marwati

if any form of suicide bombing are not according to islam then when what about pakistan army men when they blew up themselves against indian tanks in 1965?
i m confused, some body made me clear

TLK

Dude, that was a war, fought in ral battle field. Even Sahaba did it, entering into kuffar's army with intention of getting killed but killing many before dying ..

Rules of battlefield are different in Islam, attacking innocent civilians is an act of cowardliness

marwati

^it means talibans suicide attacks in afghanistan against US are right

Khehkeshan

First of all the stories of 1965 where soldiers went under indian tanks and blew themselves up are a myth of the right wing. At least I ahve not read any acts on this. Second when did sahaba go into the fight with the intention of using a weapon to kill themselves at their own hands?

firenze

It was propaganda by establishment, and the bullets were fire on the shoulders of Mumtaz Mufti, Bashir Ahmed & other well known writers of that time.

Sucks lied ..and now we are paying the price.. !

Khehkeshan

Is this also where the stories of angels in green clothes fighting alongside army came from?

firenze

^ it was white clothes.. not green.. ..

lapak

Remember there are good Taliban and bad Taliban. Good Taliban are those who are fighting against the Afghan army and suicide aginst them is allowed in Islam according to Mulana Hasan Jan and then there are bad Taliban who are fighting against the Pak army even if the Pak army is assisting an infidal army and so suicide againt the Pak army is Haraam. Got it?

TLK

I dont think that I was talking about guerrilla war tactics ..and yes maybe people attacking army camps can find religious justifications.

I was talking about suicide bombers blowing themselves up in the middle of civilian crowd.

did Pak fauj do that in 1965?

Sharaabi

Are you saying that attacking pakistani army and police installations and officies of those to whom the army and police report to can be justified?

Khehkeshan

This post has been disemvoweled.

Spock

Altaf Bhai is very fond of wearing white clothes, but he was probably fighting alongside the Indians.

Oleander

Spock please dont bring his name in each and every discussion, we know what thype of person he is.so please keep this discussion CLEAN .........

firenze

ok ??

ps. imran khan wears white too, so probably he is fighting alongside with the jews ..

Spock

Oh but he has his paid supporters here who think hes some sort of farishta, and since farishtaz were blamed or brought in by some MQMers here, I thought its only pertinent that we bring their big super 'farishta' in the discussion too.

niden

Let one thing should be clear in your mind. In 1965 war people of both East and West Pakistan were united and gave full support to the army. The leader, Ayub Khan betrayed later to the country and signed cease fire with India. Pakistani wanted this fight to end the Kashmir issue but because of Ayub's betrayal, this could not be materialized.

Now comming back to your concern. As far I read and heard from my elders that India brought 500 to 700 tanks to Chowindah sector to take over Sialkot and surrouding areas. They were common people not SOLIDIERS who sacrificed their lives to stop offensive by India. They were ordinary local people with courage to save their land by taking bombs to their body and laid under the tanks. India lost hundereds of tanks in that battle and retreated.

Khehkeshan

You need serious help.

TLK

LOL, man do you guys know how to twist words ..

mAd_ScIeNtIsT

I heard the similar story from a friend who heard it from his grandparents, but several things make me suspect that it was more of a propaganda story to boost morale than actual fact.

1) The underside of tanks are armoured. You either need a very large amount of explosive (more than a human can carry, such as the massive bombs that Hezbollah buried & used to to destroy Israeli tanks). Even if you lie underneath the tank, at least half the explosive force will be going down into the ground, not to mention how much of the force will be deflected back down by the armour. Like water, a blast wave follows the path of least resistance and would be channelled out from below the tank, rather than going up into the tank.

2) The story is that people got directly below the tank. Difficult enough at any time, but the M4 Shermans which were the bulk of the Indian tanks during the war had a machine gun built into the front side of the tank (not in the turret, but right next to the driver instead), a machine gun in the turret, and a machine gun on op of the turret for the tank commander to use. The M4 Sherman can therefore fire machine guns up to 3 different directions at once. To run up to the front of the tank and lie down below it would require all the machine gunners to be completely blind. Other Indian tanks in the battle also had multiple machine guns to stop people getting close.

3) During India's invasion of Hyderabad in 1948, my family saw local people trying to charge up with weapons against the Indian tanks and all getting mown down by machine gun fire before getting close once the tanks started firing. How could this fail in 1948 and yet work in 1965?

4) The Pakistan army had hundreds of modern M-48 tanks in the area, with long-ranged, powerful 90mm cannons.

==============================================


In fact, the most suspicious part of this story is that ordinary people don't exactly have access to enough explosive to even try to blow up a tank. For this suicide bombing story to be true, it presumes that the Pakistan Army gave people bombs and told them to throw themselves against the Indian army.

It suggests that the Pakistan army, whose regiments have a long history of desperate and heroic fighting against India, whose regiments laid down thousands upon thousands of lives in the war, was afraid to fight and sent civilians in instead. It suggests that the Pakistan Army, which has no history of shielding itself behind civilians in wars before or since, actually did so.

If strapping bombs to yourself and blowing yourself up actually worked against tank, you would imagine that the army would send its own soldiers, who are not only willing to die for their country (as they did, nearly 4000 of them), but are also trained in combat and would be able to approach tanks more effectively, to do it.

If the goal was to simply delay the Indians, then again, a group of soldiers with orders to fight to the last man (as Pakistani units have done repeatedly over the decades) could do this more effectively than civilians. The paramilitary Rangers did this, when they fought with just rifles and machine guns at the border to delay the Indian tanks at the start of the war, until they were all killed.

Captain1

The intention was not of 'getting killed', but 'kill as many as possible' without caring to save their own life. That is the twist given by fanatics to justify suicide bombing.