PDA

View Full Version : Muslims dying daily



Gangster No.1
05-22-2007, 01:04 PM
Every day you watch the bbc news seing muslims being brutally tourtured yet the next day you see it again and again.
the nes shows you a minute or secs of muslims being bombed, and still they attack those civillians, and still no1 is helping them, muslim jihadist would fight the kafr yet still muslims are then ''TERRORISTS'' come on....dont you see this trickery kafr killing muslims, muslims not responding to do any thing to prevent this happening, yet when the kafr get killed its as if they just got another 9/11.

WE have been created for 1 reason, and one reason only to obey allah, allah tells us to not trust those who oppress muslims and islam. yet still the dirty muslims amongest the dirty kufr are together and killing more muslims, allah will bring justice to those murders in this ife or the hereafter but untill then isnt it our own duty to help our muslim brothers.

Allah hu akbar and we shall defeat the kafr who insult islam for a living, for there jobs to destroy islam, that is the fundemtals aspect of the kafr to destroy islam, to not give the muslims there own land in palestine and our mosque.

the day of judgement is just getting closser day by day untill the sun rises from the west then there shal not be no more asking for allah to forgive and believein him, becuz it will be tooooooo late.

muslims brothers and sisters remember we need to do what it takes to uphold islam in our life, and hereafter. Allah has given us a a tongue to speak out against wrong, and to use phsyically, if not in our hearts.

Remember we are living in 21st century where sins are common to do, without hesitation. TOO MUCH sins are being commited by ourselves, the brutall wars going on, and against who? against who you ask, AGAINST MUSLIMS!

yet still we are naivie what the kafr are doing doing there utmost best to finish what muslims want an islamic state, islam is true surely! but islam is all around us, our duty to help our brothers and sisters.

I feel so angry in what is happening in Iraq, Palestine and afganistan, I wish i could be there myslef inshallah and help those who are being tourted, familes being tourn apart, husnads sons being killed for joke!

Allah hu akbar, inshallah we all shall rise against the kafr, and what is to be done........allah no's best..............
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Muezzin
05-22-2007, 02:48 PM
Be angry with the situation of Muslims worldwide by all means, but understand that inciting violence is against the forum rules.
Reply

Gangster No.1
05-22-2007, 02:49 PM
erm...lol
why should it be taken off?
why is it wrong 2 say that?
Reply

Muezzin
05-22-2007, 02:52 PM
Originally Posted by Gangster No.1
erm...lol
why should it be taken off?
Because it will start a fight that will derail the thread.

why is it wrong 2 say that?
Because it's inciting violence, which is against the rules of this particular forum.

Carry on.
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
aamirsaab
05-22-2007, 02:52 PM
:sl:
Originally Posted by Gangster No.1
erm...lol
why should it be taken off?
why is it wrong 2 say that?
Because it isn't a very nice thing to say in the first place and does not show a good view of muslims.
Reply

Umar001
05-22-2007, 02:54 PM
I think the greatest injustice is here, we are doing it to ourself.

Look around, the average Mr Khan, Mr Usman and Mr Khalid what are their main concerns?

Instead of spending extra money purifyin ourselfs we spend it on razorz to alter our faces, instead of spending the time learning arabic we spend it at home watchin the FA Cup (oh well at least am not down the pub is the escuse we hear) instead of learning the basic meanings of the Shahada, the conditions of Salaah and knowledge otherwise obligatory upon us, we are not only imposing ourself but also our children to learn about Business and Finanace (all the time, not half and half but 24/7) instead of following our religion we follow our culture, how many muslims would there be if all of us were born non Muslim, meaning if we had to go out of our way to discover Islam?

Then we have a portion of us who do practice the deen but suffocate it with Bida' and the likes, instead of building the solid foundations we focous on acts of dispute not known by our forefathers.

And we want an Islamic state? Lead by...either Muslims who will worry more about their clean faces and football or Muslims who will practice Bida' in the state.

I don't want a Muslim by Background Let's do what we want state. Neither do I want a 'Let us get closer to Allah with matters unheard of when we have yet to perfect the matters which are clear' state.

People dying abroad and different places, they are dying in Islam, us here, we are dying for either dunya or bidah.

But I know there's a slow changetaking place, but until then I wonder.
Reply

Gangster No.1
05-22-2007, 03:15 PM
Originally Posted by Al Habeshi
I think the greatest injustice is here, we are doing it to ourself.

Look around, the average Mr Khan, Mr Usman and Mr Khalid what are their main concerns?

Instead of spending extra money purifyin ourselfs we spend it on razorz to alter our faces, instead of spending the time learning arabic we spend it at home watchin the FA Cup (oh well at least am not down the pub is the escuse we hear) instead of learning the basic meanings of the Shahada, the conditions of Salaah and knowledge otherwise obligatory upon us, we are not only imposing ourself but also our children to learn about Business and Finanace (all the time, not half and half but 24/7) instead of following our religion we follow our culture, how many muslims would there be if all of us were born non Muslim, meaning if we had to go out of our way to discover Islam?

Then we have a portion of us who do practice the deen but suffocate it with Bida' and the likes, instead of building the solid foundations we focous on acts of dispute not known by our forefathers.

And we want an Islamic state? Lead by...either Muslims who will worry more about their clean faces and football or Muslims who will practice Bida' in the state.

I don't want a Muslim by Background Let's do what we want state. Neither do I want a 'Let us get closer to Allah with matters unheard of when we have yet to perfect the matters which are clear' state.

People dying abroad and different places, they are dying in Islam, us here, we are dying for either dunya or bidah.

But I know there's a slow changetaking place, but until then I wonder.

how can you say that bro, having an islamic state which isnt done by what we want, but by what ''Allah has orderd'' the orders and the laws of islam reagrding islamic state, not what we want like you a state of what we want.

come on your just changing my words bro, having an islamic state is a duty for all muslims to uphold, as muslims by muslims!

and how can you justify the fact that muslims are dying across the world and we're are dying her, astagfurallah, i dont exactly rember whcih hadith it was but the prophet did say if a drop of a muslim blood drops, the rest should come to its aid< not a a quote(it is a hadith not in those words)

so when muslims are dying becuz of the kafr your telling me that is not our duty individually, in a group or a else to help them, to help them protect them being killed, and finished.


for example a group of people killing vunerable innocent people who believe in allah who live in their own land. and are being killed by another group which has weapons, more powerfull then others. yet your ganna let them die and not think of helping them to protect them, and to fight against those who are killing innocent civillians.

May allah give us the strength to fight those who reject allah and oppress muslims
.ameen..
Reply

Keltoi
05-22-2007, 03:17 PM
Who protects Muslims being killed by Muslims?
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
05-22-2007, 03:24 PM
Originally Posted by Keltoi
Who protects Muslims being killed by Muslims?
imagine you and your brother had a fight, thats ok right?

but then imagine some random unknown bunch of strangers came over, invaded your home and started killing you.


please try be more understanding :)
Reply

Umar001
05-22-2007, 03:28 PM
Originally Posted by Gangster No.1
how can you say that bro, having an islamic state which isnt done by what we want, but by what ''Allah has orderd'' the orders and the laws of islam reagrding islamic state, not what we want like you a state of what we want.

come on your just changing my words bro, having an islamic state is a duty for all muslims to uphold, as muslims by muslims!
It wasn't a reply to your statement as such akhi just my observation, the Islamic State I want is the one where we have a leader like our Prophet, i.e. the same as 'What Allah has ordered' but akhi how can we ever have one when Muslims, and you know it, are living the way we are, akhi, look at the Muslims in the Uk where I am from, look how many cant even keep a beard, let alone have ambitions of making a state, look how many walk around partially naked, let alone have a state, look how many follow innovated matters let alone follow the path of making a state.

This is the sad reality.

Originally Posted by Gangster No.1
and how can you justify the fact that muslims are dying across the world and we're are dying her, astagfurallah, i dont exactly rember whcih hadith it was but the prophet did say if a drop of a muslim blood drops, the rest should come to its aid< not a a quote(it is a hadith not in those words)
Akhi, I am not justifying it, but what I am saying is this, let me ask you, would you rather die without sin or live with sin? I would rather die without sin.

If I had my choice we'd have an Islamic State, if I had my choice I would not have my sisters raped and my brothers made to wathc their mothers being raped, you think I want that? No, at the same time, if I had a choice I would want my brothers to know what La Ilaha Ill Allah means, for without that they are vergin on being non Muslim right? And which is of the worst, being raped or suffering physically or suffering in the heart and playin on the path of disbelief?

Originally Posted by Gangster No.1
so when muslims are dying becuz of the kafr your telling me that is not our duty individually, in a group or a else to help them, to help them protect them being killed, and finished.
My noble brother, listen to me, I do not take joy out of my brothers dieng and my sisters being raped, I do not take joy out of my brothers being covered in feaces.

AND

Neither do I take joy at Muslims disobeying the Shariah, I do not take joy at Muslim not knowing what is obligatory for them to know.

But I acknowledge both are bad, but to me the worse situation is that of a Muslim boardering on disbelief than a muslim suffering physical persecution.


Originally Posted by Gangster No.1
for example a group of people killing vunerable innocent people who believe in allah who live in their own land. and are being killed by another group which has weapons, more powerfull then others. yet your ganna let them die and not think of helping them to protect them, and to fight against those who are killing innocent civillians.
You know akhi, I agree we should be firm and protect the innocent, but how? By neglecting the growin problem of ignorance amongst ourselfs? Are we to Tawāşaw (recommend one another to) patience and truth whilst we ourself are ignorant of the realities of patience and truth?

That is all I say.

Your brother,

Eesa.
Reply

Gangster No.1
05-22-2007, 03:38 PM
Originally Posted by Al Habeshi
It wasn't a reply to your statement as such akhi just my observation, the Islamic State I want is the one where we have a leader like our Prophet, i.e. the same as 'What Allah has ordered' but akhi how can we ever have one when Muslims, and you know it, are living the way we are, akhi, look at the Muslims in the Uk where I am from, look how many cant even keep a beard, let alone have ambitions of making a state, look how many walk around partially naked, let alone have a state, look how many follow innovated matters let alone follow the path of making a state.

This is the sad reality.



Akhi, I am not justifying it, but what I am saying is this, let me ask you, would you rather die without sin or live with sin? I would rather die without sin.

If I had my choice we'd have an Islamic State, if I had my choice I would not have my sisters raped and my brothers made to wathc their mothers being raped, you think I want that? No, at the same time, if I had a choice I would want my brothers to know what La Ilaha Ill Allah means, for without that they are vergin on being non Muslim right? And which is of the worst, being raped or suffering physically or suffering in the heart and playin on the path of disbelief?



My noble brother, listen to me, I do not take joy out of my brothers dieng and my sisters being raped, I do not take joy out of my brothers being covered in feaces.

AND

Neither do I take joy at Muslims disobeying the Shariah, I do not take joy at Muslim not knowing what is obligatory for them to know.

But I acknowledge both are bad, but to me the worse situation is that of a Muslim boardering on disbelief than a muslim suffering physical persecution.




You know akhi, I agree we should be firm and protect the innocent, but how? By neglecting the growin problem of ignorance amongst ourselfs? Are we to Tawāşaw (recommend one another to) patience and truth whilst we ourself are ignorant of the realities of patience and truth?

That is all I say.

Your brother,

Eesa.
:sl:
brother i briefly read a bit of what you said i have now finished work, i cant carry on chatting/discussing, inshallah tommorw i will.!

inshallah
peace:w:
Reply

IceQueen~
05-22-2007, 03:55 PM
Yeah lots of bad things are happening to the Muslims nowadays but if you look at our situation-- we're not exactly behaving so perfectly ourselves as al-habeshi pointed out...

When the Ummah was following the Quran and Sunnah properly, they were victorious everywhere mashaAllah and excelled in the dunyah and deen..

If you look at Islamic history and Islam's contribution to all the spheres of knowledge- science/maths/astronomy etc you'll see this point inshaAllah

But when Muslims left their religion and fell for the dunya they grew weak..

Remember what the Prophet (saw) said- we will be destroyed by our love for this dunya and fear of death---isn't that our present situation...?

Then how can we complain? we should work on improving ourselves and our families first inshaAllah

May Allah Unite the Ummah of the Prophet (saw) on His path amiin
Reply

glo
05-22-2007, 04:13 PM
Originally Posted by Muezzin
Because it will start a fight that will derail the thread.
Wise words, Muezzin ... almost prophetic!
That's exactly what's happening to this thread ...

Peace
Reply

Cognescenti
05-22-2007, 05:09 PM
On first blush, the kufr reading this thread might be offended at being called a murderer....but, not to fear, it seems we are "tricky" too. Woohoo!

Here is hoping to see you all at the 2007 Tricky Kufr Conference in Maui in September.

Please remember to bring your invisible ink and decoder rings.
Reply

Sami Zaatari
05-22-2007, 06:37 PM
Originally Posted by Keltoi
Who protects Muslims being killed by Muslims?
if two groups of muslims are fighting, the ruling is that you should not interfere as both of them will be going to hell as it is not permissible for muslims to fight muslims.
Reply

guyabano
05-22-2007, 06:37 PM
Respect ! It's the only word which comes straight to my mind. Respect to the words of the mods how they reply to Gangsta ! Anyway, thats what he wanted, start a fight. In UK, you would call him a hooligan !
He might me a muslim, but not one of the good ones. It's the kind of person, who give the bad image to islam
Reply

England
05-22-2007, 06:40 PM
Originally Posted by guyabano
Respect ! It's the only word which comes straight to my mind. Respect to the words of the mods how they reply to Gangsta ! Anyway, thats what he wanted, start a fight. In UK, you would call him a hooligan !
He might me a muslim, but not one of the good ones. It's the kind of person, who give the bad image to islam
It's the same perception of muslim that I imagined the majority of muslims to be before I started this forum. I used to think ALL muslims had the same mind as him. Sometimes that negative thought does crop up in mind now and then about muslims especially when I hear of things.
Reply

Tobias_Muslim
05-22-2007, 06:41 PM
When one muslim suffers, all muslim suffers. I don't wanna break the rules, so i'm not gonna go deep into this discusion. But i think everyone should show their support to Mujahideens all over the world. But i dislike it when Muslims target civilians, they should not lower themself to the same level as the soldiers of America/Russia/Israel/etc.
Reply

Sami Zaatari
05-22-2007, 06:41 PM
Volume 1, Book 2, Number 30:
Narrated Al-Ahnaf bin Qais:
While I was going to help this man ('Ali Ibn Abi Talib), Abu Bakra met me and asked, "Where are you going?" I replied, "I am going to help that person." He said, "Go back for I have heard Allah's Apostle saying, 'When two Muslims fight (meet) each other with their swords, both the murderer as well as the murdered will go to the Hell-fire.' I said, 'O Allah's Apostle! It is all right for the murderer but what about the murdered one?' Allah's Apostle replied, "He surely had the intention to kill his companion."
Reply

Cognescenti
05-22-2007, 06:51 PM
Originally Posted by Tobias_Muslim
When one muslim suffers, all muslim suffers. I don't wanna break the rules, so i'm not gonna go deep into this discusion. But i think everyone should show their support to Mujahideens all over the world. But i dislike it when Muslims target civilians, they should not lower themself to the same level as the soldiers of America/Russia/Israel/etc.
Too late.
Reply

KAding
05-22-2007, 09:36 PM
The killing won't stop when the West retreats, but it will get a whole lot less attention from both sides. There was plenty of killing in Iraq and Afghanistan before the US invaded, after all there were civil wars going on in both countries. The only real difference is that there were no cameras and journalist to report on it back then. Heck, there are still civil wars going on in those countries. This whole idea of 'the Muslims' vs. 'the kafirs' is a complete myth. Nobody really cared about the millions of deaths from Saddam's wars and oppression. Muslims killing Muslims usually embarrasses Muslims, so they stay quiet. Similarly, the West usually cares little when there is a civil war going on and none of the Western nations are involved.

So I suppose in a way I agree with you, lets retreat from the region. Everybody will be happy, except the victims of Muslim infighting course. But then again: "If a tree falls in the forest, and there is no one to hear it, does it make a sound?"
Reply

Gangster No.1
05-23-2007, 08:17 AM
Originally Posted by Tobias_Muslim
When one muslim suffers, all muslim suffers. I don't wanna break the rules, so i'm not gonna go deep into this discusion. But i think everyone should show their support to Mujahideens all over the world. But i dislike it when Muslims target civilians, they should not lower themself to the same level as the soldiers of America/Russia/Israel/etc.

:sl:
Exactly!
when a muslim is hurt the other muslims should be hurt for him, he should help him in any mean so he woudnt be hurt again, how can you actually say that when muslims are being killed we shouldnt do anything and we should correct ourselves first. No No No

Fair enough we all no that no one is perfect!

even if your a sinner, and there is another brother/sis who is being hurt/killed that you wouldnt do nothing for them, you wouldnt fight for them, AND THEN YOU SAY WE SHOULD CORRECT OURSELVES FIRST?

No, that is totally wrong!
Reply

Zman
05-23-2007, 03:36 PM
Originally Posted by Al Habeshi
I think the greatest injustice is here, we are doing it to ourself.

Look around, the average Mr Khan, Mr Usman and Mr Khalid what are their main concerns?

Instead of spending extra money purifyin ourselfs we spend it on razorz to alter our faces, instead of spending the time learning arabic we spend it at home watchin the FA Cup (oh well at least am not down the pub is the escuse we hear) instead of learning the basic meanings of the Shahada, the conditions of Salaah and knowledge otherwise obligatory upon us, we are not only imposing ourself but also our children to learn about Business and Finanace (all the time, not half and half but 24/7)
:sl:

I find nothing wrong with doing both, as long as it's in moderation and not going to either extremes.

"Altering our faces," is considered hygiene. Allah (SWT) Is Beautiful and likes beauty.

I'd rather present myself with a trimmed beard than go out donning an unkept beard (no disrespect to the brothers with large beards). As long as it's well kept. This is Just my preference.

Besides, having a beard is a Sunnah, and not obligatory. IMHO, mastering the "Fard" outweighs my concentration on certain Sunnah's (don't get me wrong, it's not as negative as it sounds. I'm not saying that we should totaly disregard the Sunnah. Just to get our priorities straight).

Because, I've found brothers who have turned these upside-down. Where they concentrate on the beard, the siwak and above the heals pants, and don't perform their daily prayers, fasting, zakat, consistently, etc (that's what I meant).

And there is also nothing wrong with concentrating on the sciences along with the religion.

One of the reasons Muslims fell behind is due to the over-concentration on religious aspects (not talking about Ibadah) and forgoing our duty to the scientific field.

It's like many Muslim parents urge (sometimes, demand) that their children "choose" to become physicians, lawyers, engineers and pharmacists. What about the other fields that they're neglecting. And they choose those particular fields due to their monetary gains and worldly status.

Moderation is the key to our daily lives...
Reply

England
05-23-2007, 05:17 PM
Originally Posted by Gangster No.1
:sl:
Exactly!
when a muslim is hurt the other muslims should be hurt for him, he should help him in any mean so he woudnt be hurt again, how can you actually say that when muslims are being killed we shouldnt do anything and we should correct ourselves first. No No No

Fair enough we all no that no one is perfect!

even if your a sinner, and there is another brother/sis who is being hurt/killed that you wouldnt do nothing for them, you wouldnt fight for them, AND THEN YOU SAY WE SHOULD CORRECT OURSELVES FIRST?

No, that is totally wrong!

Go to the battlefields and fight then... :rollseyes Don't forget to leave us your measurements for your coffin. :)
Reply

don532
05-23-2007, 05:25 PM
Originally Posted by Sami Zaatari
if two groups of muslims are fighting, the ruling is that you should not interfere as both of them will be going to hell as it is not permissible for muslims to fight muslims.
That brings to mind a question I have been pondering. In the muslim view, should the coalition have stayed out of Kuwait and let Iraq take that country over? Was then Saudi Arabia wrong, in the muslim view, for being a part of the coalition that fought against Iraq in Kuwait?
Reply

Cognescenti
05-23-2007, 05:28 PM
Originally Posted by don532
That brings to mind a question I have been pondering. In the muslim view, should the coalition have stayed out of Kuwait and let Iraq take that country over? Was then Saudi Arabia wrong, in the muslim view, for being a part of the coalition that fought against Iraq in Kuwait?
Not to mention Syria........."Does not compute, does not compute.....<smoke begins to issue from overloaded transistors>
Reply

aamirsaab
05-23-2007, 06:16 PM
:sl:
Originally Posted by don532
That brings to mind a question I have been pondering. In the muslim view, should the coalition have stayed out of Kuwait and let Iraq take that country over? Was then Saudi Arabia wrong, in the muslim view, for being a part of the coalition that fought against Iraq in Kuwait?
Originally Posted by Cognescenti
Not to mention Syria........."Does not compute, does not compute.....<smoke begins to issue from overloaded transistors>
This is exactly why I hate the world affairs section: everyone gets a headache and I have to clean up the mess :p.

What ''muslim'' countries do nowadays is not neccesarily always what is the Islamic thing to do. Sometimes they interfere when they shouldn't (Iraq part 2 - The fall of saddam and/or Afghanistan) and sometimes they don't intefere when they should (Israel and Palestine) - which is largely to do with the fact that the ruling parties don't actually give a flying rat's assparagus about the other people really and just do whatever they feel like.
Reply

don532
05-23-2007, 06:34 PM
Originally Posted by aamirsaab
:sl:




This is exactly why I hate the world affairs section: everyone gets a headache and I have to clean up the mess :p.

What ''muslim'' countries do nowadays is not neccesarily always what is the Islamic thing to do. Sometimes they interfere when they shouldn't (Iraq part 2 - The fall of saddam) and sometimes they don't intefere when they should (Israel and Palestine) - which is largely to do with the fact that the ruling parties don't actually give a flying rat's assparagus about the other people really and just do whatever they feel like.
The reason I asked was I had a muslim tell me in another forum the US should have kept their assparagus out of Kuwait and the country was worse off now that the Iraqi army is gone. I figured that guy was a nutter, but when the idea of never interfering in a muslim vs muslim conflict came up, I thought maybe that's where he got the idea.
Reply

Cognescenti
05-23-2007, 06:47 PM
Originally Posted by aamirsaab
:sl:




This is exactly why I hate the world affairs section: everyone gets a headache and I have to clean up the mess :p.

What ''muslim'' countries do nowadays is not neccesarily always what is the Islamic thing to do. Sometimes they interfere when they shouldn't (Iraq part 2 - The fall of saddam and/or Afghanistan) and sometimes they don't intefere when they should (Israel and Palestine) - which is largely to do with the fact that the ruling parties don't actually give a flying rat's assparagus about the other people really and just do whatever they feel like.
That was a pretty good answer aamirsaab
Reply

Akil
05-23-2007, 06:54 PM
Muslims are dying daily . . .. At the hands of those who would call themselves Muslims.

Focus on the plank in your own eye, before the spec in your brother’s eye.
Reply

Zman
05-23-2007, 07:38 PM
Originally Posted by don532
That brings to mind a question I have been pondering. In the muslim view, should the coalition have stayed out of Kuwait and let Iraq take that country over?

Actually, the Arab nations were in the process of mediating between Iraq & Kuwait, and the U.S. government didn't want those efforts to succeed. That is why they moved so fast to rush in troops to Saudi Arabia.

Also, Cheney and Powell took doctored satellite photo's of a fabricated Iraqi military machine massing on the Kuwati/Saudi border, which didn't exist.

The U.S. government then scuttled the Arab League meeting in Cairo, and pressured the Mubarak government into siding with the "Coalition," against Iraq.

Without prior Egyptian/Saudi approval (a guaranteed Arab umbrella coverage for the attack on Iraq), the US wouldn't have been able to enter Saudi Arabia or to attack & destroy Iraq in such a manner.

Saddam Hussein once said that his biggest strategic surprise was that Egypt sided with the US against Iraq.

By bringing Egypt & Saudi Arabia into the "Coalitions fold, the U.S. guaranteed itself an Arab Umbrella, which it then claimed that this wasn't an attack on an Arab/Islamic nation, nor was it an occupation of Saudi Arabia, nor did it seek hegemony over the number 1 exporter of Oil in the world.

Ironically, the massive military bases in Saudi Arabia weren't really built for the Saudi's. They were way too large for their armed forces. Egypt, and Iran don't even have bases that large.

After the Arab oil boycot that was instituted against the West for its support for Israeli aggression, after the 1973 war with Israel was over, the U.S. started to plan on having large and permanent military bases in the region (for interventions). That's how those bases came into being.

Was then Saudi Arabia wrong, in the muslim view, for being a part of the coalition that fought against Iraq in Kuwait?

Yes. it aided in the destruction of a fellow Arab state.

With hind sight, the basing of U.S. troops in Arabia (even after the "liberation" of Kuwait) was one of reasons that heralded in the rise of terrorism and anti-Americanism.

That led to 9/11, the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq (and it's utter destruction, and its unravelling as a society), the GWOT, Rendition, Guantanamo, and the instrusiveness of state security into our personal lives, and the curtailing of some freedoms.

Every action begets a reaction and a consequence.
Reply

don532
05-23-2007, 07:49 PM
Actually, the Arab nations were in the process of mediating between Iraq & Kuwait, and the U.S. government didn't want those efforts to succeed.
Mediating between Iraq and Kuwait? How? Iraq took Kuwait over militarily.
Reply

don532
05-23-2007, 07:51 PM
Was then Saudi Arabia wrong, in the muslim view, for being a part of the coalition that fought against Iraq in Kuwait?

Yes. it aided in the destruction of a fellow Arab state.
I wonder what the people of Kuwait would say about that.
Reply

Zman
05-23-2007, 07:57 PM
Originally Posted by don532
Mediating between Iraq and Kuwait? How? Iraq took Kuwait over militarily.

I know that. But Egypt was perfoming shuttle diplomacy at the time.

Mubarak had asked Bush Sr. for some time, in order to let the Arabs solve that crisis diplomatically and amongst themselves. Bush refused.

Egypt was tackling several issues at once:

1. Iraq's debts to Kuwait (specifically, since they were in debt to a few Arab countries).

2. Kuwait's theft of Iraqi oil (they were parallel drilling, from the Kuwaiti side, and going underneath the internationally recognized border, into Iraqi territory and withdrawing their oil).

3. And the military invasion of Kuwait, and Iraq's withdrawal.

Saddam also offered to withdraw, but Bush Sr. ignored it and proceeded with the attack...
Reply

Zman
05-23-2007, 08:05 PM
Originally Posted by don532
I wonder what the people of Kuwait would say about that.

Of course they were thrilled at being liberated. But, the Orthodox Muslim organizations weren't happy at was was done to Iraq & it's civilian population as a whole. They could care less about what happened to Saddam and his government.

And you gotta look at the bigger picture. The entire Arab/Islamic World. How do THEY feel about that. Their opinion does count, and their actions carry weight...
Reply

wilberhum
05-23-2007, 08:11 PM
Originally Posted by Zman


Saddam also offered to withdraw, but Bush Sr. ignored it and proceeded with the attack...
Woooooo nelley. One: Saddam always lied. Two: It wasn't Bush, it was the UN.
Reply

Cognescenti
05-23-2007, 09:33 PM
Originally Posted by Zman

I know that. But Egypt was perfoming shuttle diplomacy at the time.

Mubarak had asked Bush Sr. for some time, in order to let the Arabs solve that crisis diplomatically and amongst themselves. Bush refused.

Egypt was tackling several issues at once:

1. Iraq's debts to Kuwait (specifically, since they were in debt to a few Arab countries).

2. Kuwait's theft of Iraqi oil (they were parallel drilling, from the Kuwaiti side, and going underneath the internationally recognized border, into Iraqi territory and withdrawing their oil).

3. And the military invasion of Kuwait, and Iraq's withdrawal.

Saddam also offered to withdraw, but Bush Sr. ignored it and proceeded with the attack...
The time for the Arab League to solve a long-standing, festering problem between Iraq and Kuwait was before an Iraqi invasion. Here is my question....has the Arab League ever solved a serious international dispute? It always seem they spend the first day arguing about seating arrangements and the second day calling each other names...then the ambassador of X or Y storms out, offended. The only thing they seem to be able to agree on is the usual condemnation of Israel.

Saddam had absolute power, he was a tyrant, he was impulsive, he lacked awareness of (or contempt for) the subtleties of international relations (not surprising for a proven, lying sociopath). Once he had what he wanted in Kuwait, he wasn't going to give it back by having cucumber sandwiches with Mubarak. You say the threat to the Saudi was trumped up? Clearly they saw him as a threat.

As for Saddam's last minute offer to withdraw..:rollseyes ...great, so he could stall for a year or do it again in 6 months somewhere else withhis military intact?
Reply

Zman
05-23-2007, 10:08 PM
Originally Posted by Cognescenti
The time for the Arab League to solve a long-standing, festering problem between Iraq and Kuwait was before an Iraqi invasion.

Solutions come after problems arise.

Also, once Iraq hurled its accusation that Kuwait was stealing its oil (before the invasion took place), certain Arab nations were addressing this. It may not have been a top priority, nonetheless, it was being addressed.

Here is my question....has the Arab League ever solved a serious international dispute?

No, the Arab League has never solved an international dispute. That is because it is a regional organization.

It has conducted successful mediations and resolutions to crisis, disputes and wars.

One recent event was the ending of the Lebanese civil war (with the aid of Egypt and Saudi Arabia).
Reply

Cognescenti
05-24-2007, 10:02 PM
Originally Posted by Zman

Solutions come after problems arise.

Also, once Iraq hurled its accusation that Kuwait was stealing its oil (before the invasion took place), certain Arab nations were addressing this. It may not have been a top priority, nonetheless, it was being addressed.
I dare say there was a problem before the invasion of Kuwait. The real problem was the debts accumulated from the disastrous war with Iran which had been partially funded with loans from other Arab states. Clearly, the measures taken were insufficient.


No, the Arab League has never solved an international dispute. That is because it is a regional organization.

It has conducted successful mediations and resolutions to crisis, disputes and wars.

One recent event was the ending of the Lebanese civil war (with the aid of Egypt and Saudi Arabia).
Ah you mean the Lebanese Civil War that went on for 15 years! Quite an urgent action by the Arab League then, wasn't it? You can't on one hand fault the US (through the UN) for addressing the crisis in Kuwait while offering the Arab League (or even Mubarak acting "alone") as a solution on the other. Quite likely, Mubarak was sent with the full assent of the US Government. It wasn't really his fault he failed. It was Hussein's fault. Hussein thought he could get away with it. He seriously miscalcualted.

BTW..the Lebanese Civil War was arguably an international problem, given the involvement of the Syrians.
Reply

beespreeteam
05-25-2007, 04:29 AM
Originally Posted by Sami Zaatari
if two groups of muslims are fighting, the ruling is that you should not interfere as both of them will be going to hell as it is not permissible for muslims to fight muslims.
errr..

Narrated by Anas:
Allah’s Apostle said: “Help your brother whether he is an oppressor or an oppressed,” A man said, “O Allah’s Apostle! I will help him if he is oppressed, but if he is an oppressor, how should I help him?” The Prophet said, “By preventing him from oppressing (others), for that is how to help him.”
[Al-Bukhari: 85, 84]

Also, I'm sure I've read a hadith where it was stated that solving a problem between brothers was more worthy of reward than itikaf.

correct me if I'm wrong, just wondering.
Reply

00:00
05-25-2007, 10:04 AM
.................
Reply

Akil
05-25-2007, 08:16 PM
Zman “your facts” are questionable and smack of propaganda and baseless conspiracy theories. Any sources for these wild claims?
Reply

Sami Zaatari
05-25-2007, 08:27 PM
Originally Posted by beespreeteam
errr..

Narrated by Anas:
Allah’s Apostle said: “Help your brother whether he is an oppressor or an oppressed,” A man said, “O Allah’s Apostle! I will help him if he is oppressed, but if he is an oppressor, how should I help him?” The Prophet said, “By preventing him from oppressing (others), for that is how to help him.”
[Al-Bukhari: 85, 84]

Also, I'm sure I've read a hadith where it was stated that solving a problem between brothers was more worthy of reward than itikaf.

correct me if I'm wrong, just wondering.
making peace is different than getting involved in the fight. :)
Reply

Zman
05-25-2007, 10:18 PM
Originally Posted by Cognescenti
I dare say there was a problem before the invasion of Kuwait. The real problem was the debts accumulated from the disastrous war with Iran which had been partially funded with loans from other Arab states. Clearly, the measures taken were insufficient.

Firstly, our ambassador to Kuwait gave Saddam the green light to handle the Kuwaiti issue, directly.

Secondly, the U.S. government provided Saddam with sattelite imagery of Iranian troop deployments, during that war.

Do you not remember the image of Rumsfeld in Baghdad shaking Saddams hand (I believe 2 weeks after the massacre of the Kurds of Halabjah).

Thirdly, the U.S. government supplied Saddam with the chemical weapons that were used against the Iranians and the Iraqi Kurds.

And some Arab states actively supported Iraq through financial aid and military hardware. They made it appear as an "Arab vs. Persian" War. So, he was in some way representing them in this war.

Lastly, Saddam was wrong, but by no means is he solely responsible for what happened.

BTW..the Lebanese Civil War was arguably an international problem, given the involvement of the Syrians.

Wrong again. It was a regional crisis.

The Syrians were invited in by the Lebanese government (after the civil war started, and it was obvious that the Lebanese government couldn't contain it), with the approval of the Arab League and it's member states. They were there in an attempt to separate the warring factions.

The civil war lasted 15 years due to the involvement of many foreign governments, who used Lebanese soil & people as pawns (a proxy nation) in their Cold War battles.

Some of those nations were: the Israeli's, the U.S. the Soviet Union, the French, the Libyans, the saudis, then the Syrians got involved by supporting some factions, etc.

Technically that's when it became secondarily an international issue, due to the foreign actors that were involved (But, primarily, it was still a regional issue).

But, it was resolved by the Arab nations on a regional level. The U.N. nor the West had a hand in its resolution...
Reply

Zman
05-25-2007, 10:23 PM
Originally Posted by Akil
Zman “your facts” are questionable and smack of propaganda and baseless conspiracy theories.

Of course they are. That's your convenient excuse for shooting-down an issue that doesn't conform to your own views.

Any sources for these wild claims?

Yes there are. But, I gave you the info, it's your obligation to disprove what I said.

I'm not going to do your work for you...

So, either prove me wrong, or hold your peace..
Reply

Akil
05-26-2007, 02:30 PM
Yes there are. But, I gave you the info, it's your obligation to disprove what I said.

I'm not going to do your work for you...

So, either prove me wrong, or hold your peace..
That’s not the way it works homie. I’m guessing you were never on a debate team >.<

What you have confirmed for me is either you have made this up and have no sources other than your own imagination and perhaps things you have been told OR your smart enough to realize the sources you do have are totally un-credible and would destroy your own argument.
Reply

Zman
05-26-2007, 03:06 PM
Originally Posted by Akil
That’s not the way it works homie. I’m guessing you were never on a debate team >.<

What you have confirmed for me is either you have made this up and have no sources other than your own imagination and perhaps things you have been told OR your smart enough to realize the sources you do have are totally un-credible and would destroy your own argument.

Another unsuccessful evasion. So be it...
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: 34
    Last Post: 05-29-2015, 06:30 PM
  2. Replies: 27
    Last Post: 08-11-2010, 03:31 AM
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-16-2007, 01:05 AM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-31-2006, 05:22 PM
  5. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 02-07-2006, 11:24 PM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!