Australian Politics Forum - Muhammed the warmonger

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Muhammed the warmonger
Reply #105 - Dec 4^th, 2013 at 7:05am

freediver wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2013 at 9:52pm:

Why don't you explain to us why Muhammed had to "defend" himself from those pagan tribes that he slaughtered? Are we supposed to guess what your excuse is going to be?

You list a grand total of two expeditions that come anywhere close to a "slaughter", both happening within 2 months of the prophet's death - neither of which included non-combatants (which is the more conventional understanding of "slaughter"). We know very little about these raids (most of all you), but there is no reason to think that it went against Muhammad's entire 10 year career of acting only in accordance to a strict "just war" theory. Does it make sense that The Prophet spends an entire 10 years of preaching non-aggression and constantly castigating his men for wanting to take a militant path, only to suddenly say to his men "go forth and slaughter" on his deathbed?

If its all the same, I'd rather trust the informed assessment of Karen Armstrong and Montgommery Watt, and the other (non-muslim) observers, who insist that Muhammad was the very opposite to your idea of a "warmonger".

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 20027 Canberra Gender:	Re: Muhammed the warmonger Reply #106 - Dec 4^th, 2013 at 11:09am bump
Back to top	A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said: Quote: Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms. IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: Muhammed the warmonger
Reply #107 - Dec 4^th, 2013 at 6:28pm

wally1 wrote on Dec 4^th, 2013 at 5:04am:

Soren wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2013 at 8:54pm:

wally1 wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2013 at 8:24pm:

Journalist Robert Haddad mentions,

In conclusion, I would like to emphasize that the treatment of the Christians and Jews by Muslim states, Arab or Ottoman, was far superior to the treatment Muslims and Jews received at the hands of Christian states, or Palestinians at the hands of the Jewish state of Israel. In his book, Syrian Christians in Muslim Society, professor Robert Haddad states that “Islamic tolerance served to insure Christian survival.”29 “No attempt was made by any Muslim government to exterminate the Christians, and only rare and isolated attempts were made forcibly to convert them.”

Do'h! Conversion meant loss of revenue. It was better to keep them in dhimmitude.

Anyway, nowadays, with dhimmi tax gone and 'Arab Spring' in full swing, Christians are hunted down and killed by the liberated Muslim mob.

Yeah tell me about it, similar to how the muslims are hunted down by the west.

Are you being hunted?

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48833
At my desk.

Re: Muhammed the warmonger
Reply #108 - Dec 4^th, 2013 at 10:20pm

Quote:

You list a grand total of two expeditions that come anywhere close to a "slaughter"

I provided a link to the wikipedia list of all his military exploits, and selected two good examples. I obviously did not mean to imply that that was the extent of it. Do you?

Quote:

both happening within 2 months of the prophet's death

His entire military career happened towards the end of his life, when he was most powerful. He started by negotiating his way into power. Then when he had a band of thieves, he started robbing. Then when he had enough followers he could mount what counted for conventional war at the time (it was still a tribal time). Then when he had even more military power he went about slaughtering people. The chronology makes perfect sense. It would be a bit dismal if he started out leading an army and ended up begging for his life, don't you think?

Quote:

neither of which included non-combatants

Yes, people tend to struggle a bit when you are chopping their heads off and dragging their women away. They should have surrendered without a fight, no?

Quote:

We know very little about these raids (most of all you), but there is no reason to think that it went against Muhammad's entire 10 year career of acting only in accordance to a strict "just war" theory.

Muhammed never stuck to any kind of standard. He did whatever he could get away with, based on the power he wielded at the time. The more power he had, the more brutal he became, and there was no line he would not cross.

Quote:

Does it make sense that The Prophet spends an entire 10 years of preaching non-aggression and constantly castigating his men for wanting to take a militant path, only to suddenly say to his men "go forth and slaughter" on his deathbed?

It makes perfect sense, if at the start you are not in a position to win. Imagine Gandhi or Mandela gaining a bit of power, seizing total control, then turning into Hitler. That's the story of Muhammed the warmonger.

Quote:

If its all the same, I'd rather trust the informed assessment of Karen Armstrong and Montgommery Watt, and the other (non-muslim) observers, who insist that Muhammad was the very opposite to your idea of a "warmonger".

Or you could try thinking for yourself. Remember the whole "suck it up and be objective" thing? Didn't last long, did it?

Quote:

Yeah tell me about it, similar to how the muslims are hunted down by the west.

Would you mind pointing out where a western country rounded up and executed 800 Muslim citizens because some of them were in communication with Al Quaida? Then can you point to all the westerners deciding that the person who committed such an atrocity must be God's messenger and the ideal example for all mankind to follow? Even Nazis don't count, because they do not actually worship Hitler. Only Muslims would hold such a person to be a great spiritual leader, and only with an absurd amount of arm waving, apologising, obfuscating and looking the other way.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Muhammed the warmonger
Reply #109 - Dec 5^th, 2013 at 6:47am

freediver wrote on Dec 4^th, 2013 at 10:20pm:

The more power he had, the more brutal he became, and there was no line he would not cross.

Ranting as usual. You must know thats complete baloney. Stupid throw-away lines that you give absolutely no consideration to. Did Muhammad use torture, or did he expressly forbid it? Did he allow slaughter of women and children (as was normal custom at the time), or did he expressly forbid it? Did he allow destruction of infrastructure like crops and buildings, or did he expressly forbid it? Did he allow the burning of religious sites and killing of monks and priests - or did he expressly forbid it?

Muhammad drew the lines that could not be crossed.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48833
At my desk.

Re: Muhammed the warmonger
Reply #110 - Dec 5^th, 2013 at 8:08am

Of course he forbade it - right up until he was in a position to do it himself:

Quote:

632 (year Muhammed died):
2nd last raid:
Muhammad's order and reason for expedition: Demolish the Temple of Dhul Khalasa worshipped by the Bajila and Khatham tribes
Outcome: 300 killed by Muslim

632:
last raid
Muhammad's order and reason for expedition: Invade Palestine and attack Moab and Darum
Outcome: Local population "slaughtered" by Muslims, "destroying, burning and taking as many captives as they could"

The only thing he was (almost) consistent about was women. They make valuable sex slaves and it would be a waste to kill them. Property was also protected where it could be taken by Muslims - no point destroying your own property is there? Just like there is no point in killing women that you now own.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Muhammed the warmonger
Reply #111 - Dec 5^th, 2013 at 10:03am

freediver wrote on Dec 5^th, 2013 at 8:08am:

Muhammad's order and reason for expedition: Invade Palestine and attack Moab and Darum
Outcome: Local population "slaughtered" by Muslims, "destroying, burning and taking as many captives as they could"

So says a single zionist historian. Gil doesn't even provide any source for that claim.

The primary sources say nothing of the sort. The battle was unfinished business after the inconclusive battle of Mutah - which was fought because the Byzantines started killing muslim emissaries.

Interestingly, from this expedition we get Abu Bakr's 10 rules of war given to the commander of the expedition:

Quote:

Then (Abu Bakr) said, "Oh army, stop and I will order you [to do] ten [things]; learn them from me by heart. You shall not engage in treachery; you shall not act unfaithfully; you shall not engage in deception; you shall not indulge in mutilation; you shall kill neither a young child nor an old man nor a woman; you shall not fell palm trees or burnt them, you shall not cut down [any] fruit-bearing tree; you shall not slaughter a sheep or a cow or a camel except for food. You will pass people who occupy themselves in monks' cells; leave them alone, and leave alone what they busy themselves with. You will come to a people who will bring you vessels in which are varieties of food; if you eat anything from [those dishes], mention the name of God over them. You will meet a people who have shaven the middle of their head and have left around it [a ring of hair] like turbans; tap them lightly with the sword.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Dec 5^th, 2013 at 10:09am by polite_gandalf »

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 48833 At my desk.	Re: Muhammed the warmonger Reply #112 - Dec 5^th, 2013 at 1:49pm Quote: you shall not engage in deception Is this another one of those lines Muhammed would never cross? Or another set of flexible moral standards that Muslims can pick and choose from depending on how nasty they feel like being?
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Adamant

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1892
Brisbane

Re: Muhammed the warmonger
Reply #113 - Dec 5^th, 2013 at 4:46pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 5^th, 2013 at 6:47am:

freediver wrote on Dec 4^th, 2013 at 10:20pm:

The more power he had, the more brutal he became, and there was no line he would not cross.

Did Muhammad use torture,
Did he allow slaughter of women and children.
Did he allow destruction of infrastructure like crops and buildings, or did he expressly forbid it?
Did he allow the burning of religious sites and killing of monks and priests - or did he expressly forbid it?

Did Muhammad use torture, Yes he did
Did he allow slaughter of women and children. Yes he allowed it if they were not muslim.

The following two items happened with gay largess after his death.

Did he allow destruction of infrastructure like crops and buildings, or did he expressly forbid it?
Did he allow the burning of religious sites and killing of monks and priests - or did he expressly forbid it?

Hope that clears up any misunderstanding on your part Gandy, now you know a small truth about the imperfect man you may move forward.

Talk to Yadda he will be able to guide along the right path.

Did he ever kill or ordered killed non combatants?

Back to top

In real life Gandalf is known as Mr 10%

IP Logged

|dev|null

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 4434
Gender: male

Re: Muhammed the warmonger
Reply #114 - Dec 5^th, 2013 at 4:57pm

Adamant wrote on Dec 5^th, 2013 at 4:46pm:

The following two items happened with gay largess after his death.

Did he allow destruction of infrastructure like crops and buildings, or did he expressly forbid it?
Did he allow the burning of religious sites and killing of monks and priests - or did he expressly forbid it?

How could he allow or forbid something after he was dead? Might be a bit of a problem there with your logic I think. Cheesy

Back to top

"Pens and books are the weapons that defeat terrorism." - Malala Yousefzai, 2013.

"we will never ever solve violence while we grasp for overly simplistic solutions."
Freediver, 2007.

IP Logged

Baronvonrort

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 18257
Gender: male

Re: Muhammed the warmonger
Reply #115 - Dec 5^th, 2013 at 5:05pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 5^th, 2013 at 6:47am:

Did Muhammad use torture, or did he expressly forbid it?
He ordered the torture of Safiyya's husband so he would reveal the location of the tribes wealth, they lit a fire of flint and steel on his chest before chopping his head off.
Covered in Sirat Rasul Allah by Ibn Ishaq

Did he allow slaughter of women and children or did he expressly forbid it?
He allowed it , read your sahih hadeeth

Did he allow destruction of infrastructure like crops and buildings, or did he expressly forbid it?
He allowed it, you should read your holy books

Did he allow the burning of religious sites?
Yes, Mohammad even had a mosque torched because the muslims were considered munafiqs (hypocrites), try reading your Islamic texts

Back to top

Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.

IP Logged

Adamant

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1892
Brisbane

Re: Muhammed the warmonger
Reply #116 - Dec 5^th, 2013 at 5:40pm

|dev|null wrote on Dec 5^th, 2013 at 4:57pm:

Adamant wrote on Dec 5^th, 2013 at 4:46pm:

The following two items happened with gay largess after his death.

Did he allow destruction of infrastructure like crops and buildings, or did he expressly forbid it?
Did he allow the burning of religious sites and killing of monks and priests - or did he expressly forbid it?

How could he allow or forbid something after he was dead? Might be a bit of a problem there with your logic I think. Cheesy

Please point me to where I said "He" allowed it? When you are unable to complete said task will you then turn your attention to the questions I have asked previously and proffer an answer!

Back to top

In real life Gandalf is known as Mr 10%

IP Logged

\|dev\|null Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 4434 Gender:	Re: Muhammed the warmonger Reply #117 - Dec 5^th, 2013 at 5:43pm Baronvonrort wrote on Dec 5^th, 2013 at 5:05pm: they lit a fire of flint and steel on his chest How do you light, "a fire of flint and steel" on someone's chest? Flint and steel were non-combustible last time I checked. [/quote] [/quote]
Back to top	"Pens and books are the weapons that defeat terrorism." - Malala Yousefzai, 2013. "we will never ever solve violence while we grasp for overly simplistic solutions." Freediver, 2007. IP Logged

|dev|null

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 4434
Gender: male

Re: Muhammed the warmonger
Reply #118 - Dec 5^th, 2013 at 5:45pm

Adamant wrote on Dec 5^th, 2013 at 5:40pm:

|dev|null wrote on Dec 5^th, 2013 at 4:57pm:

Adamant wrote on Dec 5^th, 2013 at 4:46pm:

The following two items happened with gay largess after his death.

Did he allow destruction of infrastructure like crops and buildings, or did he expressly forbid it?
Did he allow the burning of religious sites and killing of monks and priests - or did he expressly forbid it?

How could he allow or forbid something after he was dead? Might be a bit of a problem there with your logic I think. Cheesy

Please point me to where I said "He" allowed it? When you are unable to complete said task will you then turn your attention to the questions I have asked previously and proffer an answer!

You claimed that he failed to "forbid it". Therefore, he must have allowed it. Either way, how could he forbid it if he was dead?

Thats the problem with bigotry you know. You believe the most preposterous stuff just 'cause you're prejudiced. Cheesy

Back to top

"Pens and books are the weapons that defeat terrorism." - Malala Yousefzai, 2013.

"we will never ever solve violence while we grasp for overly simplistic solutions."
Freediver, 2007.

IP Logged

Baronvonrort

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 18257
Gender: male

Re: Muhammed the warmonger
Reply #119 - Dec 5^th, 2013 at 6:37pm

|dev|null wrote on Dec 5^th, 2013 at 5:43pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Dec 5^th, 2013 at 5:05pm:

they lit a fire of flint and steel on his chest

How do you light, "a fire of flint and steel" on someone's chest? Flint and steel were non-combustible last time I checked. Cheesy

Yes i made a mistake and i should correct it.

From Sirat Rasul Allah by Ibn Ishaq ,the earliest biography of that child molestor,sex offender,prophet pretender called Mohammad
Quote:

20-Khaybar

Kinana, the husband of Safiya,had been the guardian of the tribes treasures,and he was brought to the apostle,who asked where they were hidden,but Kinana refused to disclose the place.
The apostle of Allah handed him over to al Zubayr saying 'Torture him until he tells what he knows' and al Zubayr kindled a fire on his chest so that he almost expired:then the apostle gave him to Muhammad Maslama,who struck off his head.

The apostle occupied the Jewish forts one after the other,taking prisoners as he went,among these were safiya the wife of Kinana,the apostle chose safiya for himself.
The plunder of Khaybar,the richest part of the hijaz,was greater than any before.There were dates oil honey and barley as well as sheep and camels and jewels

Mohammad married Safiyya on the same day he ordered the torture and beheading of her husband,muslims will say mohammad was a kind man who married widows.

Do you think Ibn Ishaq is an Islamophobe?

Back to top

Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.

IP Logged

Poll
Question: Is war ever justified?
No. Let them come rape and kill us 0 (0.0%) No. I am too scared to ever fight 0 (0.0%) Yes. But only if there are WMDs involved 0 (0.0%) Yes. Sometimes you have to fight. 7 (70.0%) No. Only warmongers ever fight. 3 (30.0%) Total votes: 10 « Created by: True Colours on: Aug 2^nd, 2013 at 4:14pm »