bayezid: The Koran contains some rules of war which are inhuman
Submitted by PLATO (India), Jan 1, 2009 at 23:12
bayezid, you wrote:
>>islam has laws of warfare never before seen. in fact, it introduced the code of cconduct in warfare which many un islamic nations today employ.<<
I don't see any un-Islamic country following the Islamic code of taking booty from the conquered. Islamic law allows booty which includes women and children as slaves. From among these slaves it is legal for the leader to distribute the slave women for the men to use as they please as long as they clothe and feed them properly. That they may have husbands alive is according to Islamic laws of warfare of no consequence. The slaves can be freed to gain credit with Allah (Muslim slaves that is): 008.069 YUSUFALI: But (now) enjoy what ye took in war, lawful and good: but fear Allah: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. 004.024 YUSUFALI: Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess: (those whom your right hand possess are slaves).
>>muslims arent allowed to kill non comabatants. for whatever reason.<<
muslims are not allowed to harm animals belonging to the enemy. muslims are not even allowed to touch a mere plant in enemy territory with malicious intent.<< A plant cut down in enemy territory will always be with malicious intent. They are not being cut down to be given to the enemy to boil for splashing on the invaders. They will be used to cook food for themselves to get the energy to do battle or build ladders to scale forts etc. All these are malicious intent for the opposite party. But Allah says this about cutting down trees in the Koran: 59:4 What you (O Muslims) cut down of the palm trees (of the enemy), or you left standing on their stems, it was by leave of Allah….. Also read BukhariVol 5, Book 59, No 365, 366. >>muslims cannot harm monks, priests, rabbis and cannot damage religious temples.
<< Remember what happened to the Banu Quraiza? The adult males who were all beheaded must have included some priests, rabbis. Do you have even a single ruins of any synagogue or church in the Hejaz? How did they disappear?
>>muslims are suposed to treat the prisoners of war better than their own soldiers. they are to be provided with all their needs. if you are thinking of hotel service, you arent wrong. muslims must consider releasing the enemy unharmed after receiving ransom.<<
Muslims are allowed to take booty from enemy soldiers and captured ones can be ransomed. You call this treating prisoners better their captors?
>>before islam, this was a laughing matter. no one even imagined codifying these as rules for warfare.<<
bayezid, your Hindu ancestors had better rules of war than what Allah thought up in the Koran: The world famous historian, Will Durant has written in his Story of Civilisation that "the Mohammedan conquest of India was probably the bloodiest story in history". India before the advent of Islamic imperialism was not exactly a zone of peace. There were plenty of wars fought by Hindu princes. But in all their wars, the Hindus had observed some time-honoured conventions sanctioned by the Sastras. The Brahmins and the Bhikshus were never molested. The cows were never killed. The temples were never touched. The chastity of women was never violated. The non-combatants were never killed or captured. A human habitation was never attacked unless it was a fort.
The civil population was never plundered. War booty was an unknown item in the calculations of conquerors. The martial classes who clashed, mostly in open spaces, had a code of honor. Sacrifice of honor for victory or material gain was deemed as worse than death. Islamic imperialism came with a different code--the Sunnah of the Prophet. It required its warriors to fall upon the helpless civil population after a decisive victory had been won on the battlefield. It required them to sack and burn down villages and towns after the defenders had died fighting or had fled.
The cows, the Brahmins, and the Bhikshus invited their special attention in mass murders of non-combatants. The temples and monasteries were their special targets in an orgy of pillage and arson. Those whom they did not kill, they captured and sold as slaves. The magnitude of the booty looted even from the bodies of the dead, was a measure of the success of a military mission. And they did all this as mujahids (holy warriors) and ghazls (kafir-killers) in the service of Allah and his Last Prophet. Hindus found it very hard to understand the psychology of this new invader. For the first time in their history, Hindus were witnessing a scene which was described by Kanhadade Prabandha (1456 AD) in the following words: "The conquering army burnt villages, devastated the land, plundered people's wealth, took Brahmins and children and women of all classes captive, flogged with thongs of raw hide, carried a moving prison with it, and converted the prisoners into obsequious Turks."
That was written in remembrance of Alauddin Khalji's invasion of Gujarat in the year l298 AD. But the gruesome game had started three centuries earlier when Mahmud Ghaznavi had vowed to invade India every year in order to destroy idolatry, kill the kafirs, capture prisoners of war, and plunder vast wealth for which India was well-known. http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/72648 >> and the grand infidel could not have chosen a worse example than rome. he has forgotten that it was these romans who actually made gladiatorial sports official. rome was an empire raised in blood.
<< Read the above comments by Will Durant to see the blood-sport that Muslims indulged in India. >>
and they certainly did not shy away from killing non combatants or turning prisoners of war into sex objects.<<
Again read the comments by Will Durant to see the practical effects of verses like: 8:69 or 48:19 and 4:24. Muslims took women as war booty and used them as sex slaves.
Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".
Reader comments (893) on this item
Comment on this item
Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum. Daniel J. Pipes