I'll be honest. It sounds like you never read the Quran. Your post was a good laugh.
So far, the standard contradiction setup - harmless enough, but: Mohammed did indeed "push" people to accept Islam - he was a military commander, and quite a bit of "pushing" was involved in his career overall.
For those unfamiliar with Islamic history, they often let their biases get in place of neutral truth. It is a fact that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be to him) waged all his battles in defense of the state of Madinah. The Makkans persecuted the first Muslims and failed several attempts to take his life. He then emigrated to Madinah, and the first few years of the Islamic community's battles were waged against a foe who was superior is arms, allies, and troops by many times. After several Pagan and Muslim bedouin tribes allied with Madinah and people around the vicinity started embracing the religion, form as far away as Persia, Roman, Egypt, and India, the balance tilted in favor of the Muslims. After the Makkans broke the Treaty of Hudaybiyah by attacking a pagan tribe allied with the Muslims, this started the events leading up to the peaceful conquest of Makkah, in which no revenge was taken against any of its inhabitants and all were forgiven. In fact, forgiveness and peace were major themes in the Prophet Muhammad (peace be to him)'s victories. Soon after Islam became the dominant force in the Arabian peninsula, the Romans and Persians (who had been at war for hundreds of years) jointly attacked the new Muslim state in Arabia. The Romans and Persians both had vassal states in Arabia whom they relied on to keep Arabia disunited and to wage proxy wars against each other. The Muslim army than defeated the joint armies of Rome and Persia (the mightiest empires in that time). This was seen as a miracle, then the people all throughout the realms of the region began embracing Islam. In less than a hundred years, Islam had reached from Spain to India, from Nigeria to Central Asia.
The cadre of believers he (allegedly it was him) created did even more along those lines, and Islam was spread by the sword to far places and many initially unwilling people.
The Roman and Persian empires fell do to their attack against the Islamic state, yet there is no proof that Islam 'spread by the sword' to other parts of the Islamic realm. The spread of Islam was largely carried out by traveling missionaries. Its success was in large part due to the concept of One God, which was foreign to many people of the world. Furthermore, many of the Christians of the Middle East and Africa embraced Islam as they saw it as the completion of the message of Prophet Jesus (peace be to him).
Which would be OK, if it were acknowledged - because it's happening now, as well, as part of normal human life. The notion that the less savory aspects of Islamic "tolerance" - tolerance of slavery in Niger, of genital mutilation here and there, of misogyny and oppression of women almost everywhere - are not the real Islam, come from these revisions of history and mythical invocations of purity, of a vision of Islam that ascribes to it all the virtues of the theologically refined understanding, and absolves it of the consequences of its basic political nature as a patriarchal monotheistic religion with a priesthood and a holy book.
You confuse cultural practices with the religion. Statements borne from lack of knowledge and to further an agenda. Unbiased truth requires more research. Slavery may be present in some regions Sub-saharan communities, but yet it is not isolated to Muslims, the pagans and the Christians also practice this. Same thing with female genital mutilation, it is largely present in Christian and pagan societies, Islamic scholars have lost resisted it as a negative aspect of the native culture in African societies around the Nile. There was a thread concerning this topic, and I quoted a statement from the head of Al Azhar (oldest and respected Islamic university in the world) in Egypt which put this matter to complete rest. You are free to look this up for yourself. Furthermore, it is strange how those Westerners who always claim to support women rights, further support invasions and destruction of those same Muslim countries. Women's rights also includes human rights, something which is readily denied to women in the US prisons from Bagram to Abu Ghareeb (where women are kept as basically sex slaves, abused and raped by US soldiers). You should keep up with the story of Aafia Siddiqui, she was a doctor who was captured by US military and kept in Bagram airbase until she went mad from sexual abuse, including rape, and physical and mental torture. Yet these people claim to support women's rights.
The Quran, for example, is largely a set of threats, veiled and overt and implied and direct, page after page of them, against those who fail to join the True Believers or violate the edicts expressed therein. Among a small community of decent people, that is no problem. But in the hands of authoritarian government, backed by force of arms, other possibilities emerge - and the consequences of those possibilities are what the outsider sees, planet wide.
Nothing but fear mongering on your part. The Quran states quite clearly, "There is no compulsion in religion." The punishments referred to in the Quran for those who reject the message are the punishments of the Afterlife. Allah swt declares that those who do not use the minds that which He has given them to discern truth from falsehood, and reject His message and attempt to shield others from the message by disinformation, they will be judged by Him according to that. Muslims are mere human beings, we don't claim to know the future, nor the ultimate destination of all human beings on earth. God shall judge concerning this, and He makes it clear that He is the Most Just of judges. "Not an atom's weight of deed, but shall be brought out (for judgment)."
That does not mean that under the auspices of decent people, within the bounds of a community of the faithful, one cannot have a happy childhood. Just that crediting that happy childhood and community of the decent to the arcane, disputed, and unexemplified theological sophistications of such a religion is not persuasive to outsiders.
Outsiders who know nothing of Islamic culture or religious practices. What knowledge have they of the internal community of the believers? As is more than apparent from your fear-mongering and outright Islamophobia on this forum, you are not a credible source of any information regarding Islam or Muslims. You attempt to discredit the words of Muslims who have grown up in their communities and readily entrenched in it, with nothing but mere conjecture. This is always the problem with self-ascribed Non-Muslim 'scholars' of Islam, they are nothing but tools in the hands of elements which wish to demonize and make life difficult for everyday Muslims.
So this is nonsense: He isn't wrong, he's Muslim and those are his Muslim beliefs, which he shares with millions of other Muslims.
I am more than capable enough to explain my own views. You, nor anyone else, have the right to explain my views. My posts are quite clear, they don't need to be interpreted or re-explained.