Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fighting Islam: One Man's Holy War, Another's Jihad - (essential; historical reality of Islam!)

Posted on 07/19/2005 3:18:36 PM PDT by CHARLITE

One of the chief struggles America is facing in the War on Terror is defining the enemy. In a simplistic sense this is easy. We are fighting Islamist radicals as embodied by Osama bin Laden and his Al Qaeda terrorist network. This assessment falls short of the mark, however, when you consider the size and scope of the conflict.

No one man or group could be solely responsible as the source of such widespread violence stretching across the globe and through the centuries of history. Within a historical context, the War on Terror is not a unique conflict between the United States and international criminals, as many wish it was, but a continuation of the millennia long struggle between Islam and the rest of the world. Whether we like it or not, whether we chose this or not, we must face the fact that we are fighting Western civilization’s oldest and most dangerous adversary, Islam.

If you read the newspapers or watch television news you are inundated with descriptions of Islam as “a religion of peace.” After the London terrorist attacks, Moslem organizations dutifully issued their condemnations of the attacks. Yet these will be the last statements critical of Islamic radicalism you will hear from most prominent Moslem groups, until the next terrorist attack, because they are far too eager to return to their main agenda of blaming America and Israel for all the evils in the world. The reality is most of the proclamations about Islam’s being a benign religion of peace are not coming from the Islamic community, but from their new class of acolytes, our elected Western leaders.

While this may sound wonderful to culturally sensitive Western ears, it does not reflect the facts of the history or theology of Islam.

To begin, much has been made about what the true definition of “Jihad” means. In Arabic, “Jihad” literally means “struggle” or “to strive.” You have heard the term used to describe something like an individual’s own struggle to conform to the law of Allah. There are other Arabic terms, such as “harb” which translate much closer to the English definition of “war.” In a historical context, howver, there can be little doubt that for the preponderance of Islamic history, “Jihad” means more than personal struggle and quite often includes violent militant “holy war.”

On November 7, 1914, the Ottoman Empire entered World War I with a declaration of “jihad” against the Entente Powers. In 1529 and 1683 the Turkish invasions of Europe that led to Moslem troops at the gates of Vienna where all declared “jihads,” as was the 1828 attempted suppression of the Greek independence movement, and the 1854 Crimean War against England and France. These were not internal struggles to improve a person’s internal morality, but regular wars like any others, but with the added element of religious duty.

Additionally, in the most standard collection of the “Hadith,” (a collection of sayings and teaching of Mohammad compiled by Sahih al-Bakhari), “jihad” is mentioned 199 times, and each assumes the meaning “war.”

While “jihad” does apply to an internal spiritual struggle, it cannot be denied that it also means violent attack. For Moslem scholars and our leaders to claim otherwise is simply not an accurate representation of the truth about Islam’s nature.

Liberals love to blame the world’s problems with Islam on the Crusades. Yes, the Crusades where a dark and violent time for our civilization and Christians committed many atrocities and abuses through the conflicts. But he actions of Moslems during the Crusade period, and the constant attacks on the West in the centuries leading up to the Crusades, are given no scrutiny.

From its inception, Islam has been an aggressive faith that has worked to gain converts through evangelism, and if that fails, force. In Islamic eyes, the world is divided in two. There is “Dar al-Islam”, “the House of Submission,” or “Dar al-Harb,” “the House of War.” You are either in one or the other, and if you are not a Moslem, then you are technically a target of war unless you have a formal treaty with a Moslem power.

Militant Islam is attacking the United States not just over the claims of their apologists, but because we are the center of the non-Moslem world and the conflict will never end until America becomes an Islamic nation ruled under “Sharia” law, another country supersedes the United States as the world’s principle power, or Moslems change the fundamental concepts of their faith.

Islamic aggression, however, is not limited to the United States alone. Across the globe, non-Moslems are under attack in all quarters from “the religion of peace.” Cote d’Ivoire, Cyrus, East Timor, India, Indonesia, Kashmir, Afghanistan, Kurdistan, Macedonia, Egypt, Algeria, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Sudan, Chechnya, Uganda, and the Philippines are all hot beds of ethnic and religious strife and all involve Moslems. In fact, the only real areas of religious conflict in the world that do not involve Islam are in Northern Ireland, South Africa, and Sri Lanka. The evidence is indisputable. Islam is already fighting a war against us, but we have not come to realize it yet. Nor, by burying our heads in the sand and mechanically calling Islam “a religion of peace,” are we dealing with the legal, moral, and ethical issues the reality of this conflict is forcing on us.

In America, we live in a free, secular, culture where freedom of religion forms one of the foundation of our society. We simply cannot disregard these values and principles out of necessity or expedience. Nor can we lash out at individual Moslems who are honest, decent people and have no intention of ever hurting anybody. So what are we to do?

On one hand, we have the Moslems in our communities that we know, invite to our homes, play with our children, and share friendships. On the other hand, we have Ibrahim Mudayris saying on Palestinian television, “We have ruled the world and the day will come, by Allah, and we shall rule the world [again.] The day will come and we shall rule America,” and the verses such as Sura 9:5 of the “Koran,” “[S]lay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege than and lie in wait for them in every ambush.” How can we as a society protect the innocent people of a faith when the faith itself is hostile and antagonistic to that same society?

These are the issues our leaders should be dealing, but they are not. Instead they are choosing to ignore them, hoping they will go away on their own, at our own peril.

As a modern society we are not comfortable dealing with matters such as this. Moral relativists want us to think that all religions are equal, all promote basically the same good message, and have an equal benefit to society. Unfortunately this is not the case. Not all religions are equal, and some are destructive. The fact that the vast majority of Moslems are good, moral, decent people is not a reflection on Islam as a faith, but the fact most Moslems are just good people. They would act the same way no matter what, if any, faith they chose.

It is time for a whole lot of straight talk from our leaders, and debate among our citizens. The true nature of Islam must be acknowledged in the public realm so we can make the decisions necessary to meet this threat while at the same time preserve the freedoms and values that make us different from our enemies. We might have to offend a few people and allies in the process, but it is the only way to ever truly win the War on Terror.

About the Writer: Justin Darr is a freelance writer living in the Philadelphia area with his wife, Erin, and twin children. He can be read widely on the Internet and in print publications in the United States and Europe . Justin receives e-mail at

TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: bloodshed; conquest; history; islam; jihad; koran; murder; muslims; reality; war
Justin Darr is quite right. It is an unrealistic fantasy to believe that simply continuing to placate whatever "moderate" Muslims are thought to be out there, by naming Islam as a "religion of peace," will somehow diminish the threats and end the terror. Foolish thinking and extremely dangerous, IMO.
1 posted on 07/19/2005 3:18:41 PM PDT by CHARLITE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Critical Bill; Leapfrog; backhoe; Stopislamnow; Fred Nerks; canalabamian; ThreePuttinDude; ...
Fine article on the historical realities of Islam. . . 1,400 years of blood, gore, death and destruction...all toward the end of world conquest.


2 posted on 07/19/2005 3:20:33 PM PDT by CHARLITE (I propose a co-Clinton team as permanent reps to Pyonyang, w/out possibility of repatriation....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

The fact that the vast majority of Moslems are good, moral, decent people is not a reflection on Islam as a faith, but the fact most Moslems are just good people. They would act the same way no matter what, if any, faith they chose.

Interesting point.

3 posted on 07/19/2005 3:25:07 PM PDT by siunevada
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Daniel Pipes review of David Cook's book, "Understanding Jihad". This book is a good resource for the many aspects of Islam including its contrarian and violent history from its very beginning. Understanding Jihad
4 posted on 07/19/2005 3:29:53 PM PDT by 45Auto (Big holes are (almost) always better.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


At a minimum, we should stop importing more muslims, and kick out any non-citizen muslims who violate their visas, etc. But it's a sign of our impotence that no politician will even discuss this obvious step.

5 posted on 07/19/2005 4:27:08 PM PDT by teawithmisswilliams (Question Diversity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: teawithmisswilliams
"But it's a sign of our impotence that no politician will even discuss this obvious step."

There must be some core belief system operating in the government (all branches and both parties, presumably), that people will just naturally gravitate towards all of the traditional thinking and behavior of America's Judeo-Christian heritage, once they have come here and experienced our way of life.

The problem that that assumption is that it ignores the age-old, fundamental dictates of Islam, all of which are decidedly anti-western, anti-semitic and anti-Christian. Assimilation is impossible for a devout Muslim.

Thanks for your comment, teawithmisswilliams! (What a cute FR name :) !!

Char :)

6 posted on 07/19/2005 4:34:30 PM PDT by CHARLITE (I propose a co-Clinton team as permanent reps to Pyonyang, w/out possibility of repatriation....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson