I hate all muslims except the Talibans

Author: Best.Korea

Posts

Total: 140
#121
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,821
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@vi_777


Stop skirting the question.
So then what religion and what interpretation of what book are they acting on?
"They are acting on their own flawed understanding of Islam, not on the Qur'an or authentic teachings of the Prophet Muhammad
So the religion that these "individuals" are getting their ideas from is Islam.  And the book they interpret (wrongly or rightly) is the Quran?  Yes?
u mean the muslims?

Well are the "individuals" Muslim?
A Muslim is someone who submits to the will of Allah and follows the teachings of Islam

Ok. But that wasn't what I asked. 
I asked:  Are the "individuals" you spoke about HERE>>  #18 that kill someone for , say writing a novel, Muslim or not Muslim?

if they do believe ALLAH is their only creator, yes they r muslims,

Well then  if they claim that they believe in Allah and that Muhammad is his prophet then they are Muslim. And their teaching comes directly from the Quran. Right?


well yes, but don't take it to the point that their teachings r the rzn for all this.
But you have agreed that "their teachings " come from the Quran. 
You can't say on the one hand that "these individuals" that claim that they believe in Allah and that Muhammad is his prophet  are Muslim and their teachings come from the Quran but on the other say -  the Quran is not the reason for their actions.  You are trying to have it both ways. 

They are either Muslims that do follow the teachings of the Quran to the letter or there are other types of Muslims that don't, which means they are not Muslims although they insist they are  Muslims because they believe in Allah and that Muhammad is his prophet  , which is it?
#122
tigerlord
tigerlord's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 93
1
3
8
tigerlord's avatar
tigerlord
1
3
8
-->
@Best.Korea
Surah Al-A'raf (7:156) – Arabic & English Translation:

وَاكْتُبْ لَنَا فِي هَٰذِهِ ٱلدُّنْيَا حَسَنَةًۭ وَفِى ٱلْـَٔاخِرَةِ إِنَّا هُدْنَآ إِلَيْكَ ۚ قَالَ عَذَابِىٓ أُصِيبُ بِهِۦ مَنْ أَشَآءُ ۖ وَرَحْمَتِى وَسِعَتْ كُلَّ شَىْءٍۢ ۚ فَسَأَكْتُبُهَا لِلَّذِينَ يَتَّقُونَ وَيُؤْتُونَ ٱلزَّكَوٰةَ وَٱلَّذِينَ هُم بِـَٔايَٰتِنَا يُؤْمِنُونَ

"And ordain for us good in this world and in the Hereafter. Indeed, we have turned to You." (Allah) said, "My punishment—I afflict with it whom I will, but My mercy encompasses all things. So I will decree it for those who fear Me, give zakah, and those who believe in Our signs."


#123
vi_777
vi_777's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 101
0
3
6
vi_777's avatar
vi_777
0
3
6
-->
@Shila
research indicates that Muslims are often portrayed negatively in news media. Studies have found that media coverage disproportionately associates Muslims with violence and terrorism, contributing to widespread stereotypes and biases.
For instance, a 2019 study published in Justice Quarterly revealed that terrorist attacks committed by Muslim perpetrators received 357% more U.S. media coverage than those by non-Muslims, despite the higher number of attacks by non-Muslim extremists during the same period.

In the United Kingdom, a 2024 report by the Centre for Media Monitoring highlighted that GB News mentioned "Muslims" or "Islam" over 17,000 times in two years, accounting for nearly 50% of all such references across UK news channels. The report criticized the network for its overwhelmingly negative portrayal of Muslims, suggesting it could fuel community tensions and contribute to civil unrest.
These patterns of media representation can perpetuate stereotypes and contribute to Islamophobia, underscoring the need for more balanced and nuanced reporting on Muslim communities.
this is a contributing factor as well to what ppl think of muslims and islam
#124
vi_777
vi_777's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 101
0
3
6
vi_777's avatar
vi_777
0
3
6
-->
@Stephen
who in the Islamic hierarchy  can issue a Fatwa?
That's generally the Mufti.
#125
vi_777
vi_777's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 101
0
3
6
vi_777's avatar
vi_777
0
3
6
-->
@Stephen


Stop skirting the question.
So then what religion and what interpretation of what book are they acting on?
"They are acting on their own flawed understanding of Islam, not on the Qur'an or authentic teachings of the Prophet Muhammad
So the religion that these "individuals" are getting their ideas from is Islam.  And the book they interpret (wrongly or rightly) is the Quran?  Yes?
u mean the muslims?

Well are the "individuals" Muslim?
A Muslim is someone who submits to the will of Allah and follows the teachings of Islam

Ok. But that wasn't what I asked. 
I asked:  Are the "individuals" you spoke about HERE>>  #18 that kill someone for , say writing a novel, Muslim or not Muslim?

if they do believe ALLAH is their only creator, yes they r muslims,

Well then  if they claim that they believe in Allah and that Muhammad is his prophet then they are Muslim. And their teaching comes directly from the Quran. Right?


well yes, but don't take it to the point that their teachings r the rzn for all this.
But you have agreed that "their teachings " come from the Quran. 
You can't say on the one hand that "these individuals" that claim that they believe in Allah and that Muhammad is his prophet  are Muslim and their teachings come from the Quran but on the other say -  the Quran is not the reason for their actions.  You are trying to have it both ways. 

The flaw in this logic is the assumption that following the Qur'an "to the letter" automatically leads to violence.
1. Misinterpretation vs. True Teaching:
Believing in Allah and Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) makes one a Muslim, but understanding and practicing the Qur'an correctly defines their faithfulness. People can claim to follow any book, but their actions reflect their interpretation, not necessarily the book’s true teachings. For example, if a doctor misuses a medical textbook and harms a patient, is the book at fault or the doctor's misuse?
2. Literalism ≠ Correct Practice:
The Qur'an, like any scripture, has context, principles, and ethics. Those who cherry-pick verses without context distort its message. Saying their actions are "from the Qur'an" is like blaming science textbooks for nuclear weapons when science is about advancement, not destruction.
3. The Existence of Extremists in Every Group:
Every religion or ideology has individuals who commit atrocities in its name. Judging the whole by a few is a fallacy. If someone claims they are following democracy but engages in tyranny, is democracy to blame or their abuse of it?
4. Are They Muslims or Not?
They may be Muslims by belief, but their actions are against Islamic teachings. Just as a corrupt cop is still a cop by title but violates the law he swore to uphold. Islam prohibits the killing of innocent people (Qur'an 5:32).
So, your choice isn’t between ‘Qur’an causes violence’ or ‘They aren’t Muslims.’ It’s between ‘ignorance and misuse’ vs. ‘proper understanding and practice.’
not evry1 is perfect, since we all are humans.

They are either Muslims that do follow the teachings of the Quran to the letter or there are other types of Muslims that don't, which means they are not Muslims although they insist they are  Muslims because they believe in Allah and that Muhammad is his prophet  , which is it?
They are Muslims because they believe in Allah and that Muhammad (PBUH) is His prophet, which defines their faith. However, their actions do not represent the teachings of the Qur'an; rather, they are a result of misinterpretation, ignorance, or extremism. Faith makes them Muslim, but actions determine if they are good or bad Muslims.

  1. Who is a Muslim?
    In Islam, a Muslim is defined by belief (Shahada):
    • Belief in one God (Allah)
    • Belief that Muhammad (PBUH) is His messenger
    This belief makes someone a Muslim, regardless of their actions.
  2. Faith vs. Practice:
    • Islam has core teachings (Qur'an and Hadith), but interpretation varies.
    • A Muslim can sin, commit crimes, or act against Islamic teachings, but this does not remove their identity as a Muslim. It makes them a sinful Muslim.
  3. Following Teachings 'to the Letter' Misconception:
    • The Qur'an prohibits harming innocents (Qur'an 5:32: "Whoever kills a soul…it is as if he has killed all mankind").
    • Extremists claim to follow the Qur'an but cherry-pick verses out of context. This is not following it to the letter; it’s distorting it.
  4. Good Muslim vs. Bad Muslim:
    • A good Muslim follows Islam's moral teachings—peace, justice, and compassion.
    • A bad Muslim may believe but act against those teachings, driven by ignorance, hatred, or personal motives.
  5. The Qur'an is Not the Reason—Interpretation Is:
    Just as people misuse laws, ideologies, or science for harm, some misuse religion. The fault lies in how they interpret it, not in what it teaches.
some more ref.
  1. Christianity (Crusades, Inquisitions):
    • During the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition, many atrocities were committed in the name of Christianity.
    • The Bible teaches love and peace (Matthew 5:44: "Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you").
    • The actions of those people were due to political motives and misinterpretation, not the teachings of Christ.
  2. Hinduism (Caste-Based Violence):
    • Some have justified discrimination and violence based on caste in the name of Hinduism.
    • However, Hindu scriptures like the Bhagavad Gita emphasize equality and selfless action (Bhagavad Gita 5:18: “The wise see the same [spirit] in a learned scholar, a cow, an elephant, a dog, and an outcaste”).
    • The caste violence came from societal distortions, not the core teachings.
  3. Buddhism (Rohingya Crisis in Myanmar):
    • Buddhism promotes peace and non-violence. However, some Buddhist nationalist groups in Myanmar were involved in persecuting the Rohingya Muslims.
    • This contradicts Buddhist teachings (Dhammapada 5: "Hatred does not cease by hatred, but only by love; this is the eternal rule").
    • The violence stemmed from politics and nationalism, not Buddhism.
so.....
  • Religion is like a constitution—meant to guide with principles. But individuals can misuse or break those principles.
  • So, someone can be a Muslim (or Christian, Hindu, or Buddhist) and still act against their religion's teachings due to their own flaws or agendas.
  • A doctor who causes harm through malpractice does not invalidate medicine.
  • A citizen who breaks the law doesn’t represent the constitution.
  • Likewise, a Muslim who commits evil does not represent the Qur'an.

#126
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,821
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@vi_777

Stop skirting the question.
So then what religion and what interpretation of what book are they acting on?
"They are acting on their own flawed understanding of Islam, not on the Qur'an or authentic teachings of the Prophet Muhammad
So the religion that these "individuals" are getting their ideas from is Islam.  And the book they interpret (wrongly or rightly) is the Quran?  Yes?
u mean the muslims?

Well are the "individuals" Muslim?
A Muslim is someone who submits to the will of Allah and follows the teachings of Islam

Ok. But that wasn't what I asked. 
I asked:  Are the "individuals" you spoke about HERE>>  #18 that kill someone for , say writing a novel, Muslim or not Muslim?

if they do believe ALLAH is their only creator, yes they r muslims,

Well then  if they claim that they believe in Allah and that Muhammad is his prophet then they are Muslim. And their teaching comes directly from the Quran. Right?


well yes, but don't take it to the point that their teachings r the rzn for all this.
But you have agreed that "their teachings " come from the Quran. 
You can't say on the one hand that "these individuals" that claim that they believe in Allah and that Muhammad is his prophet  are Muslim and their teachings come from the Quran but on the other say -  the Quran is not the reason for their actions.  You are trying to have it both ways. 

The flaw in this logic is the assumption that following the Qur'an "to the letter" automatically leads to violence.






There is no "flaw" there at all. They are either Muslims that follow the Quran to the letter Or there are Muslims that follow their misinterpretation of the Quran. which is it?
#127
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,821
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@vi_777

idk if one would actually kill sm1 for writing a novel? do u know about anything like this?
Do you know what a Fatwa is ? 
yes.

And who in the Islamic hierarchy  can issue a Fatwa?

That's generally the Mufti.

 Ok, so when the Ayatollah Khamenei  of the Islamic State of Iran issued a Fatwa ordering the Death of Novelist Salman Rushdie was he acting in accordance with Islamic Law and its teachings?

#128
vi_777
vi_777's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 101
0
3
6
vi_777's avatar
vi_777
0
3
6
-->
@Stephen
There is no "flaw" there at all. They are either Muslims that follow the Quran to the letter Or there are Muslims that follow their misinterpretation of the Quran. which is it?
A Muslim is defined by belief in Allah and Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). However, following the Qur'an "to the letter" is about correct interpretation. Misinterpreting or misusing the Qur'an does not invalidate Islam; it reflects personal distortion. Just as a citizen who breaks the law doesn't represent the constitution, a Muslim who commits violence doesn't represent Islam. Extremists may misuse religion for their agenda, but their actions don’t reflect the true teachings of Islam, which promote peace and justice. Misinterpretation is the flaw.

to put it simply, there r Muslims that do follow the quran to the letter, yet there r some who, despite believing, don't really follow it all. there is both good and evil.
if there is some instance where the followers strictly adhere to teachings n all, could u specify? n it is not always necessarily misinterpretation, those ppl may know what Islam tells them to do in such a situation, yet they might confine themselves to their emotions n all. 
u can't hv either complete perfection or imperfection.
#129
vi_777
vi_777's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 101
0
3
6
vi_777's avatar
vi_777
0
3
6
-->
@Stephen
 Ok, so when the Ayatollah Khamenei  of the Islamic State of Iran issued a Fatwa ordering the Death of Novelist Salman Rushdie was he acting in accordance with Islamic Law and its teachings?
  1. Authority in Islam: Islamic law is derived from the Qur'an, Hadith (sayings of the Prophet Muhammad), and scholarly interpretations (fiqh). However, the authority of any individual leader, including Ayatollah Khamenei, to issue a fatwa (Islamic legal ruling) is based on their position and the specific school of thought they represent. While a fatwa is an opinion on religious matters, it isn't universally binding unless accepted by the broader Islamic community or scholars of that tradition.
  2. Fatwa Against Rushdie: The fatwa issued against Salman Rushdie was primarily based on his novel The Satanic Verses, which many Muslims found blasphemous. Ayatollah Khamenei, as a leader of the Shia branch of Islam, issued the fatwa, which called for Rushdie’s death for insulting Islam and the Prophet Muhammad. However, it is important to note that not all Muslims or Islamic scholars agree with this fatwa. Many scholars and Muslims around the world do not see such rulings as reflective of the true principles of Islam.
  3. Islamic Teachings on Violence: The Qur'an and the Hadith do not call for the death of individuals who express criticism of Islam. In fact, the Qur'an emphasizes forgiveness and peace. For instance, Qur'an 5:32 states, "Whoever kills a soul… it is as if he has killed all of humanity." Islam historically has had diverse interpretations, and many scholars argue that any interpretation calling for violence against individuals for blasphemy is a misapplication of Islamic teachings.
  4. Misinterpretation of Islamic Law: Many scholars argue that the fatwa against Rushdie is a misinterpretation of Islamic law, using selective readings of certain texts without considering the broader context of mercy, peace, and dialogue emphasized in the Qur'an. The decision to call for Rushdie’s death is not a consensus view among Muslims and is often seen as politically motivated rather than religiously mandated.
protests by muslims;
  1. Muslim Scholars and Critics: Several prominent Islamic scholars and clerics, particularly from the Sunni tradition, rejected the fatwa, arguing that it was a misinterpretation of Islamic principles. They pointed out that Islam does not sanction the killing of individuals for expressing opinions or criticism. These scholars emphasized the values of dialogue, compassion, and peace that are inherent in the teachings of the Qur'an. Some even argued that such an extreme ruling went against the true spirit of Islam, which promotes tolerance and forgiveness.
  2. Muslims Worldwide: Beyond scholars, many ordinary Muslims worldwide also opposed the fatwa. They expressed concerns over the implications of such rulings, particularly the precedent it set for freedom of expression. While many Muslims may have disagreed with Rushdie's work, they did not support the violent response advocated by the fatwa. Many Muslims viewed this as an abuse of religious authority and a misuse of Islam for political gain.
  3. International Muslim Organizations: Various international Muslim organizations, including those representing Shia communities, distanced themselves from the fatwa. They clarified that it did not reflect the views of the entire Muslim community. Some organizations also called for peaceful resolution through dialogue rather than violent or extreme measures.
  4. Political and Social Opposition: Within Iran and in other Muslim-majority countries, some groups also criticized the fatwa for its negative consequences on the image of Islam in the global community. They feared it would contribute to the rise of Islamophobia and deepen misunderstandings about the religion, especially in the West.
Islamic teachings generally advocate for peace, justice, and respect for life. Some key Quranic verses that promote these values include:
  • Qur'an 5:32: "Whoever kills a soul... it is as if he has killed all of humanity."
  • Qur'an 2:256: "There is no compulsion in religion."
  • Hadith (Sahih Muslim): "Whoever harms a non-Muslim citizen will have me as his opponent on the Day of Judgment."
In conclusion, while the fatwa against Salman Rushdie was issued by a prominent leader, it faced opposition from various segments of the Muslim world. Many Muslims, both scholars and ordinary people, denounced the fatwa as an unjustified and extreme interpretation that did not align with the broader teachings of Islam, which emphasize peace, tolerance, and the value of human life.

#130
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,821
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@vi_777
 Ok, so when the Ayatollah Khamenei  of the Islamic State of Iran issued a Fatwa ordering the Death of Novelist Salman Rushdie was he acting in accordance with Islamic Law and its teachings?

  1. Authority in Islam: Islamic law is derived from the Qur'an, Hadith (sayings of the Prophet Muhammad), and scholarly interpretations (fiqh). However, the authority of any individual leader, including Ayatollah Khamenei, to issue a fatwa (Islamic legal ruling) is based on their position and the specific school of thought they represent. While a fatwa is an opinion on religious matters, it isn't universally binding unless accepted by the broader Islamic community or scholars of that tradition.


So Ayatollah Khamenei was acting in accordance with Islamic law and the teaching of the Quran, when he ordered the death of Salman Rushdie the Novelist then?  Yes or no.




#131
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,142
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
-->
@Best.Korea
- Cool. Be wary to conflate Afghan Taliban & Pakistan Taliban. The former are Sunni traditional resistance fighters who defeated the US & banned Salafis like ISIS. The latter are Salafi terrorists funded by the US like ISIS. The reason for the confusing naming should be pretty obvious... To be able to put up headlines such as "Taliban bombed a school"...
Topic's author
#132
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 388
Posts: 12,206
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Yassine
Be wary to conflate Afghan Taliban & Pakistan Taliban. The former are Sunni traditional resistance fighters who defeated the US & banned Salafis like ISIS. The latter are Salafi terrorists funded by the US like ISIS. The reason for the confusing naming should be pretty obvious... To be able to put up headlines such as "Taliban bombed a school"...
Afghanistan Talibans are great warriors, but I dont know much about Pakistan Talibans.
#133
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,253
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Yassine
- Cool. Be wary to conflate Afghan Taliban & Pakistan Taliban. The former are Sunni traditional resistance fighters who defeated the US & banned Salafis like ISIS. The latter are Salafi terrorists funded by the US like ISIS. The reason for the confusing naming should be pretty obvious... To be able to put up headlines such as "Taliban bombed a school"...


For nearly 20 years, the Afghan Taliban fought a sophisticated and sustained revolt, confronted – at one point – by a United States-led coalition of more than 40 countries in Afghanistan. In that period, Taliban leaders and fighters found sanctuary inside Pakistan across the regions bordering Afghanistan. Taliban leaders also formed a presence in, and links with, major cities in Pakistan such as Quetta, Peshawar and later, Karachi.

Many Taliban leaders and many fighters are graduates of Pakistani Islamic religious schools, including the Darul Uloom Haqqania, where Mullah Muhammad Omar, the founder of the Taliban movement, reportedly studied. In Pakistan, the Taliban found an ecosystem fostering organic relationships across the spectrum of Pakistani society, enabling the group to reorganise and initiate a lethal uprising that began around 2003. Without Pakistan’s support and sanctuary, the successful uprising by the Taliban would have been highly unlikely.

#134
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,142
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
-->
@Shila
For nearly 20 years, the Afghan Taliban fought a sophisticated and sustained revolt, confronted – at one point – by a United States-led coalition of more than 40 countries in Afghanistan. In that period, Taliban leaders and fighters found sanctuary inside Pakistan across the regions bordering Afghanistan. Taliban leaders also formed a presence in, and links with, major cities in Pakistan such as Quetta, Peshawar and later, Karachi.

Many Taliban leaders and many fighters are graduates of Pakistani Islamic religious schools, including the Darul Uloom Haqqania, where Mullah Muhammad Omar, the founder of the Taliban movement, reportedly studied. In Pakistan, the Taliban found an ecosystem fostering organic relationships across the spectrum of Pakistani society, enabling the group to reorganise and initiate a lethal uprising that began around 2003. Without Pakistan’s support and sanctuary, the successful uprising by the Taliban would have been highly unlikely.
- This is barely any truth to this. I have no energy to write an essay about all the histories of these things. What I can say is that this is a world you or the average American know nothing about except the talking points of the CIA concocted narrative. It got to a point where even the liars are starting to believe their own stories; which is, for intelligence purposes, a trap impossible to escape. A good example of this is the utter bewilderment of all US correspondents & officials over the fall of Assad regime. So many layers of so many lies everybody forgot what was really going on.
#135
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,253
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Yassine
For nearly 20 years, the Afghan Taliban fought a sophisticated and sustained revolt, confronted – at one point – by a United States-led coalition of more than 40 countries in Afghanistan. In that period, Taliban leaders and fighters found sanctuary inside Pakistan across the regions bordering Afghanistan. Taliban leaders also formed a presence in, and links with, major cities in Pakistan such as Quetta, Peshawar and later, Karachi.

Many Taliban leaders and many fighters are graduates of Pakistani Islamic religious schools, including the Darul Uloom Haqqania, where Mullah Muhammad Omar, the founder of the Taliban movement, reportedly studied. In Pakistan, the Taliban found an ecosystem fostering organic relationships across the spectrum of Pakistani society, enabling the group to reorganise and initiate a lethal uprising that began around 2003. Without Pakistan’s support and sanctuary, the successful uprising by the Taliban would have been highly unlikely.
- This is barely any truth to this. I have no energy to write an essay about all the histories of these things. What I can say is that this is a world you or the average American know nothing about except the talking points of the CIA concocted narrative. It got to a point where even the liars are starting to believe their own stories; which is, for intelligence purposes, a trap impossible to escape. A good example of this is the utter bewilderment of all US correspondents & officials over the fall of Assad regime. So many layers of so many lies everybody forgot what was really going on.
The Taliban are a predominantly Pashtun, Islamic fundamentalist group that returned to power in Afghanistan in 2021 after waging a twenty-year insurgency.

What is the relationship between Pakistan and the Taliban?
During the Taliban insurgency, the Taliban has received substantial financial and logistical backing from Pakistan, which remains a significant source of support. Nonetheless, Pakistan's support for the Taliban is not without risks, as it involves playing a precarious and delicate game.

Pakistan’s Support for Survival and Revival of the Taliban

Pakistan has been intimately associated with the Taliban since its birth in the mid-1990s. The ISI provided support to Mullah Omar when he founded the organisation in Kandahar. It had trained Omar even earlier in the 1980s at one of its training camps for the mujahedin that fought the Soviet occupation of the country. Pakistan was one of only three countries that recognised the Taliban’s Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan as the legitimate government of Afghanistan in the late 1990s (Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates were the other two). By 2001, Pakistan was providing the Taliban regime in Kabul with hundreds of advisers and experts to run its tanks, aircraft and artillery, thousands of Pakistani Pashtuns to man its infantry and small units of its Special Services Group commandoes to help in combat with the Northern Alliance. Pakistan provided the oil needed to run the Taliban’s war machine. All of this despite a half dozen United Nations Security Council resolutions calling on all countries to cease aid to the Taliban because it was hosting al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. According to the 9/11 Commission, the ISI had mid-wifed the alliance between Mullah Omar and bin Laden, so it was no surprise that Pakistan ignored the UN.

#136
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,142
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
-->
@Shila
The Taliban are a predominantly Pashtun, Islamic fundamentalist group that returned to power in Afghanistan in 2021 after waging a twenty-year insurgency.

What is the relationship between Pakistan and the Taliban?
During the Taliban insurgency, the Taliban has received substantial financial and logistical backing from Pakistan, which remains a significant source of support. Nonetheless, Pakistan's support for the Taliban is not without risks, as it involves playing a precarious and delicate game.

Pakistan’s Support for Survival and Revival of the Taliban

Pakistan has been intimately associated with the Taliban since its birth in the mid-1990s. The ISI provided support to Mullah Omar when he founded the organisation in Kandahar. It had trained Omar even earlier in the 1980s at one of its training camps for the mujahedin that fought the Soviet occupation of the country. Pakistan was one of only three countries that recognised the Taliban’s Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan as the legitimate government of Afghanistan in the late 1990s (Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates were the other two). By 2001, Pakistan was providing the Taliban regime in Kabul with hundreds of advisers and experts to run its tanks, aircraft and artillery, thousands of Pakistani Pashtuns to man its infantry and small units of its Special Services Group commandoes to help in combat with the Northern Alliance. Pakistan provided the oil needed to run the Taliban’s war machine. All of this despite a half dozen United Nations Security Council resolutions calling on all countries to cease aid to the Taliban because it was hosting al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. According to the 9/11 Commission, the ISI had mid-wifed the alliance between Mullah Omar and bin Laden, so it was no surprise that Pakistan ignored the UN.
- Ok. You don't have to keep copy/pasting. You can't learn History in a day...
#137
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,253
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Yassine
The Taliban are a predominantly Pashtun, Islamic fundamentalist group that returned to power in Afghanistan in 2021 after waging a twenty-year insurgency.

What is the relationship between Pakistan and the Taliban?
During the Taliban insurgency, the Taliban has received substantial financial and logistical backing from Pakistan, which remains a significant source of support. Nonetheless, Pakistan's support for the Taliban is not without risks, as it involves playing a precarious and delicate game.

Pakistan’s Support for Survival and Revival of the Taliban

Pakistan has been intimately associated with the Taliban since its birth in the mid-1990s. The ISI provided support to Mullah Omar when he founded the organisation in Kandahar. It had trained Omar even earlier in the 1980s at one of its training camps for the mujahedin that fought the Soviet occupation of the country. Pakistan was one of only three countries that recognised the Taliban’s Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan as the legitimate government of Afghanistan in the late 1990s (Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates were the other two). By 2001, Pakistan was providing the Taliban regime in Kabul with hundreds of advisers and experts to run its tanks, aircraft and artillery, thousands of Pakistani Pashtuns to man its infantry and small units of its Special Services Group commandoes to help in combat with the Northern Alliance. Pakistan provided the oil needed to run the Taliban’s war machine. All of this despite a half dozen United Nations Security Council resolutions calling on all countries to cease aid to the Taliban because it was hosting al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. According to the 9/11 Commission, the ISI had mid-wifed the alliance between Mullah Omar and bin Laden, so it was no surprise that Pakistan ignored the UN.
- Ok. You don't have to keep copy/pasting. You can't learn History in a day...
That appears to be your problem. You don’t even know the Taliban in Pakistan are the same group that originated in Afghanistan.
#138
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,142
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
-->
@Shila
That appears to be your problem. You don’t even know the Taliban in Pakistan are the same group that originated in Afghanistan.
- No.

#139
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,253
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Yassine
That appears to be your problem. You don’t even know the Taliban in Pakistan are the same group that originated in Afghanistan.

- No.


The Taliban movement originated in Pashtun nationalism, and its ideological underpinnings are with that of broader Afghan society. The Taliban's roots lie in the religious schools of Kandahar and were influenced significantly by foreign support, particularly from Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, during the Soviet–Afghan War.
#140
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,142
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
-->
@Shila
The Taliban movement originated in Pashtun nationalism, and its ideological underpinnings are with that of broader Afghan society. The Taliban's roots lie in the religious schools of Kandahar and were influenced significantly by foreign support, particularly from Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, during the Soviet–Afghan War.
- Blahblah... The Taliban (Afghanistan) are a Maturidi Naqshbandi sect. I'll leave at that.