Why do some people in Pakistan support the Taliban manifesto?

[Major]

Everywhere on social media, where ever posts regarding the laws that taliban is implementing you will love reactions and supporting comments by Pakistani people.

Taliban has planned to come up with the following laws:
-forceful beard
-ban on smoking
-women not allowed to leave without a male companion.

Pakistani people are claiming this to be the shariah and a proper muslim govt. But history of the taliban has shown otherwise.

Based on the books and research i did on rawa reportings of taliban regime, a female who had dead husband and sons had no other way to go out of their house. Many had to dress as a boy if they had no companions and some were forced towards prostitution.

Why such buffoons exist in Pakistani society? Would they support such a takeover if it ever happens here?

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Majority of Pakistani people dont support the Taliban manifesto. However a lot of people support the Taliban in either destabilizing Afghanistan or that a takeover by the Taliban will make Afghanistan into a vassal state.

Why do some Pakistani people want this? Well lets see, Afghanistan backed militants groups operating against Pakistan since the 50's, long before Pakistan ever supported the Taliban. They even sent some Afghan troops as well to invade the country.

Afghanistan did this as they claims KPK and Baluchistan as their territory, and some Afghans want their border to be the Indus River. Which would mean Karachi is part of Afghanistan.

We can add that the first PM of Pakistan was assassinated by a Afghan. And the Afghan people attacked the Pakistani embassy. In addition they have given India many consulates in Afghanistan, which the Pakistani government perceives as being utilized to back militants into Pakistan.

Afghanistan is free to do whatever they want, but Pakistan has the right to retaliate.

The Afghan government is responsible for what is about to happen. Unfortunately the people of Afghanistan will suffer. But if the choice is between a Pakistani mother crying, and an Afghan mother crying, the state of Pakistan would rather it be the Afghan mother.

 

[Tubs]

Because most Pakistanis are conservative and religious. So while they may not align entirely with the Taliban, they find it more preferable to a more liberal manifesto, which would give women autonomy, allow for individualism and not enforce religion.

 

[ElRaja]

most pakistanis dont support the taliban manifesto.

tptb support taliban as they are the only indigenous group that can control the southern belt of afg, which is important to get trade routes in central asia operational, which is pretty much what the taliban were tasked to do in the early 90s.

 

[saeedhk]

80% of Pakistanis support the Taliban. You just have to go to Twitter and FB to see that, despite, killing 70000 people, the Taliban are very popular amongst the masses. We need to realise that Pakistan is a very extremist society and they are very attracted towards violence.

Almost everybody I know supports the Taliban. Pakistanis are still not tired despite picking up 70000 dead bodies. Extremism narrative is also furthered by the state and our country uses terror as a tool in its foreign policy. There is no hope!

 

[saeedhk]

Everywhere on social media, where ever posts regarding the laws that taliban is implementing you will love reactions and supporting comments by Pakistani people.

Taliban has planned to come up with the following laws:
-forceful beard
-ban on smoking
-women not allowed to leave without a male companion.

Pakistani people are claiming this to be the shariah and a proper muslim govt. But history of the taliban has shown otherwise.

Based on the books and research i did on rawa reportings of taliban regime, a female who had dead husband and sons had no other way to go out of their house. Many had to dress as a boy if they had no companions and some were forced towards prostitution.

Why such buffoons exist in Pakistani society? Would they support such a takeover if it ever happens here?

Female education has been banned in occupied territories. The Taliban are a despicable lot!

 

[Ashmal]

80% of Pakistanis support the Taliban. You just have to go to Twitter and FB to see that, despite, killing 70000 people, the Taliban are very popular amongst the masses. We need to realise that Pakistan is a very extremist society and they are very attracted towards violence.

Almost everybody I know supports the Taliban. Pakistanis are still not tired despite picking up 70000 dead bodies. Extremism narrative is also furthered by the state and our country uses terror as a tool in its foreign policy. There is no hope!

Please share the survey data/results by which you concluded that 80% Pakistanis support Taliban.

 

[saeedhk]

Please share the survey data/results by which you concluded that 80% Pakistanis support Taliban.

That is my observation from living in Pakistan. The support the Taliban enjoy here is surreal!

 

[street cricketer]

For the believer, there is never an enough level of religion in the society. If you have two societies with one having less level of religious influence and the other having more influence of religion in the society, a believer would always choose a society that has more religious influence than less. He would rather err on excessive level of religion in society than insufficient level of religion. Only those who have experience of living in an ultra conservative environment would have opposing views towards such a society and for those on the outside, the other side would always look greener.

On social media, I see a split among Indian muslims with some prominent anti-hindutva Indian muslim handles criticising the people who support the Taliban just because they're muslims while many others are sympathetic to the cause of the Taliban and see them as warriors fighting the spread of western influence in their country. And Indian muslims, on average, are a bit more liberal than Pakistani muslims in their views on religion. So it would not be surprising for me if many Pakistanis have sympathetic views towards the Taliban. In fact, the only ones who I've seen having staunch views against the Taliban are many Afghans themselves (though not everyone).

When hindus, who rarely grow up reading their scriptures and are far less likely to have dogmatic views on religion, can be roused by the ideology of hindutva which promises a society with more hindu influence than a secular society, why would it be hard for muslims, who grow up reading their scriptures from their childhood and are far more religious on average than hindus, to have sympathetic views towards a movement that promises a more islamic society than their own or elsewhere.

 

[ElRaja]

That is my observation from living in Pakistan. The support the Taliban enjoy here is surreal!

not really, its just that their supporters have the license to be the noisiest, and ppl are guilted into not challenging that for obvious reasons.

when push comes to shove the largest driver of voting in pakistan is ethnicity, if u look at how people act, rather than what they say.

 

[Giannis]

Well no Islamic party has ever won an election in Pakistan and Pew research surveys have shown that Pakistanis overwhelmingly condemn the Taliban and any religious violence. Support for Taliban is more of a geopolitical thing for Pakistan and the fact that the Taliban are popular in Afghanistan's Pashtun provinces, Pakistan doesn't have a choice but to respect their desires.

 

[Giannis]

People can use anecdotal stories to make generalizations but I believe in statistics and research. The data shows Pakistanis do not support the Taliban.

A Pew Research Center spring 2015 survey found that Pakistanis were extremely critical of these terrorist organizations and supported government action to fight extremists. And they were also much more confident in the ability of the Pakistani government, led by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, to tackle extremist groups than they were in 2014.

Overall, Pakistanis had a very negative view of the Taliban and the TTP. (The Lahore bombings were carried out by a TTP splinter group, Jamaat-ul-Ahrar, and the TTP were also perpetrators of a horrendous massacre in a public army school in Peshawar in late 2014.) In the survey last April, 72% had an unfavorable view of the Taliban umbrella group, while six-in-ten had negative opinions of TTP specifically. About half (53%) of Pakistanis viewed the Afghan Taliban negatively and 47% voiced dislike for al Qaeda

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-ta...itical-of-taliban-and-other-extremist-groups/

 

[SangasCoverDrive]

Because it's an Islamic country. A lot of people in Pakistan are conservative, they would like to see the same laws in Pakistan too.

 

[Bewal Express]

The perception is that the Taliban kicked *** and they are seen as winners for humiliating America and Ind.

 

[Local.Dada]

The perception is that the Taliban kicked *** and they are seen as winners for humiliating America and Ind.

3 questions back at you.

Do you think that’s the right perception?

Are you happy Taliban won?

Do you think Taliban taking over will be good news or any redeeming factors for Pakistan which seems to be under the radar for a extremism?

Bonus question: do you even think Taliban are extremists.

Try to answer the questions without getting into the whole rss, moody rhetoric.

 

[moghul]

80% of Pakistanis support the Taliban. You just have to go to Twitter and FB to see that, despite, killing 70000 people, the Taliban are very popular amongst the masses. We need to realise that Pakistan is a very extremist society and they are very attracted towards violence.

Almost everybody I know supports the Taliban. Pakistanis are still not tired despite picking up 70000 dead bodies. Extremism narrative is also furthered by the state and our country uses terror as a tool in its foreign policy. There is no hope!

You count yourself 80% of Pakistan ?? Most ridiculous comments I have seen here lately, by anyone.

 

[Third_Umpire]

80% of Pakistanis support the Taliban. You just have to go to Twitter and FB to see that, despite, killing 70000 people, the Taliban are very popular amongst the masses. We need to realise that Pakistan is a very extremist society and they are very attracted towards violence.

Almost everybody I know supports the Taliban. Pakistanis are still not tired despite picking up 70000 dead bodies. Extremism narrative is also furthered by the state and our country uses terror as a tool in its foreign policy. There is no hope!

I doubt it bro. At most I’d think 10% of Pakistanis are extremist enough to support taliban. I’d say another 80% are ultra conservative, in that they take the religion literally but don’t want go to the violent extent taliban does. And remaining 10% are liberal.

It’s that 80% in the middle that worry me most. They are the ones that need to subscribe to liberal, secular values or some reformed version of Islam that is devoid of all the bigotry that exists today.

 

[Third_Umpire]

People can use anecdotal stories to make generalizations but I believe in statistics and research. The data shows Pakistanis do not support the Taliban.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-ta...itical-of-taliban-and-other-extremist-groups/

Didn’t see this post before I wrote mine, but this seems accurate. Having grown up and spent a lot of time in Pakistan, it just doesn’t pass the sniff test that Pakistanis would support Taliban.

Just wish the Pakistan Army and ISI would find ways to divorce themselves from Taliban as a strategic asset. And then proceed to provide the world deliverance by bombing them into the arms of the 72 hoors that await them.

 

[Bewal Express]

3 questions back at you.

Do you think that’s the right perception?

Are you happy Taliban won?

Do you think Taliban taking over will be good news or any redeeming factors for Pakistan which seems to be under the radar for a extremism?

Bonus question: do you even think Taliban are extremists.

Try to answer the questions without getting into the whole rss, moody rhetoric.

Perception is right
I don't support the Taliban but if they stop Ind Proxies from attacking us then they are all good.
Yes they are extremists but so is Ghani for allowing us to be attacked. So in a straight choice the blood of soldiers and civilians comes 1st.
I pray that the Afghans come together to bring peace to their troubled land and stop allowing proxies to be used to attack us.

 

[guna]

Funnily the ones supporting Taliban rule are the ones living in west and enjoying their freedom. They want Sharia law implemented as long as it is not applied in the country they are residing.

 

[saeedhk]

Funnily the ones supporting Taliban rule are the ones living in west and enjoying their freedom. They want Sharia law implemented as long as it is not applied in the country they are residing.

Exactly. Pakistani government portrays the Taliban as remarkable statesmen, protectors of rights and seekers of peace and justice but why is Pakistan not offering the Taliban to rule Pakistan?

 

[saeedhk]

I doubt it bro. At most I’d think 10% of Pakistanis are extremist enough to support taliban. I’d say another 80% are ultra conservative, in that they take the religion literally but don’t want go to the violent extent taliban does. And remaining 10% are liberal.

It’s that 80% in the middle that worry me most. They are the ones that need to subscribe to liberal, secular values or some reformed version of Islam that is devoid of all the bigotry that exists today.

Khadim Rivzi's funeral and daily lynching of blasphemers say otherwise.

 

[UzmanBeast]

The reason you will find that some people support the Taliban in Pakistan is arguably because they are being brainwashed by the media.

As soon as they see that the Taliban winning in some way gets back at the United States and at India, they will support it.

You have to understand that some Pakistanis, despite occupying high profile jobs, are incredibly stupid and lack the basic historical education. They are easily swayed by politics, and to add to that, most rarely watch any credible news to suggest that they can comprehend what is happening outside of their own country.

It's like this: most people won't credit a prime minister for improving economic growth if the results are not tangible. Our people want to see good things happen, like new roads being built, etc. I've heard so many people think that the country is doing economically well because new roads were being built, it just shows you how little they understand economics and how uneducated most are.

Personally, I don't think Pakistan should have anything to do with the Taliban, we should try and shut those relations because we do not need Afghanistan for anything. I do believe that Pakistan has been involved in some terrorist sponsorship activities given that the west has maintained this stance for so long, so I think it's about time that we stop doing that.

Our goal should be to expand our relations with the western world and develop better trade. The western world will only help us if we can convince them, and so, it also means that we will need to show the results of our anti-terrorism activities by exposing terrorist operations, imprisoning convicted terrorists, and removing this image that we support terrorism.

The reason the west thinks that we do support terrorism is that it doesn't look like our government is actively hunting down terrorist activities.

Till the results are shown, we won't get off the FATF Grey List. We also need to understand that there won't be peace with India, so we are better off trying to salvage and recover our economy, and developing good relations with other countries.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Funnily the ones supporting Taliban rule are the ones living in west and enjoying their freedom. They want Sharia law implemented as long as it is not applied in the country they are residing.

The question was specifically about people living in Pakistan though, so your observations are worthless in context of the thread.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

OT:

I would imagine in Pakistan they are fed up of corruption, bribery, lack of justice and no faith in the police or courts, so much as in Afghanistan they will be looking at Shariah as a way of getting some fundamental rule of law applied, however medieval it may seem to outsiders.

 

[Bhaijaan]

I don't think that honest comments about a section of muslim population will be well received and that it might even be categorised under Islamophobia so i will keep to myself.

 

[KingKhanWC]

I don't think that honest comments about a section of muslim population will be well received and that it might even be categorised under Islamophobia so i will keep to myself.

Go for it , dont be shy.

On topic.

You have to respect a resistance force which defeated the greatest collection of armies in history. In military terms this is huge , of course you wont hear/read this in western or Indian media, its embarrasing for them.

 

[from_da_lost_dim3nsion]

]80% of Pakistanis support the Taliban.[/B] You just have to go to Twitter and FB to see that, despite, killing 70000 people, the Taliban are very popular amongst the masses. We need to realise that Pakistan is a very extremist society and they are very attracted towards violence.

Almost everybody I know supports the Taliban. Pakistanis are still not tired despite picking up 70000 dead bodies. Extremism narrative is also furthered by the state and our country uses terror as a tool in its foreign policy. There is no hope!

Bhaiii jaan quit pulling numbers out of thin air . 90% of your stats are fake.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Go for it , dont be shy.

On topic.

You have to respect a resistance force which defeated the greatest collection of armies in history. In military terms this is huge , of course you wont hear/read this in western or Indian media, its embarrasing for them.

Maybe you can take it.

Bit I doubt many could which is why I think going vocal about it would be a bad idea..Also my place of origin doesn't help my cause.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Bhaiii jaan quit pulling numbers out of thin air . 90% of your stats are fake.

Don't quite appreciate my honourary title being handed over without permission prior approval or understanding.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Maybe you can take it.

Bit I doubt many could which is why I think going vocal about it would be a bad idea..Also my place of origin doesn't help my cause.

The only cause you should have is to respect peoples right for self defence as you would want for yourself.

 

[Angrez Pakistani]

I think a lot of people support the ideology of taliban rather than their methods. Theoretically a conservative Muslim would love to have their daughter stay home, but at the same time they would like to have their daughters educated within the four walls. This doesn’t make them anti female education. They just have different way of viewing female education. But that doesn’t make them right. It’s just sad that so many people have such views. But that’s how things are for so many in Pakistan. And I think even those people would not agree in killing women as a way of stopping them from going to school and colleges. In short, the conservative Muslims in Pakistan may agree on some of Taliban’s ideology but even they may not necessarily agree with their methods. But this is not to say that all of them don’t agree with their methods. I’m pretty sure that their are a lot of people who wholeheartedly agree with killings, beatings, or even public beheadings in the name of religion.

 

[KingKhanWC]

I think a lot of people support the ideology of taliban rather than their methods. Theoretically a conservative Muslim would love to have their daughter stay home, but at the same time they would like to have their daughters educated within the four walls. This doesn’t make them anti female education. They just have different way of viewing female education. But that doesn’t make them right. It’s just sad that so many people have such views. But that’s how things are for so many in Pakistan. And I think even those people would not agree in killing women as a way of stopping them from going to school and colleges. In short, the conservative Muslims in Pakistan may agree on some of Taliban’s ideology but even they may not necessarily agree with their methods. But this is not to say that all of them don’t agree with their methods. I’m pretty sure that their are a lot of people who wholeheartedly agree with killings, beatings, or even public beheadings in the name of religion.

Full of generalisations, what is a lot?

See the pew poll posted earlier, only 6% see them as favourable. Where did you get your ideas from?

Most and rightly so support their right to self defence, not just in Pak but millions around the world.

 

[PetroDollars]

theres a difference in supporting the taliban and supporting the taliban manifesto.

The ISI will support the manifesto but will never allow them to step a foot in pakistan. This is ofcourse to stabilize afganistan and not make the country a military base to be used against Pakistan, what has happened since the 50s.

 

[PakLFC]

It is because under them terrorism is not exported to Pak. The Taliban do not give any space to the enemies of Pak in Afghanistan. Pak too keeps it's nose out of their internal affairs as was the case before 9/11.

 

[street cricketer]

Full of generalisations, what is a lot?

See the pew poll posted earlier, only 6% see them as favourable. Where did you get your ideas from?

Does it really matter if only 6% Pakistanis support the Taliban when an overwhelming majority of Pakistanis support most of the views, if not all, of the Taliban.

These were also the results of a pew survey in muslim countries..







In general, in the muslim world, Albania, Bosnia, Kosovo and Turkey (despite Erdogan) tend to be the least conservative followed by the central asian states, Indonesia falls somewhere in the moderate zone while Pakistan, Afghanistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iraq along with a host of sub saharan countries tend to be the most conservative. In fact, in some views on shariah, Pakistan tends to be the most conservative in the world, than even Afghanistan for that matter. So it is not really surprising if Pakistanis support either the Taliban or the views of the Taliban.

 

[Giannis]

Does it really matter if only 6% Pakistanis support the Taliban when an overwhelming majority of Pakistanis support most of the views, if not all, of the Taliban.

These were also the results of a pew survey in muslim countries..

View attachment 11521

View attachment 122

View attachment 523

In general, in the muslim world, Albania, Bosnia, Kosovo and Turkey (despite Erdogan) tend to be the least conservative followed by the central asian states, Indonesia falls somewhere in the moderate zone while Pakistan, Afghanistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iraq along with a host of sub saharan countries tend to be the most conservative. In fact, in some views on shariah, Pakistan tends to be the most conservative in the world, than even Afghanistan for that matter. So it is not really surprising if Pakistanis support either the Taliban or the views of the Taliban.

This is such a reach. You're going to ignore the same poll that showed Pakisanis condemned the Taliban and they try to link conservative Islamic political views with the Taliban's actions and manifesto. Honestly you and your ilk are pathetic and will do anything to justify your Islamophobia and hatred for Pakistan.

 

[PakLFC]

India and it's people are in no position to condemn the Taliban. The world does not need to hear their hypocrisy when majority Indian's elected a Hindutva terrorist government lead by an illiterate tea maker. I see nothing wrong even if the Taliban are their Muslim equivalent. Many honest Indian's are making the very same point.

 

[street cricketer]

This is such a reach. You're going to ignore the same poll that showed Pakisanis condemned the Taliban and they try to link conservative Islamic political views with the Taliban's actions and manifesto. Honestly you and your ilk are pathetic and will do anything to justify your Islamophobia and hatred for Pakistan.

How did you conclude my post as "Islamophobic" and "hatred" for Pakistan. That sounds more of a reach to me. This seems like a convenient label to throw around against people whose views you disagree with.

I simply disagreed with KKWC's notion that only 6% Pakistanis being supportive of the Taliban in a pew survey means they don't support the ideology of the Taliban as Angrez Pakistani implied in his post. And the results of the pew survey I posted simply showed most Pakistanis support what Taliban envision in their country - to implement shariah in the most fundamental version. There is hardly anything islamophobic about it because I'm not stating my opinion, but rather a fact based on a survey of Pakistanis themselves.

 

[Giannis]

How did you conclude my post as "Islamophobic" and "hatred" for Pakistan. That sounds more of a reach to me. This seems like a convenient label to throw around against people whose views you disagree with.

I simply disagreed with KKWC's notion that only 6% Pakistanis being supportive of the Taliban in a pew survey means they don't support the ideology of the Taliban as Angrez Pakistani implied in his post. And the results of the pew survey I posted simply showed most Pakistanis support what Taliban envision in their country - to implement shariah in the most fundamental version. There is hardly anything islamophobic about it because I'm not stating my opinion, but rather a fact based on a survey of Pakistanis themselves.

No, we don't support the ideology of the Taliban. You don't understand Islamic scholarship and diversity of thought between scholars. Pakistanis do not support the militant actions and their ideology, there are literal fatwas against the Taliban from mainstream Islamic scholars.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

How did you conclude my post as "Islamophobic" and "hatred" for Pakistan. That sounds more of a reach to me. This seems like a convenient label to throw around against people whose views you disagree with.

I simply disagreed with KKWC's notion that only 6% Pakistanis being supportive of the Taliban in a pew survey means they don't support the ideology of the Taliban as Angrez Pakistani implied in his post. And the results of the pew survey I posted simply showed most Pakistanis support what Taliban envision in their country - to implement shariah in the most fundamental version. There is hardly anything islamophobic about it because I'm not stating my opinion, but rather a fact based on a survey of Pakistanis themselves.

In Pakistan, especially in Sindh and Punjab, women are not forced to wear burkhas or even dupatta. So that alone is a big difference. Pakistan also has co-ed schools. Pakistan has had a women prime minister. None of this would be possible if the people were no ok with it.

Pakistan is no Sweden, but definitely a stretch to say this

most Pakistanis support what Taliban envision in their country - to implement shariah in the most fundamental version

 

[LongHorn]

There are multiple aspects to Taliban

1) Their strict Sharia rules (some of which may be beyond Sharia)

2) Their no tolerance approach to opposition, and seeing killing any Afghan govt worker as Halal

3) Their good terms with Pakistan as a country (unlike NA) by not hosting India etc

It makes sense if Pakistanis support them because of Point 3. But when i see Pakistanis, particularly those in western countries support them for 1 and 2, it screams hypocrisy.

TBH, even many Bangladeshis support them while comfortably sitting in the West and benefitting from their society

 

[street cricketer]

In Pakistan, especially in Sindh and Punjab, women are not forced to wear burkhas or even dupatta. So that alone is a big difference. Pakistan also has co-ed schools. Pakistan has had a women prime minister. None of this would be possible if the people were no ok with it.

Pakistan is no Sweden, but definitely a stretch to say this

It's a complicated issue and there are multiple dimensions to it. Pakistanis for example, according to the survey, were very supportive of women having the right to choose to whether wear the veil or not, with less Bangladeshis and Afghans saying so. Maybe it is because the veil was not popular even among muslim women in south asia in the past. I've seen many pictures of pre partition Pakistan where wearing veil was very rare and even in India, it wasn't popular when I was growing up in the 90s and early 2000s but later it became very popular. I think more islamophobia in non muslim countries makes muslims get rooted more strongly to their religion than otherwise in muslim majority countries where islamophobia might not be present.

At the same time, Pakistanis are very strongly in favour of corporal punishments like whipping, stoning and death punishment for apostasy. It is possible that you can be conservative in certain views and less conservative in certain views. I did not imply that Pakistan were supportive of Taliban's violent actions like bombing schools, etc. I merely said Pakistans favour some of the views that Taliban want to enforce.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

It's a complicated issue and there are multiple dimensions to it. Pakistanis for example, according to the survey, were very supportive of women having the right to choose to whether wear the veil or not, with less Bangladeshis and Afghans saying so. Maybe it is because the veil was not popular even among muslim women in south asia in the past. I've seen many pictures of pre partition Pakistan where wearing veil was very rare and even in India, it wasn't popular when I was growing up in the 90s and early 2000s but later it became very popular. I think more islamophobia in non muslim countries makes muslims get rooted more strongly to their religion than otherwise in muslim majority countries where islamophobia might not be present.

At the same time, Pakistanis are very strongly in favour of corporal punishments like whipping, stoning and death punishment for apostasy. It is possible that you can be conservative in certain views and less conservative in certain views. I did not imply that Pakistan were supportive of Taliban's violent actions like bombing schools, etc. I merely said Pakistans favour some of the views that Taliban want to enforce.

As I said previously, the support stern punishment because they are sick and tired of seeing crime going unpunished due to corruption, to such an extent the civilians probably fear the police more than they fear criminals these days. There is a perception in Pakistan that the Taliban cleaned up the drug trade and stopped the abuse of young boys which was rampant in Afghanistan prior to their arrival. I don't think even the Afghans like the severity of religious enforcement under a theocratic govt, but they might prefer it if it brings some peace and stability.

 

[Local.Dada]

As I said previously, the support stern punishment because they are sick and tired of seeing crime going unpunished due to corruption, to such an extent the civilians probably fear the police more than they fear criminals these days. There is a perception in Pakistan that the Taliban cleaned up the drug trade and stopped the abuse of young boys which was rampant in Afghanistan prior to their arrival. I don't think even the Afghans like the severity of religious enforcement under a theocratic govt, but they might prefer it if it brings some peace and stability.

There is a lot of crime, drugs and what is perceived as immoral behavior in Islam in UK as well, would you prefer a Taliban rule there as well?

I am not pointing this at you but I am sure there is some welfare/social security type charitable law under Taliban as well.

 

[street cricketer]

As I said previously, the support stern punishment because they are sick and tired of seeing crime going unpunished due to corruption, to such an extent the civilians probably fear the police more than they fear criminals these days. There is a perception in Pakistan that the Taliban cleaned up the drug trade and stopped the abuse of young boys which was rampant in Afghanistan prior to their arrival. I don't think even the Afghans like the severity of religious enforcement under a theocratic govt, but they might prefer it if it brings some peace and stability.

I respectfully disagree. Different societies have evolved with different levels of religion over time and like you have said plenty of times before, muslims are not a monolith. How an Albanian muslim thinks will be vastly different to how an Afghan muslim thinks because they have different perspectives - Albania owing to its location in south eastern Europe and its close proximity to European countries would be far more liberal in its views than say Afghanistan. Majority of central asian states are liberal in their views on religion because they were part of the Soviet Union and therefore would've had greater exposure to communist ideologies, which generally views religion as an impediment to progress and development. The Turks are generally on the liberal side because Ataturk was a staunch secularist and nationalist who didn't mind abolishing the decrepit Ottoman empire and therefore most of the present day Turks' views are influenced by his policies.

In contrast, Afghanistan has been in turmoil almost ever since India and Pakistan became independent countries. It has been under foreign occupation and also has been the lab for a variety of islamist organisations to experiment. It has never got the chance to progress or develop as a nation, and do the process of nation building like other countries. So an Afghan's views would be vastly different to what a Bosnian or even a Kazakh's views would be. Pakistan, on the other hand, was probably envisioned by Jinnah to be along the lines of the present day Turkey, but it soon got into the hands of islamist leaders like Zia who reimagined the constitution of Pakistan on islamic lines.

I'm not against religion, but it's my firm belief that any nation which is styled on religion will not succeed. It may continue to "exist", but it won't succeed. There's a difference between existence and success. I'm staunchly opposed to hindu nationalism in India for the exact same reason. Now it might be far easier for me to express my opposition against the imposition of religion in public sphere but for muslims, it might be difficult because any such opposition by muslims against undue influence of religion in society would be viewed as apostasy and therefore will never get popular support as muslims are generally among the most religious. And so it would not be a surprise to see Pakistanis having very conservative views on religion because the nation, whether or not it was imagined on islam by Jinnah, has come to exist on islamic lines due to what happened after his death.

While it's possible that Pakistanis support harsh corporal punishments on shariah due to extreme frustration with corruption and theft by politicians, it cannot explain the overwhelming support for death penalty for apostasy or heavy opposition against family planning, or favouring harsh punishments for adultery, blasphemy, etc. I just think Pakistanis are generally very conservative when it comes to religion and so are more prone to supporting laws or having views on punishments as it was revealed in the shariah. That is not because they're inherently violent or aggressive, that is because they are arguably among the most religious even in the muslim world and probably believe following liberal versions of laws as straying from their religion.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

There is a lot of crime, drugs and what is perceived as immoral behavior in Islam in UK as well, would you prefer a Taliban rule there as well?

I am not pointing this at you but I am sure there is some welfare/social security type charitable law under Taliban as well.

It's just a pointless question since this thread is clearly about support for Taliban in Pakistan.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I respectfully disagree. Different societies have evolved with different levels of religion over time and like you have said plenty of times before, muslims are not a monolith. How an Albanian muslim thinks will be vastly different to how an Afghan muslim thinks because they have different perspectives - Albania owing to its location in south eastern Europe and its close proximity to European countries would be far more liberal in its views than say Afghanistan. Majority of central asian states are liberal in their views on religion because they were part of the Soviet Union and therefore would've had greater exposure to communist ideologies, which generally views religion as an impediment to progress and development. The Turks are generally on the liberal side because Ataturk was a staunch secularist and nationalist who didn't mind abolishing the decrepit Ottoman empire and therefore most of the present day Turks' views are influenced by his policies.

In contrast, Afghanistan has been in turmoil almost ever since India and Pakistan became independent countries. It has been under foreign occupation and also has been the lab for a variety of islamist organisations to experiment. It has never got the chance to progress or develop as a nation, and do the process of nation building like other countries. So an Afghan's views would be vastly different to what a Bosnian or even a Kazakh's views would be. Pakistan, on the other hand, was probably envisioned by Jinnah to be along the lines of the present day Turkey, but it soon got into the hands of islamist leaders like Zia who reimagined the constitution of Pakistan on islamic lines.

I'm not against religion, but it's my firm belief that any nation which is styled on religion will not succeed. It may continue to "exist", but it won't succeed. There's a difference between existence and success. I'm staunchly opposed to hindu nationalism in India for the exact same reason. Now it might be far easier for me to express my opposition against the imposition of religion in public sphere but for muslims, it might be difficult because any such opposition by muslims against undue influence of religion in society would be viewed as apostasy and therefore will never get popular support as muslims are generally among the most religious. And so it would not be a surprise to see Pakistanis having very conservative views on religion because the nation, whether or not it was imagined on islam by Jinnah, has come to exist on islamic lines due to what happened after his death.

While it's possible that Pakistanis support harsh corporal punishments on shariah due to extreme frustration with corruption and theft by politicians, it cannot explain the overwhelming support for death penalty for apostasy or heavy opposition against family planning, or favouring harsh punishments for adultery, blasphemy, etc. I just think Pakistanis are generally very conservative when it comes to religion and so are more prone to supporting laws or having views on punishments as it was revealed in the shariah. That is not because they're inherently violent or aggressive, that is because they are arguably among the most religious even in the muslim world and probably believe following liberal versions of laws as straying from their religion.

What do you base that on? Is there some survey where Pakistan public have spoken on those topics specifically?

 

[street cricketer]

What do you base that on? Is there some survey where Pakistan public have spoken on those topics specifically?

https://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30...ligion-politics-society-beliefs-about-sharia/

 

[Kroll]

Imagine if all the Taliban were sent to India. One group trying to ban beef, the other trying to force beards, lol.

 

[PakLFC]

The Taliban if they come in to power can implement any law. Why are Indian's so concerned about a country that they don't even neighbour? It is for this reason that the Taliban are threatening India.

 

[PakLFC]

If India interferes in Afghanistan then I will fully support the Taliban doing the same in India. The Taliban have made this very clear to India, mind your own business unless you want us to reciprocate in IoK is what they are saying. This is why Indian TV anchors are holding their heads seeing all their investment turned in to dust.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Does it really matter if only 6% Pakistanis support the Taliban when an overwhelming majority of Pakistanis support most of the views, if not all, of the Taliban.

These were also the results of a pew survey in muslim countries..

View attachment 110521

View attachment 110522

View attachment 110523

In general, in the muslim world, Albania, Bosnia, Kosovo and Turkey (despite Erdogan) tend to be the least conservative followed by the central asian states, Indonesia falls somewhere in the moderate zone while Pakistan, Afghanistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iraq along with a host of sub saharan countries tend to be the most conservative. In fact, in some views on shariah, Pakistan tends to be the most conservative in the world, than even Afghanistan for that matter. So it is not really surprising if Pakistanis support either the Taliban or the views of the Taliban.

When did you visit Pakistan?

If Pak was conservative it would have voted in a religous party, it never has. Pakistan is mostly a sufi country, nothing like how the Taliban practice their faith. Your point lacks understanding of what is conservative, this word means different to different people. Majority of Pakistanis support their right to self defence and yes many do as they also Muslims but this doesnt mean they want the Taliban to be the government of Pakistan lol.

 

[street cricketer]

When did you visit Pakistan?

If Pak was conservative it would have voted in a religous party, it never has. Pakistan is mostly a sufi country, nothing like how the Taliban practice their faith. Your point lacks understanding of what is conservative, this word means different to different people. Majority of Pakistanis support their right to self defence and yes many do as they also Muslims but this doesnt mean they want the Taliban to be the government of Pakistan lol.

I'm not stating my personal opinions here, I'm merely saying what the pew survey says how majority of Pakistanis think. And I never said Pakistanis wanted Taliban to rule them.

And I see the point about not electing a religious party often being repeated here, that's a moot point. India is a secular state and the hindutvadis vote for hindutva parties because they like their vision of turning India into a Hindu rashtra. What would Pakistanis achieve by voting for religious parties in an already theocratic state. BJP brought in the beef ban law in selected states to avoid "blasphemy" to hinduism. And they're the right wing party in India. Imran vowed to defend the blasphemy law staunchly if he came to power in his run up to the elections. He actually went ahead and dismissed an Ahmadi economist purely because of his religion. And he would be considered left wing in Pakistani politics. So Pakistanis not voting for religious parties is a moot point when their constitution already has religious laws deeply embedded into it.

 

[saeedhk]

I'm not stating my personal opinions here, I'm merely saying what the pew survey says how majority of Pakistanis think. And I never said Pakistanis wanted Taliban to rule them.

And I see the point about not electing a religious party often being repeated here, that's a moot point. India is a secular state and the hindutvadis vote for hindutva parties because they like their vision of turning India into a Hindu rashtra. What would Pakistanis achieve by voting for religious parties in an already theocratic state. BJP brought in the beef ban law in selected states to avoid "blasphemy" to hinduism. And they're the right wing party in India. Imran vowed to defend the blasphemy law staunchly if he came to power in his run up to the elections. He actually went ahead and dismissed an Ahmadi economist purely because of his religion. And he would be considered left wing in Pakistani politics. So Pakistanis not voting for religious parties is a moot point when their constitution already has religious laws deeply embedded into it.

Good point. Imran himself is an extremist who glorifies terrorism and goes out of his way to show his religiosity.

 

[street cricketer]

Good point. Imran himself is an extremist who glorifies terrorism and goes out of his way to show his religiosity.

I don't think Imran is an extremist. He probably was pressured into dismissing Atif Mian due to Mullah power on the streets. But that only reinforces my point - that mullahs are able to wield power in streets because the public believe in those conservative views too.

Imran is not an extremist, he is probably the best bet for Pakistan right now. But he would he considered a right wing conservative politician in any other country.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

I'm not stating my personal opinions here, I'm merely saying what the pew survey says how majority of Pakistanis think. And I never said Pakistanis wanted Taliban to rule them.

And I see the point about not electing a religious party often being repeated here, that's a moot point. India is a secular state and the hindutvadis vote for hindutva parties because they like their vision of turning India into a Hindu rashtra. What would Pakistanis achieve by voting for religious parties in an already theocratic state. BJP brought in the beef ban law in selected states to avoid "blasphemy" to hinduism. And they're the right wing party in India. Imran vowed to defend the blasphemy law staunchly if he came to power in his run up to the elections. He actually went ahead and dismissed an Ahmadi economist purely because of his religion.

This is extremely misleading. He appointed that Ahmadi professor and every other political party did politics on it, including the liberal ones. He is guilty of caving, but the people who caused him to cave are the ones who should be held responsible.

And he would be considered left wing in Pakistani politics. So Pakistanis not voting for religious parties is a moot point when their constitution already has religious laws deeply embedded into it.

Not really. I would classify the parties like this in Pakisan

PTI - Centre
PPP - Centre-Left
PML N Centre-Right
MQM, ANP, BNP - Left Wing
Jaamat-e-Islami - Right Wing
Tehreek-e-Labbaik- Far Right

 

[street cricketer]

This is extremely misleading. He appointed that Ahmadi professor and every other political party did politics on it, including the liberal ones. He is guilty of caving, but the people who caused him to cave are the ones who should be held responsible.

I have addressed this in my next post.

Not really. I would classify the parties like this in Pakisan

PTI - Centre
PPP - Centre-Left
PML N Centre-Right
MQM, ANP, BNP - Left Wing
Jaamat-e-Islami - Right Wing
Tehreek-e-Labbaik- Far Right

Exactly. PTI would be centre in Pakistani political terms but my entire point is that Pakistani political classification differs vastly from the actual political divisions of right and left wing. Imran would be classified as a right wing conservative politician in any other secular country, but in the context of Pakistan which is an islamic republic, his politics may lie in the centre.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

I
Exactly. PTI would be centre in Pakistani political terms but my entire point is that Pakistani political classification differs vastly from the actual political divisions of right and left wing. Imran would be classified as a right wing conservative politician in any other secular country, but in the context of Pakistan which is an islamic republic, his politics may lie in the centre.

Maybe in some regards. Liberal parties in Pakistan are more socialist, they want bigger government. Right wing are more capitalist, they want less regulation, less tax. Thats similar to other countries.

In terms of social issues, than yes, even the liberal parties in Pakistan would be like right wing conservative in western countries. No party would support gay marriage for example.

However these parties are not the same when it comes to social issues. Some parties in Pakistan are considerably more liberal than others. So I would say like other countries, Pakistan also has similar political divisions of right and left. Just that we are more conservative when compared to non Muslims.

 

[street cricketer]

Maybe in some regards. Liberal parties in Pakistan are more socialist, they want bigger government. Right wing are more capitalist, they want less regulation, less tax. Thats similar to other countries.

In terms of social issues, than yes, even the liberal parties in Pakistan would be like right wing conservative in western countries. No party would support gay marriage for example.

However these parties are not the same when it comes to social issues. Some parties in Pakistan are considerably more liberal than others. So I would say like other countries, Pakistan also has similar political divisions of right and left. Just that we are more conservative when compared to non Muslims.

Supporting same sex marriages is too liberal for south asia. India just decriminalised homosexuality 3 years ago which was considered a landmark decision and it still hasn't legalised same sex marriages.

I'm talking about the bare minimum like supporting secularism that centre-left parties like Congress do in India.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Supporting same sex marriages is too liberal for south asia. India just decriminalised homosexuality 3 years ago which was considered a landmark decision and it still hasn't legalised same sex marriages.

I'm talking about the bare minimum like supporting secularism that centre-left parties like Congress do in India.

The closest party to Congress in Pakistan would be PPP. They call themselves a "progressive" party, and right now are the most liberal party which has a chance to win a decent number of seats.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I'm not stating my personal opinions here, I'm merely saying what the pew survey says how majority of Pakistanis think. And I never said Pakistanis wanted Taliban to rule them.

And I see the point about not electing a religious party often being repeated here, that's a moot point. India is a secular state and the hindutvadis vote for hindutva parties because they like their vision of turning India into a Hindu rashtra. What would Pakistanis achieve by voting for religious parties in an already theocratic state. BJP brought in the beef ban law in selected states to avoid "blasphemy" to hinduism. And they're the right wing party in India. Imran vowed to defend the blasphemy law staunchly if he came to power in his run up to the elections. He actually went ahead and dismissed an Ahmadi economist purely because of his religion. And he would be considered left wing in Pakistani politics. So Pakistanis not voting for religious parties is a moot point when their constitution already has religious laws deeply embedded into it.

If what people said on surveys was to be believed, Pakistan would already be a theocratic state. The reality of Pakistan simply doesn't reflect this. It maybe points more that people in Pakistan like to pay lip service to religion, otherwise there would certainly be less fraud, corruption and crime.

 

[KingKhanWC]

I'm not stating my personal opinions here, I'm merely saying what the pew survey says how majority of Pakistanis think. And I never said Pakistanis wanted Taliban to rule them.

And I see the point about not electing a religious party often being repeated here, that's a moot point. India is a secular state and the hindutvadis vote for hindutva parties because they like their vision of turning India into a Hindu rashtra. What would Pakistanis achieve by voting for religious parties in an already theocratic state. BJP brought in the beef ban law in selected states to avoid "blasphemy" to hinduism. And they're the right wing party in India. Imran vowed to defend the blasphemy law staunchly if he came to power in his run up to the elections. He actually went ahead and dismissed an Ahmadi economist purely because of his religion. And he would be considered left wing in Pakistani politics. So Pakistanis not voting for religious parties is a moot point when their constitution already has religious laws deeply embedded into it.

All you need is some common sense and some basic knowlege. India claims to be secular, its not. Hindus in India have voted for an extremist party, this is a fact, take what you like about their own mindset for doing this. We know on here, the BJP/RSS supporters & what their views are.

You're confusing yourself, the blasphemy law was placed by the British.

Again, Pakistan is a Sufi nation ,nothing like the Taliban. They are only supported because they have a right to self defence & Pakistan is safer without having puppets of US or paid terrorists of India in charge. Its as simple this, please try not to make this more complicated because you really are trying hard to find a link.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Any Pakistanis that supports the 'Taliban Manifesto' is just paying lip service and pretending.

No reasonable person would want to live under the jurisdiction of those goons.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

I don't think Imran is an extremist. He probably was pressured into dismissing Atif Mian due to Mullah power on the streets. But that only reinforces my point - that mullahs are able to wield power in streets because the public believe in those conservative views too.

Its a fair point although I genuinley don't believe the public believes in those views either.

The Mullahs are able to weaponise their views using highly loaded language like 'kufr' 'murtad' 'blasphemer' etc and their isn't the right level of nuanced debate to counteract these statements. Nor is it worth it....if you have a small minority of people thinking a small action can lead to death then I think that the majority of the public just put their head down and let the rabble rousers get on with it.

The democractic governments are always weak and insecure to a level that in a highly weaponized scenario with such loaded language (blasphemy)the opposition will also make it a matter of religion not because they believe it is so but because its politically convenient to do so.

Its a lose lose scenario currently but its shifting ever so slightly.

 

[street cricketer]

All you need is some common sense and some basic knowlege. India claims to be secular, its not. Hindus in India have voted for an extremist party, this is a fact, take what you like about their own mindset for doing this. We know on here, the BJP/RSS supporters & what their views are.

Again, Pakistan is a Sufi nation ,nothing like the Taliban. They are only supported because they have a right to self defence & Pakistan is safer without having puppets of US or paid terrorists of India in charge. Its as simple this, please try not to make this more complicated because you really are trying hard to find a link.

I'm under no illusions to believe Indians are a liberal or tolerant bunch, they probably have as much religious intolerant views as Pakistanis have. So there isn't a whole lot of difference between Indians and Pakistanis in terms of tolerance or the lack of it. I mean, these were the same people who hacked each other during the partition.

The key difference however is that India is a secular state because of Ambedkar who wrote the constitution, if Savarkar had written it, it would've been a different story and India would have been a religious state like Pakistan. But as it happened, India was defined to be a secular state and therefore even the religious intolerant views cannot be expressed into openly discriminatory laws and must operate within the ambit of India's version of secularism. So India can't have a law like the Indian PM or President should only be a hindu like Pakistan has. There in lies the difference. Every party in Pakistan would lie in the far right spectrum of parties in India. The most right wing leaders like Adityanath enact love jihad laws to prevent interfaith marriages from happening in India. While in Pakistan, or even advanced muslim countries like Malaysia, interfaith marriages are barred by the constitution and a non muslim individual has to convert to Islam in order to marry a muslim individual. So almost every leader in Pakistan or indeed many muslim countries (except a few like Turkey, Indonesia, Azerbaijan, Albania, etc.) would fall in the right wing spectrum that the BJP lie.

The hindutvadis who vote for the BJP want to remove this restriction of secularism and operate freely in the ambit of a hindu state, i.e, they support the conversion of India into a religious state like Pakistan is. Their view is that the muslims of British India got their own country for their religion, but the hindus had to settle/compromise for a secular state, which is why they hate the Congress and its founding leaders like Nehru who did it more than they hate Pakistan or its founding leaders.

You're confusing yourself, the blasphemy law was placed by the British.

Was the death penalty for blasphemy also placed by the British? Or indeed being convicted in prison for nearly a decade?

 

[Itachi]

All you need is some common sense and some basic knowlege. India claims to be secular, its not. Hindus in India have voted for an extremist party, this is a fact, take what you like about their own mindset for doing this. We know on here, the BJP/RSS supporters & what their views are.

You're confusing yourself, the blasphemy law was placed by the British.

Again, Pakistan is a Sufi nation ,nothing like the Taliban. They are only supported because they have a right to self defence & Pakistan is safer without having puppets of US or paid terrorists of India in charge. Its as simple this, please try not to make this more complicated because you really are trying hard to find a link.

learn the definition of secular.

If hindus vote for hindus, it doesn't mean the entity is non secular.

the secularism of India belongs to the Indian constitution which has separated religion and state since it's inception.

If you want to point out non secularism in India, you'll have to point out the constitution of India which discriminates people on basis of religion.

On subject, it's mostly overseas Pakistanis which support them in my pov. They have nothing to lose and hence it's easier for them to support extremism. But scenario changes for native Pakistanis.

 

[Local.Dada]

learn the definition of secular.

If hindus vote for hindus, it doesn't mean the entity is non secular.

the secularism of India belongs to the Indian constitution which has separated religion and state since it's inception.

If you want to point out non secularism in India, you'll have to point out the constitution of India which discriminates people on basis of religion.

On subject, it's mostly overseas Pakistanis which support them in my pov. They have nothing to lose and hence it's easier for them to support extremism. But scenario changes for native Pakistanis.

What Pakistanis don’t realize is before even Taliban gets to India and shift their focus to non-Muslims they will first target their own who don’t adhere to their interpretation of Islam. For Ghazwa-e-Hind the route has always been present day Pakistan, that is why they have missiles named after Afghan origin people.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

learn the definition of secular.

If hindus vote for hindus, it doesn't mean the entity is non secular.

the secularism of India belongs to the Indian constitution which has separated religion and state since it's inception.

If you want to point out non secularism in India, you'll have to point out the constitution of India which discriminates people on basis of religion.

On subject, it's mostly overseas Pakistanis which support them in my pov. They have nothing to lose and hence it's easier for them to support extremism. But scenario changes for native Pakistanis.

Can you help me understand.

Is having a beef ban secular?
Is having separate marriage laws secular?

 

[Itachi]

Can you help me understand.

Is having a beef ban secular?
Is having separate marriage laws secular?

1. It's not only beef ban but cattle slaughter ban where supreme court has already given it's verdict. You should read more about the Supreme Court verdict.

2. The separate marriage law comes from right to religion. Constitution has given rights to the people of various religion to practice their customs and if Muslims could marry 4 wives by Islam, then Indian constitution will allow it NOT because Islam says so but because article 25 permits a Muslim to exercise Islam.

 

[Technics 1210]

Most people don't understand what secularism is, mainly Indians who pretend their country is secular. It's not.

Secularism is the separation of the state and religion. Meaning religion doesn't (or rather should't) play a role in defining how a secular country is governed.

India has a right-wing Hindu nationalist/terrorist in power who governs on the basis of Hindu values. Pakistan on the other hand doesn't pretend to be secular, because it's not. It's a religious state, just like Isreal, where religion plays a fundamental role.

What these Hindutava sympathisers need to learn is the word - pluralism - which is where multiple religions/ideologies can co-exist under one nation - this is far from the case in India. Add caste based discrimination, and it propels India's pretentious values to a whole new level of intolerance.

Thus asking why Pakistanis support the Taliban is the same as asking why Indians support, and crucially voted, for a Hindutva terrorist.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

What Pakistanis don’t realize is before even Taliban gets to India and shift their focus to non-Muslims they will first target their own who don’t adhere to their interpretation of Islam. For Ghazwa-e-Hind the route has always been present day Pakistan, that is why they have missiles named after Afghan origin people.

1,000 plus years ago the route started from whats now called Afghanistan. However as Muslim dynasties established themselves in the subcontinent it expanded from their.

And Ghazwa-e-Hind simply meant Muslim rule of the subcontinent. It didnt matter if it was a liberal Muslim King like Akbar, or a more religious one like Aurangzeb.

Today Outside of a fringe no one believes in Ghazwa-e-Hind. And the Only way Ghazwa-e-Hind happens is if somehow India becomes a Muslim majority state.

However dont worry their is no mass Muslim conspiracy to take over India. Love Jihad is not true. Muslim birth rate is decreasing. I have never heard of one person in real life mention Ghazwa-e-Hind.

missiles named after Afghan origin people.

Historically Afghan refers to Pashtun people. Mohammad Ghori for example was not an Afghan.

Afghan refers to someone or something from Afghanistan, in particular a citizen of that country. The pre-nation state, historical ethnonym Afghan was used to refer to a member of the Pashtuns.

 

[Local.Dada]

1,



Historically Afghan refers to Pashtun people. Mohammad Ghori for example was not an Afghan.

The irony is the power center of Pakistan is concentrated in Punjab and to some extent Sindh
and run by people of that origin.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

Its a fair point although I genuinley don't believe the public believes in those views either.

The Mullahs are able to weaponise their views using highly loaded language like 'kufr' 'murtad' 'blasphemer' etc and their isn't the right level of nuanced debate to counteract these statements. Nor is it worth it....if you have a small minority of people thinking a small action can lead to death then I think that the majority of the public just put their head down and let the rabble rousers get on with it.

The democractic governments are always weak and insecure to a level that in a highly weaponized scenario with such loaded language (blasphemy)the opposition will also make it a matter of religion not because they believe it is so but because its politically convenient to do so.

Its a lose lose scenario currently but its shifting ever so slightly.

It wasn't only the Mullahs. The secular parties did not want Atif Mian to be a member of the economic committee either. They politicized it to score points against Imran Khan. The reason that worked was because alot of people in Pakistan dont like Ahmadis, and IK had to cave under the pressure. The secular parties are more responsible for this than the Mullahs.

Not to mention it was a secular party which declared Ahmadis non Muslim in the first place.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

The irony is the power center of Pakistan is concentrated in Punjab and to some extent Sindh
and run by people of that origin.

Not sure why its ironic. Thats where the majority of people live, so it makes sense.

Mohammad Ghori was like Babur a foreigner to the subcontinent. However his slave sons created the Delhi Sultanate, and subsequently assimilated into the subcontinent. No different than the Mughals. You only find it ironic as you view these people as perpetual foreigners, regardless of how many generations they were their.

This would be the equivalent of people of England viewing the Kings of French descent as perpetual foreigners just because the first one conquered the land. I mean that's how you become a King, either you or one of your ancestors conquer a land.

The irony is the power center of Pakistan is concentrated in Punjab and to some extent Sindh
and run by people of that origin.

Do you realize millions of people in Punjab and Sindh are of Pashtun and Baloch descent? They have assimilated into Punjabi and Sindhi culture, and identify as Punjabi and Sindhi, but you can tell their origin by their surname.

Same way their are millions of people in Punjab and Sindh who are of Rajput, Jatt, etc descent.

These people dont care of conflicts that happened centuries ago. In the same family their can be a person with surname of Chauhan, and another person with surname of Ghori. They would all identify as Punjabi/Sindhi first, then the baradari/zaat comes afterwards. And alot of people no longer care about baradari/zaat anymore.

Just to give some examples of how you can tell:

Usman Buzdar - CM of Punjab is of Baloch descent
Bilawaz Zardari - Leader of PPP is of Baloch descent.
Imran Khan Niazi - PM of Pakistan is of Pathan descent.

 

[Sirris]

95% of pro-Taliban comments on Twitter are by accounts based in Pakistan.

A bit embarrassing and only further strengthens the image of Pakistan being the force behind Taliban

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

95% of pro-Taliban comments on Twitter are by accounts based in Pakistan.

A bit embarrassing and only further strengthens the image of Pakistan being the force behind Taliban

Kandahar was the birthplace of the Taliban and that is very much Afghan territory, so this propaganda that Pakistan is the force behind Taliban needs to be quashed. It's like saying Pakistan has been more successful in conquering Afghanistan than any other superpower including NATO and USSR.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

95% of pro-Taliban comments on Twitter are by accounts based in Pakistan.

A bit embarrassing and only further strengthens the image of Pakistan being the force behind Taliban

Their is a saying that the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

So some Pakistanis are happy that a country they perceive as an enemy is about to go into civil war. This doesn't prove that Pakistan is supporting them.

 

[Itachi]

Their is a saying that the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

So some Pakistanis are happy that a country they perceive as an enemy is about to go into civil war. This doesn't prove that Pakistan is supporting them.

logic flaw is there. The support is there but only intention is different even if I take your hypothesis.

If I am supporting you only to beat you up later, even then it simply means I am supporting you right at that moment though I have ill motive for you for future.

 

[Local.Dada]

Their is a saying that the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

So some Pakistanis are happy that a country they perceive as an enemy is about to go into civil war. This doesn't prove that Pakistan is supporting them.

In that case doesn’t being friends with enemy India have relatively more benefits for Pakistan in terms of trade and other cultural exchange like sports, arts than cheerleading for the Taliban.

The saying that would work better is “Hum to doobenge sanam……”