bayezid:What was Muhammad Bin Kasim retaliating against in India?
Submitted by Plato (India), Jan 4, 2009 at 05:39
bayezid you wrote:
>>thanks for the historical insight there, although it really wasnt necessary. i am aware of the fact that rome went to war for materilistic reasons. islam went to war as retaliation and for spreading the word of ALLAH. a far nobler cause, easy to see.<<
What did the Hindus in Sindh do to provoke retaliation by Hajjah ibn Yusuf of the Umayyad Caliphate? What did the Copts of Egypt do to provoke retaliation. Hint: They had great wealth and refused to accept the word of Allah.
>>the laws of the muslims clearly state that muslims cannot take part in such horrendous activities. our upholding of GOD's laws gives us the islamic identity. not for any other reason. if these are indeed muslims then they have nothing to do with islam. just like the priests in the churches of christendom have nothing to do with the revelation of jesus when they abused little boys. common sense, mate.<<
Did Khalid bin Walid have anything to do with Islam? You know he was a sahaba and he was considered the sword of Islam. He was so brutal that even the prophet had to plead with Allah that he was not responsible for Khalid's cruelty. Ibn Ishaq, the Life of Muhammad, translated Alfred Guillaume, Oxford university press, Pakistan:
‘Hakim b Hakim from Abu Jafar Muhammad b Ali told me: As soon as they had laid down their arms Khalid ordered their hands to be tied behind their backs and put them to the sword, killing a number of them. When the news reached the prophet he raised his hands to heaven and said, O god, I am innocent before thee of what Khalid has done.'
Did the the Prophet give justice to those killed needlessly by Khalid? Make a guess.
>>threat to religion, life, property and home constitutes provocation. under these circumstances not going to war would be a crime !!<<
The HuJI, that Bangladesh harbours, the LeT and other terror groups Pakistan harbours and launch terror attacks into India are a threat to life, property and home of Indians. Are we committing a crime by not going to war with Bangladesh and Pakistan? I certainly think so, because by not taking out these terror outfits we are sure to have more deaths in future at their hands.
>>islam spread by means of envoys and ambassaos to foreign countries, and one the first few nations to accept islam by and large were the countires around jerusalem. the ones that islam went to war with were the ones that harmed islamic interests, either by killing muslim minorities or preventing islam fom being spread.<<
bayezid, which is it, was Islam spread by envoys and ambassadors or was it by war against nations that prevented Islam from being spread? You know very well, though you will not admit it, Islam was spread by war.
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