Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Send Topic Print
Muhammed engaged in collective punishment (Read 4092 times)
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47066
At my desk.
Muhammed engaged in collective punishment
Jul 17th, 2013 at 12:01pm
 
Apparently the thread Gandalf started about collective punishment was not actually about collective punishment. He spent most of the thread trying to explain why it is not about colelctive punishment and why he therefor cannot discuss it:

Where the "collective punishment" meme comes from

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1372771765

Gandalf, would you mind clarifying whether you believe that Muhammed engaged in colelctive punishment?

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 13th, 2013 at 9:25pm:
freediver wrote on Jul 13th, 2013 at 8:28pm:
Gandalf, before we go too far down the path of ethnic cleansing, would you mind clarifying your position on collective punishment? Six pages in and I still have no clue where you stand.


Thats because my position on collective punishment has no relevance to this thread - as explained many times. But if it matters to you so much, please feel free to call the expulsions collective punishment - you seem determined to do so anyway.


polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 12th, 2013 at 6:33pm:
freediver wrote on Jul 12th, 2013 at 12:51pm:
So you were just trying to trick me into thinking this thread had something to do with where the collective punishment "meme" comes from? Should I start a different thread on collective punishment so I can leave this one to whatever particular claim you are trying to invent and then disprove?


You trick yourself FD. I made it very clear in the OP what this thread is about -  you were the one that decided this must necessarily be a pointless debate about a meaningless definition, not me. You answering every argument of mine with the line "my argument is that he engaged in collective punishment" ad nausuem doesn't change this fact.


polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 12th, 2013 at 10:04pm:
freediver wrote on Jul 12th, 2013 at 8:16pm:
As far as I can tell, this thread is about you backpedaling because you realised that Muhammed did indeed engage in collective punishment and ethnic cleansing.


Of course he engaged in 'collective punishment' - as defined by your arbitrary and meaningless definition of the word. A "collective" was "punished" - right? However it clearly doesn't fit the definition as we understand it today.


polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 7th, 2013 at 11:52am:
freediver wrote on Jul 7th, 2013 at 10:48am:
My argument is that it is collective punishment.


And what does that even mean? Its a meaningless slogan that seeks to remove any historical context and simplify the situation into a silly 'good vs evil' dichotomy.


polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 7th, 2013 at 11:52am:
Now you claim that your only argument was to point out that it is 'collective punishment'. I wouldn't neccessarily disagree with that - though I disagree that it conforms to the modern meaning of the word: I reject that the women and children were punished ('enslavement' = protective custody), and the only people who were executed were the men who participated in the fighting against the muslims. 'Collective punishment' in the modern sense of the word, refers to punishing an entire population for the actions of a few.


polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 3rd, 2013 at 10:32pm:
The other problem you have is you don't seem to understand the proper meaning of collective punishment.




polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 13th, 2013 at 11:18am:
freediver wrote on Jul 13th, 2013 at 9:57am:
My point was that Muhammed practiced ethnic cleansing of all non-Muslims


Grin Grin Nice attempt at a backtrack - "practiced ethnic cleansing of all non-muslims" is a nice subtle change to "He did ethnically cleanse all non-Muslims from a significant area" - I'll give you that. But don't pretend the differences between the two are not significant.

freediver wrote on Jul 13th, 2013 at 9:57am:
You appear to be attempting to disprove this by citing examples of Muhammed engaging in collective punishment of Jews, then insisting the "tone" of the article is correct even if the details are a little off, then doing a classic Abu trick and pretending there is some sort of confusion over the meaning of collective punishment


The discussion was never about the question of whether or not Muhammad engaged in what you term "collective punishment". Thats meaningless and pointless.

Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47066
At my desk.
Re: Muhammed engaged in collective punishment
Reply #1 - Jul 17th, 2013 at 12:03pm
 
polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 13th, 2013 at 2:51pm:
freediver wrote on Jul 13th, 2013 at 1:35pm:
When I throw the accusation of collective punishment, I mean that he engaged in collective punishment.


Yes, FD - I'm absolutely positive you just coined this emotive term and applied it to islam as a perfectly objective observation about the prophet and how islam developed.  Roll Eyes

freediver wrote on Jul 13th, 2013 at 1:35pm:
Why is it so hard to believe that when i say collective punishment I mean collective punishment?


Its not hard, its not hard at all. Perhaps thats the problem. Your prejudice is just all too transparent. For someone trying to paint islam in a particular light, who has preconceived prejudices about the prophet, using terms like 'collective punishment' - while completely ignoring the context, is exactly what I would expect. Even if you said "yes he practiced collective punishment, but there were defensive justifications for doing so..." would be a great advance on your current approach "garr islam is evil - the prophet engaged in (da da dummm...) *COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT* (gasp!)


polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 8th, 2013 at 10:11pm:
freediver wrote on Jul 8th, 2013 at 7:49pm:
I have been trying to get you to discuss the issue of collective punishment. It is you who keeps changing the topic. I have brought up a specific example in nearly every single post. You have responded every single time by talking about a very different example in order to paint the Jews in a worse light. Hitler would have approved.


I have no idea what you are talking about. Collective punishment though is punishing an entire group for the actions of a few. The Banu Qurayza men who were executed were not a small number of perpetrators in amongst a majority of innocents - they all picked up arms against the muslims - in violation of their treaty.


Were the women of this tribe punished for the actions of their men?

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 3rd, 2013 at 10:32pm:
Clearly it was not one incident of molestation that led to expulsion. The muslims were fighting a war for their very existence, which they just barely survived after the battle of the trench. The three jewish tribes in question were clearly conspiring with Muhammad's enemies, who were on the verge of overrunning them.


How was it so clear?



polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2013 at 11:14pm:
freediver wrote on Jul 10th, 2013 at 10:02pm:
No Gandalf I mean the Nazir. I keep referring to your opening posts in this thread. However throughout this whole discussion you have grown completely oblivious to your own opening posts. This is the first line in your second post:


I see. And in answer to your previous question, as far as I know the whole tribe conspired to assassinate him. The plan certainly was made at the highest levels - as the leader of the tribe was the one who tried to lure him to his place in order for the assassination to take place. In troubled times, with enemies all around and with a very real existential threat to the community - you simply can't afford to have a tribe living amongst you who is plotting to kill you. So tough titties - its not about punishment, but about removing a grave threat to your survival.


This sounds a bit far-fetched also. How do we know the entire tribe was plotting to kill Muhammed?
Back to top
« Last Edit: Jul 17th, 2013 at 12:12pm by freediver »  

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47066
At my desk.
Re: Muhammed engaged in collective punishment
Reply #2 - Jul 17th, 2013 at 12:03pm
 
On the Banu Qaynuqa:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2013 at 10:16am:
freediver wrote on Jul 9th, 2013 at 10:06pm:
Did the whole tribe of Banu Nazir attempt to assassinate Muhammed?


I think you mean the Banu Qaynuqa. From wikipedia:

Quote:
In March 624, Muslims led by Muhammad defeated the Meccans of the Banu Quraish tribe in the Battle of Badr. Ibn Ishaq writes that a dispute broke out between the Muslims and the Banu Qaynuqa (the allies of the Khazraj tribe) soon afterwards. When a Muslim woman visited a jeweler's shop in the Qaynuqa marketplace, she was pestered to uncover her hair. The goldsmith, a Jew, pinned her clothing such that, upon getting up, she was stripped naked. A Muslim man coming upon the resulting commotion killed the shopkeeper in retaliation. A mob of Jews from the Qaynuqa tribe then pounced on the Muslim man and killed him. This escalated to a chain of revenge killings, and enmity grew between Muslims and the Banu Qaynuqa.


Clearly it was not just one event, but a series of events that made coexistence impossible.


So why not just punish the people who engaged in revenge killings? Why punish the entire Jewish tribe, but not punish any of the Muslims involved? Was the "chain of revenge killings" limited to Muslims going on a violent rampage and killing Jews in response to one Muslim being killed, then demanding Muhammed finish the job for them?

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2013 at 10:16am:
freediver wrote on Jul 9th, 2013 at 10:06pm:
The disrobing example you gave is an example of collective punishment. You appear to think it is not.


On the contrary - if an entire tribe was expelled for that single action, that would be unfair, and an example of collective punishment. That was obviously not the whole story though - see my link I posted earlier.

freediver wrote on Jul 9th, 2013 at 10:06pm:
I thought you were a muslim. Would you mind explaining the myth thing?


The myth that Muhammad hated jews and engaged in collective punishment, and worked to ethnically cleanse the jews from Arabia.


Can you explain how your examples of collectively punishing Jews shows that collective punishment is a myth?


polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2013 at 11:14pm:
freediver wrote on Jul 10th, 2013 at 10:02pm:
Can you explain to me how you think making a bitter enemy of an entire Jewish tribe over the disrobing incident helped Muhammed's war effort?


Don't be ridiculous. That was covered in my last post. I even specifically said that no one was expelled over one person being disrobed. It was a build up tensions that almost certainly didn't start with this one incident. Regardless of who was to blame, the long and the short of it was that the tribe effectively declared a state of war against the muslims - while they were living under a covenant with the muslims. This is obviously unacceptable for a fledgling community fighting for its very survival, and with enemies all around it. So again, tough titties - off you go.

freediver wrote on Jul 10th, 2013 at 10:02pm:
The link you posted earlier does not contradict the claim of collective punishment.


You are playing a silly semantic game. The whole point of this thread was not to debate the term 'collective punishment', but to understand the context of Muhammad's relations with the jews. You look at seemingly harsh measures taken by the prophet, ignore the context, and label them with emotive terms like 'collective punishment', and say "thats all there is to it". I'm here to say that there is a hell of a lot more to it than that.


What other incidents did it start with? Or are you merely assuming there were other "starts" because Muhammed couldn't possibly engage in collective punishment?

Why do you say "regardless of who is to blame"? Surely if the Jews were not to blame it means Muhammed was in the wrong? Or does it not matter if Muhammed was in the wrong, so long as he achieved his geopolitical goals?

Also, you never did explain how it actually helped Muhammed's war effort. It looks to me like it helped in that it gave him another chance to declare war on non-Muslims.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Jul 17th, 2013 at 12:13pm by freediver »  

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Muhammed engaged in collective punishment
Reply #3 - Jul 17th, 2013 at 12:04pm
 
ffs, do we really need 10 thousand threads on the same goddammed topic?

Grow up FD.
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47066
At my desk.
Re: Muhammed engaged in collective punishment
Reply #4 - Jul 17th, 2013 at 12:06pm
 
polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 17th, 2013 at 12:04pm:
ffs, do we really need 10 thousand threads on the same goddammed topic?

Grow up FD.


How about 2 threads Gandalf? You started the previous thread on collective punishment, then spent ten pages explaining that it is not actually about collective punishment. I did offer several times to start new thread that was actually about collective punishment in order to get you to respond, but I never got a response. What else should I have done?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47066
At my desk.
Re: Muhammed engaged in collective punishment
Reply #5 - Jul 17th, 2013 at 12:07pm
 
polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 11th, 2013 at 11:17pm:
freediver wrote on Jul 11th, 2013 at 10:13pm:
Right. Muhammed escalated it to kicking out the entire Jewish tribe. What happened in the gap Gandalf? Yet another violent rampage by Muslims, who wore themselves out and demanded Muhammed finish the job for them?


You could save yourself some trouble and read all about it in the wiki article I already linked. Modern historians are quoted as referring to the precarious position Muhammad found himself in: with a powerful and virtually autonomous tribe under his roof, acting belligerently at a time when his pagan enemies were expected at any moment to march out in force to annihilate the vulnerable muslim community once and for all. When Muhammad confronted the tribal leaders, they effectively declared a state of war with the muslims. Regardless of which party was most at fault, this was obviously an intolerable situation for a vulnerable community fighting for its very survival. Again - nothing to do with anti-semitism, everything to do with power-politics.


Gandalf, this is what the wiki article you linked to says. This immediately follows the paragraph you quoted, and it hardly paints it in a positive light for Muhammed:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banu_Qaynuqa

Traditional Muslim sources view these episodes as a violation of the Constitution of Medina.[3] Muhammad himself regarded this as casus belli.[4] Western historians, however, do not find in these events the underlying reason for Muhammad's attack on the Qaynuqa. According to F.E. Peters, the precise circumstances of the alleged violation of the Constitution of Medina are not specified in the sources.[11] According to Fred Donner, available sources do not elucidate the reasons for the expulsion of the Qaynuqa. Donner argues that Muhammad turned against the Qaynuqa because as artisans and traders, the latter were in close contact with Meccan merchants.[12] Weinsinck views the episodes cited by the Muslim historians, like the story of the Jewish goldsmith, as having no more than anecdotal value. He writes that the Jews had assumed a contentious attitude towards Muhammad, and as a group possessing substantial independent power, they posed a great danger. Wensinck thus concludes that Muhammad, strengthened by the victory at Badr, soon resolved to eliminate the Jewish opposition to himself.[5] Norman Stillman also believes that Muhammad decided to move against the Jews of Medina after being strengthened in the wake of the Battle of Badr.[13]

Muhammad then approached the Banu Qaynuqa, gathering them in the market place and addressing them as follows,
“      

O Jews, beware lest God bring on you the like of the retribution which he brought on Quraysh. Accept Islam, for you know that I am a prophet sent by God. You will find this in your scriptures and in God's covenant with you.[14]
     ”

To which the tribe replied,
“      

Muhammad, do you think that we are like your people? Do not be deluded by the fact that you met a people with no knowledge of war and that you made good use of your opportunity. By God, if you fight us you will know that we are real men![14]
     ”

Shibli Nomani and Safi al-Mubarakpuri view this response as a declaration of war.[15] According to the Muslim tradition, the verses 3:10-13 of the Qur'an were revealed to Muhammad following the exchange.[3] Muhammad then besieged the Banu Qaynuqa for fourteen[5] or fifteen days, according to ibn Hisham,[16] after which the tribe surrendered unconditionally.[17] It was certain, according to Watt, that there were some sort of negotiations. At the time of the siege, the Qaynuqa had a fighting force of 700 men, 400 of whom were armoured. Watt concludes, that Muhammad could have besieged such a large force so successfully without Qaynuqa's allies support.[2]

After the surrender of Banu Qaynuqa, Abdullah ibn Ubayy, the chief of a section of the clan of Khazraj̲ pleaded for them.[18] According to Ibn Ishaq:[19]

According to Michael Cook, Muhammad initially wanted to kill the members of Banu Qaynuqa but ultimately yielded to Abdullah's insistence and agreed to expel the Qaynuqa.[20] According to William Montgomery Watt, Abd-Allah ibn Ubayy was attempting to stop the expulsion, and Muhammad's insistence was that the Qaynuqa must leave the city, but was prepared to be lenient about other conditions; Ibn Ubayy argument was that presence of Qaynuqa with 700 fighting men can be helpful in the view of the expected Meccan onslaught.[21] Rodinson states that Muhammad wanted to put all the men to death, but was convinced not to do so by Abdullah ibn Ubayy, who was an old ally of the Qaynuqa.[22] Because of this interference and other episodes of his discord with Muhammad, Abdullah ibn Ubayy earned for himself the title of the leader of hypocrites (munafiqun) in the Muslim tradition.[23]

Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47066
At my desk.
Re: Muhammed engaged in collective punishment
Reply #6 - Jul 17th, 2013 at 12:07pm
 
polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 11th, 2013 at 11:17pm:
freediver wrote on Jul 11th, 2013 at 10:13pm:
Collective punishment is not an emotive term.


Of course it is. To say it isn't is ridiculous. The term was born from the massacres during WWI and WWII when civilians were killed for the crimes of enemy combatants. It refers to intimidatory actions to terrorise the civilian population. What Muhammad did to the jews cannot be seen in this light, however much you want to twist it.


Why can't it be seen in this light? Muhammed opened negotiations by threatening them, demanded they accept Islam, then declared war on them because they did not respond politely. After winning he even tried to get them all executed, but was talked out of it by a man who Muslims came to refer to as "leader of hypocrites".
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47066
At my desk.
Re: Muhammed engaged in collective punishment
Reply #7 - Jul 18th, 2013 at 4:43pm
 
Gandalf, do you believe that Muhammed engaged in collective punishment?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Mattyfisk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 91863
Gender: male
Re: Muhammed engaged in collective punishment
Reply #8 - Jul 18th, 2013 at 5:01pm
 
I'm not sure, FD, but he definitely engaged in a meme.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
True Colours
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2837
Gender: male
Re: Muhammed engaged in collective punishment
Reply #9 - Jul 19th, 2013 at 12:27am
 
What would any leader of any state do with people who behave as the following:

The Jews were continually attacking Muslims in Madina and this included murders, attempted murders, grievous physical assaults, robberies and even a sexual assault on a Muslim woman in public by a Jew. But they were not initially expelled. In fact, the first time Jews killed a Muslim Prophet Muhammed tried to keep the peace by paying blood money out of his own pocket to the family of the killed Muslim.



But the Jews continued their hostilities and treachery.



Even though the Jews of Madina had signed a treaty promising to help the Muslims against any aggressor, at every opportunity, the Jews would conspire with the enemies of the Muslims to attack Madina.

What kind of leader would permit a group of people to stay after they had treacherously joined forces with an invading enemy?

Think about what any leader in medieval times would have done in the same circumstances. The Jews of Madina were lucky that they weren't killed if you consider how a Christian or pagan leader would have dealt with them at the time.


Summary of main crimes committed in Hijaz by Jews against the Muslim community:


*Jews began by making many physical assaults on Muslims in Madina as intimidation when they became jealous of the Muslim's prestige when the Muslims successfully defended the city from pagan attack in 624.

*A Jew sexually assaulted a Muslim woman publicly in the Jewish marketplace of Madina

*A gang of Jews killed a Muslim man in public in Madina

*A Jew Robbed and caved in the head of a Muslim girl.

*Jews killed a Muslim at Khaybar and threw his body in a well.

*In 625, the Jews reneged on their treaty in which they had promised to help defend Madina from pagan attack and waited in their homes whilst the Muslims faced attack from the pagans of Mecca. The Jews claimed this was because it was the Sabbath. The Jews had made secret pact to help the pagans of Mecca.

*The Jews attempted the assassination of Prophet Muhammed.

*Poisoned Prophet Muhammed and one of his companions

*The Jews used to come and curse the Prophet, the head of the Islamic state, to his face by saying "death be upon you".

*The Jews of Khaybar attacked the son of leader of the Muslims, Umar, dislocating his hands and feet whilst he was on official business.

*The Jews, who had made a treaty promising to defend Madina from attack, committed treason by making a secret pact with the pagans to attack the Muslims of Madina in 627. The Jews recruited pagans from central Arabia, and launched an attack with 10,000 Jewish and pagan soldiers. The Jewish Qurayza tribe  living inside madina then attacked the small Muslim army of 3000 from behind. THis is despite Muslims pleading with them to keep their treaty and telling them that they would be punished if they attacked.

Back to top
« Last Edit: Jul 19th, 2013 at 1:13am by True Colours »  
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47066
At my desk.
Re: Muhammed engaged in collective punishment
Reply #10 - Jul 19th, 2013 at 8:14am
 
Quote:
What would any leader of any state do with people who behave as the following:


I know the answer to this one! Kill them all. Kill every single male relative you can find. And take all the female relatives as sex slaves. And take all their stuff too.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47066
At my desk.
Re: Muhammed engaged in collective punishment
Reply #11 - Jul 19th, 2013 at 6:08pm
 
polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 19th, 2013 at 2:39pm:
I agree that a "collective" was "punished".

Do I agree it fits the term "collective punishment" as we understand it today? No.


Why not?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Send Topic Print