nov 17 and Afghanistan

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Fri Oct 26, 2001 4:56 pm

Originally posted by Yshania:
Unless I am mistaken there are modern day concessions to this rule though aren't there? For instance...pregnant women?

As you know I'm not a muslim and Fas will surely explain this better than I can do, but as I understand, children, pregnant women, ill people and everybody else that might be harmed by fastening, are excluded from the fasting.

THE JAKER · Post by **THE JAKER** » Fri Oct 26, 2001 5:01 pm

As far as bombing during Ramadan, I would say to stop, although I think this is a spin/PR war anyway, and so if the US keeps bombing, the anti US press will say "look, they have no respect for holy days" and if the US stops, the anti US press will say "the cowardly americans have admitted defeat" or "they have stopped bombing in a transparent attempt to create the impression that they care about the Muslim faith, but we know they don't"...etc etc etc...the US needs to hire an image consultant.

fable · Post by **fable** » Fri Oct 26, 2001 7:03 pm

I think the bombing should stop. The Taliban is demonstrably no longer in control of the country; bin Ladan is hiding out somewhere, and he was, after all, the original point of this whole exercise. It would appear that the old "Bomb 'em to kill a single human target" has once again not worked especially well.

Yshania · Post by **Yshania** » Sat Oct 27, 2001 1:10 am

@Fable - I agree. IMHO - it is overkill now, they should send in the crack troups and flush him out. It was interesting to note that the US Defence Secretary has either been misquoted originally or gone back on his statement that said he did not believe that we could aaprehend OBL. Blair believes this campaign will result in the death of OBL. My own opinion is the bombing will not achieve this. Here is an article...

[url="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/south_asia/newsid_1619000/1619503.stm"]Capturing Bin Laden[/url]

CM · Post by CM » Sat Oct 27, 2001 2:02 am

CE has made some very good guesses.

Pregnant women have never been allowed to fast, even if it is the first day or pregnacy or the last.
For the 9 month period they aren't allowed.
And 7 months after that.

If you are sick, you should not fast.
If you are traveling you should not fast.
Children who have not reached puberty do not have to fast and should not.
But those who do should fast till 12, this is a more of a cultural thing than actual law.
These have been established for the past 8 or 9 centuries.
My six year old nephew fast till 11 as he is young, but he loves doing it for some reason.

If you are in the arctic or scandinivian nations the rules are the same.
I have relatives in denmark who at points do fast more than 12 hours.

@CE i was leading but even more it was a pure set up to see how many people are aware of it.

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Sat Oct 27, 2001 5:13 am

Originally posted by Fas:
If you are in the arctic or scandinivian nations the rules are the same.
I have relatives in denmark who at points do fast more than 12 hours.

@CE i was leading but even more it was a pure set up to see how many people are aware of it.

A set up - heh

Because the axis of the earth is tilted, close to the poles, you have periods in the summer when there is sunshine 24 hours a day. The closer to the pole you come, the longer this all day sunshine period will be. Now, this is not a problem close to the south pole since nobody lives south of the Antarctic circle except a few research teams, and should some of them be muslims and Ramadam in is summer, they might be classified as travelling. But there are people living close to or above the Arctic circle. The sun will not set for several weeks. If Ramadan is in the summer, a muslim living in northen Sweden could surely not go without food and water for several weeks, the human body can only be without water less than a week without dying. So, what will they do, do you think?

(Perhaps I should go to the town of Kiruna and ask any muslims there...

)

[ 10-27-2001: Message edited by: C Elegans ]

nael · Post by **nael** » Sat Oct 27, 2001 7:34 am

my suitemate in college was muslim, and i think he took the easy way out, he just basically became a vampire. he slept all day and then ate all night. he might wake up once in a while and go to class for an hour or so then go back to bed.
of course, now that i think about it...didn't we all do that?

ThorinOakensfield · Post by **ThorinOakensfield** » Sat Oct 27, 2001 8:15 am

Originally posted by Fas:
CE has made some very good guesses.

Pregnant women have never been allowed to fast, even if it is the first day or pregnacy or the last.
For the 9 month period they aren't allowed.
And 7 months after that.

If you are sick, you should not fast.
If you are traveling you should not fast.
Children who have not reached puberty do not have to fast and should not.
But those who do should fast till 12, this is a more of a cultural thing than actual law.
These have been established for the past 8 or 9 centuries.
My six year old nephew fast till 11 as he is young, but he loves doing it for some reason.

If you are in the arctic or scandinivian nations the rules are the same.
I have relatives in denmark who at points do fast more than 12 hours.

@CE i was leading but even more it was a pure set up to see how many people are aware of it.

You don't have to fast. I don't. I did it once, but when you live in the heat of Pakistan, you give up especially if you're playing around in sun.
I got really sick(i was 10) by fasting, because it was hot and i was playing outside in 95 degree weather.

I also though more people should have known about Ramadan. Its been in the news alot, and Islam is the world's third or so largest religion.
Biggest would be Christianity, followed by Hindusim(maybe??), then i guess Islam. Not to sure, though.

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Sat Oct 27, 2001 1:14 pm

Originally posted by ThorinOakensfield:
I also though more people should have known about Ramadan. Its been in the news alot, and Islam is the world's third or so largest religion.
Biggest would be Christianity, followed by Hindusim(maybe??), then i guess Islam. Not to sure, though.

Largest is christianity, 2 billion, then islam 1.1 billion then hinduism 900 million. Those figures are when you count people by state religion though. For instance, in Germany and the UK about 90% of the population is counted as christians. Germany has 80 million people, the UK has 60. But polls show that 70-80% of the Germans and Brits don't believe in a god. Since many of the officially christian states are much more secularised than the most muslim states, my guess is that actual christian believers are a lot fewer than 2 billion.

CM · Post by CM » Sat Oct 27, 2001 11:22 pm

Originally posted by ThorinOakensfield:
You don't have to fast. I don't. I did it once, but when you live in the heat of Pakistan, you give up especially if you're playing around in sun.
I got really sick(i was 10) by fasting, because it was hot and i was playing outside in 95 degree weather.

I also though more people should have known about Ramadan. Its been in the news alot, and Islam is the world's third or so largest religion.
Biggest would be Christianity, followed by Hindusim(maybe??), then i guess Islam. Not to sure, though.

Thorin there i wouldn't agree.
Fasting is one of the 5 pillars of islam.
It is a must for those who can perform the task.
If you have a recuring problem like eplipse - spelled something along those lines - don't have to fast at all as they have a medical condition.
Those who don't choose to follow may do so if they wish.

@CE now i am no religion expert, but i do believe muslims don't live that up north in Sweden.
If they did, they better move down, what do they want with all that ice and reindeer???
What does anybody need with all that ice?

[ 10-28-2001: Message edited by: Fas ]

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Sun Oct 28, 2001 5:43 am

Originally posted by Fas:
@CE now i am no religion expert, but i do believe muslims don't live that up north in Sweden.
If they did, they better move down, what do they want with all that ice and reindeer???
What does anybody need with all that ice?

LOL

Well, it was more of a theoretical question, but I actually do know there are some muslim people living in the town of Luleå, and that's very close to the polar circle. You would have to eat all you need in about 30 minutes if Ramadan is in June. It never gets dark, but the sun at least go just behind the horizon for a short while.

AFAIK there are no muslims having reindeers, though

Regarding fasting, it seem like diffent people have a little different view on that. For instance, both in UAE and Morocco I've met muslim who views fasting more like Thorin, like a choice. Also I have met many muslims from different countries who don't pray 5 times a day. So just like with most religious, it seems to differ widely how much people pratice even if they have an inner belief.

CM · Post by CM » Sun Oct 28, 2001 8:32 am

Correct you have to pray 5 times a day, again that is a must on those who can perform the task. I don't pray 5 times a day, i am too lazy and forget half the time.
According to a moderate interpretation islam makes only 5 things complusory:

1. the oneness of Allah - God
2. Fasting
3. Zakt - or pay 2% of all your wealth to the poor
4. Haj - pilgirmage to Mecca
5. Namaz - prayersd 5 times a day.

All of these are complusory if you can perform them.
If you are ill or pregnant or have a recuring problem you don't have to perform any of these.

ThorinOakensfield · Post by **ThorinOakensfield** » Sun Oct 28, 2001 9:20 am

Originally posted by Fas:
Correct you have to pray 5 times a day, again that is a must on those who can perform the task. I don't pray 5 times a day, i am too lazy and forget half the time.
According to a moderate interpretation islam makes only 5 things complusory:

1. the oneness of Allah - God
2. Fasting
3. Zakt - or pay 2% of all your wealth to the poor
4. Haj - pilgirmage to Mecca
5. Namaz - prayersd 5 times a day.

All of these are complusory if you can perform them.
If you are ill or pregnant or have a recuring problem you don't have to perform any of these.

If you're poor you don't have to go to Mecca for Haj.

I don't fast or anything because i'm not religious. I never was.

CM · Post by CM » Sun Oct 28, 2001 9:37 am

Originally posted by ThorinOakensfield:

If you're poor you don't have to go to Mecca for Haj.

I don't fast or anything because i'm not religious. I never was.

And that is your choice.
Please don't think i am passing judgement by posting this stuff.
And yes it is correct if you are too poor you don't have to go.
But the govt have awarded a lottery for those who are too poor to go, and the govt pays of them.

scully1 · Post by **scully1** » Mon Oct 29, 2001 7:52 am

I thought it might be Ramadan, but I also thought Ramadan was sometime in the spring?? Hmmm, I wonder why I thought that...Glad I've been corrected on that

@Fas: I'm not trying to make trouble here, I'm just asking because I really want to know: IMO the military action in Afghanistan is not a war against the religion of Islam. It's a retaliation against a government which is harboring a man who was, directly or indirectly, responsible for a grave attack against the people of the US. So, why do so many Muslims feel that it is an attack on Islam itself?? Like I said, I really want to understand that viewpoint, I'm not trying to be difficult (for once

)

And I'm also curious to know if that is only the reaction of "eastern" Muslims, or if Muslims in the western world feel the same way?...

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Mon Oct 29, 2001 8:19 am

Originally posted by loner72:
I thought it might be Ramadan, but I also thought Ramadan was sometime in the spring?? Hmmm, I wonder why I thought that...Glad I've been corrected on that

The islamic calender is a lunar calender as opposed to our solar calender, so their year is like 11 days or so shorter than ours. IIRC Ramadan is the ninth month in the islamic calender, so that means Ramadan is moving relative to our calender. This year it starts 17th Nov in our calender, next year it will start 6th Nov I believe.

Gruntboy · Post by **Gruntboy** » Mon Oct 29, 2001 9:42 am

Now according to islamic teachings, we should [EDIT]NOT?![EDIT] fight during this period.
However if attack we have the right to retaliate.
But the point now is not important.
It is one of those few moments where feelings of muslim "unity and brotherhood" at extremely high levels.

Looking at it from the political point of view, is that US actions during Ramadan WILL inflame common muslims on the street.
Something the US does not want to happen.
People in muslim nations are already pissed off with the US.
Attacking during a holy period to all muslims will not earn them any brownie points, which is half the war.

This is getting really tiring.

The US has been attacked (and innocent civilians are casualties - military forces were not targetted).

The US is the one who is retaliating, with right.

Terrorist actions have inflamed and p*ssed off the US.

The US doesn't need a coalition, brownie points or the help of muslim countries. If people are too stupid to realise that the US will put an end to civilian terror attacks then it is their funeral. Literally.

Oh, and I'm self-moderating my temper and posting here. You don't want to see what I really want to write. Mind you, it isn't half as bad as what I saw on sept. 11th.

CM · Post by CM » Mon Oct 29, 2001 12:34 pm

Loner all women are difficult!

Perception is the key to every thing and anything.
With the fact that nations like mali and malaysia are brought under the wing of religion but have nothing else in common adds to this.
You here on CNN and BBC everyday, about muslim terrorists, muslim leaders, muslim nations of the coalition, muslim fundementalists in Pakistan or Saudi Arabia or somewhere.
We believe in the Muslim brotherhood, and the Western media has picked up on this - examples as above.
We are defined by our religion in the western media and in western minds.
And yet when we take that very definition an deem it as an attack on our people and religion, people can't understand.
Now that is something i can't understand - confusion seems to be the name of the game right now!

This emphasis on religion has decreased recently but the effect has taken place.
Also people tend to remember the bad instead of the good more often.
All muslims know the use of the word of crusade by Bush.
That did not bode well then and people still remember it.
Also another thing people in the islamic world is want proof of Osama's involvement.
Provide the proof and we will gladly support your cause.
The common opinion on the street with favor the US, if the proof is concrete and solid.
So far NO proof has been shown, heck England hasn't seen all of it.
This does not settle with the muslim people which are already wary of the US and its uni-lateral and in some eyes arrogant policies.
The iraq issue adds to this.
The "High of Death" is remembered by everybody in the islamic world.
Many think including me innocents and villians died that day, that should not have.
The use of cluster bombs which target innocents and the enemy alike is not a good away to show that the US is not targeting the people of afghanistan.
Of course there is the whole israel palestinian issue, which makes every muslim unhappy, no matter where they are from.
I am rabbling on as there are so many large problems over the decades which have led to the animosity the common muslim feels for the US.
I am at a loss right now what else to type, so if you want more information on something please ask.

Eastern and Western?
Well, everybody is different.
But taking my college as an example with a great deal of arabs, a few pakistanis - one afghani a couple of iranis and 2 malay, the opinion was the same.
What Osama did was wrong.
If he did it, provide the proof and we will support you.
However attacking the people of afghanistan and you might broaden the war - as the US has stated many times - does not cut it at all.
The US is treading on thin ice right now.

Gruntboy from what i have read lurking you belong to the US marines.
So your anger is understood, however if you can't convey your true sentiments i believe there is no point in discussing anything.
Next time, if you post on a topic like this and want a reply from me, please say exactly what you want to say.
I certainly don't mince words here, and i don't think you should either.

Now you say that innocents died, but does that mean the afghani people are fair game for the US army.
I will continue with this point once you have answered yes or no.

Second you don't need the help of muslim nations?
That is pure arrogance.
The US has NO intelligence within Afghanistan.
Russia can't even spell afghanistan due to the beating they got there.
Pakistan and Saudi have very strong ties with Afghanistan.
Recently - well actually in this thread - i posted a article from "the independent" a UK based newspaper.
It says the sole incursion to Afghanistan by the ground troops was a failure.
You guys look like you need help.
According to a NYT articles which i got from a friend - i don't have an link, i will post that in another post after this one - the US has accused the Pakistani Secret service of having links with Al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
Extremely suspicious in my eyes when the Washington post carried an article about a botched CIA operation which killed Abdul Haq.
It was on the internet yesterday.
I can't get a link until after 2 weeks of the articles publication.
Anyway the ISI according to the NYT has links to Al Qaeda.
So you need our help like it or not.
And after the 80's it is not going to be cheap.
This is not arrogance or immorality.
It is reality.

CM · Post by CM » Mon Oct 29, 2001 12:50 pm

The Link to th NYT article was talking about:
[url="http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/29/international/asia/29PROB.html?ex=1005350727&ei=1&en=d60d37df4c402b1f"]http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/29/international/asia/29PROB.html?ex=1005350727&ei=1&en=d60d37df4c402b1f[/url]

Also just to poke a few holes in the article.

1. The article says:

The casualties
included several members of a Kashmiri militant group
supported by Pakistan who were believed to be training in
the Qaeda camps,

My question is how do they know?
Do they have a list of every single person who joined the Mujahids groups in Pakistan?
If they do, do they have pictures to match with these names?
Third after the cruise missile strike did any of their faces remain intact so that they could be positively identified?

Also the article states

The Kashmiri fighters, labeled a terrorist group by the
State Department, are part of Pakistan's continuing efforts
to put pressure on India in the Kashmir conflict.

The NYT should be more specific as there is only 1 organization that is on the list of terrorists, but this organization is also banned in Pakistan for sectarian violence.
I believe it is the Sipah -e- something.
I am very bad with high urdu - arabic names.
But i know there is only one, as BBC covered it on tv as being the sole Mujahid group.
Heck Christian Amanpur asked the General a couple of question about this organization on the live interview CNN had some time back.

Gruntboy · Post by **Gruntboy** » Tue Oct 30, 2001 3:12 am

By Fas:

Gruntboy from what i have read lurking you belong to the US marines.

LOL! That wasn't meant to be funny but it is. No Fas, I'm not in the USMC - that is an honor beyond my abilitites. I wish I were in the Marines.

So your anger is understood, however if you can't convey your true sentiments i believe there is no point in discussing anything.
Next time, if you post on a topic like this and want a reply from me, please say exactly what you want to say.
I certainly don't mince words here, and i don't think you should either.

I believe, on certain topics, that self-moderation is in order. By all means, you have the right to say what you wish but know that by posting whatever you please can upset others. This is precisely the reason I have not posted my feelings, despite extreme calousness and provocation from others here.

Now you say that innocents died, but does that mean the afghani people are fair game for the US army.
I will continue with this point once you have answered yes or no.

Now you're putting words in my mouth. No, they are not fair game. The US is doing what it has to do to destroy civilian terror. The Terrorists had a choice - give up. But no, they chose to make us bring death to them.

Second you don't need the help of muslim nations?
That is pure arrogance.
The US has NO intelligence within Afghanistan.
Russia can't even spell afghanistan due to the beating they got there.
Pakistan and Saudi have very strong ties with Afghanistan.
Recently - well actually in this thread - i posted a article from "the independent" a UK based newspaper.
It says the sole incursion to Afghanistan by the ground troops was a failure.
You guys look like you need help.
According to a NYT articles which i got from a friend - i don't have an link, i will post that in another post after this one - the US has accused the Pakistani Secret service of having links with Al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
Extremely suspicious in my eyes when the Washington post carried an article about a botched CIA operation which killed Abdul Haq.
It was on the internet yesterday.
I can't get a link until after 2 weeks of the articles publication.
Anyway the ISI according to the NYT has links to Al Qaeda.
So you need our help like it or not.
And after the 80's it is not going to be cheap.
This is not arrogance or immorality.
It is reality.

We don't need that kind of intelligence. Other intelligence available to us will allow us to find him kill him with bombs or shoot him dead.
We're not Russian consripts (how many times do I have to say this?).
Don't believe everything you read in the papers. WTF does the Independent know about military activity in Aghanistan. I'd say dropping 200 Rangers into the most hostile country on Earth, killing a score of Terrorists and not losing a casualty to enemy fire was a success. I'd say your poor analysis and blind acceptance of others opinions shows you know nothing about military affairs. How do you even know what the objective of the mission was?

Maybe what I say is arrogant. But the US has always had to carry the can. Terror is set to destroy this world and all people can do is envy the US and complain.

I'm not half as arrogant as some of the statements you've made.

[ 10-30-2001: Message edited by: Gruntboy ]