Islamic RoE

In My Opinion – by Bob Fogarty

It appears that those wondrous folks who brought you the big hole in the side of the USS Cole, the blown-up Bamyan statues in Afghanistan, and the 9-11 attack in New York, are at it again. Now it seems that an Al-Qaeda inspired mob of Syrians are threatening to begin terrorist attacks on Lebanon’s interests in Syria, if the government of Lebanon doesn’t stop attacking the Palestinian terrorists hiding out in a Lebanese refugee camp. In a Web statement, the group “Tawhid and Jihad in Syria” promised its support for Fatah Islam, the militant group holed up in the camp. "We warn the Lebanese government that its vital interests, officials, and sons living in Syria will be moving targets for us if it does not lift its siege of the camp". The unauthenticated statement went further with; "Let the Lebanese government wait for the hell of kidnapping, shooting and chopping of heads if it does not respond to the demand". "Tawhid and Jihad", Arabic for "monotheism and holy war", is a name used by several groups apparently inspired by Al Qaeda, though their actual links to Osama bin Laden are unknown. The most prominent militant group in Syria is known as Jund al-Sham, but it is sometimes called the Jund al-Sham for Jihad and Tawhid. The warning said that the groups current leader, al-Dimashqi allegedly met with Fatah Islam's representative, who "explained the ideology of the group, its aims to support Islam and the establishment of the State of Islam, which is a dream for every Muslim." Tawhid and Jihad promised to support Fatah Islam, saying "Jews, Christians and the malevolent Crusaders in Lebanon and in Europe ... (and) Lebanese officials — France and America's dogs, weaned on the breast of treason — have all rushed to help against the brothers of Fatah Islam." I can understand the extremists being mad at the United States, in the aftermath of 9-11 the US actually has the effrontery to oppose the march of militant Islam! Why that’s nothing less than anti-Moslem Sacrilege!! But now they’re accusing FRANCE of opposing Muslim extremism!?

These folks do have some strange ways of fighting their wars though; An American journalist was in Zarqa, Jordan, was trying to interview two heavily bearded Islamic militants when he asked one too many questions. "He's American?" one of the militants growled. "Let's kidnap and kill him." But before anyone could act on that idea the rules of jihadi etiquette kicked in. Apparently you can't just slaughter a visitor, as the militants are taught by Islamic scholars that you need permission from whoever arranges the meeting. And in this case, the arranger declined to sign off.

During the late unlamented war in Vietnam, the United States had a quite extensive set of orders, the “Rules of Engagement”, telling us when, where, how (or even if), we could shoot back. From talking to some of our local veterans of the Iraq war, I understand they also have rules of engagement, but nothing as extensive, exasperating, and “enemy friendly” and the RoE in Vietnam. Now I find that the Sunni insurgents have their own set of rules.

Jihadi etiquette is unwritten, and apparently varies in interpretation and practice almost as much as the extremist groups vary in their stated goals. But the rules do have some generalized guidelines. Some are rooted in Middle Eastern culture, and some are based on the Koran, which generally prohibits the slaying of children, women, the elderly, and the infirm. However, an Egyptian Islamic scholar, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, has argued it is fine to kill Israeli citizens because Israeli compulsory military service means they are not truly civilians. Apparently you can also kill innocent bystanders without feeling guilt. Fatah Al Islam in Lebanon claims that government officials are proper targets, claiming that "Any person that comes to our region with a military, security, or political aim, then he is a legitimate target." Considering that Kassam rockets aren’t all that accurate, nor very particular about who or how many they kill, I guess it’s a good thing the collateral damage is incidental and acceptable under Islam. ‘Course a “Crusader” bomb or artillery shell is a different story.

The Iraqi war is changing things too. Suicide bombers from radical Muslim groups have long been called martyrs, a word that apparently bypasses the Koran's ban on killing oneself, in favor of the honor it accords death in battle against the infidel. But now you can kill children too, without concern. It seems the extremists in Jordan who embrace Al Qaeda's ideology teach their recruits that children receive special consideration in death. They are not held accountable for any sins until puberty, and if they are killed in a jihad operation, they will go straight to heaven. There, they will instantly age to their late 20s and enjoy the same access to virgins and other occupational benefits of martyrdom.

Sometimes you can single out civilians for killing; bankers are an example. In Islamic theory noncombatants cannot be the target of a militant operation, but the list of exceptions is long and rapidly growing. A Briton of Cypriot descent awaiting trial in England on terrorism charges claims "It would be legitimate to attack banks because they charge interest, and this is in violation of Islamic law." And then he came up with this additional tidbit; "We have a voting system here in Britain, so anyone who is voting for Tony Blair is not a civilian and therefore would be a legitimate target." With this, perhaps Homeland Security will cancel our next presidential election, in order to “protect” us from a perceived terrorist threat?

You’re not supposed to kill in the country where you reside unless you were born there. Militants who go to Iraq apparently get a free pass on this as they’re “expeditionary warriors”. And the 9-11 attack did not violate this rule either, since the hijackers originally came from outside the United States. Huh… and all this time I thought they’d been living here for quite some time. Then to, you can lie or hide your religion if you do this for jihad. Muslims are instructed by the Koran to be true to their religion, but lying about it is allowed when it is deemed a necessity - for example, when deception serves a good purpose, such as posing as a passenger on an airliner perhaps?

Militant Islamists interpret the Koran and the separate teachings of Muhammad that are known as the “Sunna” as laying out five criteria to be met by people wanting to be jihadis. They must be Muslim, at least 15 years of age and mature, of sound mind and debt-free, and they must have parental permission. The parental rule is currently waived inside Iraq, where Islamists say it is every Muslim's duty to fight the Americans. The rule is optional for residents of nearby countries like Jordan.

Rules of Engagement in the sandbox, based on inescapable Islamic religious logic… I think I kinda prefer “Bob’s one rule of engagement”, something that dates back to what seemed like a lifetime spent in a gawd forsaken jungle… “Shoot at ME you dumba- - , and you’d better not miss!”