Taliban - The moral equivalent of America's founding fathers.

format_quote Originally Posted by ardianto

Those people were not Taliban, but people who later become Northern Aliance, the enemy of Taliban.

Taliban did not exist in 1985.

Bro - are you sure?

format_quote Originally Posted by ardianto

100% sure!. I was 18 in 1985 and always follow news from Afghanistan war.

People who meet Reagan were the Mujahidin, those who fought Soviet. They were coming from few different ethnics, and very close with USA. Taliban was a new group that established in 1994 in refugee camp in Pakistan. This is a Pashtun ethnic group, and they fought the Mujahidin. Then the Mujahidin and Uzbek militia (who did not fight Soviet) establish the Northern Alliance.

It is true that the Taliban didn't exist at the time. But someone might misunderstand your statement and came out thinking that the Pashtun were not part of the Mujahidin who fought the Soviets. It is true that the majority of those who fought the Soviets did not necessarily joined the Taliban, but they also did not exclusively joined the Northern Alliance. If we say the Taliban was to some extent based on ethnicity then the same holds true for the Northern Alliance.

Afghanistan was in civil war after the soviet withdrawal, this was done purposely done by the CIA to keep the drugs running. After the taliban rose to power, and wanted to establish justice in Afghanistan, and i do admit that they were a bit too hard in their interpetration of shariah law, but atleast it was better than before they rose to power and they enjoyed many support from the afghans. After the taliban vowed to nationalize(!) their resources and to stop the drugs trade by burning poppy fields, and by arresting their growers, the US withdrew all their ties from afghanistan. Pakistani ISI betrayed the taliban and started to pit fights between nationalists.

After the US invasions poppy fields started to coming up again, turns out most of these criminals have ties with the puppet karzai government. They aren't doing for themselves, but to spread drugs to the west and turkey. Iran is the only country in the region who tries to stop drug trafickers, often very violently by killing them. i dont agree with iran and its ideology, but i think its a very good thing that iran does this with much anger from the west.

The idea that the Taliban were 'anti-opium' is very ingrained and I have always assumed it was true myself. But probing a little deeper, I wonder how accurate it is?

The Taliban were in power for about 4 years before they took any action against poppy growing. Instead they tried to restrict hashish, another major narcotic crop in Afghanistan. Abdul Rashid, the former head of the Taliban’s anti-drug force in Kandahar, explained that they had imposed a strict ban on hashish “because it is consumed by Afghans and Muslims,” whereas “opium is permissible because it is consumed by kafirs in the West and not by Muslims or Afghans.” Not exactly the high moral ground they are credited for, then.

The Taliban only finally acted against opium in return for a massive 'bribe' by the UN/US. Again, not exactly the high moral ground.

The events of 9/11 and the war swept all this away and poppy growing returned with a vengeance. But even today the main poppy crop is in Taliban controlled areas (especially Helmand province). The main smuggling route also goes through their territory, as well as Iran.

If the Taliban wanted to stop opium, they would.

format_quote Originally Posted by Independent

The idea that the Taliban were 'anti-opium' is very ingrained and I have always assumed it was true myself. But probing a little deeper, I wonder how accurate it is?

The Taliban were in power for about 4 years before they took any action against poppy growing. Instead they tried to restrict hashish, another major narcotic crop in Afghanistan. Abdul Rashid, the former head of the Taliban’s anti-drug force in Kandahar, explained that they had imposed a strict ban on hashish “because it is consumed by Afghans and Muslims,” whereas “opium is permissible because it is consumed by kafirs in the West and not by Muslims or Afghans.” Not exactly the high moral ground they are credited for, then.

The Taliban only finally acted against opium in return for a massive 'bribe' by the UN/US. Again, not exactly the high moral ground.

The events of 9/11 and the war swept all this away and poppy growing returned with a vengeance. But even today the main poppy crop is in Taliban controlled areas (especially Helmand province). The main smuggling route also goes through their territory, as well as Iran.

If the Taliban wanted to stop opium, they would.

This post needs probing..

format_quote Originally Posted by Independent

If the Taliban wanted to stop opium, they would.

Question here should be. ''Why would they''?
It is a God given natural resource that has many medicinal purposes- why should any force inside or out challenge the cultivation of that? and that is regardless of course of whether or not we choose to subscribe to the obvious one sided testimony here of 'moral high grounds'.

format_quote Originally Posted by Independent

If you have nothing to say, best to say nothing.

Taliban are a ISI militia created to secure the gas pipeline from Turkmenistan to Pakistan. they got notoriety by defeating some warlord in their region who were colleting tax from people. The rest of people welcome them at first hoping they put the stop to the dog fight between the mujahedeen groups . After they took control, they showed their true face of being the stooge of Pakistan and Arab countries. There are a bunch of illiterate that uses Islam as cover, the extremists try to use them to create their Utopia. In order to enforce their interpretation of Sunnah, they violated Allah commands.

For them beard is more important than learning. Covering is more important than basic human/ Islamic rights.

format_quote Originally Posted by شَادِنُ

Question here should be. ''Why would they''?
It is a God given natural resource that has many medicinal purposes- why should any force inside or out challenge the cultivation of that? and that is regardless of course of whether or not we choose to subscribe to the obvious one sided testimony here of 'moral high grounds'.

Yes, and alcohol has at times been valuable as a sedative and as a 'water purifier' - yet you're opposed to that. Are narcotics ok in Islam?

Whatever your position about opium - or Islam's - the fact remains that the Taliban themselves have at different times both condemned and permitted opium growing. They are not consistent within their own terms. While they opposed it, they sometimes beheaded opium growing farmers, which is as drastic as you can get.

Also, whatever opium they cultivate or permit is not going into legal pharmaceuticals. It's going to narcotics gangs and dealers. It funds crime all over the world, and in Afghanistan/Pakistan it funds the Taliban.

As for 'moral high ground' - this is their claim about themselves, not mine.

format_quote Originally Posted by Independent

The idea that the Taliban were 'anti-opium' is very ingrained and I have always assumed it was true myself. But probing a little deeper, I wonder how accurate it is?

The Taliban were in power for about 4 years before they took any action against poppy growing. Instead they tried to restrict hashish, another major narcotic crop in Afghanistan. Abdul Rashid, the former head of the Taliban’s anti-drug force in Kandahar, explained that they had imposed a strict ban on hashish “because it is consumed by Afghans and Muslims,” whereas “opium is permissible because it is consumed by kafirs in the West and not by Muslims or Afghans.” Not exactly the high moral ground they are credited for, then.

The Taliban only finally acted against opium in return for a massive 'bribe' by the UN/US. Again, not exactly the high moral ground.

The events of 9/11 and the war swept all this away and poppy growing returned with a vengeance. But even today the main poppy crop is in Taliban controlled areas (especially Helmand province). The main smuggling route also goes through their territory, as well as Iran.

If the Taliban wanted to stop opium, they would.

If the Taliban are not as firm against Opium as you claim, then this is definitely something wrong that they are doing from an Islamic perspective. But this mustn't shadow the fact that they have massively reduced the drug trafficking taking place in Afghanistan and they deserve credit for that if Allah (swt) wills.

format_quote Originally Posted by Independent

Yes, and alcohol has at times been valuable as a sedative and as a 'water purifier' - yet you're opposed to that. Are narcotics ok in Islam?

Whatever your position about opium - or Islam's - the fact remains that the Taliban themselves have at different times both condemned and permitted opium growing. They are not consistent within their own terms. While they opposed it, they sometimes beheaded opium growing farmers, which is as drastic as you can get.

Also, whatever opium they cultivate or permit is not going into legal pharmaceuticals. It's going to narcotics gangs and dealers. It funds crime all over the world, and in Afghanistan/Pakistan it funds the Taliban.

As for 'moral high ground' - this is their claim about themselves, not mine.

Nothing you've written up there is factual. It's akin to the tall tales the French wrote about the Egyptians after Bonaparte invaded Egypt and made out with a few temples and statues. Vilifying, maligning and filling in the gaps with what soothes them.
I am not going to get into a debate about medicine and religion with you for obvious reasons you're not well versed in either!
The Taliban can do whatever they want in their own country!
Western nations had best take care of their own prostitutes, their own drug lords, their own economy, their own education system their own racism and prejudices before traveling to far away nations to police them and then speak of moral high grounds!