	Quote