Is Isreal overacting?

[Mott1]

Actually I was going by what liberal Muslims clerics said about the situation, the fact that fundementalists take the Koran out of context and use it to brainwash people into believing that Jihad is the first resort not the last. Since you are so knowledgeable I stand ready to recieve wisdom. Show me how the Koran tecaches it's followers to kill innocents, to commit suicide to war against other faiths? Show me how a suicide bomber is following the Korans message, show me where mohammed tells his people to sweep races into the sea to condone genocidal messages, show me how Islam is a violent religion? Say more so than Christianity. I tell you what I know a fair buit about Christianity, since it is responsible for more death in the world than any other religion I'll dig up all the passages that support Chrsits message as one of warfare and intolerance, ala fundementalist Christians and we can compare notes. Trouble is I think the same messages that jesus gives in the Christian bible are repeated in the Koran. This should be interesting, show me the texts?

Ok, first I am not a Christian--never was, however I was a Muslim up until 5 years ago. So my knowledge of Christianity is obviously less than Islam. However I do have a good understanding of the NT which I believe most Christians ascribe too.
That being said, why has Christianity reformed or modernized; and why hasn't Islam? There is a simple answer to that. Besides the fact that the New Testament does not contain so much violence and terror as does the Quran. I am not saying the Bible is factual. It sounds more like myths and legends. Nonetheless, the Jesus of the Bible is a saintly figure. His philosophies are peaceful. Of course, fanatics are everywhere but the message of Christ is not fanatical.
Most importantly the Bible is not seen as a book written word for word from God. It is written by humans inspired by God. An example are the Gospels "the good news" as portrayed by the apostles, not God.

Islam is different. The author of Islam was a vile man. He is not a mythological figure. He really existed, and his acts are recorded. Many ludicrous miracles are attributed to him, but once you put aside all those as nonsense and study his life, the portrait of a psychopath emerges. Muhammad was anything but saintly. There is not an act of goodness in his life. Even his kindness and generosity were manipulative and politically motivated. To Muslims he is the most perfect human being, Muslim strive to emulate him. He is seen as the prophet of all times, meaning all his actions apply even today. I do not see Islam reforming any time soon, to Muslims the Quran is dictated word for word by God. And you cannot alter the word of God or omit a few tenants that are nothing less than barbaric in the 21st century.

You ask what tenants of Islam create extremists and their violent and hateful behaviour. There are many, but lets start with Jihad.
There are over a hundred verses in the Quran alone that exhort believers to wage jihad against the unbelievers. Since you asked for some text let me list a few:

9.5 But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

9.29 Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.

Pay that submission tax and acknowledge Islamic supremecy, sound fimilar to you?

47.4 When ye encounter the unbelievers, strike off their heads, until ye have made a great slaughter among them; and bind them in hands; and either give them a free discussion afterwards, or exact ransom; until the war shall have laid down its arms.

This warfare was to be directed against both those who reject Islam and those who professed to be Muslims but did not hold to the fullness of the faith:

9.73 Phrophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate.

Jihad is the highest duty of Muslims (Quran 9.29), Jihad fi sabil Allah refers specifically to taking up arms for Islam. Paradise is guaranteed to those who slay and are slain for Allah:

9.11 Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs [in return] is the garden[of Paradise]: they fight in his cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth.

You say that you listen to the moderate Muslim leaders, unfortunately they are far and few. For the most part they are the silent minority.
However, there are a great number of Muslims who realize there is something wrong with Islam, but they erroneously believe the problem can be solved through the miracle of reinterpretation; and that they can keep the Quran and believe in Muhammad but somehow do the opposite of what he did and said and still call themselves Muslims.
I respect these Muslims however misguided they are in their belief, and it is sad that they are continually persecuted by the Muslim Majority.

Nonie Darwish is a one such Muslim women I find immensly courages.

"Now They Call Me Infidel : Why I Renounced Jihad for America, Israel, and the War on Terror (Hardcover) is Nonie Darwish's personal story of tragedy and redemption, as well as a scholarly analysis of Middle-Eastern culture. Every Western statesman, indeed every European and American citizen will benefit from Ms. Darwish's unique insights into the danger to Western civilization posed by Radical Islam and sustained by deep-rooted Arab/Muslim cultural dynamics."

This is a link to her book that is soon to be released.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1595230319/ref=sr_11_1/104-6176942-1915167?ie=UTF8

 

[RedWolf]

A proof that the "over-reaction" is working:

The Palestinian groups announced a unilateral cease fire, despite heavy Israeli activity in the Gaza Strip and large numbers of Palestinian casualties. The Israeli deterrence is starting to recover.

In the short term maybe... This isn't taking into consideration the potential moderates that have become future terrorists after living in an Israeli-manufactured hellzone of shelling, bombs, starvation and lack of electricity.

 

[zulu9812]

A proof that the "over-reaction" is working

No one said it wasn't working. But it is evil.

 

[mango20022002]

A proof that the "over-reaction" is working:

The Palestinian groups announced a unilateral cease fire, despite heavy Israeli activity in the Gaza Strip and large numbers of Palestinian casualties. The Israeli deterrence is starting to recover.

Watch this space for Israel to reject the ceasefire and keep bombing. They have done this before.

 

[Sidhe]

Ok, first I am not a Christian--never was, however I was a Muslim up until 5 years ago. So my knowledge of Christianity is obviously less than Islam. However I do have a good understanding of the NT which I believe most Christians ascribe too.
That being said, why has Christianity reformed or modernized; and why hasn't Islam? There is a simple answer to that. Besides the fact that the New Testament does not contain so much violence and terror as does the Quran. I am not saying the Bible is factual. It sounds more like myths and legends. Nonetheless, the Jesus of the Bible is a saintly figure. His philosophies are peaceful. Of course, fanatics are everywhere but the message of Christ is not fanatical.
Most importantly the Bible is not seen as a book written word for word from God. It is written by humans inspired by God. An example are the Gospels "the good news" as portrayed by the apostles, not God.

Islam is different. The author of Islam was a vile man. He is not a mythological figure. He really existed, and his acts are recorded. Many ludicrous miracles are attributed to him, but once you put aside all those as nonsense and study his life, the portrait of a psychopath emerges. Muhammad was anything but saintly. There is not an act of goodness in his life. Even his kindness and generosity were manipulative and politically motivated. To Muslims he is the most perfect human being, Muslim strive to emulate him. He is seen as the prophet of all times, meaning all his actions apply even today. I do not see Islam reforming any time soon, to Muslims the Quran is dictated word for word by God. And you cannot alter the word of God or omit a few tenants that are nothing less than barbaric in the 21st century.

You ask what tenants of Islam create extremists and their violent and hateful behaviour. There are many, but lets start with Jihad.
There are over a hundred verses in the Quran alone that exhort believers to wage jihad against the unbelievers. Since you asked for some text let me list a few:

9.5 But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

9.29 Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.

Pay that submission tax and acknowledge Islamic supremecy, sound fimilar to you?

47.4 When ye encounter the unbelievers, strike off their heads, until ye have made a great slaughter among them; and bind them in hands; and either give them a free discussion afterwards, or exact ransom; until the war shall have laid down its arms.

This warfare was to be directed against both those who reject Islam and those who professed to be Muslims but did not hold to the fullness of the faith:

9.73 Phrophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate.

Jihad is the highest duty of Muslims (Quran 9.29), Jihad fi sabil Allah refers specifically to taking up arms for Islam. Paradise is guaranteed to those who slay and are slain for Allah:

9.11 Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs [in return] is the garden[of Paradise]: they fight in his cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth.

You say that you listen to the moderate Muslim leaders, unfortunately they are far and few. For the most part they are the silent minority.
However, there are a great number of Muslims who realize there is something wrong with Islam, but they erroneously believe the problem can be solved through the miracle of reinterpretation; and that they can keep the Quran and believe in Muhammad but somehow do the opposite of what he did and said and still call themselves Muslims.
I respect these Muslims however misguided they are in their belief, and it is sad that they are continually persecuted by the Muslim Majority.

Nonie Darwish is a one such Muslim women I find immensly courages.

"Now They Call Me Infidel : Why I Renounced Jihad for America, Israel, and the War on Terror (Hardcover) is Nonie Darwish's personal story of tragedy and redemption, as well as a scholarly analysis of Middle-Eastern culture. Every Western statesman, indeed every European and American citizen will benefit from Ms. Darwish's unique insights into the danger to Western civilization posed by Radical Islam and sustained by deep-rooted Arab/Muslim cultural dynamics."

This is a link to her book that is soon to be released.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1595230319/ref=sr_11_1/104-6176942-1915167?ie=UTF8

Read this it is a more moderate view, maybe it's only western Islamics that are moderate but I seriously doubt it. There are a great deal of Muslims and I think the fundementalists are in the minority, they just have a big mouth.

http://www.mediamonitors.net/shaziamirza2.html

"The greatest Jihad is that against a man’s own lust;" Which means that the best way of recommending the belief in Allah’s universal sovereignty and extending the new realm of peace and brotherhood is by the example of righteous conduct. The term Al-Jihad-ul-Akbar. "The greatest Jihad," is also applied by the Holy prophet (peace be upon him) to the effort of the student to become learned and the effort of the learned to spread knowledge.

"The ink of the scholar is more holy than the blood of the martyr."

Jihad means serious and sincere struggle on the personal as well as on the social level. It is a struggle to do well and to remove injustice, oppression and evil from the society. This struggle should be spiritual as well as social, economic and political. In the Quran this word is used in its different forms 33 times. It often comes with other Quranic concepts such as faith, repentance, righteous deeds and migration. It is therefore incorrect to limit the meaning of the term to warfare of the fanatical religious kind

Funnily enough a quick search of google tends to show in entirity that Jihad is not necessarily about violent struggle, I'm not convinced by a few koranic passages, I'd like to see the passages either side of these too, to get an idea of real meaning, in what context is this being said and why?

Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not do aggression, for Allah loves not the aggressors. (Al Baqarah 2:190)

It is not the religion that is to blame it is those who follow it and corrupt it, who refuse to see anything in context, who preach loathing an intolerance, this to me is not Islam, it is a political corruption for political means. It is brainwashing, it would not recieve such far reaching attention if their was peace in the Middle East I know this much.

 

[Mirc]

I think they are definetely overacting. I am from Europe.

 

[Eli]

Zulu:

No one said it wasn't working. But it is evil.

But is it, really? The measured response strategy brought on Israel 4 years of terrorist attacks during the second Intifada. Had Israel, during October 2000, or if you want to be certain, after the summit whose name escapes me in early 2001, reconquered the West Bank, going house to house and killing/arresting all terrorist group members, we would'nt have had the intifada.

The war would've killed a thousand Palestinians and a hundred Israelis, but it would've saved 4,000 lives in the long run, together with 4 years of economic damage. Why? Because in the end, the measured responses and counter-responses slowly but surely became more serious and Israel ended up with doing what it should've done in the first place.

That's evil?

 

[Monker]

Of course, that's the real reason. The Hizballah is a puppet of Syria and Lebanon and acts in their interests.

It may be a puppet of Syria, but I don't think it is a puppet of Lebanon. Lebanon is a very diverse country, and there are many Lebanese who hate Hezbollah and want the Syrians to leave them alone. They are just powerless to do anything about it. The government itself doesn't have the power to confront Hezbollah. This is a country that went through a long civil war and had been occupied by the Syrian military for 30 years before they pulled out last year. I don't think we can blame Lebanon as a whole for not being able to control Hezbollah.

... You can kill the terrorist, but you won't kill the terrorism until you address the underlying causes and grievances that give rise to it.

This is exactly the problem. Violence won't provide any long term solution.

Americans are entitled to their views. But I think that they are being failed by a one-sided message from their leaders' blind support for Israel and by politicians beholden to the pro-Israel lobby for campaign contributions at elections. People don't always know when they're being brainwashed.

As one of the very few Americans who don't think we should back Israel unconditionally, I think this is very true. I think a lot of the problem is also that people here have trouble distinguishing between Arabs and terrorists, because of 9/11 and also because Hezbollah and Hamas have been elected into government positions. Anyway, I don't think there will be a peaceful solution until our government forces Israel to make concessions in negotiations with the palestinians. I wouldn't count on this ever happening though.

 

[Gladi]

No one said it wasn't working. But it is evil.

I disagree. For violence to be a solution it must be utmost violence.

Most famous bombing campaign is Kosovo is it not? And even there the actual bombing of military was not all that effective. Further Milosevic depended on support of privileged citizens and even common people. Hizbollah has no such concerns.

But Palestinians do. The problem will be, I feel, finding people there we can work with.

 

[atreas]

I disagree. For violence to be a solution it must be utmost violence.

Definitely. That way there will be nothing left either way, and thus it will be for sure a solution. It's humanitarian too - you relieve these people from their sufferings.

How was it called in the past years this kind of solution? Ah, I remember now, they had several names like "genocide", "war crime", etc. How far are we now, with 700,000 people being forced to leave from their houses?

When you think you can buy peace using the blood of the others, you in fact guarantee to yourself an eternal war. Because you just base your hopes on fear - but this is a fear mixed with enormous amounts of hate.

 

[Fëanor]

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

- Mohandas Karamchand (Mahatma) Gandhi.

"The old law about "an eye for an eye" leaves everybody blind."

- Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

But seeing the number of Lebanese Civilians have been murdered by the Israeli's it goes well beyond "Aye for an Aye" doctrines.

What Israel is doing is not "Overreacting" its pure and simple Crimes against Humanity.

 

[Fugitive Sisyphus]

It is rather ironic that both King Jr. and Ghandi were shot and killed.

 

[Fëanor]

It is rather ironic that both King Jr. and Ghandi were shot and killed.

Yes, they became Martyrs for their causes, which in the end were Acheived.

 

[Lord Cooper]

ok although i support israel right now... the palestinians aren't being much of terrorists as most people think... they are fighting for thier homeland back.. backin the 40's the jews were the terrorists.. my grandpa who was in the british army was stationed there and he told me the palestinians were very calm people and it wa sthe jews who were terrorists.. so palistinians are fighting for thier home back, which was stolen by the UN.. although this is no excuse for any terrorism.. but these people dont live in america or europe.. they live in a world strictly run by government and war is run by religeous fanatics and what not.. it will always be this way .. always has and always was.. even in the bible the israelites and the philistines.. and what we're in 2006? it shouldnt be such a big deal as it is... but i believe what makes this big is.. current situations in iran and what not.. and the fact that iran threatened israel.. see if iran declares war on israel.. they will wipe them clean.. and you can bet your butts that america and britain and other supporters and whatnot will be there in a flash.. and then possibly other arab nations joining the fight.. and even if its just iran.. iran is compared to germany under hitler's rule.. and if you look at it.. the whole situation is very similiar to the third reicht.. and they have a nuclear program running.. and if they get a warhead they will most definately use it.. the lebanon and israel thing i believe is just the beginning to a massive conflict.. and possibly as we can say "world war III".. thats just my two cents.. now i have nothing against muslims whatsoever as of my girly is one ... thanks for reading

 

[Fugitive Sisyphus]

Yes, they became Martyrs for their causes, which in the end were Acheived.

It is sad that martyrs in the Middle East do not have such noble causes. It is good that the both the United States and Britain were civilized enough so that it was possible for Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi to succeed.

 

[Fëanor]

It is sad that martyrs in the Middle East do not have such noble causes.

Actually they cause is much the same, freedom from Opressions.

It is good that the both the United States and Britain were civilized enough so that it was possible for Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi to succeed.

That makes no sense, if the United States and Britain were civilized enough there would have been no need of people to fight against opression of the Blacks and the Indian peoples.

 

[Fugitive Sisyphus]

Actually they cause is much the same, freedom from Opressions.

Ghandi used peaceful means to gain India's independence from Britain. M. L. King used peaceful means to ensure Civil Rights to minorities. King did not fight to "wipe the white man off the map" and Ghandi did not have any problem with Britain being a country.

That makes no sense, if the United States and Britain were civilized enough there would have been no need of people to fight against opression of the Blacks and the Indian peoples.

It makes perfect sense. This is why Britain and the United States were "civilized enough." They could not claim to be completely civilized because of the opression but they were civilized enough to make changes. A barbaric country would worsen the conditions of the people who peacefully rebell against authority.

 

[Lord Cooper]

nicely stated, i agree.

 

[happy_Alex]

A proof that the "over-reaction" is working:

The Palestinian groups announced a unilateral cease fire, despite heavy Israeli activity in the Gaza Strip and large numbers of Palestinian casualties. The Israeli deterrence is starting to recover.

Well, that depends on your definition of 'working'. If you think, as I do, that any long term soloution needs to bring an equitable soloution to the middle east that brings lasting peace for all people, then this approach is certainly not 'working'.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

An equitable solution that brings lasting peace to all people? Theres never been such a thing, and never will be. Next suggestion.