Strike Terror Into Their Hearts!
I found, via several odd links, a reference to the recent US Army War College Quarterly Winter 2006-2007 article The Quranic Concept of War by Joseph C. Meyers.
This is a review of the principles put forward by by Brigadier General S. K. Malik of the Pakistani Army in his 1979 book The Quranic Concept of War.
According to Myers, the important thing to learn from Malik's book is :
Malik’s most controversial dictum is summarized in the following manner: in war, “the point where the means and the end meet” is in terror. He formulates terror as an objective principal of war; once terror is achieved the enemy reaches his culminating point. “Terror is not a means of imposing decision upon the enemy; it is the decision we wish to impose . . . .” Malik’s divine principal of Islamic warfare may be restated as “strike terror; never feel terror.” The ultimate objective of this form of warfare “revolves around the human heart, [the enemies] soul, spirit, and Faith.”56 Terror “can be instilled only if the opponent’s Faith is destroyed . . . . It is essential in the ultimate analysis, to dislocate [the enemies] Faith.” Those who are firm in their religious conviction are immune to terror, “a weak Faith offers inroads to terror.” Therefore, as part of preparations for jihad, actions will be oriented on weakening the non-Islamic’s “Faith,” while strengthening the Islamic’s. What that weakening or “dislocation” entails in practice remains ambiguous. Malik concludes, “Psychological dislocation is temporary; spiritual dislocation is permanent.” The soul of man can only be touched by terror.57
It is interesting for one of no faith to examine this. Because I feel no terror at all caused by the actions of so-called terrorists. Does the lack of faith somehow make one unable to be terrorized ? And thus unable to be targeted by Quranic warfare?
It seems to me only someone who was innately full of terror would ever require faith to protect themselves from it. Although one could perhaps argue that the reason I don't have the terror is because of faith in myself.
Still, defining the act of waging a war as winning it, is cheating, IMO!
This is a review of the principles put forward by by Brigadier General S. K. Malik of the Pakistani Army in his 1979 book The Quranic Concept of War.
According to Myers, the important thing to learn from Malik's book is :
Malik’s most controversial dictum is summarized in the following manner: in war, “the point where the means and the end meet” is in terror. He formulates terror as an objective principal of war; once terror is achieved the enemy reaches his culminating point. “Terror is not a means of imposing decision upon the enemy; it is the decision we wish to impose . . . .” Malik’s divine principal of Islamic warfare may be restated as “strike terror; never feel terror.” The ultimate objective of this form of warfare “revolves around the human heart, [the enemies] soul, spirit, and Faith.”56 Terror “can be instilled only if the opponent’s Faith is destroyed . . . . It is essential in the ultimate analysis, to dislocate [the enemies] Faith.” Those who are firm in their religious conviction are immune to terror, “a weak Faith offers inroads to terror.” Therefore, as part of preparations for jihad, actions will be oriented on weakening the non-Islamic’s “Faith,” while strengthening the Islamic’s. What that weakening or “dislocation” entails in practice remains ambiguous. Malik concludes, “Psychological dislocation is temporary; spiritual dislocation is permanent.” The soul of man can only be touched by terror.57
It is interesting for one of no faith to examine this. Because I feel no terror at all caused by the actions of so-called terrorists. Does the lack of faith somehow make one unable to be terrorized ? And thus unable to be targeted by Quranic warfare?
It seems to me only someone who was innately full of terror would ever require faith to protect themselves from it. Although one could perhaps argue that the reason I don't have the terror is because of faith in myself.
Still, defining the act of waging a war as winning it, is cheating, IMO!