I am interested in knowing how Muslims look at terrorism done by groups like Islamic state and al-Qaeda.
Is it allowed to kill in the name of your god like they do? If they with sincere hearts are striving to have a state where the
laws of the koran will be fulfilled with no western influence, is it then lawful?
- Please be as objective as possible, less bias and your own feelings and more of the koran. I would like to have information I can use as an example of the Muslim perspective on terrorism.
If you are willing to help me and to give me profitable knowledge about this topic, I will be very grateful.
I'll let others answer your question, in the mean time can you answer mine?
I"m interested in knowing how many westerners look at terrorism one by groups like usa and uk
is it ok to kill in the name of Jesus with bible verse numbers printed on the bullets? will the crusades, invasions, occupations and war crimes committed by them in Muslims lands in the name of demoncracy win the "hearts and minds" of those they wipe out?
- Please be as objective as possible, less bias and your own feelings and more of the truth. I would like to have information I can use as an example of the western christan perspective on terrorism, especially state terrorism.
I'll let others answer your question, in the mean time can you answer mine?
I"m interested in knowing how many westerners look at terrorism one by groups like usa and uk
is it ok to kill in the name of Jesus with bible verse numbers printed on the bullets? will the crusades, invasions, occupations and war crimes committed by them in Muslims lands in the name of demoncracy win the "hearts and minds" of those they wipe out?
- Please be as objective as possible, less bias and your own feelings and more of the truth. I would like to have information I can use as an example of the western christan perspective on terrorism, especially state terrorism.
I see you are making fun of my statement. I personally am against any kind of terrorism and war.
The only thing I know of terrorism from the Muslim perspective is, that there is many kinds of beliefs because not many Muslims support those terrorist groups in the middle east. So I would like to know what the Qur'an says about that, and in which foundation other Muslim believers stand on.
I am terribly sorry if I have offended you by any means. I would like a mature Muslim to answer my question formally with no ridicule. Thank you.
We have had here already several discussions about this matter (daesh/al-qaeda, terrorism, using Islam for hate speech etc.) during the last year. Why we should start same again and again? Have you searched earlier discussions before started this topic? If not, please do it first.
I am interested in knowing how Muslims look at terrorism done by groups like Islamic state and al-Qaeda.
Is it allowed to kill in the name of your god like they do? If they with sincere hearts are striving to have a state where the
laws of the koran will be fulfilled with no western influence, is it then lawful?
- Please be as objective as possible, less bias and your own feelings and more of the koran. I would like to have information I can use as an example of the Muslim perspective on terrorism.
If you are willing to help me and to give me profitable knowledge about this topic, I will be very grateful.
Grace and peace!
the question is highly insulting.
it is as if you are questioning the morals and ethics of the quran itself .
as posters have said ,the question has been answered .
We have had here already several discussions about this matter (daesh/al-qaeda, terrorism, using Islam for hate speech etc.) during the last year. Why we should start same again and again?
I can answer that. The reason is very simple. There continues to be right different Islamist non-state terror networks with a net worth of hundreds of millions of US dollars, and all eight of them have a truly global reach and are capable of waging war as if they were nation states with a military, even though they are not. Within the past year, two such networks have been valued at 1 trillion and 2 trillion USD respectively.
That's why this is still a thing. And it will continue to be a major point of interest, by my best estimate, until about half of those networks are no longer operational in their current capacity and the net worth of the remaining networks is less than half a trillion USD, collectively.
That's a good question, and this is the best answer that I know how to give at this time.
I can answer that. The reason is very simple. There continues to be right different Islamist non-state terror networks with a net worth of hundreds of millions of US dollars, and all eight of them have a truly global reach and are capable of waging war as if they were nation states with a military, even though they are not. Within the past year, two such networks have been valued at 1 trillion and 2 trillion USD respectively.
That's why this is still a thing. And it will continue to be a major point of interest, by my best estimate, until about half of those networks are no longer operational in their current capacity and the net worth of the remaining networks is less than half a trillion USD, collectively.
That's a good question, and this is the best answer that I know how to give at this time.
Was it ok for the US to buy oil from ISIS, all the while claiming that they were fighting them?
Was it ok for the US to buy oil from ISIS, all the while claiming that they were fighting them?
I'm not aware of any credible evidence that would indicate the US has bought oil from Daesh. Additionally, the US doesn't just claim to fight Daesh- the US really does fight Daesh and does a very good job of it too.
Now, in answer to the core of the question, it is wrong to buy oil from Daesh and help fund them. So Turkey, and Bilal in particular, was wrong for doing that. It is also wrong to buy stolen antiquities from them and help fund Daesh. Many regular citizens have done this in North America and Europe, perhaps with varying levels of knowledge as to where the money was going, but in general that is wrong as well. Of course it's wrong to help fund Daesh.
I'm not aware of any credible evidence that would indicate the US has bought oil from Daesh. Additionally, the US doesn't just claim to fight Daesh- the US really does fight Daesh and does a very good job of it too.
Now, in answer to the core of the question, it is wrong to buy oil from Daesh and help fund them. So Turkey, and Bilal in particular, was wrong for doing that. It is also wrong to buy stolen antiquities from them and help fund Daesh. Many regular citizens have done this in North America and Europe, perhaps with varying levels of knowledge as to where the money was going, but in general that is wrong as well. Of course it's wrong to help fund Daesh.
I hope you like those sources.
You must have missed several reports in American newspapers and entire maps of where oil is bought and sold in The Times.
Pain and hardships allow you to grow spiritually Alhamdulilah so smile when a so called calamity befalls upon you.
Alhamdulilah Allah swt is the greatest.
You must have missed several reports in American newspapers and entire maps of where oil is bought and sold in The Times.
But I know your agenda.
Yes, I must have missed that. From what I have seen, Daesh oil has been going to its neighbors, mostly Turkey, through porous borders. I have not heard reports of Daesh oil crossing an ocean to the US, or of US involvement in fencing their oil.
And since you haven't provided any sources so far, I still haven't.
Killing of civilians in warfare is not permitted in Islam, neither is cutting down of trees, killing of animals, or destruction of infrastructure. But killing American soldiers when they invade your country, rape your women, install tyrants, support occupiers (like Israel, China, and India), etc. is not supposed to be haram just because the non-Muslim Americans feel it should be.
Killing of civilians in warfare is not permitted in Islam, neither is cutting down of trees, killing of animals, or destruction of infrastructure. But killing American soldiers when they invade your country, rape your women, install tyrants, support occupiers (like Israel, China, and India), etc. is not supposed to be haram just because the non-Muslim Americans feel it should be.
Point of clarification- are you talking about fighting the US military with another military? Or are you talking about some other things well outside of that scenario, like a militia (regular or irregular), or perhaps you're even trying to excuse the violent acts of random civilians who don't take kindly to the presence of US soldiers in their country?
Let's take Iraq as an example. Actually, Iraq is a great example for a side by side comparison. US troops are in Iraq with the permission of the Iraqi government, and are working closely with the Iraqi military especially the Golden Brigade. Turkey, on the other hand, insists on having some of their troops stationed right near Mosul and are determined to take part in that battle no matter what Iraq says- and the Iraqi government is dead set against this, they're really upset about Turkey having its troops there. So my question to you is this. In this side by side comparison, what are the acceptable things that Iraq ought to be able to do in order to expel the military forces of foreigners from their country? (In terms of what is haram and what is not, of course).
Example One. The US military has the backing of the Iraqi government, so the Iraqi government obviously isn't going to expel them. But if some regular Iraqi people don't want the US military to be there, do you support them in trying to expel the US military? If so, by what means exactly? Would they need to be somewhat organized in a movement that seeks to overthrow the existing government, or would you also support random acts of violence by anyone who happens to be angry? Would you support the violent acts of Muslims from outside Iraq, who go to Iraq for religious sectarian reasons, and attempt to kill or expel the US forces because...for example...these are Sunnis that are concerned about undue favor being shown to Shia? Do you draw the line there, or is that acceptable to you as well?
Example Two. Turkey's military forces acting without the permission of Iraq's government, in Iraq. This time, the government of Iraq- which is trying to control its borders- does not want Turkey's military to be there. So, according to you, what options are available to Iraq as a country and to regular Iraqis as citizens? If able, and when able, should the Iraqi government and military force those soldiers out, perhaps with the help of some allies? Is this the only course of action that Iraq ought to limit itself to, or are there some other potential courses of action? For example- there actually are some militias that aren't really being allowed to fight in Mosul as much as they'd like. What if they went after the unwanted Turkish forces, would you be okay with that? What if it was just some random violent civilians that aren't organized in any way, do you support violent acts by regular civilians against foreign forces in this type of situation or do you want them to refrain from such violence? And finally, suppose a Muslim, or maybe a bunch of Muslims, travel there from outside Iraq with the purpose of helping Iraq carry out its will and expel the foreign army from its land. If we hold on to the assumption that they are indeed acting in the interest of Iraq, and according to the will of what Iraq wants the outcome to be, do you support that course of action?
I look forward to seeing what your responses are, and I hope you can tell me why you reach your various conclusions in some more detail.
I'll let others answer your question, in the mean time can you answer mine?
I'll give it a shot.
I"m interested in knowing how many westerners look at terrorism one by groups like usa and uk
We do talk about this a lot in general terms, but perhaps there are some issues that we should address on which we aren't as good at volunteering information.
is it ok to kill in the name of Jesus with bible verse numbers printed on the bullets?
Speaking as a Christian who cares about the Bible a lot, I think that's an offensive thing to do with Bible verses. I don't think it represents Christianity well at all, and as a citizen of a secular country, I think it suggests a certain type of religious motivation to state violence which is quite frightening. This is supposed to be a secular country that treats all religions equally well, and as a secular country that supports diversity of religion we must look at violence, when motivated by religion, as an especially grave problem. Soldiers who choose to do this are probably not breaking any laws by doing this, and I'm not sure if there's a realistic way to make it a punishable offense, but if it were possible for one of the higher-ups to let people know this is detrimental to the hearts and minds type of thing and if caught doing it you'll get a NJP, I'd be in support of that.
NJP- that's a non-judicial punishment, also called a Ninja Punch in common parlance. A non-judicial punishment is not considered a criminal offense, it involves discipline without a court-martial, and it does stay on a soldier's record. I would be supportive of a scenario in which a Ninja Punch results from what you've described, and I would expect it to be an effective deterrent.
will the crusades, invasions, occupations and war crimes committed by them in Muslims lands in the name of demoncracy win the "hearts and minds" of those they wipe out?
No, that won't help, although you're reaching back pretty far with the Crusades there aren't you now? The US didn't even exist as a country back then. (Yes of course the land mass was there, but the government and the recognized borders, not so much). As to the war crimes, I have a feeling that a lot of them are in your imagination. Which is to say, if you were to state the estimated number of Actual War Crimes of which the US is definitely guilty of over the course of the past 15 years, I think you'd say an extremely high number that can't be supported in any way by actual evidence.
With that being said, the advise and support strategy is quite brilliant and that will work out a whole lot better. But in order for that to be brought off properly, it really helps if Muslim soldiers are willing to fight side by side with US non-Muslim troops. Yes, even if they're fighting other Muslims. I understand there's some type of prohibition in traditional Islam, but I want to make something very clear to you- when our people try to imbed with yours in this way, We Are Trying To Work With You. So if these soldiers refuse, and their government is not cooperative with that- and not because they're specifically angry with us, but because we're not Muslim- That is an example of You Not Working Well With Us. So stop that, okay? Do whatever ijtihad it is that you have to do, and work with us more consistently when we're trying to do that.
- Please be as objective as possible, less bias and your own feelings and more of the truth. I would like to have information I can use as an example of the western christan perspective on terrorism, especially state terrorism.
Oh yes, I can tell you just love talking about state terrorism. Would Hezbollah be a good example of this, I wonder? Iran is primarily responsible for funding and training, but it's based in Lebanon and it's not the military of a country. It's a militant group and a political party....and the EU does distinguish between the two, it only refers to the military wing as a terror organization. Afghanistan has also been accused of supporting terror in Pakistan, while Bangladesh and Sri Lanka have accused India of supporting terrorism and economic sabotage. I don't like these things, I think they're bad.
If we go back to the Soviet era for a moment, the KGB was actually a vocal proponent of state sponsored terrorism. According to Ion Mihai Pacepa, General Aleksandr Sakharovsky from the First Chief Directorate of the KGB once said, "In today's world, when nuclear arms have made military force obsolete, terrorism should be our main weapon." http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...n-mihai-pacepa
From the same source, we have additional quotes from various people within and in charge of the KGB that describes a plan for the Soviet Union to turn a billion Muslims against Israel and the Jews in hatred of them, and by proxy against the United States. This was a strategy, it was done by design, and it was done through state sponsored terror. And I must say, it worked quite well- most Muslims continue to blame the Jews for everything bad that's ever happened to them, and just about everybody (Muslim or not) seems to have cut the Soviet Union and the KGB out of their explanation for why things have worked out this way. In the words of KGB chairman Yuri Andropov, "We needed to instill a Nazi-style hatred for the Jews throughout the Islamic world, and to turn this weapon of the emotions into a terrorist bloodbath against Israel and its main supporter, the United States." (Ibid- from the source previously linked to).
That's not what you were looking for, but in my estimation that's where the conversation should always go whenever you bring up the topic of state-sponsored terrorism with a Westerner.
I see you are making fun of my statement. I personally am against any kind of terrorism and war. The only thing I know of terrorism from the Muslim perspective is, that there is many kinds of beliefs because not many Muslims support those terrorist groups in the middle east. So I would like to know what the Qur'an says about that, and in which foundation other Muslim believers stand on. I am terribly sorry if I have offended you by any means. I would like a mature Muslim to answer my question formally with no ridicule. Thank you.
If you wish for a honest discussion on the issue, maybe you should make a demonstration of goodwill.
Many Muslims are rather weary of the whole topic, since it's one that's used to demonize Muslims as a group, or for Westerners to claim aggrieved status toward Muslims, even though Western deaths from Islamic terrorism are a tiny fraction of the number of Muslim noncombatants killed by Western military actions, the latter which is sanctimoniously held up as *totally different*.
Also, your request is self-contradictory. You're asking us what we think, but then you go on with "less bias and your own feelings and more of the koran". Are you requesting us to prove that whatever we reply to you is in accordance with the Quran? That smacks of you not trusting us in the first place, or being put in a position of having to be accountable for why we believe what we do to someone who doesn't even accept the very premises those beliefs come from, an absurd request.
Futuwwa, I don't really want to discuss about this, but I want you to fully understand my situation.
I am a student who needs to present about terrorism. I, with my partner, have decided to know which perspectives there is on terrorism, especially that much of the western world thinks that Islam = ISIS/supported terrorism.
So I sincerely wanted to have information from legitimate Muslim people, who could answer my question. I, on the other hand, would be dooming myself if I ignorantly set a perspective on terrorism from the Muslim point of view by my self, which would mean I would mostly say what others say, which, a lot of it, is untrue. I also want to make it clear, that I was not making an absurd request, I did NOT ask "What do you think " I asked a series of questions and later on said "NOT YOUR OWN FEELINGS, BUT from the quran, because I was being sincere and doing you a favor of not giving out information which can differ from believer to believer. That's why I asked about legit information of the Quran, so I can represent the Muslim belief about terrorism correctly.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Scimitar liked this post
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks