SOCNET: The Special Operations Community Network

SOCNET: The Special Operations Community Network (
-   Terrorism and Asymmetric Warfare (
-   -   Is The Bond of Ummah Stronger Than The Bond of Nationhood? (

T-Rock 8 August 2007 09:26

Is The Bond of Ummah Stronger Than The Bond of Nationhood?
.....just curious (assimilation)? Interesting video:

Although I'll not post a link (Ummahdotcom), here is a an interesting discussion board linked from LGF:

Jimbo 8 August 2007 09:42

Seriously, please read Understanding Terrorist Networks by Marc Sageman.

Then read Imagined Communities by Benedict Anderson. And then read In the Name of Identity: Violence and the Need to Belong by Amin Maalouf.

And then answer your subject line question yourself.

T-Rock 8 August 2007 18:58

Thanks Jimbo for the recommendations, I was looking for something to take with me on our beach trip...

Typhoon 8 August 2007 20:06

Thanks for the book recommendations, Jimbo. I got 'em on my post it notes and I'll get to them when I have a bunch of free time this winter at the track meets...:)

MixedLoad 10 August 2007 06:37

Just ordered all three books.

walkin' trails 22 August 2007 10:06

I read an article yesterday in the IACSP's Counter Terrorism journal (found it on the magazine rack in Borders). The article was entitled, "The Orgins and Goals of Radical Islam: Why First Responders Need to Know," by Henry Morgenstern. It summed up much of the YouTube videos in a nutshell and listed some of the ideas of the radical "Brotherhood." One such idea was that no form of government, democracy in particular, was good for muslims, although if a government was necessary, a dictatorship was preferred. The irony is that radical Islam seems to be flourishing under the protection of free speach, one of the pillars of a democracy.

Gryfen-FL 23 August 2007 01:36


if a government was necessary, a dictatorship was preferred
Future of Political Islam by Grahm E. Fuller (;) Thanks, Jimbo ;)) has some interesting ideas about why radical islam flourishes under certain types of government. And also raises a resounding indictment about what type of government Islamist movements would likely form if they came to power.

T-Rock 24 August 2007 01:04

Just started “Understanding Terror Networks” today….one thing caught my eye in the opening chapter and it had to do with “Jihad”. The author describes the greater jihad as an individual nonviolent struggle……the jihad accepted by most Muslims…....striving to live a good life whereas he refers to violent jihad as the lesser of importance. Do most Muslims really see it this way? I’m just curious if his research starts from a false premise? The reason I question his premise is this: In medicine, in order to obtain the right diagnosis and implement the proper treatment, healthcare workers must know what disease they’re actually dealing with in order to treat it effectively. I’m assuming this approach is utilized in solving the Radical Islamic problem as well? The author utilizes empirical science to obtain his conclusions; nevertheless, the idea of jihad being an inner struggle doesn’t support the statistical analysis. Are we biased with a western POV when trying to come up with a solution?
I’m definitely no Islamic scholar but it’s my understanding that all of Islam’s political doctrine is found in the text of the Qur’an, the Hadith, and the Sirah. If so, how exactly do Muslims see the real jihad? Is it inner struggle or the jihad of war? Statistically speaking, the majority of jihad references concerning war compromise about 97% of the doctrinal texts; (Qur’an, Hadith, Sirah) whereas, only about 3% of jihad references cover inner struggle within the Islamic texts. I’m wondering if western logic based on the law of contradiction will be able to come up with a solution regarding the problem of Global jihad? Is dualism the key to understanding Islam?

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 23:00.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc. All Rights Reserved