The motivation of these two seems not really traceable to
the Koranic counsels of Jihad to spread, impose, or even defend Islam, per se.
Hence it’s not really traceable to those factors that have
made Islam historically the most dangerous and violent of at least the world’s major
religions.
Now and again, it looks a lot more like ordinary tribal
loyalty.
“You attacked my people so I’m attacking back.”
And you always have to wonder how far most Muslim fighters
in their battles all over the world are motivated by like considerations, mixed
in varying measures with more specifically religious and more specifically
Islamic motivations.
Likewise Muslims who side with the Palestinians and oppose Zionism.
Likewise Muslims who oppose America's policies in the Middle East.
That a Muslim terrorist yells "Allahu Akbar" as he fires into a crowd or sets off his bomb does not mean his cause or his motivations are rooted in the special and spectacular violence of the Koran.
That an IRA bomber kisses a crucifix in a like circumstance does not mean his fight is primarily an act of obedience to God's presumed will, nor an effort to impose that will.
Tribal war is not religious in the sense alleged even when the tribes are defined by their religion.
And certainly not merely because fighters try to take comfort and courage from those same religions as they fight.
Nor even because it is by no means uncommon for warriors of any given religion to believe, or to hope, that God is on his side.
God, or Allah, or the gods, or whomever.
Which throws a different light altogether on the spread of Islam by Jihad in the years between the end of antiquity and the beginning of the Middle Ages, as well as the Christian counter-attacks of the Crusades and the Spanish Reconquista, doesn't it?
Likewise Muslims who side with the Palestinians and oppose Zionism.
Likewise Muslims who oppose America's policies in the Middle East.
That a Muslim terrorist yells "Allahu Akbar" as he fires into a crowd or sets off his bomb does not mean his cause or his motivations are rooted in the special and spectacular violence of the Koran.
That an IRA bomber kisses a crucifix in a like circumstance does not mean his fight is primarily an act of obedience to God's presumed will, nor an effort to impose that will.
Tribal war is not religious in the sense alleged even when the tribes are defined by their religion.
And certainly not merely because fighters try to take comfort and courage from those same religions as they fight.
Nor even because it is by no means uncommon for warriors of any given religion to believe, or to hope, that God is on his side.
God, or Allah, or the gods, or whomever.
Which throws a different light altogether on the spread of Islam by Jihad in the years between the end of antiquity and the beginning of the Middle Ages, as well as the Christian counter-attacks of the Crusades and the Spanish Reconquista, doesn't it?
Still, a bomb is a bomb and these things have to be dealt with, either way.
Even if the blame does not attach to the bombers' religion, strictly speaking.
Is Catholicism at fault for the crimes of the IRA?
Protestantism for those of the Protestant opponents of the IRA?
No, OK.
But they were crimes, all the same.
Pat Buchanan, by the way, has seen things in this light, more than once.
A good and valid point, and an important one.
Even if the blame does not attach to the bombers' religion, strictly speaking.
Is Catholicism at fault for the crimes of the IRA?
Protestantism for those of the Protestant opponents of the IRA?
No, OK.
But they were crimes, all the same.
Pat Buchanan, by the way, has seen things in this light, more than once.
A good and valid point, and an important one.
No comments:
Post a Comment