/* */

PDA

View Full Version : Defence minister urges more British Muslims to join armed forces



Uthman
04-04-2009, 01:45 PM
The defence minister, Bob Ainsworth, has appealed to British Muslims to joined the armed forces, saying that it was "vitally important that our army, navy and air force are reflective of the hugely diverse society in which we live".

In an address last night to the Armed Forces Muslim Conference, Ainsworth said the services were a "fundamental and very positive part of British society, and that they need to be a positive part of Muslim society as well", the Ministry of Defence said today.

His address follows last month's Royal Anglian Regiment homecoming in Luton at which a group of Muslims protested, prompting angry scenes involving some of those who had been welcoming the return of the troops.
Ainsworth described the protests as acts of extremism which was the "true enemy of our society".

The minister said that "there is an enemy within, but it isn't the Muslim community in this country, it is extremism in any and all of its forms". He went on to say that "it is people who are not prepared to participate in the conversation, who are not prepared to try to change people's lives, not prepared to use politics, logic, engagement to discuss the wars, but would rather shout abuse, threaten people and at their extreme kill people".

Political opinion and respect for service of the state needed to be clearly distinguished in the Muslim community, he said. He did not think there needed to be "conflict between being a British Muslim and a serviceman or woman".

Ainsworth said that from what he knew of the Muslim community in Coventry North East, his parliamentary constituency, "the values that they hold are exactly the same values espoused in the military; duty, sacrifice, serving other people" adding that "there ought to be easy passage into the armed forces for Muslims".

Imam Asim Hafiz, the Muslim Chaplain to the armed forces, also spoke at the conference. According to the MoD, he said: "It is great that the work and contribution of Muslim service personnel inside and outside the armed forces is being recognised. It is possible to be a British Muslim and to serve our country in the armed forces, and the people here today are testament to that".

There are about 390 Muslims serving across the armed forces. The first Muslim Civilian Chaplain to the armed forces was appointed in 2005.

Source
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
aadil77
04-04-2009, 07:31 PM
What do they expect us do? fight with them against muslims?

Maybe if they started war against Israel or the US you'd have thousands joing the army
Reply

Dawud_uk
04-04-2009, 07:38 PM
:sl:

this is laughable, except for the fact enough muslims have abandoned their deen to make enough people for such a conference.

what the article should say is kaffir enemy of Allah, a man worse than a dog or pig asks others at a conference who want to be just like him, worse than dogs and pigs to make others also want the same also.
Reply

Thinker
04-04-2009, 07:43 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by aadil77
What do they expect us do? fight with them against muslims?

Maybe if they started war against Israel or the US you'd have thousands joing the army
Maybe they expect that anyone living in a country and enjoying the security, freedom and prosperity that country provides should contribute in same way as every other citizen does. Or, if you feel that you cannot do that because your loyalties lie elsewhere, you should leave the country and go to one which can command your loyalty. To do less would be hypocritical (that’s correct isn’t it Dawud?).
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
aadil77
04-04-2009, 09:16 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Thinker
Maybe they expect that anyone living in a country and enjoying the security, freedom and prosperity that country provides should contribute in same way as every other citizen does. Or, if you feel that you cannot do that because your loyalties lie elsewhere, you should leave the country and go to one which can command your loyalty. To do less would be hypocritical (that’s correct isn’t it Dawud?).
Our loyalties only lie with God, not any specific country. How can they expect muslims to 'contribute' to killing other muslims? Does this make sense to you?
If they are that desperate to get muslims to 'contribute', like I said they could always start a more logical and just war on a country like maybe Israel or America, then they'd get truckloads of muslims 'contributing'.
Reply

anatolian
04-04-2009, 09:41 PM
We make it easy here in Turkey. Every male Turkish citizent is obligated to join the army for a while. Religion or any socio-economic diversity does not make a difference.

As for the muslims living in USA, UK, Israel and others who make war on muslims..I think it is very understable that they have right to call you to the army inorder to "defend" your country as long as you benefit from being a citizent of that country, this is one thing but it is also clear that the goverments of these countries are imperialist and facist blood suckers and they have decided to suck the bloods of some muslim nations todays...Now it is all up to that muslim citizent what to do..

On the other hand even if you reject to join army still you are in the circle. You pay your tax and the state use that money to fund the army. In other words, you fund that war on muslim nations indirectly as being a citizent.
Reply

Cabdullahi
04-04-2009, 10:12 PM
When bob ainsworth sends his kids to iraq and afghanistan first! then is when we will take him seriously....and why should we join their army when they still call us ragheads
Reply

Amadeus85
04-04-2009, 10:19 PM
Defence minister urges more British Muslims to join armed forces
This is not a good idea, neither for UK muslims, nor for the UK army.
Reply

KAding
04-04-2009, 11:35 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by aadil77
What do they expect us do? fight with them against muslims?

Maybe if they started war against Israel or the US you'd have thousands joing the army
Well, I suppose from the British government perspective you'd be helping out , say, the Afghan government and people by protecting them against those who misinterpret Islam and want to oppress and abuse them.

It is all a matter of perspective! I know you probably don't agree this is the case, but do keep in mind that UK soldiers are actually fighting and training with Afghan Muslim government soldiers in, for example, Afghanistan. This isn't black or white and there need not be bad intentions on either side per se.
Reply

Dawud_uk
04-05-2009, 06:51 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by anatolian
We make it easy here in Turkey. Every male Turkish citizent is obligated to join the army for a while. Religion or any socio-economic diversity does not make a difference.

As for the muslims living in USA, UK, Israel and others who make war on muslims..I think it is very understable that they have right to call you to the army inorder to "defend" your country as long as you benefit from being a citizent of that country, this is one thing but it is also clear that the goverments of these countries are imperialist and facist blood suckers and they have decided to suck the bloods of some muslim nations todays...Now it is all up to that muslim citizent what to do..

On the other hand even if you reject to join army still you are in the circle. You pay your tax and the state use that money to fund the army. In other words, you fund that war on muslim nations indirectly as being a citizent.
:sl:

i know a couple of brothers online from turkey, they were forced to shave, beaten if tried to pray or talked about islam, at one point they were going to be forced to fight their brothers when the turkish government was talking of sending troops to afghanistan.

your last point however is a valid one, that is why the scholars of the past agreed it is necessary to leave darul kufr if you are not able to practice your deen or if they attack the muslims from there and this is the situation in britain and the US today.

:sl:
Reply

Thinker
04-05-2009, 08:17 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by aadil77
How can they expect muslims to 'contribute' to killing other muslims? Does this make sense to you?

OK, so how many Muslims are killed each week by other Muslims and how many are killed by non-Muslims?

Does this make sense to you?

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/articl...kills_50_.html
Reply

Uthman
04-05-2009, 09:11 AM
Hi Thinker,
format_quote Originally Posted by Thinker
OK, so how many Muslims are killed each week by other Muslims and how many are killed by non-Muslims?

Does this make sense to you?

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/articl...kills_50_.html
That doesn't make it right from an Islamic perspective. A Muslim may not kill another Muslim.
Reply

Dawud_uk
04-05-2009, 09:24 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Osman
Hi Thinker,

That doesn't make it right from an Islamic perspective. A Muslim may not kill another Muslim.
:sl: osman,

in these case the targets were not muslims but apostates, government soldiers and officals.

saying that i doubt i would have made the decision the local mujahideen had made because of the killing of muslims alongside them, but they may have information i am not privy to which swayed their decision.
Reply

Muezzin
04-05-2009, 10:34 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Thinker
Maybe they expect that anyone living in a country and enjoying the security, freedom and prosperity that country provides should contribute in same way as every other citizen does. Or, if you feel that you cannot do that because your loyalties lie elsewhere, you should leave the country and go to one which can command your loyalty. To do less would be hypocritical (that’s correct isn’t it Dawud?).
Er... are you saying that anyone who is not in the army is a traitor?

Because if you are, that is both insane and hilarious.
Reply

Thinker
04-05-2009, 02:37 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muezzin
Er... are you saying that anyone who is not in the army is a traitor?

Because if you are, that is both insane and hilarious.
Where did the word 'traitor' come from, the word I used was hypocrit!!
Reply

Muezzin
04-05-2009, 07:22 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Thinker
Where did the word 'traitor' come from, the word I used was hypocrit!!
Okay.

Are you saying that anyone who is not in the army is a hypocrite?

If you are that is both insane and etc etc.
Reply

Thinker
04-06-2009, 10:27 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muezzin
Okay.

Are you saying that anyone who is not in the army is a hypocrite?

If you are that is both insane and etc etc.
No I didn't say that. What I said was 'anyone living in a country and enjoying the security, freedom and prosperity that country provides should contribute in same way as every other citizen does. Or, if you feel that you cannot do that because your loyalties lie elsewhere, you should leave the country and go to one which can command your loyalty. To do less would be hypocritical'

I believe that Islam recognises that non-Muslims might not wish to join a Muslim army and charges them a tax for that. That's an Islamic concept of how an individual might pay his dues. In the UK we don't have that concept, we believe that everybody should BE WILLING to support the organisations that provide our security, freedom and prosperity and if they are not willing they should go and live in a place which can command their loyalty - 'to do less would be hypocritical.'
Reply

Uthman
04-06-2009, 11:31 AM
Greetings Thinker,
format_quote Originally Posted by Thinker
I believe that Islam recognises that non-Muslims might not wish to join a Muslim army and charges them a tax for that.
This was not the only reason for the Jizyah (tax) so that reason should not be looked at in isolation. This sums it up perfectly in my opinion:
The wisdom behind the tax/jizyah paid by non-Muslims to the Islamic state was fairness. This is for two reasons:

First, Muslims were paying zakah (the annual charity) to the Islamic state, which was used for all sorts of services and social welfare. Zakah is an Islamic act of worship, but it is only for Muslims. It was fair to make non-Muslim citizens of the same state pay a similar (in fact, smaller) amount as a tax, since zakah is not taken from them as it is taken from Muslims. Jizyah was calculated in different ways throughout different eras (a certain amount of money, certain percentage of the crops, etc), but it was consistently less than the zakah, which every Muslim had to pay anyway.

In addition to that, this tax was paid in exchange of protection of these non-Muslim communities (i.e., military protection) and exemption of their men from joining the Islamic army. At that time, this was a necessary and fair measure given all the wars that the Islamic state was going through based on religious divides. It was not fair to ask these non-Muslim citizens to fight with Muslims against fellow believers of their same religion.

Source
The article goes on to argue that the Jizyah would no longer be applicable in this day and age since the political circumstances are not the same. However, I'm not sure whether this is a universally shared opinion.

Regards
Reply

wth1257
04-07-2009, 04:50 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Thinker
Maybe they expect that anyone living in a country and enjoying the security, freedom and prosperity that country provides should contribute in same way as every other citizen does. Or, if you feel that you cannot do that because your loyalties lie elsewhere, you should leave the country and go to one which can command your loyalty. To do less would be hypocritical (that’s correct isn’t it Dawud?).

This is simply absurd in a number of different ways. To begin with the idea that serving in the armed forces is contributing to the upkeep of the country "in same way as every other citizen does" is simply nonsense. An extraordinarily small contingent of the total population will ever serve in the armed forces. Implying that Muslims host dual loyalty is akin to the nationalistic driven anti Semitic charges of a bygone era and you would do well to exercise caution in that charge, particularly in the present political climate. Every citizen has dual loyalties. That a citizen who would refuse to join the armed forces ought to move elsewhere is simply asinine. Such a proposition would bar all pacifists (such as Buddhists, the Quakers, and numerous organic populations) from citizenship a-priori. The idea that a Muslims ought to move elsewhere because the refuse to be part of the hegemonic and neo colonial policies of the great western powers in the middle east is not only morally appalling but applicable far beyond the Muslim community. By such logic approximately half the total population of the UK needs to "love it or leave it".
Reply

Whatsthepoint
04-07-2009, 11:11 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by wth1257
This is simply absurd in a number of different ways. To begin with the idea that serving in the armed forces is contributing to the upkeep of the country "in same way as every other citizen does" is simply nonsense. An extraordinarily small contingent of the total population will ever serve in the armed forces. Implying that Muslims host dual loyalty is akin to the nationalistic driven anti Semitic charges of a bygone era and you would do well to exercise caution in that charge, particularly in the present political climate. Every citizen has dual loyalties. That a citizen who would refuse to join the armed forces ought to move elsewhere is simply asinine. Such a proposition would bar all pacifists (such as Buddhists, the Quakers, and numerous organic populations) from citizenship a-priori. The idea that a Muslims ought to move elsewhere because the refuse to be part of the hegemonic and neo colonial policies of the great western powers in the middle east is not only morally appalling but applicable far beyond the Muslim community. By such logic approximately half the total population of the UK needs to "love it or leave it".
what do you think should be done with people who publically shun the armed forces of their country of residence at a home coming parade, calling them terorists, cowards and such?
Reply

wth1257
04-07-2009, 11:24 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Whatsthepoint
what do you think should be done with people who publically shun the armed forces of their country of residence at a home coming parade, calling them terorists, cowards and such?
That would depend on the country. In the United States they have every right to do so. Thoreau gave a scathing description on what sort of man a Marine was in his "Civil Disobedience". I suppose at one point some reactionary would accuse him of alternative loyalties and advocate his expulsion from the nation, much like Mark Twain's attacks on the rising tide of American Imperialism. Fortunately such forces did not succeed and now they stand as iconic figures of America political thought. One of the high points of an advanced liberal democracy is that the armed forces are not sacrosanct, nor are expansionist agendas. The idea that Muslims ought to leave because they refuse to participate in the hegemonic neo colonialism laying waste to the Muslim world is simply appalling. If it was the 1940's and the UK was facing an existential threat from a foreign power I would agree that every citizen had a duty to help defend their land and populace from such a threat. That is not the case today though.
Reply

Whatsthepoint
04-07-2009, 11:41 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by wth1257
That would depend on the country. In the United States they have every right to do so. Thoreau gave a scathing description on what sort of man a Marine was in his "Civil Disobedience". I suppose at one point some reactionary would accuse him of alternative loyalties and advocate his expulsion from the nation, much like Mark Twain's attacks on the rising tide of American Imperialism. Fortunately such forces did not succeed and now they stand as iconic figures of America political thought. One of the high points of an advanced liberal democracy is that the armed forces are not sacrosanct, nor are expansionist agendas. The idea that Muslims ought to leave because they refuse to participate in the hegemonic neo colonialism laying waste to the Muslim world is simply appalling. If it was the 1940's and the UK was facing an existential threat from a foreign power I would agree that every citizen had a duty to help defend their land and populace from such a threat. That is not the case today though.
I completely agree except for the first part, which I'm not so sure about myself. I support the freedom of speech, which of ranges from writing a political article to drawing cartoons of some prophet to, as in this case, insulting the soldiers of your country of residence. But on the other hand what these people have done feels so terribly wrong that I would have deported this instance. Though I am aware I can't base the legilation of what I feel.
It's Muslims who constantly tell the world how freedom of speech has limits and should be used responsibly and at the same time you get this..
Reply

Muezzin
04-08-2009, 04:34 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Whatsthepoint
I completely agree except for the first part, which I'm not so sure about myself. I support the freedom of speech, which of ranges from writing a political article to drawing cartoons of some prophet to, as in this case, insulting the soldiers of your country of residence. But on the other hand what these people have done feels so terribly wrong that I would have deported this instance. Though I am aware I can't base the legilation of what I feel.
It's Muslims who constantly tell the world how freedom of speech has limits and should be used responsibly and at the same time you get this..
I for one felt those particular protesters were being silly and offensive for the sake of being silly and offensive. The returning soldiers were the wrong target for such a protest in any case. Plus, it looked like it was about to cause a fight.

So, in my humble-yet-annoying opinion - Danish cartoons: Abuse of free speech

Silly protest against returning soldiers: Abuse of free speech
Reply

Dawud_uk
04-10-2009, 09:26 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muezzin
I for one felt those particular protesters were being silly and offensive for the sake of being silly and offensive. The returning soldiers were the wrong target for such a protest in any case. Plus, it looked like it was about to cause a fight.

So, in my humble-yet-annoying opinion - Danish cartoons: Abuse of free speech

Silly protest against returning soldiers: Abuse of free speech
then your humble opinion is in this case wrong,

these brothers are the most sincere brothers i know, they go up and down the country doing dawah stalls, talks, study circles, calling to Allah. most of the dawah stalls i know of have links with them.

when the brother was assulted in leicester picking up his kids from school we knew straight away who we could call upon and ask for help, subhanallah more of these people you label as silly and trouble makers turned up than people from my local masjid.
Reply

Muezzin
04-10-2009, 11:10 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Dawud_uk
then your humble opinion is in this case wrong,
An opinion in this case cannot be wrong. It can be stupid.

these brothers are the most sincere brothers i know, they go up and down the country doing dawah stalls, talks, study circles, calling to Allah. most of the dawah stalls i know of have links with them.

when the brother was assulted in leicester picking up his kids from school we knew straight away who we could call upon and ask for help, subhanallah more of these people you label as silly and trouble makers turned up than people from my local masjid.
I think they were the wrong targets (the right targets would be the politicians who sent them into combat in the first place), and I think it was about to start a fight. I don't think that is right.

But what do I know?

I apologise if I offended you or your friends.

(Many of my posts = abuse of free speech)
Reply

Dawud_uk
04-13-2009, 06:25 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muezzin
An opinion in this case cannot be wrong. It can be stupid.


I think they were the wrong targets (the right targets would be the politicians who sent them into combat in the first place), and I think it was about to start a fight. I don't think that is right.

But what do I know?

I apologise if I offended you or your friends.

(Many of my posts = abuse of free speech)
:sl: akhi,

it wasnt because they were my friends, if you check my other posts you will see i do try to defend the honour of my brothers and sisters when they are slandered and cant answer back.

it is like some people i know accuse islamic board of being saudi government following versions of salafi or following them, but i try to stick up for the brothers on here and tell them only a few are like that.

on the other point you make, i dont believe they were the right target for a number of reasons.

first of all it is a lie to say they had no choice but to go where the government sent them,

they had a choice not to sign up for job where they knew they would be killing people for money, anyone who kills for money is worse than a prostitute.

or they are nationalists, the motivations of seeing which dog pack's alpha male can pee up the tree the highest.

or they are truly believing in pushing their values on muslims at the end of the gun, in which case they are worse than either prostitutes or dogs.

anyone who goes and kills our brothers and sisters deserves our contempt and hatred much more than the general enmity we should give to the disbelievers in general, they are much worse.

this is in the same way that the mujahideen are much better than the general muslim, the kuffar who physically fight are much worse than the general kuffar, they are the ones who kill, rape and torture.
Reply

AntiKarateKid
04-13-2009, 07:39 PM
If I had known that being in a country like the US would REQUIRE me to fight in their military, I would have packed up and left.

In reality, they can urge me all they want but I'm not going to fight for a government that doesn't have Islamic goals.

"Oh but you are safe here why don't you do your part,"

I give my taxes.
I don't break the law.
I contribute to society's well being by volunteering and etc.

That's doing my part.

Killing wasn't in the job description.
Reply

Uthman
04-13-2009, 08:12 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Osman
Greetings Thinker, This was not the only reason for the Jizyah (tax) so that reason should not be looked at in isolation. This sums it up perfectly in my opinion:
The wisdom behind the tax/jizyah paid by non-Muslims to the Islamic state was fairness. This is for two reasons:

First, Muslims were paying zakah (the annual charity) to the Islamic state, which was used for all sorts of services and social welfare. Zakah is an Islamic act of worship, but it is only for Muslims. It was fair to make non-Muslim citizens of the same state pay a similar (in fact, smaller) amount as a tax, since zakah is not taken from them as it is taken from Muslims. Jizyah was calculated in different ways throughout different eras (a certain amount of money, certain percentage of the crops, etc), but it was consistently less than the zakah, which every Muslim had to pay anyway.

In addition to that, this tax was paid in exchange of protection of these non-Muslim communities (i.e., military protection) and exemption of their men from joining the Islamic army. At that time, this was a necessary and fair measure given all the wars that the Islamic state was going through based on religious divides. It was not fair to ask these non-Muslim citizens to fight with Muslims against fellow believers of their same religion.

Source
Notice the emboldened part above. Under Islamic rule, it was considered unfair to ask Non-Muslim citizens to fight against fellow believers of their same religion.
Reply

aamirsaab
04-13-2009, 08:14 PM
:sl:
Seeing as we're living in the techno age, I think we should resolve our wars and disputes over a game of halo 3.
Reply

AntiKarateKid
04-13-2009, 09:39 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by aamirsaab
:sl:
Seeing as we're living in the techno age, I think we should resolve our wars and disputes over a game of halo 3.
Halo 3 pshhh.... BattleField Bad Company is where it's at! Destructible environments ftw!

Though if you insist, I'll make you eat my Covenant plasma!
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 01-26-2011, 02:52 AM
  2. Replies: 42
    Last Post: 08-09-2010, 04:47 PM
  3. Replies: 16
    Last Post: 02-22-2007, 03:28 PM
  4. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 06-26-2006, 06:19 PM
  5. Replies: 43
    Last Post: 03-25-2006, 09:03 AM
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Holiday in the Maldives

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!