freediver wrote on Jul 30
th, 2013 at 6:49pm:
While Muslims often claim that Muhammed raised standards, he actually lowered them.
*sigh* No FD, you are so far from the truth. Muhammad raised standards on a revolutionary scale. He was the first to institute a legal code for the lawful conduct of warfare: no killing of women, children, monks and all other non-combatants, no mutilating bodies, and no wanton destruction of enemy property (infrastructure, trees, animals etc). Its hard to believe that he had to spell this out, because all these things were standard practice in war. The banishment of the two jewish tribes with safe passage and allowing them to keep their property was unheard of in the arab world till them - and Muhammad copped much flak from his followers.
freediver wrote on Jul 30
th, 2013 at 6:49pm:
The execution of 700 POWs by Muhammed for example was a low point, even by the brutal standards of 7th century Arab tribal warfare.
So selective, that its just dishonest.
Here's where you got that from:
Quote:Aiming at placing the events in their historical context, Watt points to the "harsh political circumstances of that era"[11] and argues that the treatment of Qurayza was regular Arab practice.[81] Similar statements are made by Stillman,[30] Paret,[78] Lewis[82] and Rodinson.[66] On the other hand, Michael Lecker and Irving Zeitlin consider the events "unprecedented in the Arab peninsula - a novelty" and state that "prior to Islam, the annihilation of an adversary was never an aim of war."[64][83] Similar statements are made by Hirschberg[84] and Baron.[85]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banu_Qurayza#Demise_of_the_Banu_QurayzaNote there is two opposing opinions on this. 5 historians are quoted as saying it was standard practice, 4 say it wasn't. Who is right? Who knows - the point is, you are being blatantly dishonest by claiming only one side of the debate exists.
Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 30
th, 2013 at 7:10pm:
Was Abu Bakr a cavemate of Mo?
what?