Rules of War in the Quran

Don't know actually, I'd have to be under fire in an occupation to give an opinion.
 
Like I said, ask me after I've been under fire in an occupation. I'd say there is a vast difference between a guy throwing 2000 lbs bombs from 20,000 feet and a guy blowing himself up in the market place. At least in terms of "nothing left to lose"
 
see edit.

I'd have to say I begin with the presumption that human beings are generally alike and if someone is willing to kill himself in that manner, there is a rationale to it.
 
S.A.M. said:
see edit.
Click to expand...
There is no difference between the innocents, they're all innocent.. on both sides.

S.A.M. said:
I'd have to say I begin with the presumption that human beings are generally alike and if someone is willing to kill himself in that manner, there is a rationale to it.
Click to expand...
Dangerous assumption. Psychopaths kill people, and themselves, all the time.
Doing extreme things, in itself, doesn't imply a good reason for doing it.
 
Enmos said:
There is no difference between the innocents, they're all innocent.. on both sides.
Click to expand...

And some others are oblivious and ennabling.
Dangerous assumption. Psychopaths kill people, and themselves, all the time.
Doing extreme things, in itself, doesn't imply a good reason for doing it.
Click to expand...
Well when 12,000 people blow themselves up in a country with no history of suicide bombing, its safe to assume that its not psychopathy.
 
S.A.M. said:
And some others are oblivious and ennabling.
Click to expand...
I don't know what you mean here. In fact, I don't know what the word 'ennabling' means :eek:

S.A.M. said:
Well when 12,000 people blow themselves up in a country with no history of suicide bombing, its safe to assume that its not psychopathy.
Click to expand...
I wasn't suggesting that, just giving an example.
 
Well we're not talking about isolated incidents here are we? But a growing trend in the disenfranchised. Its probably going to get a lot worse as they feel more and more frustrated.

ennabling = not noticing when people stop blowing themselves up and are starved for two years with 5000 deaths due to violence against them, noticing when they throw a few rockets even though no one gets killed.
 
S.A.M. said:
Well we're not talking about isolated incidents here are we? But a growing trend in the disenfranchised. Its probably going to get a lot worse as they feel more and more frustrated.
Click to expand...

The point is, no matter how much injustice has been inflicted upon you, you cannot go around killing innocents to get what you want.

So really, you either agree with or condemn ALL intentional bombings of innocents, regardless of any possible underlying 'reasons'.
 
S.A.M. said:
ennabling = not noticing when people stop blowing themselves up and are starved for two years with 5000 deaths due to violence against them, noticing when they throw a few rockets even though no one gets killed.
Click to expand...

John99 said:
enable. in this context it would seem as though this guy is using it as frequently used in addiction. it allows for excuses.
Click to expand...

Ah.. thanks.
 
You want to know why this is BS? Because the Qu'ran has 16 common translations, and those are the common ones, there are millions of possible translations.The reason why is because when it was written, the i's did not have dots over them, the t's had no crosses, and several other things like this with letters. So in the end you do not know if a letter is an l, t, or i. So these quotes may have been any one of the translations.
 
Arabic still doesn't have dots and dashes, only the Arabic in the Quran does, you know, for non-Arabic speaking people.
 
Yet because of the obvious and blatent defect in arabic the world will never know if Muhammed was a kind loving person, or a blood thirsty killer, (dont worry that version of the Qu'ran is not one of the 16 common ones), or a war monger. You have no proof as to which version is the right one
 
I've been following the work of Patricia Crone in this regard

Modern scholars usually assure themselves that since the Qur'an was recited from the start, we can rely on the oral tradition to supply us with the correct reading. But there is often considerable disagreement in the tradition – usually to do with vowelling, but sometimes involving consonants as well – over the correct way in which a word should be read. This rarely affects the overall meaning of the text, but it does affect the details which are so important for historical reconstruction.
Click to expand...

http://www.opendemocracy.net/faith-europe_islam/mohammed_3866.jsp

Whats the basis for your claims?
 
Translation is everything.
Take this verse:

“When you encounter the infidels (non-Muslims), strike off their heads and make a great slaughter among them.”
~ The Koran, Chapter 47: 4-9


It can also be translated as:

"When you are having a party, invite everyone".
If you are the host, make sure no-one feels left out.
Ensure that you have enough food and drink to last the evening.
Dips are always popular"
 
Last edited:
Captain Kremmen said:
Translation is everything.
Take this verse:

“When you encounter the infidels (non-Muslims), strike off their heads and make a great slaughter among them.”
~ The Koran, Chapter 47: 4-9

.
Click to expand...

Clearly. Its also extremely short to be 5 sentences. :p
 
And then there is:

[60:8] GOD does not enjoin you from befriending those who do not fight you because of religion, and do not evict you from your homes. You may befriend them and be equitable towards them. GOD loves the equitable.

[60:9] GOD enjoins you only from befriending those who fight you because of religion, evict you from your homes, and band together with others to banish you. You shall not befriend them. Those who befriend them are the transgressors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top