Mohammed’s Wars: The Bloody Reality Behind the Myths
Were Mohammed’s wars—those relentless jihads glorified in Islamic lore—really just noble acts of self-defense against bloodthirsty Jews and Christians? This is the tired fairy tale spun by modern Islamic apologists, especially those cozying up in the West. They paint Mohammed as a serene sage, reluctantly wielding the sword only when cornered. But peel back the veil of deception with authentic Islamic sources like Sahih Muslim, and the truth emerges like a dagger from the shadows: Mohammed’s wars were brazen campaigns of conquest, conquest dripping with the blood of innocents and fueled by a demonic imperative to dominate. This wasn’t divine defense; it was the satanic blueprint for Islam’s fraudulent empire-building. Dive into the damning Khaybar hadith, and watch the peaceful prophet myth crumble.
The Khaybar Hadith: Exposing the Core of Mohammed’s Wars
Picture this: the sweltering sands of Khaybar, a thriving Jewish oasis 100 miles north of Medina, July 628 CE. No invading armies at the gates, no arrows raining on Muslim homes—just prosperous Jewish farmers tending date palms and trading spices. Yet Mohammed summons his war council. From Sahih Muslim (Book of the Virtues of the Companions, Chapter on the Virtues of Ali bin Abi Talib, narrated by Abu Huraira), we get the unvarnished command:
> The Prophet (peace be upon him) said on the day of Khaybar: I will give this flag to a man who loves Allah and His Messenger, and Allah will grant victory at his hands. Umar ibn al-Khattab confessed his burning ambition for the honor, but it fell to Ali bin Abi Talib. Mohammed ordered: Advance and do not turn back until Allah grants you victory. Ali pressed on, then halted and shouted, O Messenger of Allah, on what shall I fight these people? Mohammed’s reply was chilling: Fight them until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Mohammed is His Messenger. When they do that, they will have safeguarded their lives and property from you, except as required by the rights of Islam, and their reckoning is with Allah.
For authenticity, here’s the Arabic straight from the source:
> عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ يَوْمَ خَيْبَرَ لَأُعْطِيَنَّ هَذِهِ الرَّايَةَ رَجُلًا يُحِبُّ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ يَفْتَحُ اللَّهُ عَلَى يَدَيْهِ… قَاتِلْهُمْ حَتَّى يَشْهَدُوا أَنْ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا اللَّهُ وَأَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ فَإِذَا فَعَلُوا ذَلِكَ فَقَدْ مَنَعُوا مِنْكَ دِمَاءَهُمْ وَأَمْوَالَهُمْ إِلَّا بِحَقِّهَا وَحِسَابُهُمْ عَلَى اللَّهِ.
This isn’t a call to repel invaders; it’s a jihad fatwa demanding submission or slaughter. Khaybar’s Jews surrendered, but their fate was grim: lands confiscated, turned into sharecroppers for Muslims, leaders like Kinana bin al-Rabi tortured and beheaded for hidden gold. Mohammed’s wars here reveal Islam’s satanic fraud—a theology masquerading as mercy while enforcing dhimmitude, the boot of humiliation on non-believers.
Case 1: Ali’s Bewilderment Shatters the Defensive Delusion in Mohammed’s Wars
Even Ali—Mohammed’s cousin, son-in-law, and the Shia lion of God—was baffled. He didn’t cry, How do we fend off their assault? No, his question pierced the heart: On what basis shall I fight these people? Why the confusion? Because Khaybar posed zero threat. These Jews hadn’t marched on Medina; they were neutral traders, their crime mere existence outside Islam’s fold. Ali’s pause exposes Mohammed’s wars as premeditated aggression, a proactive purge scripted by a false prophet’s insatiable hunger for power. This isn’t defense; it’s the devil’s playbook, cloaked in piety.
Case 2: No Whiff of Self-Defense—Just Pure Conquest in Mohammed’s Wars
Apologists bleat that Mohammed’s wars were purely defensive. Where’s the evidence? This hadith mentions no Jewish raid, no broken swords on Muslim throats—nothing but a divine dictate to fight until the Shahada echoes from every tongue. Sahih Muslim isn’t some fringe blog; it’s a cornerstone of Sunni orthodoxy, revered alongside the Quran. Western Muslims touting peace while sidelining this? It’s taqiyya on steroids—deceit permitted against infidels—or willful blindness to their faith’s fraudulent foundations. Cherry-pick all you want; the bloodstains remain.
Case 3: The Phantom Treaty Myth Crumbles Under Scrutiny of Mohammed’s Wars
Oh, but they broke treaties! cry the defenders. Show me the scrolls. No Islamic primary source produces a Khaybar pact shattered by Jews. Vague gripes about alliances or neutrality? That’s pretext, not proof. Post-conquest, Khaybar’s survivors slaved under jizya taxes, their autonomy gutted. Compare to the Banu Qurayza: 800 Jewish men (including boys with pubic hair) beheaded after surrender, women and children enslaved. Treason? Maybe. But no invasion—just paranoia fueling genocide. Mohammed’s wars thrived on such excuses, birthing Islam’s satanic cycle of accusation, siege, and subjugation.
Case 4: Geography Maps the Offensive Onslaught of Mohammed’s Wars
Defensive wars hug home turf. Mohammed’s wars? They exploded outward like a plague. Khaybar: 100 miles north. Mu’tah: 500 miles into Jordan against Byzantine allies. Tabuk: 600 miles to Syria’s edge. These weren’t desperate stands; they were invasion drills. Fast-forward: Umayyad jihads devoured Egypt (641 CE), Syria (636 CE), Persia (651 CE), Spain (711 CE). Did Christian Visigoths sail to Mecca? No—these were Mohammed’s wars metastasizing, Quranic commands like Surah 9:29 (Fight those who do not believe in Allah… until they pay the jizyah with willing submission) weaponized for global dominion.
Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah catalogs over 80 expeditions, scores offensive raids like the flesh-market caravan grabs or the Nakhla ambush (first blood spilled in Ramadan, breaking their own rules). The pattern? Plunder, conversion by coercion, and empires built on skulls. Within a century, Islam’s sword carved from Spain to India—faster than Alexander, deadlier than Rome. Peaceful? Tell that to the Coptic Christians, Zoroastrian fire temples, or Buddhist Bamiyan Buddhas.
The Satanic Fraud at Islam’s Heart: Legacy of Mohammed’s Wars
Mohammed’s wars didn’t end with his death in 632 CE; they ignited an inferno. The Ridda Wars crushed apostates; the Rashidun caliphs steamrolled empires. This martial DNA pulses in ISIS beheadings, Hamas rockets, Boko Haram slave markets—echoes of Khaybar’s command. Apologists gaslight with context or cherry-picked hadiths, but Sahih Bukhari, Muslim, and the Quran scream unison: jihad is sacred duty, offensive when opportunity knocks.
Islam’s fraud shines brightest in its denial. Mohammed claimed angelic revelation, yet his wars mirror tribal banditry elevated to theology—rape (Aisha at nine), assassinations (Ka’b bin al-Ashraf for poetry), child soldiers. Satanic? Consider: Jesus healed lepers; Mohammed beheaded them. Buddha sought enlightenment; Mohammed sought forts. A true God commands love your enemies (Matthew 5:44); Allah mandates fight them till submission (Quran 8:39).
Western blindness endangers us. Taqiyya floods mosques, campuses, media—portraying Islam as religion of peace while Mohammed’s wars lurk in the texts. Confront this: Islam’s origins are conquest, not coexistence. Demand honesty, or watch history’s blade return.
In conclusion, Mohammed’s wars demolish the self-defense sham peddled today. From Khaybar’s clarion call to Tabuk’s tramp, they unveil Islam as a satanic fraud—a counterfeit faith forged in Arabian bloodlust, masquerading as monotheism. Authentic sources indict it beyond redemption. Wake up, West: ignoring Mohammed’s wars invites their rerun. Truth isn’t Islamophobia; it’s survival.
(Word count: 1,248)
