oops, that quote was from Quran sura 8, verse 12.
We’ll let that little mistake pass. 
Have there been any recent jihad situations in the world?
Aren’t like, 20 Jihads called a day?
grienspace said:
No. If there was one then all 1.2 billion muslims would have to join in. A true global jihad could probably only be triggered by a concerted attempt to eradicate islam. Since there has never been such an attempt since the time of Mohammed then there has never been a jihad.
In the time of Mohammed (when islam was small) there were attempts to destroy his tribe so that triggered a jihad but there hasn’t been one since then and there probably never will be one.
Although, islam itself predicts that there will be a big final battle before the day of judgement and many muslims will die during this battle. I think Mohammed said that islam would one day shrink back to Mecca and Medina where it started. This will happen shortly before the day of judgement.
World Eater said:
Yes but none of them ever count as true jihads (recognised as such by all muslim scholars and all muslims).
I think the religious differences are a primary irritant for only a small number of Iraqi insurgents (a group presumably including those who conducted the two recent beheadings). The majority of insurgents are probably acting as they do because of generalised feelings of nationalism and wounded pride, and the religious differences are mere icing on the cake. Therefore, I think we’d see an insurgency in similar circumstances even if both parties had the same religion.
For example, the Ottoman empire, throughout its history, was constantly fighting separatists, for religious reasons (eg the Shiites of the Basra province), for gradual usurpation of power for its own sake (eg the pashas of Egypt), and for mixes of nationalist, religious and pure power reasons (the Wahhabist-influenced split of what is now Saudi Arabia). In the modern era, at the end of the Ottoman empire, there was a dramatic rise in nationalism in the Middle East. The majority of states in the region owe their independence from the Ottomans to nationalism and to colonial ambition from Europe. Even very recently we see Muslim fighting Muslim for nationalist reasons (eg Arabs versus Kurds, Iranians).
Some thoughts of Arab elite on jihad
Abdulrahman al-Rashed, a Saudi who is general manager of Al Arabiya television, said the problem of extremism is an internal one and the solution must come from within Muslim societies.
Mr. al-Rashed wrote one of the most provocative pieces on the issue, saying in a column in the wake of the school siege in Beslan, Russia, that Muslims must acknowledge the painful fact that they are the main perpetrators of terrorism.
In his column, published in Asharq Al-Awsat — the world's largest Arabic daily, published in Saudi Arabia — Mr. al-Rashed listed recent attacks by Islamist extremists in Russia, Iraq, Sudan[li], Saudi Arabia and Yemen, many of which were influenced by the ideology of bin Laden, the Saudi-born leader of the al Qaeda terror network. [/li] "What a terrible record," he wrote. "Doesn't it say something about us, our societies, our cultures?"
Not everyone agrees. One letter, from a reader identified only as Muhammad, said:
"I don't know whether al-Rashed lives on planet Earth or on Mars and can only see Fox News and [Britain-based] Sky News. Do you know about the crimes of terrorist [Israeli Prime Minister Ariel] Sharon? Do you know about the crimes of terrorist [President] Bush in Iraq and Afghanistan?"
"We all know," Mr. al-Rashed wrote back. "But that's not an excuse to kill innocent, unarmed civilians."
Salama Ahmed Salama, an Egyptian columnist, said such self-blame "has been exaggerated."
He said that although it's true that most terrorist attacks have been perpetrated by Muslims, Europe and Asia are no strangers to terrorism.
"The logic of terrorism is not new in international politics," he said. "It's not Arabs who invented it."
"We shouldn't be unfair to ourselves," he added. "But at the same time, we should tell groups that have chosen **jihad** as a course that it's not the right one. The world has turned against Islam and Muslims because of the barbaric acts."
Mr. al-Rashed said a change of heart also has occurred among many Muslims, who now believe terrorists are acting not only against their stated enemies — the West and Israel — but also against fellow Arabs and Muslims, such as in Saudi Arabia and Iraq.
"People can now see that those groups do not have a political stand against America, but an extremist stand that believes everybody is wrong," Mr. al-Rashed said.
He said that although the discussions are limited to the intellectual elite, word will filter down to impressionable youths.
"You can't convince the masses before you convince the elite," he said. "They are the ones who will take the word to the masses." [bolding mine]
[li]Which makes me wonder. Why do I read so little about muslims killing hunderds of thousands non-muslims in Dafur, Sudan? [/li]Is it because the victims are black?
Gum, here’s an interesting article written from an African perspective.
Thanks roger thornhill. So, if I understand it correctly; Muslims are killing other muslims by the thousands because they’re black?
I’m so glad the muslim-faith is the faith of peace. I’d hate to think what would happen when they were racists, or something.
Both groups are Muslims, so how does that make Islam racist? Which ones are the racists? The Arab Muslims doing the killing in this case? The black African Muslims being killed? The Kurdish Muslims nearby? The European Muslims in places like Bosnia? Maybe it’s the Asian Muslims in Indonesia. Or the Muslim converts of European descent in Australia or the US?
The majority of Muslims that you see on the news fucking suck. The majority of Muslims don’t. You are ignorant.
Somalia - I don’t recall the religion of the participants in the Rwandan genocide being an issue. Why is it an issue in Somalia, which is an ethnic conflict that just happens to involve Muslims.
Fucking hell, this Islamophobia is making my head spin. Yeah, the majority of terrorists today appear to be Muslim, and most of them are religiously motivated, but the terrorists are NOT the majority of Muslims. You fucking eejits.
I would just ask, do you know any Moslems? Do they suck? I know quite a few and the ones I know don’t.
Generalising that a group of people do not share our common humanity is an harmful and wrong proposition. It is what allows a terrorist to justify his inhumanity. It is what allows us to feel desensitized to the suffering going on in the Middle East. It is what gave the Nazis the “courage” to persecute genocide on European Jewry. Tell enough lies, spread enough hate, spew enough vitriol and we are all capable of horror. Keep spreading the Islamaphobia and we will have lynchings on our own doorsteps.
Atticus Finch
Yes, I know. Stangely enough it’s in my post.
So, you’re saying it’s okay that muslims kill other muslims because they are black? What would happen if catholics or jehova’s witnesses would kill their fellow believers because they are black? Do you think anyone would tut tut that away?
Yes, ofcourse jjimm. * :: pat pat pat::*. You keep on yelling ‘eejits’.
As long as you understand that, indeed, ‘the majority of terrorists today appear to be Muslim, and most of them are religiously motivated’.
I take it you’re not black?
oh, wow, InvidiousCourgette. I didn’t want to drag the nazi’s and genocide into this, but have you read the article? Talking about genocide…
Here, have another logical fallacy. I think you’re using yours up.
Oops, there goes another one. Well gosh, I can’t really make my mind up whether genocide is a good or a bad thing. (That was sarcasm, for the gums of this world.)
Do you know how many Muslims there are in the world? Can you estimate how many of them are terrorists? Can you work out the proportion?
The price of tea has gone up recently. Your point?
Don’t give me a lot of vogue words, jjimm That don’t impress me much.
I repeat: Is it okay for muslims to kill their fellow muslims by the thousands because they’re black?
No.
These are the Baggara:
http://www.sudan101.com/baggara.htm
They are among the pastoral Arabs most heavily involved in the janjaweed militias that have sown so much destruction across Darfur in recent years. Note the skin tone.
Arabs in Sudan are speakers of Arabic. The word implies absolutely nothing about the color of your skin. This isn’t a conflict based on race as determined by skin color - it is a conflict that originated in an economic struggle between agriculturalists ( mostly non-Arab in Darfur ) and pastoralists ( mostly Arab ) in an area hard hit by drought. It has since taken on a tinge of Arab supremacism vis-a-vis non-Arabs ( hence government favoritism towards the janjaweed, both in turning a blind eye to atrocities and apparently the occasional semi-covert aid ) but it is not a “race” issue in an American sense.
It certainly has nothing to do with religion, as both sides are overwhelmingly Muslim of the same persuasion. And it has very little to do with secessionism until this past year or so and even then among only a minority of rebels - the Fur provided plenty of troops for the government in its civil struggle with the largely non-Muslim south and for the most part aren’t looking to split Sudan ( they do want to toss the current hostile government however and the appeal of secessionism may grow if the conflict drags on ).
- Tamerlane
Sigh No, you dim and/or obtuse person, it fucking isn’t.
Now tell me, what has the religion of the participants got to do with this particular heinous situation? Did you similarly condemn Christians during the Rwandan genocide?
Sheesh.
Hey jjimm I’m not too sure of your position. Are you saying killing is wrong but so is being idiotic jingoistic Islam phobic cunt?
Is that what your saying?
Just for completeness, here are among the most prominent of the tribal/ethnic groups being oppressed by the janjaweed and now fighting back, the Fur ( for whom the region is named ) :
http://www.sudan101.com/fur.htm
- Tamerlane