I think while discussing Swat we go off the track.
Question here again is not the Islam and Shariah, question is the path that is being followed to get it.
Should ends justify means?
Should we allow people to kill other people who dont want their format of Shariah (or any law) ?
Should government bow down to one violent group without trying to understand what people of that region actually want? Will it resolve the issue or further ignite the people.
We have clouded this discussion by using the sacred names and religion, smoke screening the acutal situation with emotions. Lets do one exercise.
For one moment I want you replace word Shariah with Christianity or Jewish Laws in all the news you have read about the Swat.
Tell me will you be comfortable that a violent group is trying to implement a Jewish Law in SWAT region?
Replace word Taliban with the Israeli-Soldiers (IDF) and think this news of blowing up the school makes you feel what? or Members of RSS attacked and killed a woman they think was immoral; makes you say police should arrest these people or not?.
But this makes it more emotional only now it has -ve feeling due to the IDF, RSS etc..
For neutrality replace word Taliban with word some ZKF-force. Now think about the news paper saying ZKF blew up the girls school in region of Cambodia. ZKF is killing and throwing people on the choaks. ZKF wants some ABC laws that will provide justice more quickly, for that they have cut the ears of civilian guards.
Dont you get the -ve feeling associated with them, even when ABC Laws they are trying to get are better but they are being blaimed for killing Police officers, members of elected party, civilians?
Ends never justify the deeds especially when the cost of deed is being paid the person other than one persuing the ‘Ends’.
Whether it’s military, mullah, so called moderate-secular-foces; decisions by few and their insistance on applying their wishes on everyone is recipe of disaster; even when their wishes are good ones.