How Muslims Can Win The Coming Wars!

#17 by HisExcellency on April 16, 2003 6:01pm PT

You know what? Its bigots like you who are the real cause for much of the Muslim world’s misery. Tell a Muslim that Islam is in danger, and he’ll mobilize the entire neighborhood to lead protest marches, burn the US/Indian/Israeli flag depending on which geographical region he is in, denounce American imperialism or Indian/Israeli atrocities/repression, etc. But when dictators like Saddam or Musharraf snatch away his democratic rights, he dare not rise against them (the MMA in Pakistan did protest against the LFO, but that was more out of political considerations than their innate love for democracy). Because Muslims like to believe in the “he may be a bastard, but he is our bastard” idea, which is what the Ummah is, a pathetic fairytale. 90% of Muslim countries are ruled by dictatorships, and none of you gives a rat’s ass to it, but when the US invades Iraq (which is wrong, but that’s another issue altogether), you talk about unity among Muslim nations and other crap.

You so love to mock the US for mollycoddling dictators around the world eh? What have you done to bring democracy and liberty to your motherland? By tolerating dictators and monrachs, you are as much a party to the crime as the US is.

You want to counter the US? First, confront your homegrown tyrants and build a democracy and let it flourish like it has done in the US for over 200 years. Let democracy gain momentum, build strong institutions, promote science and technology, produce strong individuals capable of contributing to the country productively instead of producing Jihadis by the hordes (who do nothing better than spreading anarchy around much of the world), and build a strong economy. Till then, all the Muslim countries put together wouldn’t be able to more than pinprick the US.

what?? you are going to teach naat and yoga to the Brits now? Another 4 years for Bush and you will be singing bhajans with Narendar Chanchal. No more Johad as central tenet of Islam? not more suicide missions? no ore killings of Kashmiri hindus to cleanse kashmir?
Oh Sufism. How convenient !!. Now that spanking has started Abdul is already learning how to sing kafis.

Your love, peace, tolerance and humanity is a fall back plan - plan B to jihad and killing and eventual subjugation of whole of kuffar. Unfortunately, your time is up. Big daddy kafir has got that with the first strike on 9/11 unlike other hypocrites of the world who keep bending for loving kicks in the ass from you and then doing namsakar to the great peaceful religion of yours.

Your buck has stopped at WTC on 9/11.

want to win a war --- easy -- run to the Masjid

Asif,

Here we go, yet another pathetic article from a pakistani. The true meaning of islam, the religion of peace and love. Asif, why cant you say that killing hindus is not jihad and it could be very riveting just now when the lasker chief has annonced with the ruling party of pakistan that kill9inmg of hindus is jihad.

Just repeating that islam is a religion of peace sonds hollow, when jihad a central tenet of islam is about killinmg kafirs and the ilks of you will not dare to criticise it.

Tell me asif, killing kafirs is it jihad or not.

WHEN THE GOING GETS TOUGH ON MUSLIMS, THEN THE TOUGH IN MUSLIMS EITHER KEEPS GOING OR GO AND VENT THEIR ANGER AT WOMEN, CHILDREN AND OTHER WEAK PEOPLE.

THNK ABOUT IT. FOR ALL THE FATWAHS` SPEWING FROM MULLAHS, HAVE YOU SEEN ANY OF THEM ACTUALLY DOING WHAT THEY ARE PREACHING. MULLAH NOORANI, MULLAH SAND-WICH HAQ AND OTHER MULLAH ET ALS HAVE SOMETHING IN COMMON WITH ISLAMIC GENERALS(ZIA, SADDAM, MUSHARRAF) FOR ALL THEIR GLORIES WITH MEDALS AND WHAT NOT, WHEN S$IT HITS THE GROUND,THEY FLEE LEAVING FORCED CONSCRIPTS, WOMEN, CHILDREN, OLDER PEOPLE TO FACE THE MUSIC OR WORSE YET, HIDE BEHIND WOMEN/CHILDREN AS A HUMAN SHIELD.

DISGRACEFUL.

COUPLE OF OBSERVATIONS FROM THIS IRAQ AND AFGHANISTHAN CAMPAIGN:

MUJAHEDEEN SUCCEEDED WITH SOVIETS IN AFGHANISTHAN BECAUSE OF US HELP; NOW THE MULLAH MUJAHADEEN ARE HAVING PROBLEMS HAVING CROSSED THE RUSSIANS AND NOW THE AMERICANS. NOW THE MULLAHS/MUJAHADEEN ARE THE ONES GETTING SCREWED. EVEN HERE, THERE ARE MANY CIVILIAN CASUALTIES.

THESE ARMS PURCHASES FROM ARAB COUNTRIES ARE UP TO NO GOOD. MOST OF THE MILITARY DICTATORS PURCHASE ARMS NOT TO DEFEND THEIR COUNTRIESFROM OUTSIDE, BUT RATHER USE IT AGAINST THEIR OWN PEOPLE. (EXAMPLE: PAKISTAN, IRAQ AND MANY ISLAMIC COUNTRIES)

Mr.Naqshbandi is blaming Muslims for wars imposed upon them by non-Muslims. Why did America not indulge in spiritualism and introspection after 9/11? Simply because it doesn`t help. Action must be met with equal and opposite reaction.

Turning the other cheek simply means that you will have two bloody cheeks instead of one. Instead of spiritualism, Muslims need to invest in the following:

a) long-range ICBMs that can be launched from mobile launchers

b) All Muslims countries should have 5-10 nuclear warheads that can easily be fitted on long-range missiles at short-notice

c) All Muslim countries should pass a declaration stating that...

``Economic sanctions shall be considered an act of war. The sanctioned country reserves the right to hit back with full military force in response to economic sanctions.``

This will prevent America from using sanctions to weaken its enemy, and then attack it later on the pretext of MD/terrorism/dictatorship/oil.

d) And finally, Muslim countries need to ensure perfect unity among themselves. ``All for one, and one for all`` should be the principle of this alliance. Nobody should do trade, etc with any Muslim nation that breaks the ranks to form a separate peace with the aggressor.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#10
General zia used naat-bazi to cover-up his obvious pro-wahabi leanings. What we know about him is that he persecuted shias and embarked on the wahabisation of pakistan with the help of his baddu friends.

#8
wrong comparison..Saddam ruled bodies, the saints ruled (and still rule) hearts. Saddam and Pharoes belong to the mesums, the saints draw millions to their graves century after century (kerbala alone attracted 3 million visitors just 2 months ago, despite the looming shadow of war).

btw..may be I`m paranoid but you sound like a wahabi..

This article is a plethora of inconsistencies, which makes the basic premise of this article fall flat on its face. I wish author had worked a little bit harder on this important subject. Some of the basic flaws of this article are:

1. Author says ``What has 9/11 achieved? `` .

This simply is an admission of guilt; whereas forensic as well as circumstantial evidence do not support the American claims that some Arab/Muslim hijackers caused the incident of 9/11. Now please explain to me how do you want to propagate your message of love while taking credit for blowing up their buildings at the same time? I think, on the other hand we should be persistent about a fair and open investigation into this matter as long as it takes. What this `admission of guilt does` is that it closes the doors of criminal investigation forever. We should seek justice and not their pity (or scorn) by being pathetic.

2. Author says ``What have the mujahideen achieved in Kashmir except to make life even more wretched for the innocent Muslims? What did the Taliban achieve except the destruction of their nation? Ditto Iraq last time round? )``

What author is overlooking in all three cases is the basic fact that all three parties mentioned are not aggressors; instead they are victims of an aggression. In all three cases wars were forced on these people when neither wanted it nor worked to deserve it. Take for example, Kashmiris; their demand for the right to vote is neither a declaration of war nor it is an act of aggression. Even by American standards of McDemocracy, right to vote is a basic human right – isn`t that why they attacked Iraq? Similarly, Taliban never sent an Armageddon to attack Washington, instead they were attacked and slaughtered mercilessly while they were negotiating how to hand over OBL to an impartial country for a trial. And Iraqis; I don’t think any Iraqi had ever harmed an American or even threatened American interests, instead UN was used in a diabolic plan to disarm Iraqis completely and as their disarmament was complete and US government was sure that they cannot retaliate, they were slaughtered mercilessly, violating international law and common principles of justice and human compassion. In other words author is indirectly endorsing these acts of criminal aggression by shifting the blame on victims.

3. Asif further writes ``This is true of all the `reformist` movements in India, in North Africa, in Egypt and most visibly in the Arabian peninsula itself with the Wahabis who were supported fully by the British. ``

While it is true that British supported Shah Saud who happened to be Wahabi and used him against Ottomans, the fact remains that the 19 hijackers who attacked twin towers are also alleged to be wahabis; as a matter of fact it is alleged that whole ideology of Al-Qaida like organizations revolve around Wahabism (also claimed by Asif on several boards). Now could someone please explain to me, if we accept Asif`s thesis, how Wahabism can be pro-imperialism and anti to it at the same time. And how could West be pro-Wahabism and against it at the same time. It defies all logic. And common sense thus suggests that Wahabism in this equation is irrelevant. I think Asif is trying to settle some personal scores against wahabis.

4. And I disagree completely with the method i.e. internalize the focus, that Asif is suggesting to achieve a goal that is purely external i.e. ``How Muslims Can Win The Coming Wars! `` . This defies logic. Common sense suggests that when you internalize your focus you get the results that are internal to you and when you interact with others, externalize your focus, you get results that are external to you.

What Asif is suggesting is absolutely against the sunnah of our Prophet (pbuh). If we accept Asif`s thesis, our Prophet should have confined himself to the cave Hira as he started facing tests and tribulations. But the facts tell us, that instead of internalizing his focus he went out on journeys to Taif and other towns etc. and continued spreading his message despite of the fact that he was stoned, cursed, and abused by his opponents for years. What Asif is suggesting is called, according to Karl Marx ``religion is the opiate of masses``. Allah Allah khair sallah…..if world could become a better place just by that, then each one of us would have started chilla-kashi. This world cannot become a just and tolerant place just by sitting on mussalla; it needs hard work, dedication, struggle, sweat and blood.

These are testing times; which demand that we shouldn`t sit at our homes, or monasteries, or mizars, or Khanqas, instead, it is time to struggle; to show others by example, by logic, by debate that we have been subjected to an unjust aggression. The best way to show others the righteous path is by walking on it first.

religion serve no more.no one is comfortable with it.just keep on memorizing verses ignoring the true essence.mulla has distorted every thing.this war is not of islam and christian.simply might is right.islam is not the only religion exhorted for peace and huminity,chrischinity has the same message.forget about the religionand serve the huminity.

so you have succeeded in your quest for spiritual fulfillment. excellent. lesser mortals (i.e. ordinary pakis) on the other hand have rather mundane concerns such as paying utility bills or finding good and affordable schools for children or getting decent healthcare for elderly parents or finding a reasonably paying job for the son who has just completed his b.com.

general zia followed the course of action advocated by the author and the net result is that thousands of our citizens pay lakhs of rupees every year to human smugglers for the privilege of living as second class citizens in countries where they are not wanted. scary to think of consequences if we spend another ten years reciting naats.

The article`s title is how muslims can win the coming war. For starters, they can be realistic and realize that most of the present, common problems in the muslim nations, are the result of their own handiwork. As nazarhayatkhan said in his post (# 2), it is not about religion; it is about good governance or lack of it thereof.

Regressing and seeking comfort in the greatness of the past will not work. Such an option will create a mythological nationalism, which will be totally out of sync with the prevailing reality. Muslim rulers have to end the injustices in their society and they have to be less concerned about preserving their own power interests. They have to look beyond the egoism of power and they have to stop using religion as crutch for their own vested interests and this implies, that they have to stop appeasing the militant theocratic inclinations of the Islamic clergy.

It is not about whether the muslims can win the future wars; as much as it is about whether the muslims realize they are in the eye of the hurricane and have, or show, the willingness to step away from the path of the hurricane.

Ciao

good article.thought provoking,awakeningspirituality.no doubt all religion deceded from heaven with different messengers but the same messages.at present time all religion failed.spirituality,onthe other hand will always succeed.religion ask us to learn from the experiences of others,spirituality urges us to seek our own.religion can not stand spitituality it can not abide it..for spiritualitymay bring to a different conclusion than a particular religion and this no known religion can tolerate.religion n courges us to explore the thoughts of others and accepts them as our own.spirituality invite us to toss away the thoughts of others and come up with our own spirituality can helps us in improving perception of all religions.

So, the Naqshbandi strategy for winning wars is: love and revere certain types of men (sufis, religious leaders, prophets and suchlikes, in case of Nazshbandi).

Saddam had a similar strategy for winning wars: love and revere certain types of men (namely, he Saddam Hussein). Saddam idols now are lie in the dust. With Iraqis slapping his face with shoes.

So, what is common between Naqshbandi and Hussein:

a. Both believe in man-worship. Not principles, not values. But idols.

b. Both believe in war against the west. From the safety of their palace (in case of Saddam) and from the safety of his UK home (in case of Naqshbandi).

Jeetay raho beta.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts