ابو سامي

The entire incel movement would be impossible if mixing were prohibited

Hijra >>> fantasizing about establishing sharia in the West

Likewise, harshness may sometimes be appropriate.

It takes experience and humility to cultivate this capacity for wisdom in da'wah.

May Allah make us among those who support struggle for the sake of Allah in all our actions and speech, and protect us from benefitting our enemies.

This doesn't necessarily require attacking personalities, but rather doctrines.

And indeed, sincere scholars may end up as mouthpieces for government policies without even realizing it. Patience, wisdom, and good manners may be key in certain contexts.

This dimension of the war is also one that almost any Muslim can participate in by raising awareness about the imprisoned and assassinated scholars, and how the government-approved scholars serve Western agendas.

Key to this shift in understanding is also raising awareness about why some Islamic scholars rise to international prominence while others waste away in prison.

This media war, casting mujahideen as khawarij, is extremely widespread and prevalent.

This applies even if the territory is only held temporarily, so failing to establishing stable and permanent rule does not mean that these local struggles are a total loss.

The more Muslims understand this dynamic of the war, the more support the mujahideen will get.

Territory provides the "terrorist safe havens" that the West is so concerned with preventing. Most major operations on the West, including the strikes on New York and Washington, Charlie Hebdo, and the Paris attacks were actively planned and executed using territory under Muslim rule.

Of course, the Palestine front is no exception to this, since Israel is completely dependent on the West for its survival.

Furthermore, it is from liberated areas that most effective external operations are carried out.

2) Losses to Western economies as they are deprived of human and other resources, as described above.

As the West's resource are stretched more and more thin, this will directly benefit Muslims waging insurgencies against West and their proxies in other regions.

These resources take the form of intelligence resources, including satellites, monitoring of electronic communications, budget for spies and informants, field agents, drones and drone strikes, direct military aid to the Pakistani government. The bigger the conflict, the bigger the bill.

However, if we consider the disruptions to resource flows (including human resources) that come with expanding conflict, it is clear that this conflict is also a means of fighting the West.

There are two aspects to this.

1) West has to deploy more resources to prop up the Pakistani government.

Fighting in Pakistan may at first seem like a lost cause because of its strategic importance.

Since it is so important, the West will devote a lot of resources to propping up the current regime, as already happened in the last war between Muslim groups and the Americans/Pak government.

As a jihadi front, Pakistan has a major ripple effect, because it is so important for both the economic visions of the West and China. Instability in Pakistan means China's investments there turn into a loss, and the West loses a major neo-colonial income stream.

The nuclear issue is also a human resources issue. If you consider how important the issue of Iran obtaining nuclear weapons is to the West, the issue of an Islamic takeover of Pakistan is even bigger.

In the event of a major breakdown in relations, all of the resources currently shipped out of the country under neo-colonial trade patterns would become available for local use.

These are purely economic factors. The presence of nuclear weapons is additional to this.

A huge amount of the wealth of a country like Pakistan goes toward people trying to get visas to the West, traveling to the West, paying for university studies in the West, purchasing imported status items like cars and clothing, servicing interest on debt to the West, etc.

2) The departure of shuhada in war frees up resources, lowering expenses. Current unemployment crises are related to an overabundance of labor which large scale war resolves.

3) The amount of resources that currently go to the West is enormous.

"If a wound has touched you, similar wounds have touched the others." [3:140]

If we focus on the long term gain (both spiritual and worldly) that come from inflicting damage on our enemies (both India and the broader Anglo-American world order), then the short term losses will be more tolerable.

Many Muslims fear such scenarios as much as the kuffar because of the economic consequences for the Muslims.

These fears are unfounded for at least three reasons.

1) It is necessary in war to take damage in the process of inflicting damage.

This matter is especially critical for the West due to their current demographic crises, shortages of skilled labor, and cost of living crisis.

Many companies are only staying afloat because of the supply of cheap outsourced labor from the Indian subcontinent.

These national school systems currently prioritize education in sectors suited to providing human resources to the West, but a major war would disrupt all of that.

It would also disrupt supplies of natural resources and agricultural products India and Pakistan provide to global markets.

Post-colonial exploitation of human resources is a long term endeavor. Modern British and Americans reap the fruit of the colonial efforts of their ancestors.

For example, standardization of English in the Indian and Pakistani school systems prepares students for work in and with the UK and US.

Such a confrontation would shift a lot of India's resources toward the conflict and away from being the useful neo-colonial minion that they currently are.

It would disrupt trade and transport, raising costs in both maritime transport and civil aviation.

It would disrupt not only the flow of human resources from Pakistan (although with a population of ~240 million this is huge in itself) but also from India, since direct confrontation would be inevitable if Muslims took control.

The West is terrified of Pakistan falling under the control of Muslims not only because of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal, but also because of disruption of the world market.

When they speak fearfully of "Islamist militants" taking control of the goverment, it's in the context of "regional stability."

It's not only because of nuclear weapons that the West is terrified of Pakistan being controlled by Muslims.

Pakistan's biggest export is human resources, without which the West cannot function.

This flow of wealth is not only via "brain drain" but also through outsourcing.

Studying economics as a mode of thought is more useful than studying economics itself.

In a was similar to how Western anthropologists study the mythologies of remote tribes.

The modern nation-state is a product of centuries of deliberate destruction of families by the Roman Catholic church.

Feminism, along with public education, enable replicating this process in a much shorter time span.