There's a difference of opinion is it allowed for an Islamic state to ask non-muslims to help against those from Muslims who are rebelling and fighting against the state (bughaat). Some culamaa say it's not allowed, while others say it's allowed under strict conditions, like that there is absolute necessity for this and they'd be 100% under Muslim command and dominance (Muslims should be able to win them if some problems come) and they are not allowed to kill fleeing Muslim rebels etc. They should also do only that what state asks them to and not do anything on their own.
Now, none of those conditions exist in Somalia. AMISOM are the real power in Somalia while TFG are their b****s, not other way around. TFG is not an Islamic government (they don't rule by shariica) and they are lead by foreign kaafir powers with very little authority on their own. Secondly who says that Al-Shabaab are rebelling against the government? TFG is 100% artificially created by foreigners and brought to Somalia and established there only with kuffaar military power. UIC had the power in Southern Somalia before Xabashi invasion and after Ethiopians were kicked out Al-Shabaab had the authority in Southern Somalia and still has in most parts. In reality it's TFG that is rebelling against the already established authority. Recognition of TFG as a legal government in Somalia by USA & co. is not Islamic recognition and not binding Muslims in any way. People call Al-Shabaab rebels because they are brainwashed by western media and the only truth to them is current world order by USA & co. and thinking outside the box is impossible for most. For them UN and USA determine what is legal authority and who are rebels and how the world should work...
This so-called educational clip is ridiculous. Wow, this guy heard one hadiith, so now he has like 1% of the knowledge of the issue and he's qualified to educate people while he hasn't studied the subject even two minutes of his life. Islamic science is very deep, but nowadays people think they can just define Islam out from their own head, while in any other issues (financial, medical etc) they go straight to professionals.
A quote about suicide bombings from older topic:
Issue of suicide bombings/camaliyaat istishaadiya is not as simple and clear as many here believe. This is a question of fiqh, not question of caqiida or xaqq and baatil. People who say stuff like "this group is clearly on baatil because they support suicide bombings" show only the extent of their own ignorance in religious issues.
Some times a hadiith or aayah is not self-explanatory, but needs deeper knowledge to extract the right xukm from it. It could be that it was given to a certain situation that is not clear from the actual wording when you read it. There could be some cillah (reason) behind the hadiith and if it's removed then hadiith is not taken literally. I'm also 99% sure that none of Somalinet forum members studied even one day usuul al-fiqh or maqaasid al-shariica, so our knowledge is very limited and it's just stupid to be very arrogant and certain in your own ignorance (I don't mean this topic, but speaking generally).
Some major scholars are on opinion that suicide bombings are haraam, while some other major scholars are on opinion that it's halaal. Both are perfectly legal fiqhi opinions.
Those who regard it haraam take the hadiith (quoted here earlier) about suicide literally, meaning that it's haraam in every case no matter what's the reason behind it.
Those who regard it halaal see that there is cillah behind the hadiith and it's killing oneself because of desperation and not being able to handle what Allah has written for him, but in some other case it could be ok. They base their ijtihaad on the hadiith about boy, sorcerer and king (where king couldn't kill the boy, but boy told him how to kill him for the greater good and thus basically killed himself). Other evidence are dozens of narrations about sahaaba and taabiciin throwing themselves alone into big enemy army with absolute certainty that they will be killed, but with the intention of terrifying enemies and trying to kill as many as possible while getting killed themselves. Think about the effect on the morale of enemy in war when they see Muslims as people who love death and run to fight alone against thousands. Classical culamaa permitted this action in Jihaad on able-bodied and good fighters, who can achieve that goal. But if someone is very weak or handicapped he will just be killed without benefit.
So those are basically the most quoted evidence for those who allow suicide bombings. Here's one narration about understanding the aayah completely wrong and also about attacking enemy army alone:
Al-Tirmidhi (2972) narrated that Aslam Abu ‘Imraan said: We were in the city of the Byzantines and there came out to us a large number of Byzantines. One of the Muslim men charged at the Byzantine ranks until he penetrated among them, and the people shouted and said: Subhaan Allaah! He has thrown himself into destruction! Abu Ayyoob al-Ansaari stood up and said: O people, you are misinterpreting this verse. Rather this verse was revealed concerning us Ansaar, when Allaah granted victory to Islam and the number of its supporters increased. We said to one another in private, and not to the Messenger of Allaah (blessings and peace of Allaah be upon him): Our wealth and property have diminished. Allaah has granted victory to Islam and the number of its supporters has increased. We should focus on our wealth and property and try to take care of them. Then Allaah revealed to His Prophet (blessings and peace of Allaah be upon him) a verse which refuted what we said: “And spend in the Cause of Allaah (i.e. Jihad of all kinds) and do not throw yourselves into destruction (by not spending your wealth in the Cause of Allaah)”. So destruction here referred to focusing on wealth and property, and abandoning jihad. Abu Ayyoob continued to strive in jihad for the sake of Allaah until he was buried in Constantinople.
So some of the Mujaahidiin understood the aayah wrong, while in reality the meaning was opposite of what they thought (in worldy sense).
Melo is right about the thing that those who regard camaliyaat istishaadiya xalaal, say that suicide bombings are not to be used as everyday weapon, but only when there's no other way to achieve some great goal in Jihaad. They haven't been very common in Somalia and I don't even know if the number of those kind of attacks exceed ten during these past years. Anyway those attacks targeting AMISOM-bases and even killing some of their leaders fall into this category in my opinion, because they couldn't be achieved any other way. One guy with concealed weapon could do much less harm than same guy with concealed explosives.
Anyway, these are fiqhi questions and after that issues of military tactics and strategy. Many times in these issues no one can be certain what is the absolute truth.
