Qur'an promote war?

schmikbob wrote: I understand what you are saying Chrysalis.  My point does not concern the literal meaning of the word.  My point was that Muslim leaders of the first 1300 years after the revealing of the Quran have further defined it to be literal war or armed conflict.  That has changed in the last 100 years probably because it is not a sound long term strategy to go around calling for armed conflict against anyone that is a non-believer.  It tends to unite the unbelievers against you.

Can you support your assertions with some darn evidence?
You sound like you been reading too much of the Bob Spencer gutter sniping @Jihad Watch!
If the Muslims leaders of first 1300 as you assert were into Jihad there would be no European colonialism or Hinduism left...The latter day Jihad was fashioned and funded and pushed by the Americanos after the communist take over of Afghanistan and that is well documented history...
And btw what has the united unbelieving NATO forces have achieved in that place lately...LOL


Edited by Sign*Reader - 08 November 2010 at 8:27pm

Sign Reader, you need to read a little closer.  I did not say the Muslim leaders of 1300, I said the Muslim leaders of the last 1300 years following the revealing of the Quran.  Also, with reference to European colonialism and Hinduism, just because the Muslim Jihads were halted and pushed back doesn't mean that they didn't occur.  I wonder if you understand what the Christian Crusades were a response to??  Lastly, what was pushed by President Reagan in the 1980's was the rolling back of cummunism and the Soviet Union which succeeded.  It had nothing to do with religion.  How that was done was deplorable only because you and I have perfect 20/20 hindsight.  I'm not sure what "the combined unbelieving NATO forces" have to do with this thread but I've come to accept your throwing around all manner of irrelavent opinions in your relentless attempt to blame all the worlds ills on the United States. 

Chrysalis wrote: schmikbob wrote: Chrysalis, I am curious if you actually believe this "Actually I think the media has defined Jihad to be literal war or armed conflict... not us Muslims". Perhaps I should rephrase: Yes I believe it is the media that has put Jihad under a microscope and put it in a box to mean only an armed struggle.

Thank you (and others) for clarifying the term "jihad" for us, and what it means within the context of Islam. If only this message could be spread a little wider, perhaps there would be less fear and mistrust from non-Muslims toward Muslims in general.

I'm sure that most reasonable Westerners (especially those in the U.S.) will agree that the domestic media here tends to shape public opinion around what the domestic "government" wants to spread as propaganda to its own people. Being able to see this phenomenon as it actually is helps those of us who are not swayed by such blatant lies to appreciate the truth about other religions such as Islam.

It also helps to point a finger at the real culprit in such hateful fomentation: the government itself. Which then poses an interesting question: why would the government (or those in government) wish to do such a thing? 

Attempting to answer that question may be a bit more complicated than most people are willing to pursue. Certainly, the implications of such are not very pleasant to contemplate.

schmikbob wrote: Sign Reader, you need to read a little closer.  I did not say the Muslim leaders of 1300, I said the Muslim leaders of the last 1300 years following the revealing of the Quran.  Also, with reference to European colonialism and Hinduism, just because the Muslim Jihads were halted and pushed back doesn't mean that they didn't occur.  I wonder if you understand what the Christian Crusades were a response to??  Lastly, what was pushed by President Reagan in the 1980's was the rolling back of cummunism and the Soviet Union which succeeded.  It had nothing to do with religion.  How that was done was deplorable only because you and I have perfect 20/20 hindsight.  I'm not sure what "the combined unbelieving NATO forces" have to do with this thread but I've come to accept your throwing around all manner of irrelavent opinions in your relentless attempt to blame all the worlds ills on the United States.

I may unscrew your head and screw it back on the right way...
And I am going to make it bit clearer for a dense agnostic's edification... There were only three dynasties, that held the realm... Ummayads,  Abbasids and then Ottomans and I wouldn't count others like the Mugals etc.
The first one got established after a settling a conflict amongst Muslims, the second one after an insurrection led by a non Arab group against the last Ummayad ruler and the third one was a Turkish interest that began by consolidation of the Muslim ruled states in present day Turkey and remnants of the Abbasid empire that was knocked over by Halago Khan...that makes a span of 1300 years!
So pray tell, where was the Jihad in these 1300 years?
It is the branding of crusades in the western psyche that has kept flames of colonialism alive for ever and force other to do the same by default! Wasn't the Bush war against Iraq and Afghans a crusade!
So by default what choice do you let the victims have?
And here is perfect article about the Crusades: I bet it will blow you away even if you intro as ignostic:
Tomgram: John Feffer, Crusade 2.0 &The lies of Islamophobia

There was no certainty of rolling back of Communism!
It was a covert scheme that kindled the effort, the result was a serendipity that even blew past Bush Sr. when USSR gone broke decided to withdraw from fighting Afghan guerrillas...

Don't tell me about your ignorance, if Americans had done all that overtly it would have been a WWIII.
That was a war on the cheap but the current one the shoe is on the other foot the most expensive now, that driven zionist occupied government has gone broke being told by the world to quit printing money to fight crusades...lol

If the genesis of the Afghan Jihad was American doing, hindsight 20/20!LOL Every criminal pleads the same thing! Just don't deny the evidence and continue to obfuscate and blame the victims!
You need to listen to Dr. Petit's press talk... in America there are no victims rights and same mentality pervades every where they go crusading!

The NATO thing was in response to your comment about "It tends to unite the unbelievers against you" Duh...



Edited by Sign*Reader - 09 November 2010 at 4:57pm