Once again, children are the target of violent extremists..

You said

Which makes it sound like that is your opinion.
Perhaps you meant:
The Taliban thought that they were not true believers (the children) I guess.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I figured that was implied and obvious. I guess not.

I have a hard time thinking that anyone really thought that I was saying that the children deserved to die. If they didn't think that then why is everyone being so quick to be offended?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

At least they claim to. I suspect that some of them might be political revolutionaries or opportunists of various kinds, and might not be as devoutly religious as they claim to be. But yeah, no doubt many of them are. That's the cause they are organized around.

It isn't just the Quran, it's the Hadiths too, the canonical traditions about what the Prophet said and did. Together, these are Islamic law's analogue of statute law. It has the authority of God's word and can never be repealed or changed, something that Muslims see as a virtue but I feel locks them into a permanent dark-ages mindset.

Then, since Islamic law has to be applied in countless real life situations where its application might be hazy, there's a huge body of what might be thought of as Islamic common law. This finds its expression in schools of Islamic jurisprudence, of which there are several. Finally, there are individual Islamic jurists whose legal decisions (fatwas) can differ quite a bit, depending on what Islamic legal principles they cite and find binding in particular situations.

So my impression is that the radical jihadists have equally radical jihadist clerics (in the Islamic context 'cleric' is often synonymous with 'jurist') cheering them on, justifying what they are doing and even issuing fatwas commanding it be done.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Thinking as a Tehreek-e-Taliban person: The parents of these children are hindering the work of Allah and harming our children. Why should we hesitate to kill them and teach those (%$#&*) a lesson?

 

They are fundamentalist Christians, not fundamentalist Jews. And why has God changed the times? He wants us to follow his word until judgement day, no matter what technology may emerge.

 

Just BTW, Ghenghis did not come to India. It was Timur and Nadir Shah and later, Ahmad Shah Abdali.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

i find you hatred of these people amusing. considering there is litle difference between your views on the justified use of violence and theirs. you both feel its appropriate to use violence against innocents to get what you want. they attack children and you condone genocide. your a hoot and half.

 

You get "fundamentalists" in every religion, and they all tend to be from the same cloth - mad as a hatter

 

My point is that fundamentalism is the same thing as following the religion to the letter. Moderation in religion is directly proportional to how much religion you choose to ignore.

 

I don't feel that the unavoidable deaths of some innocent people should preclude one from using force against mortal enemies, no. You can't fight any kind of war without such regrettable casualties, that's why war should be avoided if at all possible. I don't think your accusation of moral equivalency is very well thought out. It would equate Churchill with Hitler.

 

rely because i don't see a single difference between your neo-colonial mindset and these terrorist. you both believe in harm innocents to get what you want simply because you have the power to do so. you excused the use of the military force to steal land and resources in colonial ventures using the justification that they had the power to do so coupled with the belief that they were better than their victims. i fail to see any meaningful distinction in between that viewpoint and what these jackhats are doing. they have the power to do these things and they believe they are better than their victims. where's the difference. you can pretend you didn't say lesser peoples deserve to be killed off and conquered but you did and from my prospective i see no moral difference. its killing because you want something. the idea that your victim doesn't matter one whit in the face of your desire.

 

Pjdude: where, ever, has spidergoat expressed such an opinion? Support your accusation, please.

 

That seems a little simplistic.

 

Though I have not had many chances to correspond with Spidergoat but I agree in all-out war these things happen. This is a fact and he was only mentioning that. It does not mean that he supports it.

 

Seems that the so reffered to as Middleast, from American perspective is a messy area.. in the U.S.A Isreal is supported by an many who seek for isreal to be supported (meanwhile one wonders of the concern that U.S> civilians/citizens challenge U.S single and political integrity of U.S. citizens, and our Government). In the middle east anyone can pose problems insulting whomever they want and publicize fault upon whomever they choose for more lineage, it may be that aspect the continuance of disorder is relative to demand of a main language for the entirety of the middleeastern scape which Isreal is near. the issued problem of technological voyeurism often junks people whom may have chosen to bring solution to end such metrics, of coercion error, and blame. Practical reason says, o.k. ?why has the U.S government been challenged?by what seems to be a relative network of it's citizens behavioral psychology..then seems supporting Israel is kind of a main civilian interest in moneytown on the eastcoast there isn't commentary of any other place international of the U.S.A venturing for public support of itself. Civilan/domestic..technological voyeurism, is very delusive,,, with talents of voyuerism that the violence we see on .tv and in the movies purvey.:upon citizens/domestic and business whom prefer integrity to being chosen as subtle voyuers frikken marionettes. It's terrrrrrribLe.

 

It is an all-out war as far as Tehreek-e-Taliban-e-Pakistan (TTP - Waziristan terrorists, especially the Mehsud tribe) is concerned. Either they make the Pakistan army bow or the US drones and army will kill them all with big collateral damage.

"The Maseed, Masūd or Mehsūd or Mahsoud (Pashto: مسید، مهسود، مسود، محسود، مسعود‎), also spelled Masīd (Pashto: مسید‎), is a Karlanri Pashtun tribe inhabiting parts of the South Waziristan Agency in Federally Administered Tribal Areas of Pakistan. A number of Maseed lineages are settled in the Logar Province of Afghanistan, especially in Charkh District, Baraki barak and Muhammad Agha, but also in Wardak, Ghazni and Kunduz Provinces. The Maseeds inhabit the center and north of South Waziristan valley, surrounded on three sides by the Darwesh Wazirs, and being shut off by the Bettanis on the east from the Derajat and Bannu districts. Two Pashtun tribes, the Ahmadzai Wazirs and the Maseeds, inhabit and dominate South Waziristan. Within the heart of Maseed territory in South Waziristan lies the influential Ormur (Burki) tribe's stronghold of Kaniguram. The Ormurs are considered by other tribes of South Waziristan to be close brethren of the Maseeds due to marital and other ties and the fact that the Ormurs have lived in and controlled Kaniguram for over a thousand years.

The Maseeds usually pronounce their name Māsīd. They are divided into three great clans or subtribes, namely Manzai, Bahlolzai, and Shaman Khel. Maseeds usually call these Drei Māsīd, meaning the "Three Maseeds"(DREZE). Each tribe has his own Khan. In the words of Sir Olaf Caroe, who acted as the former governor of the British Indian Frontier, "The Maseed tribe are a people who can never even think of submitting to a foreign power." From 1860 to 1937, the English forces repeatedly attacked Maseed positions, but never got a foothold in the area."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahsud

 

There have been 300 arrests in Islamabad itself. http://indianexpress.com/article/wo...es-nab-over-300-terror-suspects-in-islamabad/