Peaceful Muslim said:
You tell me first if you were standing between a fire that will burn you alive and another one that will just burn your hand or leg only, which one will you choose?
When Islam leaders used to send the armies for a battle the first thing they used to tell their soldiers: don't kill a woman, a child, an old man , a civilian not even cut a tree. what do you think that was ??and what was it for? This only means that Islam concepts in war prevents such behaviors.
but let me ask you: isn't there a difference between stealing because i am hungry and poor and stealing because i wanna take the easy way ? that doesn't justify stealing but the intentions are different.
I choose to let my hand or leg burn rather than my body, like I would choose to sacrifice myself to save my family. But, we are not talking about a fire that is just a temporary threat to our body. If anything the Palestinians have chosen to jump into the fire on every occasion instead of making peace with Israel. When they elected Hamas it was jumping into the fire instead of taking a burn on the hand in making peace with Israel.
First I would assume that for an Islamic soldier, like everyone else, there simply is no honor for a soldier to slaughter the unarmed. But, obviously it is more complicated. In ancient societies going all the way back to the oldest known writings mistreatment of a stranger (or civilian if you will) was dangerous, as they might be an angel like at Lut’s house, or a messenger from G-d. Like during Homer’s time when the suitor in the Odyssey struck Odysseus, the first crime Odysseus listed as reason to kill the suitors was their abuse of strangers. In ancient times it was common practice to welcome the stranger into the home and to feed them, like Odysseus’ wife welcomed the stranger even when the suitors had abused hospitality, and the punishment is illustrated by what Jesus said to his disciples: Mark 6:11 “And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.“
Stealing bread…I think I can do better than that. Imagine your home is damaged by massive storms (ever seen a Hurricane?) to the point that only one room in the house is habitable, and you have lost many of your valuable and treasured possessions. You got hit on the head by falling debris while trying to save your Koran (in my case it would be the childhood Bible), you were lying there during a hurricane with a big headache that did not feel right; you obviously sent the family to safety but stayed behind to save what you could. Now, you cannot get a loan on your home until it is fixed, and many of the possessions you would think to sell to pay off debts are gone now. Your house is now a tent! You are in shock. The insurance will take six months to pay anything, and due to incompetence the second claim on the second storm will pay out before the first insurance claim on the first storm; the insurance will be unable to pay what they owe. You must start some repairs and demolition before you get insurance money. You have debts and you cannot pay the bills until you fix your home. Your income and any savings were reduced or gone due to the storms and sickness in the family respectively. When you get the money from the insurance you must use that money to fix your home and not pay usurers. While the tarps are flapping in the breeze and you can see daylight through your blue tarp covered roof, the usurers that took advantage of a situation call. Even though you tell the usurers that you will pay them off as soon as you get your house repaired, they literally tell you that they do not care. You do not want to file bankruptcy because you actually want to pay your debts. While you are working as fast as you can to get your house repaired the usurers call every single day, waking you up in the morning with threatening phone calls, and they get a judge to put a garnishment on your accounts before you finish repairing your home; the judge never bothers to call to hear your side because the judge does not care. You have direct deposit and can‘t stop it in time. Your cupboard is bare and it just so happens your medicine has run out. You can neither buy food, medicine, or finish the repairs. Another hurricane season is approaching. If you have to sell your damaged property in distress you will lose everything and your family will be homeless and still have a debt. After all of this stress your spouse is crying, and needs medicine, and there is talk of suicide; you are scared to death for your spouse; you are beyond screaming. Maybe sleeping on a fold up cot has made you irritable. But, wait, the good news is that due to the location of your property the appraiser says it is worth more than you thought, so you can get a loan to pay off the debts even though you have not finished the repairs. You get the loan without a problem because your credit is still “good,” and put the money in the account, and according to the law and a letter you got right in your hand from the bank, that is in plain simple language, you should be able to get money out of the account that is in excess of the garnishment judgment. But, the servants of the usurers refuse to allow you access to any of your money to feed your kid and buy medicine for your spouse; they are saying it may take months; they are telling you to get a lawyer, and the lawyers tell you it will take months, even though one lawyer tells you that what they are doing is ILLEGAL. Most people would lose it at that point. Somebody unthinkingly blurted out one single threat to an answering machine demanding the usurers take their money and lift the garnishment. Somebody is going to court for ONE “harassing” phone call, and a sentence far shorter than this. Somebody can assure you that I KNOW the law does not work for us, unless somebody goes into more debt to buy the law a new set of golf clubs, maybe they want a cruse to Aruba, nor will the law care that somebody’s intent was to feed the family, buy medicine, and pay the bills. Somebody is not voting for a Hamas to stop the harassing phone calls that caused the spouse to cry last week, or to kill the filthy New York “Jew” that can’t get it through their damn head that somebody has a cancelled check proving that damn usurer got paid months ago, but the bad part of ME will want to dance in the street like a Palestinian the next time New York is hit; yesterday somebody was urinating blood, somebody feels much better now; no matter how much I want to be the lord high executioner of usurers, with the nice black hood and the big ax, I do not want to support terrorism even when I understand how someone can be pressured to lose their cool.
====================
Now for the fifth time I repeat, and for the fifth time I ask:
Since “Muslims are against hurting civilians in any way,“ and since you “believe that 9/11 served the people who want Islam to look bad and justify the war against it,“ and since the 9/11 attackers wore civilian disguise, consequently, the use of civilian disguise in warfare serves the people who want civilians “to look bad and justify the war against it,” therefore, those people that use civilian disguise in warfare are the enemies of Islam.
“Peaceful” Muslim, in your opinion, is that a valid argument?