All this talk about...

Well the question is are all people peaceful??? Have they ever been throug time? We are given limited free will are we not?

If so then bad things happen to good people. And therefor we are given guidelines to help guide us. Take for instance, if your family was murdered by a seriel killer, what woud you do? Whati s "peace" in this instance? Do we just forgive? What happens with this person?  War is a larger scale of, often wrongful actions. Not all war is wrong? Was the efforts by many countries to stop Hitler a wrong action? Were those countries not justified in going to defend themselves?

I became a Moslem and am a very peaceful person. And what are the guidelines to be used if someone attacks me, attacks my home? What should I do. What I like about Islam is that it is clear you have the right to defend yourself, against oppression, against injustice.

I grew up in one of those "turn the other cheek" households. And you know what, then they hit the othe cheek and they keep on hitting. There are bad people out there. And they don't have the same rights as if they abuse mine or anyone elses.

Rules, in my mind, are there to help everyone and to make it clear. 

Perhaps its just practical.  Men wage war.  War is sometimes necessary.  The Bible says, "There is a time for peace, a time for war."

The Quran states that war is against oppressors and to free the oppressed.  Thus, it also stipulates how war is to be conducted.

Its easy to say preach peace, but where has that gotten the Tibetans.  Or the Buddhists of Myanmar. 

To fight against oppressors is a divine cause, to fight for freedom and security of the weak. However, if there is no rules, then there is only slaughter and the just side can easily begin taking revenge and become unjust in their dealings.

Ghandi was a rarity... and I wish all would be as successful as him.  However, the Ghandi's of the world are charismatic saints.  The Dalai Lama is working towards this same kind of peaceful change.  But, what is it about Ghandi that made him succeed where the Dalai Lama fails. 

The Dalai Lama has the political backing, he has the internet and satellite TV to reach his followers around the world.  Yet, he's not been able to affect that great change.

I have seen many people point less to Ghandi and more to the over-extended British Empire.  The difference between Ghandi and the Dalai Lama is the focus given by the occupiers.  The British were thousands of miles from home and unable to hold a colony.  The Chinese are right on top of the Tibetans and able to put more troops and resources into the oppression.  The Chinese government is able to move troops faster than the British.  The success of the Indian independence movement comes AFTER the Second World War and after the British had been pounded on by the Germans, not once but twice.  They were no longer able to keep up their Empire.  And a country who just freed so many other countries from occupying forces was having a hard time justifying its own conquests.

So, did pacifism work?  Or was it a combination of social and political pressure coupled with the depleted resources of the oppressive empire.  People like to simplify the successful non-violent bid to gain independence, however, its not that simple.  A number of factors converged to make it a possibility. 

As for your claim that the Crusades had no religious motives.  You obviously have not read very much about the Crusades.  When the Pope ordered the Holy Land reclaimed from the Infidels, his objective was to secure the place of the Savior's birth from unbelievers.

There were waves of Crusades each with their own purposes.  I will give you that not all the Crusades were given a religious objective, but many of them were called on by the Church for religious reasons.  The want to secure the Holy sites. 

Now, as for the Dar el Harb.  I have done a search on this book of yours.  It seems I can only find it referred to on anti-Islamic websites.  I could not find any references supporting it on Islamic websites.  I wonder why that is. 

Of course, if you want to know about Mormons, ask an anti-Mormon.  If you want to know about the Jews, ask a Nazi.  If you want to know about the Muslims...trust the millions of websites dedicated to unveiling it.

The Quran states very specific rules for when someone can go to war.  Self-defense and to throw off an oppressor.  It really doesn't matter what any other reference says.  In Islam, the Quran is the only perfect law.  They believe that war is wrong, but sometimes necessary.

If any one slew a person - unless it be [in punishment] for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people - Quran 5:32

Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors. - Quran 2:190

And in a hadith narrated by Abdullah bin Amr bin Al-As, God Told Mohammed :

You are neither hard-hearted nor of fierce character, nor one who shouts in the markets. You do not return evil for evil, but excuse and forgive. - Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 362