Do Muslims have the correct approach when it comes to killing PoWs?
Article 13 of the Geneva Convention prohibits the killing of PoWs, and also outlaws treating them inhumanely.
Islamic law, however, permits the killing of captured enemy combatants. This gives jihadis the advantage when it comes to warfare, as they are not preoccupied with feeding, watering, or providing medical treatment to their captured enemies.
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
too bad they squandered all those savings paying the cia for 60fps cameras and adobe premier subscriptions
What happens if the captured combatant reverts to Islam?
>chivalry 2 tenosian invasion
He will go to hell after they execute him because he abandoned Christ when infact he needed him the most.
>Islamic law, however, permits the killing of captured enemy combatants.
Post proof bongshit.
Christ is King
Calm down Ahmed.
It's literally what your prophet did
You are sandniggers and don't follow anything either way, so it isn't about your cousins writing long texts, it's about the genetics of those involved.
>the advantage when it comes to warfare
Every military is infiltrated by the enemy, and the same people also funds your opponents in every war, so if you were supposed to be serious about advantages during warfare, that was pure gayness.
The NAP is the only law you need. That, and firepower.
Of course a bongshit would regurgitate jewish propaganda. Your nose is exposed again.
en.wikipedia.org
>Researcher, W. N. Arafat places doubt on the description of events described by Ibn Ishaq (which was used later by Tabari as his sole source). Arafat states in regards to the reception of Ibn Ishaq's and Tabari's account: "The attitude of scholars and historians to Ibn lshaq's version of the story has been either one of complacency, sometimes mingled with uncertainty, or at least in two important cases, one of condemnatlon and outright rejection." Ibn Ishaq was criticized by Sunni scholar, Malik ibn Anas as being "a liar" and somebody "who transmits his stories from the Jews."
>The historicity of this incident has been questioned by Islamic scholars of the Revisionist School of Islamic Studies and by some western specialists.
en.wikipedia.org
>The most widely discussed criticism of his sīra was that of his contemporary Mālik ibn Anas. Mālik rejected the stories of Muhammad and the Jews of Medina on the ground that they were taken solely based on accounts by sons of Jewish converts. These same stories have also been denounced as "odd tales" (gharāʾib) later by ibn Hajar al-Asqalani. Mālik and others also thought that ibn Isḥāq exhibited Qadari tendencies, had a preference for Ali (Guillaume also found evidence of this, pp. xxii &xxiv), and relied too heavily on what were later called the Isrā'īlīyāt. Furthermore, early literary critics, like ibn Sallām al-Jumaḥī and ibn al-Nadīm, censured ibn Isḥāq for knowingly including forged poems in his biography, and for attributing poems to persons not known to have written any poetry. The 14th-century historian al-Dhahabī, using hadith terminology, noted that in addition to the forged (makdhūb) poetry, Ibn Isḥāq filled his sīra with many munqaṭiʿ (broken chain of narration) and munkar (suspect narrator) reports.
Israeli mercenary army. All covered their faces with cloths because they are cowards that are ashamed of what they were doing. Effectively they are IRL meme-flags.
Lol, the people that wrote the geneva convention mass murderd germans AFTER the war was OVER. They then destroyed their culture and minds with propaganda for 70 some years. The only other thing i admire about islam is that they have managed to keep their women in check so far.
How convenient that you have yet another issue that you can muddy the waters with and proclaim one thing and later on do another, and have some level of claim to legitimacy both ways.
>Narrated 'Aisha: When Allah's Apostle returned on the day (of the battle) of Al-Khandaq (i.e. Trench), he put down his arms and took a bath. Then Gabriel whose head was covered with dust, came to him saying, "You have put down your arms! By Allah, I have not put down my arms yet." Allah's Apostle said, "Where (to go now)?" Gabriel said, "This way," pointing towards the tribe of Banu Qurayza. So Allah's Apostle went out towards them.
Sahih Bukhari 4:52:68
>Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: Some people (i.e. the Jews of Bani bin Quraiza) agreed to accept the verdict of Sad bin Muadh so the Prophet sent for him (i.e. Sad bin Muadh). He came riding a donkey, and when he approached the Mosque, the Prophet ﷺ said, "Get up for the best amongst you." or said, "Get up for your chief." Then the Prophet ﷺ said, "O Sad! These people have agreed to accept your verdict." Sad said, "I judge that their warriors should be killed and their children and women should be taken as captives." The Prophet ﷺ said, "You have given a judgment similar to Allah's Judgment (or the King's judgment)."
Sahih Bukhari 5:58:148
Enjoy worshipping a pedophile, Ahmed.
Those were jews who dishonored a defensive treaty and aided the enemy. They got tried under their own law.
try to put your bare foot on a dune coon's face...watch how mad it makes them lol
so your first wikipedia rebuttle is that the person who copied the story also condemns the story they copied, or rejects Mohammad, ipso the story itself is false. Begging the point that mohammad is always right, isn't proof the story is wrong, this is a shitty form of trick.
>the children of converts to Islam are unreliable
holy fuck, this is amazing reasons to join your faith. can I get more, please please?!
Forever stuck in the year 675
>This gives jihadis the advantage when it comes to warfare, as they are not preoccupied with feeding, watering, or providing medical treatment to their captured enemies.
Because of this type of behavior, the west devoted almost 300 years to coming up with shit like square bullets and machine guns to make the Muslim suffer more. Great results