Jihad requires Muslims to "struggle in the way of God" or "to struggle to improve one's self and/or society."[3][4] Jihad is directed against the devil's inducements, aspects of one's own self, or against a visible enemy.[1][5] The four major categories of jihad that are recognized are Jihad against one's own self (self-perfection), Jihad of the tongue, Jihad of the hand, and Jihad of the sword.[5]

During his life, Muhammad gave various injunctions to his forces and adopted practices toward the conduct of war. The most important of these were summarized by Muhammad's successor and close companion, Abu Bakr, in the form of ten rules for the Muslim army:[1]


“ Stop, O people, that I may give you ten rules for your guidance in the battlefield. Do not commit treachery or deviate from the right path. You must not mutilate dead bodies. Neither kill a child, nor a woman, nor an aged man. Bring no harm to the trees, nor burn them with fire, especially those which are fruitful. Slay not any of the enemy's flock, save for your food. You are likely to pass by people who have devoted their lives to monastic services; leave them alone."

Muslim jurists agree that Muslim armed forces must consist of debt-free adults who possess a sound mind and body. In addition, the combatants must not be conscripted, but rather enlist of their free will, and with the permission of their family.[1]

After Muhammad and his companions, there is no concept in Islam obliging Muslims to wage war for propagation or implementation of Islam. The only valid basis for military jihad is to end oppression when all other measures have failed. Islam only allows jihad to be conducted by a government,[15] with at least half the power of the enemy.[16][17][18] Some Islamic scholars consider the latter command only for a particular time.[19]




So, are you?

Being attacked and being oppressed are two different things though. And there is the problem of how you define oppression of course.

I run away even if I hear a mouse squeak.

Being attacked and being oppressed are two different things though. And there is the problem of how you define oppression of course.

Hmm I forgot, I would pontificate.:p

There's a difference between family and country. I'd do some things to protect my family and probably less things to defend my country.

I would probably go to live to another country though. I'm not interested in politics and any spot of land is my home. Depends on who's attacking though, the resources I have, the chances of victory, the routes of retreat and endless other circumstances that depend on each particular case. I'm not a jihadist, I'm rational.

Here's a video from the last revolution I participated in: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00AJoSZkaIg
The man shot dead had saved my life two months before.

i don't have a country.

OK what if aliens attacked Earth?

i don't have a country.

you can't have it...it doesn't have a reproductive organ to have it

OK what if aliens attacked Earth?
Mexicans?

OK what if aliens attacked Earth?

Let them have it. After all, resistance is futile..

OK what if aliens attacked Earth?

I would run away on their spaceship...learn how to use it...and than slooowly ruuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuun away.

Too much Holywood in your brain, draqon

i voted "fight back" and "hide"..
im not one to catch bullets. im more the type that would severely piss off an occupier, i would like to think this anyhow.

you can't have it...it doesn't have a reproductive organ to have it

???

???
One word: Insurgency.

Too much Holywood in your brain, draqon

I watch Bollywood more than Holywood...being from India myself.

One word: Insurgency.

think i would rather become a blackwater employee of the month.

think i would rather become a blackwater employee of the month.
Ah, a foreign insurgent.

Ah, a foreign insurgent.

no...these are now called liberators, freedom makers.

I watch Bollywood more than Holywood...being from India myself.

Weren't you born in CCCP and now living in the USA?

I watch Bollywood more than Holywood...being from India myself.
Weren't you born on Earth and now living in Mars?

Weren't you born in CCCP and now living in the USA?

well thats just an image to keep up to. I am from southern India, those pakis better not come here.

Weren't you born on Earth and now living in Mars?

Yes I was born on Mars and now I am moving to Europa...they say they give free cold showers there..."real cold water showers" my tour agent said. Last time I checked it was freezing there. :p

well thats just an image to keep up to. I am from southern India, those pakis better not come here.

Ah, sucker, stupid image whichever is true.

Ah, sucker, stupid image whichever is true.

yeah I knew that the Indian and Russian image would be hard to keep to. In reality...I am from UK.

But lets keep silent about that ok?

Did you bring any polonium here?

In reality you're a liar.

In reality you're a liar.

In reality I am too real to live in the reality.

Did you bring any polonium here?

well just a sip of it. :cool:

With milk or lemon?

With milk or lemon?

just a bit of lemon. I also drink it with milk as well...before it turn to...well I want talk about that.

YEEHAAAAW!

If those religious zealots take one step on American soil I will take my colt and shoot them back to the desert.

God bless America!

YEEHAAAAW!

If those religious zealots take one step on American soil I will take my colt and shoot them back to the desert.

God bless America!

Actually I am thinking of converting to Islam and now I live in USA...so I will be a religious zealot.

Jihad requires Muslims to "struggle in the way of God" or "to struggle to improve one's self and/or society."[3][4] Jihad is directed against the devil's inducements, aspects of one's own self, or against a visible enemy.[1][5] The four major categories of jihad that are recognized are Jihad against one's own self (self-perfection), Jihad of the tongue, Jihad of the hand, and Jihad of the sword.[5]
*************
M*W: From your description, and from discussions with Muslim friends, aren't we all "jihadists?" Don't we all have struggles?

I didn't like the question. I voted fight back. But this is a reserved answer, because it only applies to the first concept ''if my loved ones where attacked.'' On the other hand, what happens to the country is up to Ceaser.

A couple of problems firstly especially this is subjective
J Do not commit treachery or deviate from the right path.

Then when you make rules then make excuses for breaking them the system doesn't really work. Not to mention making war booty a god given right (kinda tends to get folks to bend the rules for the smallest perceived insult or wrongdoing)

Chapter 8: PROHIBITION OF KILLING WOMEN AND CHILDREN IN WAR
Book 019, Number 4319:

It is narrated on the authority of 'Abdullah that a woman was found killed in one of the battles fought by the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him). He disapproved of the killing of women and children.

Book 019, Number 4320:

It is narrated by Ibn 'Umar that a woman was found killed in one of these battles; so the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) forbade the killing of women and children.


Chapter 9: PERMISSIBILITY OF KILLING WOMEN AND CHILDREN IN THE NIGHT RAIDS, PROVIDED IT IS NOT DELIBERATE
Book 019, Number 4321:

It is reported on the authority of Sa'b b. Jaththama that the Prophet of Allah (may peace be upon him), when asked about the women and children of the polytheists being killed during the night raid, said: They are from them.

Book 019, Number 4322:

It is narrated by Sa'b b. Jaththama that he said (to the Holy Prophet): Messenger of Allah, we kill the children of the polytheists during the night raids. He said: They are from them.

Book 019, Number 4323:

Sa'b b. Jaththama has narrated that the Prophet (may peace be upon him) asked: What about the children of polytheists killed by the cavalry during the night raid? He said: They are from them.


Chapter 10: JUSTIFICATION FOR CUTTING DOWN THE TREES AND BURNING THEM
Book 019, Number 4324:

It is narrated on the authority of 'Abdullah that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) ordered the date-palms of Banu Nadir to be burnt and cut. These palms were at Buwaira. Qutaibah and Ibn Rumh in their versions of the tradition have added: So Allah, the Glorious and Exalted, revealed the verse:" Whatever trees you have cut down or left standing on their trunks, it was with the permission of Allah so that He may disgrace the evil-doers" (lix. 5).

Book 019, Number 4325:

It is narrated on the authority of Ibn Umar that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) caused the date-palms of Banu Nadir to be cut down and burnt. It is in this connection that Hassan (the poet) said:

It was easy for the nobles of Quraish to barn Buwaira whose sparks were flying in all directions.

in the same connection was revealed the Qur'anic verse:" Whatever trees you have cut down or left standing on their trunks."

Book 019, Number 4326:

'Abdullah b. Umar reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) burnt the date-palms of Banu Nadir.


Chapter 11: THE SPOILS OF WAR ESPECIALLY MADE LAWFUL FOR THIS UMMA
Book 019, Number 4327:

It has been narrated by Abu Huraira that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: One of the Prophets made a holy war. He said to his followers: One who has married a woman and wants to consummate to his marriage but has not yet done so; another who has built a house but has not yet erected its roof; and another who has bought goats and pregnantshe-camels and is waiting for their offspring-will not accommpany me. So he marched on and approached a village at or about the time of the Asr prayers. He said to the sun: Thou art subserviant (to Allah) and so am I. O Allah, stop it for me a little. It was stopped for him until Allah granted him victory. The people gathered the spoils of war (at one place). A fire approached the spoils to devour them, but it did not devour them. He (the Holy Prophet) said: Some of you have been guilty of misappropriation. So one man from each tribe should swear fealty to me. The did so (putting their hands into his). The hand of one man stuck to his hand and the Prophet (may peace be upon him) said: Your tribe is guilty of misappropriation. Let all the members of your tribe swear fealty to me one by one. They did so, when the hands of two or three persons got stuck with his hand. He said: You have misappropriated. So they took out gold equal in volume to the head of a cow. They-placed it among the spoils on the earth. Then the fire approached the spoils and devoured them. The spoils of war were not made lawful for any people before us, This is because Allah saw our weakness and humility and made them lawful for us.


Chapter 12: SPOILS OF WAR
Book 019, Number 4328:

A hadith has been narrated by Mus'ab b. Sa'd who heard it from his father as saying: My father took a sword from Khums and brought it to the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him) and said: Grant it to me. He refused. At this Allah revealed (the Qur'anic verse):" They ask thee concerning the spoils of war. Say: The spoils of war are for Allah and the Apostle" (viii. 1).

Book 019, Number 4329:

A hadith has been narrated by Mus'ab b. Sa'd who heard it from his father as saying:" Four verses of the Qur'an have been revealed about me. I found a sword (among the spoils of war). It was brought to the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him). He (my father) said: Messenger of Allah, bestow it upon me. The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Place it there. Then he (my father) stood up and the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said to him: Place it from where you got it. (At this) he (my father) said again: Messenger of Allah, bestow it upon me Shall I be treated like one who has no share in (the booty)? The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him said: Place it from where you got it. At this was revealed the verse:" They ask thee about the spoils of war.... Say: The spoils of war are for Allah and the Messenger"

Book 019, Number 4330:

It has been narrated on the authority of Ibn Umar that the Prophet (may peace be upon him) sent an expedition to Najd and I was among the troops. They got a large number of camels as a booty. Eleven or twelve camels fell to the lot of every fighter and each of them also got one extra camel.

Book 019, Number 4331:

Ibn 'Umar reported that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) sent an expedition to Najd and Ibn Umar was also among the troops, and their share (of the spoils) came to twelve camels and they were given one camel over and above that. and Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) did not make any change in it.

Book 019, Number 4332:

It has been narrated by Ibn 'Umar that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) sent an expedition to Najd, and I (also) went with the troops. We got camels and goats as spoils of war, and our share amounted to twelve camels per head, and the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) gave an extra camel to each of us.

Book 019, Number 4333:

This hadith has been narrated on the authority of 'Ubaidullah with the same chain of transmitters.

Book 019, Number 4334:

Ibn Aun said: I wrote to Nafi' asking him about Nafl (spoils of war) and be wrote to me that Ibn 'Umar was among that expedition. (The rest of the hadith is the same.)

Book 019, Number 4335:

A hadith has been narrated by Salim who learnt it from his father and said: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) gave us an extra (camel) besides our share of Khums; (and in this extra share) I got a Sharif (and a Sharif is a big old camel).

Book 019, Number 4336:

Ibn Shihab reported: It reached me through Ibn Umar that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) gave a share of spoils to the troop. The rest of the hadith is the same.

Book 019, Number 4337:

It has been narrated on the authority of Abdullah b. 'Umar that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) used to give (from the spoils of war) to small troops seat on expeditions something more than the due share of each fighter in a large force. And Khums (one-fifth of the total spoils) was to be reserved (for Allah and His Apostle) in all cases.

Book 019, Number 4338:

Abu Muammad al-Ansari, who was the close companion of Abu Qatada. narrated the hadith (which follows).

Book 019, Number 4339:

Abu Muhammad, the freed slave of Abu Qatada reported on the authority of Abu Qatda and narrated the hadith.


Chapter 13: REGARDING THE RIGHT OF THE FIGHTER TO THE BELONGINGS OF THE ONE KILLED BY HIM IN THE FIGHT
Book 019, Number 4340:

Abu Qatada reported: We accompanied the Messenger of Allah (my peace be upon him) on an expedition in the year of the Battle of Hunain. When we encountered the enemy, (some of the Muslims turned back (in fear). I saw that a man from the polytheists overpowered one of the Muslims. I turned round and attacked him from behind giving a blow between his neck and shoulder. He turned towards me and grappled with me in such a way that I began to see death staring me in the face. Then death overtook him and left me alone. I joined 'Umar b. al-Khattab who was saying: What has happened to the people (that they are retreating)? I said: It is the Decree of Allah. Then the people returned. (The battle ended in a victory for the Muslims) and the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) sat down (to distribute the spoils of war). He said: One who has killed an enemy and can bring evidence to prove it will get his belongings. So I stood up and said: Who will give evidence for me? Then I sat down. Then he (the Holy Prophet) said like this. I stood up (again) and said: Who will bear witness for me? He (the Holy Prophet) made the same observation the third time, and I stood up (once again). Now the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: What has happened to you, O Abu Qatada? Then I related the (whole) story, to him. At this, one of the people said: He has told the truth. Messenger of Allah 1 The belongings of the enemy killed by him are with me. Persuade him to forgo his right (in my favour). (Objecting to this proposal) Abu Bakr said: BY Allah, this will not happen. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) will not like to deprive one of the lions from among the lions of Allah who fight in the cause of Allah and His Messenger and give thee his share of the booty. So the Messenger of Allah (may peace he upon him) said: He (Abu Bakr) has told the truth, and so give the belongings to him (Abu Qatada). So he gave them to me. I sold the armour (which was a part of my share of the booty) and bought with the sale proceeds a garden in the street of Banu Salama. This was the first property I acquired after embracing Islam.

In a version of the hadith narrated by Laith, the words uttered by Abu Bakr are:" No, never! He will not give it to a fox from the Quraish leaving aside a lion from the lions of Allah among...." And the hadith is closed with the words:" The first property I acquired."

Book 019, Number 4341:

It has been narrated on the authority of 'Abd al-Rahman b. Auf who said: While I was standing in the battle array on the Day of Badr, I looked towards my right and my left, and found myself between two boys from the Ansar quite young in age. I wished I were between stronger persons. One of them made a sign to me and. said: Uncle, do you recognise Abu Jahl? 1 said: Yes. What do you want to do with him, O my nephew? He said: I have been told that he abuses the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him). By Allah, in Whose Hand is my life, if I see him (I will grapple with him) and will not leave him until one of us who is destined to die earlier is killed. The narrator said: I wondered at this. Then the other made a sign to me and said similar words. Soon after I saw Abu Jahl. He was moving about among men. I said to the two boys: Don't you see? He is the man you were inquiring about. (As soon as they heard this), they dashed towards him, struck him with their swords until he was killed. Then they returned to the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) and informed him (to this effect). He asked: Which of you has killed him? Each one of them said: I have killed him. He said: Have you wiped your swords? They said: No. He examined their swords and said: Both of you have killed him. He then decided that the belongings of Abu Jahl he handed over to Mu'adh b. Amr b. al-Jamuh. And the two boys were Mu'adh b. Amr b. Jawth and Mu'adh b. Afra.

Book 019, Number 4342:

Auf b. Malik has narrated that a man from the Himyar tribe killed an enemy and wanted to take the booty. Khalid b. Walid, who was the commander over them, forbade, him. 'Auf b Malik (the narrator) came to the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) and informed him (to this effect). The latter asked Khalid: What prevented you from giving the booty to him? Khalid said: I thought it was too much. He (the Holy Prophet) said: Hand it over to him. Now when Khalid by Auf, the latter pulled him by his cloak and said (by way of chafing him): Hasn't the same thing happened what I reported to you from the Messenger of Allah (may peace he upon him)? When the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) heard it. he was angry (and said): Khalid, don't give him, Khalid, don't give him. Are you going to desert the commanders appointed by roe? Your similitude and theirs is like a person who took camels and sheep for grazing. He grazed them and when it was time for them to have a drink, he brought them to a pool. So they drank from it, drinking away its clear water and leaving the turbid water below So the clear water (i. e. the best reward) is for you and the turbid water (i e. blame) is for them.

Book 019, Number 4343:

It has been narrated on the authority of Auf b. Malik al-Ashja'i who said: I joined the expedition that marched under Zaid b. Haritha to Muta, and I received reinformcement from the Yemen. (After this introduction), the narrator narrated the tradition that had gone before except that in his version Auf was reported to have said (to Khalid): Khalid, didn't you know that the Messenger of Allah (way peace be upon him) had decided In favour of giving the booty (sized from an enemy) to one who killed him? He (Khalid) said: Yes. but I thought it was too much.

Book 019, Number 4344:

It has been reported by Salama b. al-Akwa': We fought the Battle of Hawazin along with the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him). (One day) when we were having our breakfast with the Messenger of Allah (may peace he upon him), a man came riding a red camel. He made it kneel down, extracted a strip of leather from its girth and tethered the camel with it. Then he began to take food with the people and look (curiously around). We were in a poor condition as some of us were on foot (being without any riding animals). All of a sudden, he left us hurriedy, came to his camel, untethered it, made it kneel down, mounted it and urged the beast which ran off with him. A man on a brown rhe-camel chased him (taking him for a spy). Salama (the narrator) said: I followed on foot. I ran on until I was near the thigh of the she-camel. I advanced further until I was near the haunches of the camel. I advanced still further until I caught hold of the nosestring of the camel. I made it kneel down. As soon as it placed its knee on the ground, I drew my sword and struck at the head, of the rider who fell down. I brought the camel driving it along with the man's baggage and weapons. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) came forward to meet me and the people were with him. He asked: Who has killed the man? The people said: Ibn Akwa'. He said: Everything of the man is for him (Ibn Akwa').


Chapter 14: ADDITIONAL AWARD TO THE FIGHTERS AND REPATRIATION OF THE ENEMY PRISONERS AS A RANSOM FOR THE MUSLIMS
Book 019, Number 4345:

It has been narrated on the authority of Salama (b. al-Akwa') who said: We fought against the Fazara and Abu Bakr was the commander over us. He had been appointed by the Messenger oi Allah (may peace be upon him). When we were onlv at an hour's distance from the water of the enemy, Abu Bakr ordered us to attack. We made a halt during the last part of the night tor rest and then we attacked from all sides and reached their watering-place where a battle was fought. Some of the enemies were killed and some were taken prisoners. I saw a group of persons that consisted of women and children. I was afraid lest they should reach the mountain before me, so I shot an arrow between them and the mountain. When they saw the arrow, they stopped. So I brought them, driving them along. Among them was a woman from Banu Fazara. She was wearing a leather coat. With her was her daughter who was one of the prettiest girls in Arabia. I drove them along until I brought them to Abu Bakr who bestowed that girl upon me as a prize. So we arrived in Medina. I had not yet disrobed her when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) met me in the street and said: Give me that girl, O Salama. I said: Messenger of Allah, she has fascinated me. I had not yet disrobed her. When on the next day. the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) ag;tin met me in the street, he said: O Salama, give me that girl, may God bless your father. I said: She is for you. Messenger of Allah! By Allah. I have not yet disrobed her. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) sent her to the people of Mecca, and surrendered her as ransom for a number of Muslims who had been kept as prisoners at Mecca.


Chapter 15: FAI' (PROPERTY TAKEN FROM THE ENEMY WITHOUT A FORMAL WAR)
Book 019, Number 4346:

It has been narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: If you come to a township (which has surrendered without a formal war) and stay therein, you have a share (that will be in the form of an award) in (the properties obtained from) it. If a township disobeys Allah and His Messenger (and actually fights against the Muslims) one-fifth of the booty seized therefrom is for Allah and His Apostle and the rest is for you.

Book 019, Number 4347:

It has been narrated on the authority of Umar, who said: The properties abandoned by Banu Nadir were the ones which Allah bestowed upon His Apostle for which no expedition was undertaken either with cavalry or camelry. These properties were particularly meant for the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him). He would meet the annual expenditure of his family from the income thereof, and would spend what remained for purchasing horses and weapons as preparation for Jihad.


Lastly I just can't understand why "the last prophet of god" relied on military might so much. His words alone apparently were insufficient.

Book 019, Number 4465:

It has been narrated on the authority of Zaid b. Arqam that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) fought nineteen battles and after the Migration performed only one Pilgrimage called Hajjat-ul-Wada'.

Book 019, Number 4466:

It has been reported on the authority of Abu Zubair who heard Jabir b. Abdullah say: I fought in the company of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) nineteen battles. Jabir said: I did not participate in the Battle of Badr and the Battle of Uhud. My father prevented me (from participating in these battles as my age was tender). After 'Abdullah (my father) was killed on the Day of Ubud, I never lagged behind the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) and joined every battle (he fought).

Book 019, Number 4467:

It has been narrated on the authority of Buraida (who heard the tradition from his father) that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) conducted nineteen military campaigns and he (actually) fought in eight of them.

Book 019, Number 4468:

It has been narrated by Buraida who heard it from his father that he joined the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) in sixteen military campaigns

Book 019, Number 4469:

It has been narrated on the authority of Salama who said: I joined seven military expeditions led by the Messenger of Allah himself (may peace be upon him), and nine expeditions which he sent out once under Abu Bakr and once under Usama b. Zaid.

And no by those definitions I'm not a jihadist.

If your loved ones or your country is attacked, you will?

Attacked? By whom? With what? Why?

If I was attacked by a midget with a bag of marshmellows because I was taller than him, I wouldn't do any of the above.

You need to clarify, SAM. Your current poll is pointless.

Attacked? By whom? With what? Why?

If I was attacked by a midget with a bag of marshmellows because I was taller than him, I wouldn't do any of the above.

You need to clarify, SAM. Your current poll is pointless.

Do you consider a bag of marshmallows as an attack?:confused:

I didn't like the question. I voted fight back. But this is a reserved answer, because it only applies to the first concept ''if my loved ones where attacked.'' On the other hand, what happens to the country is up to Ceaser.

So if your country was under attack, what, hypothetically would you do? Just curious.

And no by those definitions I'm not a jihadist.

So if your loved ones were under attack, you would do none of the above?

Since you did not vote for any?

*************
M*W: From your description, and from discussions with Muslim friends, aren't we all "jihadists?" Don't we all have struggles?

Yes, of course, but you have the advantage of understanding the definition. ;)

As you can see, everyone else is going directly to war :D

No, I'm not a jihadist in any sense of the term.

No, I'm not a jihadist in any sense of the term.

Would you mind explaining what you would do?

How can one be a jihadist without "fighting in the way of Allah"?

Poll kinda senseless. :crazy:

How can one be a jihadist without "fighting in the way of Allah"?

Poll kinda senseless. :crazy:

Why not, apparently everyone who speaks Arabic is a Jihadist, even when they are self proclaimed Marxists.

I've just extended the definition to a situation, thats all.

And apparently in this situation, one would need the promise of paradise and or 72 virgins to reach a decision. So if you are NOT a jihadist, please select your best option.

Would you mind explaining what you would do?

Either call the police or let the Army defend the country. Perhaps if the war were serious enough, I would join the Army.

Either call the police or let the Army defend the country. Perhaps if the war were serious enough, I would join the Army.

Ah so you would


support, but not get involved?

The problem is Jihadists these days are not defending themselves, but rather waging a war of aggression on anything western or non-Muslim, and also their own fellow citizens that aren't devout enough for their taste. I don't think I could support anything like that.

The problem is Jihadists these days are not defending themselves, but rather waging a war of aggression on anything western or non-Muslim, and also their own fellow citizens that aren't devout enough for their taste. I don't think I could support anything like that.

So what is your definition of a jihadist? Is it

all suicide bombers
all Muslims who are fighting back
all Arab Muslims who are fighting back
only Muslim suicide bombers
Muslims who are fighting the US
Muslims who are fighting other Muslims
occupied Muslims who are fighting back
occupied Muslims and nonMuslims who are fighting back
unoccupied Muslims who are fighting back
specific Muslims in European or Western countries who protest
all Muslims who protest and fight back
all Muslims who protest but do not fight back
all Muslims

:rolleyes:your bias is in no way apparent here

Generally viewed (in the western world) a jihadist is a Muslim that is fighting in a holy war against the western world for reasons not well understood or appreciated by western society.

:rolleyes:your bias is in no way apparent here

I want to see what people understand by the term jihadist.

Apparently Muslims fight for paradise and virgins. They are, by turns, Islamic militants, Islamic extremists, Islamic insurgents, Islamic fundamentalists, Islamic terrorists, with emphasis on the Islamic. Non-Muslims are by virtue of not believing in a demonic Allah, laissez faire and peace loving, with no recourse to bombings, torture, invasions or occupations. Lacking acess to the glory of the Islamic paradise, they devote themselves to the peace and security of this world, much of which is opposed by the militant Islamists, who see this as a way of blocking their access to the virgins.

These Islamists are (apparently) not affected by their conditions, the conditions of their families and their countries.

So I would assume that all non-Muslims here would have no problem rejecting the states of their family or country, since there is no paradise or virgins guaranteed.

So what is your definition of a jihadist? Is it

all suicide bombers
all Muslims who are fighting back
all Arab Muslims who are fighting back
only Muslim suicide bombers
Muslims who are fighting the US
Muslims who are fighting other Muslims
occupied Muslims who are fighting back
occupied Muslims and nonMuslims who are fighting back
unoccupied Muslims who are fighting back
specific Muslims in European or Western countries who protest
all Muslims who protest and fight back
all Muslims who protest but do not fight back
all Muslims

All Muslims who fight without being a member of the military of an internationally recognized state.

What a ridiculous way to generalize the people here, how do you know that people here think muslims only fight for virgins and and paradise? I would think that Muslims fight for reasons others fight, Ideology, Power, Family, values, greed. I dont think that just because they are muslim means they fight for some completely not understandable reason, although just like EVERYONE else they can become extremists. Not everyone is against muslims SAM, and most of the people here who are against terrorism are also opposed to the terror that our countryis inflicting on muslims in the middle east.

All Muslims who fight without being a member of the military of an internationally recognized state.

Hmm does that include members of the militia that supports the government, that is the elected government, that wants to overthrow dictators, that is contracted by a government or that has no real government by virtue of occupation?

What a ridiculous way to generalize the people here, how do you know that people here think muslims only fight for virgins and and paradise? I would thin that Muslims fight for reasons others fight, Ideology, Power, Family, values, greed. I dont think that jsut because they are muslim means they fight for some completely understandable reason, although just like EVERYONE else they can become extremists. Not everyone is against muslims SAM, and most of the people here who are against terrorism are also opposed to the terror that our countryis inflicting on muslims in the middle east.

You'd be surprised how many so-called educated people think this way.

To you, it may be obvious, but its not obvious to everyone. :)

I am frequently surprised by the depth of bigotry that blinds people in their perception of the motivations of those under dictators, occupiers, extremist governments or in a constant state of war or oppression. Apparently, they are to be judged for not having the Western notions of freedom and secularism implanted in their thought process. Of course, the Westerners, when at war, are supremely calm and never resort to demonisation or atrocities or even illegal invasions or occupations.

But Muslims, by virtue of their inherent extremism, must by all Western standards, espouse peace even under pressure or discrimination.

Yes.

Yes.

And international recognition of course, means the members of the Security Council, who are oddly enough, not required to fulfill the letter of the international law and can recognise or derecognise a state based on personal profit?

For without a doubt, there has never been an accounting for genocides performed in the last 50 years by Western governments, for torture, for incarceration without cause, for kidnapping, murder, invasion, occupation etc.

When was the last time they did that?

I think the ongoing incarceration of people in Gitmo qualifies, as does the illegal occupation of Iraq, Palestine and Afghanistan.

But of course, laws are inconsequential when the lawmakers break them.

e.g. if the Israeli attack on Syria had been a Syrian attack on Israel, then the "punishment" would be very different.

As it is, there is a total lack of interest.

The same people who "remember" 9/11, have no concept of Abu Ghraib, Gitmo or the people of Afghanistan or Iraq or even Palestine (who are deserving of what they get, due to being vicious savages beyond redemption, that eat the hearts of their enemies and drink the blood of children, unlike refined secularists who merely bomb from the safety of tanks and aircrafts)

Do you consider a bag of marshmallows as an attack?:confused:

Ah, reading comprehension problem again, I see. Or, maybe another attempt at avoidance. Typical.

No, it is the midget who is the attacker and who actually attacks, hence the label 'attacker', sam.

Ah, reading comprehension problem again, I see. Or, maybe another attempt at avoidance. Typical.

No, it is the midget who is the attacker and who actually attacks, hence the label 'attacker', sam.

I was informed that a midget is stalking you, better be careful, he may catch you unawares. :rolleyes:

There is no state of Palestine.

There is no state of Palestine.

The UN would disagree, and since the UN has also donated the state of Israel, one is hard put to recognise the criteria by which part of a UN resolution is accepted while another part of it is ignored.

No they wouldn't. The region was partitioned, but there is no recognized state of Palestine.

`
embrace the enemy

'Cos you gotta...

No they wouldn't. The region was partitioned, but there is no recognized state of Palestine.

Of course there isn't. Which is why there is no recognition of the occupation or oppression of the people there. But thats because they are paying the price of the Holocaust, it is the countries who are invested in the Holocaust, for politcal reasons that keep the State of Palestine from being recognised. That much is clear from the innumerable unilateral vetos that govern political action in that region.

They are todays victims of the Jewish Holocaust.:shrug:

The Palestine Liberation Organization gained observer status at the United Nations General Assembly in 1974 (General Assembly resolution 3237). Acknowledging the proclamation of the State of Palestine, the UN redesignated this observer status as belonging to Palestine in 1988 (General Assembly resolution 43/177.) In July 1998, the General Assembly adopted a new resolution (52/250) conferring upon Palestine additional rights and privileges, including the right to participate in the general debate held at the start of each session of the General Assembly, the right of reply, the right to co-sponsor resolutions and the right to raise points of order on Palestinian and Middle East issues. By this resolution, "seating for Palestine shall be arranged immediately after non-member States and before the other observers." This resolution was adopted by a vote of 124 in favor, 4 against (Israel, USA, Marshall Islands, Micronesia) and 10 abstentions.

No elected government in Palestine will be recognised unless it is a government that abstains from putting its own population first.

I am frequently surprised by the depth of bigotry that blinds people in their perception of the motivations of those under dictators, occupiers, extremist governments or in a constant state of war or oppression.

It's far more surprising that you assume we're to believe you know those motives especially when those motives are actually revealed by the protagonist as religious. Regardless, they certainly use their religion to justify those motives and keep the masses in check (oppressed.)

Apparently, they are to be judged for not having the Western notions of freedom and secularism implanted in their thought process.

Duh. It's too bad you consider 'freedom' as a western notion. One would think freedom would be for all. Perhaps it is you who is bigoted and blind..

I was informed that a midget is stalking you, better be careful, he may catch you unawares.

Ah, so it was avoidance. Thanks. Your poll is still pointless.

"If your loved ones or your country is attacked, ..."

I'd do what the Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan are doing, I'd go around blowing up my own countrymen, especially women and children, until the oppressors or invaders finally couldn't stand me killing my own people, and then they'd leave.

Baron Max

It's far more surprising that you assume we're to believe you know those motives especially when those motives are actually revealed by the protagonist as religious. Regardless, they certainly use their religion to justify those motives and keep the masses in check (oppressed.)

IOW, I should give more credence to random media soundbites than academic studies



Duh. It's too bad you consider 'freedom' as a western notion. One would think freedom would be for all. Perhaps it is you who is bigoted and blind..

Look again, I said "Westen Notions of Freedom"; the ones that include "not-so-free trade", Gitmo, support for dictators and occupiers and non recognition of elected governments.

Ah, so it was avoidance. Thanks. Your poll is still pointless.

Warned ya,
http://youtube.com/watch?v=28NYU4NIL3Q

"If your loved ones or your country is attacked, ..."

I'd do what the Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan are doing, I'd go around blowing up my own countrymen, especially women and children, until the oppressors or invaders finally couldn't stand me killing my own people, and then they'd leave.

Baron Max

Strange, how the attacks always follow the US troops. Nothing to do with the arming of Sunni war criminals from the de-clawed previous regime. :rolleyes:

"If your loved ones or your country is attacked, ..."

I'd do what the Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan are doing, I'd go around blowing up my own countrymen, especially women and children, until the oppressors or invaders finally couldn't stand me killing my own people, and then they'd leave.

Baron Max

I don't think it worked in the American civil war, in New Orleans or with the IRA, so why would it work elsewhere?

IOW, I should give more credence to random media soundbites than academic studies

Just stick with your usual brand of propaganda and intellectual dishonesty, no need to swing from your norm.

Look again, I said "Westen Notions of Freedom"; the ones that include "not-so-free trade", Gitmo, support for dictators and occupiers and non recognition of elected governments.

Yes, I'm sure you could go on and on and on... with your usual nonsense, but it's getting tiresome and predictable.

Why not just put your cards on the table and tell us the REAL reason you started this poll.

...as if we didn't know.

Just stick with your usual brand of propaganda and intellectual dishonesty, no need to swing from your norm.

Whassamatter? Afraid to take a stand on your bigotry?:rolleyes:



Yes, I'm sure you could go on and on and on... with your usual nonsense, but it's getting tiresome and predictable.

Why not just put your cards on the table and tell us the REAL reason you started this poll.

...as if we didn't know.

You missed it, its a few posts back.

What does the poll have to do with being a jihadist?

This whole thread is just weird.

The big problem with the poll and the reason I can't respond is because it conflates my loved ones and my country. If someone attacked by wife and child or even my siblings I'm going to respond violently and probably abruptly. When someone attacks my country I would have more reasoned response. I would want to know how they attacked, why they attacked, who they were, etc. My response would have to take into account a lot of factors I wouldn't be bothered with if someone attacked my family. My love of my family is unconditional, whereas I'm quite aware that my country (or at least the gov't thereof) can be kind of fucked up.

Come on, SAM just described my Chihuahua...may he rest in peace.

What does the poll have to do with being a jihadist?

If you were a jihadist, you wouldn't answer the poll, because it says nothing about 72 virgins. Instead you'd hem and haw and make excuses NOT to answer the poll. ;)

I cant answer the poll. For my family i am a fighter, afaik everyone else is. For my country, it depends. I would not fight for Saddam or someone like him. "Your" country is just a patch of dirt, and it is only 'yours' when they want you to die for it. But i would fight for U.S, because i can only assume the alternative to be much worse.

because it says nothing about 72 virgins.

Where does that come from anyway?

So, are you?
The way the poll is posed, of course the answer is fight back.

But when I think "jihadist", I think of a bunch of cowards in masks screaming "Allah akbar" and then cutting off the head of some innocent person they have tied up. I think of men hijacking planes and crashing them into the world trade center. I think of savages torturing and killing school children in Beslan.

So while jihadist may have some positive meaning in its original definition, it's kind of picked up a bad reputation of late.

`
embrace the enemy

'Cos you gotta...

and it feels so good!

and it feels so good!

they pay money...lots of money...to kill your brothers and sisters...and than yourself for a lulliby of 72 virgins...

So if your loved ones were under attack, you would do none of the above?

Since you did not vote for any?

From what I've seen of jihadists they are the most incompetent bunch of idiots around, much better suited to killing their own than the enemy.

are you a crusader or a viking, spp?

are you a crusader or a viking, dqn?

I am a rat on board the crusader's/viking's ship

are you a crusader or a viking, spp?

A fisherman

I am a rat on board the crusader's/viking's ship

The exterminator has been informed.

Also are the above the only options available to a jihadi?

No, you can also sit in cave putting on lipstick.

A fisherman

jesus was a carpenter. :shh:

No, you can also sit in cave putting on lipstick.

I would eat the lipstick...if its edible...is it edible?

jesus was a carpenter. :shh:

I do that on the side. Check out this little love nest.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/13/Rundown_Shack.jpg/800px-Rundown_Shack.jpg

I do that on the side. Check out this little love nest.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/13/Rundown_Shack.jpg/800px-Rundown_Shack.jpg

if jesus had similar carpenting skills then maybe it was for the good of mankind that he switched his career to messiah'ing.

if jesus had similar carpenting skills then maybe it was for the good of mankind that he switched his career to messiah'ing.

If the materials jesus had to work with were human beings then that would be a monumental success.

If the materials jesus had to work with were human beings then that would be a monumental success.

shame other people have been remodeling the work of jesus.

shame other people have been remodeling the work of jesus.

Not remodelling, restoring. Refurbishment is the big thing these days.

remember that jesus patented his status in the bible...yes it all says there...all the image copying is protected by GOD. Galactical Omniscent Dynasty that is. Oh yes and Moses is the prosecutor.

Actually that patent is pending.

Actually that patent is pending.

oh yes you are right...the Bible's new new age testament says it all.

Not remodelling, restoring. Refurbishment is the big thing these days.

how can you restore something that is lost and unknown?

how can you restore something that is lost and unknown?

you find it, give it a name, and set it free.

I found a girl amongst a crowd, gave her child from my seed a name, and set the girl free

So you see how it works? now...

you find it, give it a name, and set it free.

I found a girl amongst a crowd, gave her child from my seed a name, and set the girl free

So you see how it works? now...

in theory because you are a virgin.

I was talking about in practice.

how can you restore something that is lost and unknown?

By using your imagination.

in theory because you are a virgin.

I was talking about in practice.

in practice...well emmmmm in practice. You walk in inside an unknown store...buy an unknown lost amongst humans rabbit, give it a name, cook it on a stake, give the delicious dinner a name, and set it free inside a stomach.