# The Great Muslim Warriors



## edi

Introduce your favorite Great muslim worrior.


----------



## edi

*Baibars al-Bunduqdari *(also spelled Baybars) (Arabic : &#8236;&#1576;&#1610;&#1576;&#1585;&#1587;* &#8236;&#1575;&#1604;&#1576;&#1606;&#1583;&#1602;&#1583;&#1575;&#1585;&#1610 (epithet: al-Malik al-Zahir 

He was a commander of the Mamluks in around 1250, when he defeated the Seventh Crusade of Louis IX of France. He was still a commander under Sultan Qutuz at the Battle of Ain Jalut in 1260. After the battle he killed Sultan Qutuz on a hunting expedition, because he expected that he would be rewarded with the governorship of Aleppo for his military success; but Qutuz, fearing his ambition, refused to give such a post and disappointed him. Baibars then took power for himself and became Sultan.[4]

He continued what was to become a lifelong struggle against the Crusader kingdoms in Syria, starting with the Principality of Antioch, which had attempted to ally itself with the Mongols against Baibars at Ain Jalut.

In 1263 he attacked Acre, the capital of the remnant of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, but was unable to take it. Nevertheless, he defeated the Crusaders in many other battles (Arsuf, Athlith, Haifa, Safad, Jaffa, Ashkalon, Caesarea); whenever possible he took prisoners who were members of the Knights Templar and Knights Hospitaller, who were much hated in the Muslim world at the that time as they defended Christian castles and at the same time considered to be a great military threat.

In 1266 Baibars defeated the Armenians in Cilicia, the only powerful ally of Antioch. In 1268 he besieged Antioch, capturing the city on May 18. He razed the city and killed or enslaved the population, although Prince Bohemund was able to escape.

The fall of Antioch led to the brief Ninth Crusade in 1271 led by Edward I of England, who also attempted to ally with the Mongols, although they were unable to capture any territory from Baibars. Although Edward and Baibars settled on a truce, Baibars tried to have Edward killed by the Hashshashin, and Edward returned home in 1272.

Baibars then fought the Seljuk Turks in Anatolia, who were by this time subjects of the Mongols. He died in Syria in 1277.


His tactics of war was very intresting.His great Work is to unite muslims against Halaku Khan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## edi

He also built an advanced military infrastructure, with new arsenals, warships and cargo vessels.
Moreover, Baybars effectively united Syria and Egypt as one state. Through this, he was more capable of surpressing the double threat of Mongols from the east and of the Crusaders already established along the Middle Eastern coast. Baybars also secured less threatening fronts in the West and South. Military expeditions were sent into Libya and Nubia, with him as the commander in many cases.
On the homefront, he was active in building the infrastructure of the state. Canals were built in Egypt, harbours were improved, and he even established a postal service between Cairo and Damascus that required only 4 days for delivery. He also built mosques, and appointed chief justices of all the 4 schools of Sharia.


----------



## F.O.X

I Have just one Greatest warrior all are behind him : & he is Holy Prophet Hazrat Muhammad (S.A.W).

Regards
Wilco

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## PakistaniPatriot

Another one is Hazrat Ali A.S. The most bravest man to ever set foot on this planet. And another one Tipu Sultan, he fought until all the blood from his body was draining out a fell due to lack of blood.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Marathaman

PakistaniPatriot said:


> Another one is Hazrat Ali A.S. The most bravest man to ever set foot on this planet. And another one Tipu Sultan, he fought until all the blood from his body was draining out a fell due to lack of blood.



Since when did Tipu Sultan become a Pakistani?


----------



## Tiki Tam Tam

The greatest, in my opinion, was Salluddin or Saladin or Salah al-D&#299;n Yusuf ibn Ayyub!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## PakistaniPatriot

Marathaman said:


> Since when did Tipu Sultan become a Pakistani?



I didn't say that Tipu Sultan was a Pakistani. The Pakistani flag is just something a add at the end of many of my posts, if thats what confused you.


----------



## Tiki Tam Tam

Yes.

I thought so too that it was a sign of joy and nothing more there being nothing else available!


----------



## Marathaman

PakistaniPatriot said:


> I didn't say that Tipu Sultan was a Pakistani. The Pakistani flag is just something a add at the end of many of my posts, if thats what confused you.



Ohk....well....i would have preferd the american flag


----------



## salahuldin786

1.muhmmed prophet of allah.

2.umar bin khattab

3.ali bin talib

4.khaild bin walid

5.tariq bin ziyad 

6.muhmmed bin qasim

there are many more muslim commander's that have gone to great height's in the muslim world but these are the most well know and come to mind.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## su-47

Akbar the Great. The Mughal empire was at its zenith during his reign, both militarily and economically. he was also a very just and fair emperor. a true visionary.


----------



## edi

there is an other one

Shahab-uddin Ghauri

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## edi

During Umar's reign, the Islamic empire grew at an unprecedented rate, *taking Mesopotamia and parts of Persia from the Sassanids (effectively ending that empire), and taking Egypt, Palestine, Syria, North Africa and Armenia from the Byzantines*. Many of these conquests followed watershed battles on both the western and eastern fronts. The Battle of Yarm&#363;k, fought near Damascus in 636, saw a small Muslim army defeat a much larger Byzantine force, permanently ending Byzantine rule south of Asia Minor.

A Muslim army achieved victory over a larger force in the Battle of al-Q&#257;disiyyah (c. 636), near the banks of the Euphrates River. During the course of the battle, Muslim *general Sa'ad bin Abu Waqqas* soundly routed the Sassanid army and killed the Persian general Rostam Farrokhz&#257;d.

In 637, after a prolonged siege of Jerusalem, the Muslims finally invaded the city.

Hazrat Umar undertook many *administrative reforms *and closely oversaw public policy, establishing an *advanced administration for newly conquered lands*, including several *new ministries and bureaucracies, as well as ordering a census of all the Muslim territories.* During his reign, the garrison cities (amsar) of *Basra and Kufa were founded *or expanded. In 638, he extended and renovated the Grand Mosque in Mecca and the Mosque of the Prophet in Medina. He also began the process of codifying Islamic law.

*Hazrat Umar was known for his simple, austere lifestyle*. Rather than adopt the pomp and display affected by the rulers of the time, he continued to live much as he had when Muslims were poor and persecuted

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Wounded Healer

The Military Genius-----Khalid Bin Walid

and of course, Salahuddin Ayyubi.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## niaz

salahuldin786 said:


> 1.muhmmed prophet of allah.
> 
> 2.umar bin khattab
> 
> 3.ali bin talib
> 
> 4.khaild bin walid
> 
> 5.tariq bin ziyad
> 
> 6.muhmmed bin qasim
> 
> there are many more muslim commander's that have gone to great height's in the muslim world but these are the most well know and come to mind.



Are we talking about 'warrior' and general or the rank as a companion of the Prophet (?)

Let us not include our Holy Prophet ( PBUH) he had 'divine' guidance. Hazart Umar ( RAA) was no doubt a great fighter but is known in history as the best administrator and Amir al Momineen. He didnot command any battle of note during early years nor do we hear of his military exploits as of Hazrat Amir Hamza, Hazarat Ali or Khalid bin Walid.

If one is truly looking from purely the miliatry point of view, not the fame but actual military prowess.

IMO great muslim warriors are:

1. Ali ibne Abi Talib

2. Hamza bin Abdul Muttalib

3. Khalid bin Walid

4. Saad bin Abi Waqqas ( conquerer of Iran)

5. Mogheira bin Shaiba

6. Abu Muslim Khurasani ( he was the one who threw out the Omayyads and put Abbassides in power).

All of these were early muslim warriors.

6. Musa in Naseer ( overlord of Tariq bin Ziad and real conquerer of North Africa and Spain. Tariq bin Ziad only started the invasion, actual conquest had to wait until Musa arrived himself)

6. Mahmud Ghaznavi

7. Malik Shah Saljuqi

8. Nuruddin Zangi ( His army annihilated second crusade)

9. Salahuddin Ayyubi

10. Sultan Baibars ( Mamluke)

11. Amir Taimur ( Tamerlane)

12. Mehmat the Conquerer ( He captured Constantinople)

13. Sulaiman Qanuni ( His armies reached Vienna)

14. Alauddin Khilji. (He captured nearly all of India)

15. Shibani Khan Ozbeck. He threw out the Taimurids from their homleland ( Including Babur)

15. Sher Shah Suri . If didnt die at an early age, there would have been no Mughal empire.

16. Abdur Rahim Khan e Khanaan. ( principal officer of Akbar)

16. Nadir Shah Afshaar. He was a miliatry genius and his military achievements are comparable to Napolean.

17. Ahmad Shah Abdali.

I have nothing against Tipu Sultan, but from the miliatry point of view, his father Haider Ali was a far better general than Tipu. Tipu is remembered because he died fighting bravely. We are discussing military prowess not bravery. Tipu didnot defeat English ever, whereas Haider Ali defeated English in the 2nd Maysur war. 

Mohammed bin Qasim was very young and only appointed because Hajjaj bin Yousaf wanted someone he could trust to command the expedition. Hajjaj himself was a miliatry commander of great repute. It was he who put an end to the Khilafat of Hazart Abdulla ibne Zubair. It is a travesty to include a very young Mohammed bin Qassim and ignore Hajjaj who was his overlord and far better military commander.

Among Indian ( non muslim) commanders from 7th Century onwards, Prithvi Raj, Shivaji. Mahdji Scindia and Ranjit Singh were very capable. Both Raja Bhagwan Das and Raji Maan Singh were of note among the Akbar's mughal army commanders.

We have a tendency to look at Indian subcontinent and consider it the 'World'. There are many muslim commanders such as Amir Subek Tagin, Alp Arsalan Saljuqi, Bayazit Yildrim in the Middle ages. Later Mohammad Ali Pasha of Egypt, Anwar Bey and Kamal Ata Turk with remarkable military achievements that the subcontinent muslims are not aware off or ignore.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## edi

Khair uddin Barbarossa

Barbarossa Hayreddin Pasha (Turkish: Barbaros Hayreddin Pa&#351;a or H&#305;z&#305;r Hayreddin Pa&#351;a; also H&#305;z&#305;r Reis before being promoted to the rank of Pasha and becoming the Kaptan-&#305; Derya (Fleet Admiral) of the Ottoman Navy) (c. 1478  July 4, 1546), was a Turkish privateer and Ottoman admiral who dominated the Mediterranean for decades. He was born on the island of Midilli (Lesbos in today's Greece) and died in Istanbul.
His war tactics was very intresting.


----------



## niaz

My appologies. Muslims have traditionally been land lubbers and not produced many famous sea going heroes thus this great sea warrior completely slipped my mind.

Khairuddin Pasha was no doubt a great Admiral. Even though intially a pirate and a privateer; for nearly 40 years was master of the Mediterranean. IMO his greatest service was helping the evacuation of thousands of muslims from Andalusia to North Africa following the fall of Garanada.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## edi

you r right.but during ottamon empire muslims advanced in naval wars.khairuddin and his successors ruled meditranian. Hazrat was the first muslim worrior to recognize the importance of naval forces. He orderd to build a naval force.


----------



## amunhotep

why there is no mention of any modern military generals ????

i mean there should be atleast someone from the 20th-century, worth mentioning.

what say guys ???


----------



## Ababeel

In my point of view amny other names can be included:
Muhammad Bin Qasim "Conquerer of Sindh"
Kutaiba Bin Muslim Bahli "Conquerer of Eastern China"
Jalal-al-Din "Tiger of Khwarezm" who stand in front of the Tatarian onslaught.
Imam Mansour & Imam Shamil "The great fighters of Kavkaz"
Omar Mukhtar " The Lion of Desert" in Libyan Independence fight against the Italians.
Bayezid Yildirim or "The Thunderbolt" of Turkey


----------



## niaz

amunhotep said:


> why there is no mention of any modern military generals ????
> 
> i mean there should be atleast someone from the 20th-century, worth mentioning.
> 
> what say guys ???



Only Muslim generals of note of 20th Century were Turkish. Both Anwar Bey and Kamal Ata Turk were very capable generals. No other muslim armies ever fought in the war on their own. Most of muslim world was a colony or a client state except the Turks. 


Quote
In my point of view amny other names can be included:
Muhammad Bin Qasim "Conquerer of Sindh"
Kutaiba Bin Muslim Bahli "Conquerer of Eastern China"
Jalal-al-Din "Tiger of Khwarezm" who stand in front of the Tatarian onslaught.
Imam Mansour & Imam Shamil "The great fighters of Kavkaz"
Omar Mukhtar " The Lion of Desert" in Libyan Independence fight against the Italians.
Bayezid Yildirim or "The Thunderbolt" of Turkey

Unquote.

Any general worthy of note must also be a 'Victor' if not the war, at least in battles.

Omar Mukhtar and Mehdi of Sudan were notable in that sense. Bayazit Yildrim was probably a better general than Mehmet the Conquerer. Bayazit had however the bad luck of facing Amir Taimur, one of the finest military commanders of all times and he lost. No doubt the "Thuderbolt" or Yildrim was a very good military leader. 

Jalal uddin of Khwarism was a hero in the Tipu Sultan style. He carried on the heroic fight with the Mongol forces but without success. In war I would rather have a less capable general but the one who wins!!.


----------



## im_aquarius86

Yusuf bin tashfeen of morroco was a great general too, his victory against, alfanso of castalione and his crusade companions, made the muslim rule of spain to last for few hundred years.


----------



## Titanium

niaz said:


> Jalal uddin of Khwarism was a hero in the Tipu Sultan style. He carried on the heroic fight with the Mongol forces but without success. In war I would rather have a less capable general but the one who wins!!.



Beg to differ here, Jalal Uddin and Tippu Sultan May have lost the Wars, but they were Great Warriors and Generals. Had they were not facing that much overwhelming force... the outcome would have been different. 

Tippusultan was vertually fighting wars from all side, north maratha and Nizam, east British from Chennai, South from travancore the present kerala, West Coorg Raja and British from Bombay, Add the fleet at sea. You can imagine the theater of War.
If just a breathing space was provided of say 5 years, even then the picture would have different. Why, coz the *rockets were in development *, it was just a matter of fine tuning and producing in numbers... alas.

Anyway there were so many generals came and gone in subcontinent who won wars. How many we recall? But Tipu Sultan is one who we remember till day.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## im_aquarius86

you'r right titanium, in case of jalal uddin when he took the command of his army most of his empire was already captured or destroyed by ganghis khan's forces due to the drastic decision of spliting the khwarzim army to defend samarkand and other cities, taken by jalal uddin's father.

even then he did a good job and kept the mongols busy otherwise they would have swept through india ,egypt or even holy land under the command of ganghis khan. 

also after winning a big battle against ganghis khan's son boto khan he could not press on the attack because of a tribal clash within his army, because of which his forces were depleted by great number.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Titanium

im_aquarius86 said:


> also after winning a big battle against ganghis khan's son boto khan he could not press on the attack because of a tribal clash within his army, because of which his forces were depleted by great number.



All for a horse, who should have...pity.


----------



## Majnun

Mustafa Kemal Pasha Ataturk
First, as a leiutenant colonel and colonel in the 1st World War, his military skill saved the Dardanelles Strait during the Battle of Gallipoli. Then, during the Turkish War of Independence, fighting three countries (Armenia, Greece and France) and going against the British, he created a Turkish nation. He turned it into the strongest Muslim nation in the world and it now also has the best military in the world.


----------



## Scorpius

Timur also known as Tamerlane. 

His empire at it's height of power:



Probably not a lovely person but a very competent general and warrior.

Timur - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## courageneverdies

Indeed, Saladin was one of the Greatest Heroes and Warriors of Islam. His achievments were
1) defeating Guy in Battle of Hattins
2) Getting back Jerusalem from Crusaders
3) Peace and prosperity for all Muslims, Christians and even Jews
4) His art of forgiving. He even forgave the Knights fighting against him
5) Re-claiming many cities including Acre back
6) united both Shiahs and Sunnih groups against Crusaders
7) Withstood against Richard the lionhearted (England), King Phillips (France) and Barbarossa's army (Germany)

These were the greatest achievments of his life.

KIT Over n Out.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## HK-47

all history.all of them;each of them belong to the past.
do we have anyone alive among the great warriors category?


----------



## AlpErTunga

My list is;

1- Hz Muhammed SAV
2- Hz Ali RA (the lion of the Allah)
3- Hz Omer RA ( the sword of the justice)
4- Selahaddin Eyyubi (nightmare of crusaders)
5- Battal Bilal Gazi (seljuki warrior)
6- Malkocoglu Bali Bey (seljuki warrior)
7- Sultan Alparslan Gazi (conqueror of Anatolia)
8- Sultan Kilicarslan (one man-castle of Anatolia during the Crusades) 
9- Alaeddin Keykubat (tamer of Byzantine)
10- Y&#305;ld&#305;r&#305;m Bayezit (Ottoman Sultan of supreme honour)
11- Fatih Sultan Mehmet ( Conqueror of Istanbul)
12- Ulubatli Hasan (the warrior who waved the first Turkish flag over Istanbul, he was hit by tens of arrows but succeeded to wave holy sancak) 
13- Yavuz Sultan Selim (he destroyed Memluks and gain the first Ottoman caliphate title)
14- Kanuni Sultan Suleyman (he ruled all world during his sultanate)
15- Admiral Barbaros Hayrettin Pasa (he controlled all Mediterrennean sea) 
16- Nene Hatun (woman warrior during Russo-Ottoman War)
17- Kara Fatma (woman warrior during Asia Minor War against to allied powers)
18- Marshall Gazi Mustafa Kemal Ataturk (the only nondefeated victorious muslim commander during the WW1, victor of Greece's Asia-Minor Campaign and Turkish Independence War, the founder of modern Turkish Republic)
19- Sutcu Imam (civillian warrior from KahramanMaras, fought against to French Army)
20- Sahin Bey (civillian warrior from GaziAntep, fought against to French Army)
21- Full-General Kazim Karabekir (he safed Turkish-Russian borders during the allied campaign against to Turkiye)
22- Brigadier General Ismet Inonu (he won the first Turkish offensive battle for 300 years in Sakarya Battle)
23- Muhammed Ali Cinnah (he gave a national struggle against to the western imperialism and founded the Pakistani Republic)
24- Colonel Celal Dora (he defeated crowded Chineese Armies with a regiment)
25- Martyr(Shehid) Pilot 1st Lieutenant Cengiz Topel (he was the first pilot who bomb the Greek anti-aircraft centers as he knew he will be shehid; during the Turkish Peace Operation of Cyprus...)


----------



## Majnun

I've already said I think Ataturk was the greatest. Greatest Muslim generals in my opinion were:

1) Mustafa Kemal Ataturk
2) Khalid bin Walid (RA)
3) Salahuddin Ayyubi (RA)
4) Bayazid
5) Tariq bin Ziyad
6) Captain Ahsan Malik (Captain in 1971 War)
7) Ali (RA)
8) Babur


----------



## asaad-ul-islam

I don't think there's any doubt, Rasulallah (&#1589;&#1604;&#1610; &#1575;&#1604;&#1604;&#1607; &#1593;&#1604;&#1610;&#1607; &#1608; &#1587;&#1604;&#1605; ) was the greatest of generals. the greatest known warriors among him would testify to that.

Ali (&#1585;&#1590;&#1610; &#1575;&#1604;&#1604;&#1607; &#1593;&#1606;&#1607;&#1605; ) said: *'When the war become hot and we met and faced the enemy, we shielded ourselves behind the Messenger of Allah (&#1589;&#1604;&#1610; &#1575;&#1604;&#1604;&#1607; &#1593;&#1604;&#1610;&#1607; &#1608; &#1587;&#1604;&#1605; ) and there was no one who was closer to the enemy than he was'. *(Ahmed)
Ali (&#1585;&#1590;&#1610; &#1575;&#1604;&#1604;&#1607; &#1593;&#1606;&#1607;&#1605; ) said: *"When the battle used to become fierce and the eyes seemed to be coming out of the sockets, we were wont to look for the Prophet in order to find a refuge behind him. Then, we found noneclosing up with the enemy as the Prophet. This was how it happened in Badr; we were taking shelter behind the Prophet who was then going at the enemy more closely than anyone of us."* 

Al-Baraa ibn Aazib (&#1585;&#1590;&#1610; &#1575;&#1604;&#1604;&#1607; &#1593;&#1606;&#1607;&#1605; ) said: *'Wallahi, if the war become severe we would shield ourselves from the enemy, by getting behind the Prophet, and the brave one from amongst us was the one who would stand next to the Messenger of Allah'.* (Muslim)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## asaad-ul-islam

Ali (RA) would also be on the top of my list. No one can match him in greatness on the battlefield. He was known for being the ultimate warrior, especially after Khyber where he was given the standard of Islam.

Khalid bin Waleed(RA) would be the next one on my list. His name "Saifullah" or "Sword of Allah" pretty much says it all. Rasulullah valued his opinions and strategies, let alone his bravery and courage.

Other than people from among the Sahaba, I would pretty much recommend Salahuddin Ayubi. He was a charismatic leader who managed to unite everyone against the crusader threat.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Alp_Arslan

SMustafaMoiz said:


> I've already said I think Ataturk was the greatest. Greatest Muslim generals in my opinion were:
> 
> 1) Mustafa Kemal Ataturk
> 2) Khalid bin Walid (RA)
> 3) Salahuddin Ayyubi (RA)
> 4) Bayazid
> 5) Tariq bin Ziyad
> 6) Captain Ahsan Malik (Captain in 1971 War)
> 7) Ali (RA)
> 8) Babur



As-Salaamu Alaikum

Wat nonsense do we have here? Some1 praisin the 1 who brought down the Islamic System, cant believe there are some idle people around who do not use their intellect. Wat else can 1 say?


----------



## Always Neutral

Alp_Arslan said:


> As-Salaamu Alaikum
> 
> Wat nonsense do we have here? Some1 praisin the 1 who brought down the Islamic System, cant believe there are some idle people around who do not use their intellect. Wat else can 1 say?



Why ? The title of the thread is Good Muslim Generals not good Islamic Generals.

The progress in Turkey is thanks to their generals.

Regards


----------



## Alp_Arslan

Always Neutral said:


> Why ? The title of the thread is Good Muslim Generals not good Islamic Generals.
> 
> The progress in Turkey is thanks to their generals.
> 
> Regards



As-Salaams Is a muslim not one whos religion is Islam?


----------



## Alp_Arslan

As-Salaamu Alaikum

Most probably the best Islamic hence Muslim General was Khalid Ibn Walid (RA) a.k.a. SayfUllah. I am not going to argue or explain why because his legacy anwers for itself.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Always Neutral

Alp_Arslan said:


> As-Salaams Is a muslim not one whos religion is Islam?



Dear Als,

By that logic do you mean Turkey is an Islamic state ?

Regards


----------



## Usman Mahmood Iqbal

At the moment I dont think, there is any true Muslim State in world except Iran.


----------



## haviZsultan

Alp_Arslan said:


> As-Salaamu Alaikum
> 
> Most probably the best Islamic hence Muslim General was Khalid Ibn Walid (RA) a.k.a. SayfUllah. I am not going to argue or explain why because his legacy anwers for itself.



Yaaa i go for Khalid bin Walid and Musa bin Nusair... also Salauddin Ayubi made some conquests


----------



## su-47

What about Tamerlane, Akbar and Babur


----------



## salman nedian

su-47 said:


> What about Tamerlane, Akbar and Babur



Mehmood Ghaznavi, Syed Ahmed Shaheed ,Babur and Aurangzeb Alamgir were also great warriors.


----------



## Alp_Arslan

Always Neutral said:


> Dear Als,
> 
> By that logic do you mean Turkey is an Islamic state ?
> 
> Regards



What i meant was in relation to the topic; 'Great Muslim Warriors'; not to the secular government of Turkey. There is no mention of Turkey in my comment so please read carefully before posting your comment.

Regards


----------



## yashchauhan

Akbar the great!


----------



## Airboss

Marathaman said:


> Since when did Tipu Sultan become a Pakistani? [/QUOTE
> 
> Since you failed to read or understand the title of the thread.....
> 
> 'The Great Muslim Warriors'
> 
> Hence, that includes 'Tipu Sultan' also. (Who Happens to fall into the category of the aforementioned thread. 'The Great Muslim Warriors'!!!!)


----------



## Bill Longley

Greatest Warriors of ISLAM and Pakistan are

1) Ali Ibn Abi Talib
2) Hussain Ibn e Ali
3) Hamza ibn Abdul Muttalib
4) Abbas Ibn e Ali
5) Khalid Bin Waleed
6) Hurr 
7) Salahuddin Ayubi
8) Major Shabbir Sharif
9) Capt Kernal Sher Khan
10) Naik Mahfooz
11) Sub Atta Muhammad


----------



## Al-zakir

I am sure some you already mention our well known Islamic warriors and they are the pride of ummat-e-muslimah. We love them for their contribution toward din-e-Islam. 

*Ikhtiyar Uddin Muhammad Bin Bakhtiyar Khalji*

Very well known when comes to the region of Bengal or present day Bangladesh however may not be well known in other part of Islamic world. 

*He is the founder of the Khilji dynasty and is considered to be the first Muslim ruler of Bengal. *


Ikhtiyar Uddin Muhammad Bin Bakhtiyar Khalji - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Xtremeownage

The Prophet Muhammad (SAW) is truly the best man ever!

The Prophet Muhammad (sal Allahu alay he wasalam, peace be upon him) is the most honest, righteous, pious, kind, sincere, handsome, humble, knowledgeable, pure, honourable, wise, and GREATEST of all of God's creation!

The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH/SAW) is the closest one to Allah (SWT)! 

Some others:

Hazrat Ali (AS), the lion of Allah, who struck fear in to the enemies.

Hazrat Umar (Rad), who brought justice and strength to the battlefield!

Hazrat Abu Bakr (Rad), who fought as hard as he could and never left the holy Prophet's (SAW) side!

Hazrat Usman (Rad), an other amazing sahaba!

Hazrat Khalid bin Walid (Rad) who never lost a battle, and struck fear in to the hearts of the Roman and Persian empires. 

Other soldiers/general's that may or may not have been mentioned:

Salahuddin (Rah)

Sultan Mehmet II (Rah)

Tariq Bin Ziyad (Rah)

Muhammad bin Qasim (Rah)

Suleiman - Ottoman Sultan


Some comtemporary heroes:







1. Captain Muhammad Sarwar Shaheed (1910&#8211;July 27, 1948), 6/8 Punjab
2. Major Muhammad Tufail Shaheed (1914&#8211;August 7, 1958), 1 Battlion East Pakistan Rifles
3. Major Raja Aziz Bhatti Shaheed (1928&#8211;September 10, 1965), 17 Punjab
4. Major Muhammad Akram Shaheed (1938&#8211;1971), 4 FF
5. Pilot Officer Rashid Minhas Shaheed (1951&#8211;August 20, 1971), PAF Training Squadron
6. Major Shabbir Sharif Shaheed (1943&#8211;December 6, 1971), 6 FF
7. Sawar Muhammad Hussain Shaheed(1949&#8211;December 10, 1971), 20 Lancers
8. Lance Naik Muhammad Mahfuz Shaheed (1944&#8211;December 17, 1971), 15 Punjab
9. Captain Karnal Sher Khan Shaheed (1970&#8211;July 5, 1999), 12 NLI
10. Havaildar Lalak Jan Shaheed (1967&#8211;July 7, 1999), 12 NLI.
11. Saif Ali Janjua(25 April 1922 ,26th April 1948)

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## My-Analogous

"Yeh Ghazi teray pur-israr ban-daay jinhay to nay bikh-shah yah zokh-e-khudai"

in my opion every person how stood for Jihad is greatest warrior and since we stop Jihad so there is no living legend.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kambojaric

Its hard to put them in a rank from 1 to 10 because they all had different contributions to make. Instead i will just mentioned the general and his achievements.'

Bairam Khan: Have seen many people here say Akbar as the greatest general but it was Akbars generals, not Akbar who reestablished and spread the Mughal Empire. Bairam Khan is the man who won the 2nd Battle of Panipat for the muslims. A Hindu named Hemu had taken over after Sher Shah's weak suri decendents fell from power. It was thus at the battle of Panipat that the fate of the Indian subcontinent was decided for the nest 400, 500 years. And who was the general of that battle? Bairam Khan. Akbar was just a child at that time!

Berke: The grandson of Genghis Khan and first Mongol ruler to adopt Islam. His horde known as the Golden horde spearheaded Islam into Russia and Eastern Europe. The Golden Horde dominated Ukraine, Western Russia and Western Central Asia for the next 300 years.

Alp Arsalan: Arguably the founder of the state of Turkey due to his victory over the Byzantines at Manzikert which pushed the Byzantines back towards Constantinople whilst allowing the Turks to enter Anatolia from Central Asia.

Zafar Khan: General of the Delhi Sultunate. Defeated a Mongol army form the Chagatay Horde(which hadnt become Muslim yet) despite being heavily outnumbered (Some say the Mongol army was greater than 200 000 though if this is accurate is questionable) and thus saved Pakistan and North India from what Persia and Iraq had experianced after Mongol invasions.

General Shahbaz Khan Kamboh: Another one of Akbar's generals. Redded Bengal and Orissa and parts of the Deccan to the Mughal Empire as well as breaking down numerous uprises by the Rajputs and Pashtuns. He was also an Orthodox Sunni much to the dislike of Akbar, and he refused to bow to him as well as refusing to join Akbars Din-e-Illahi religion. However he was tolerated due to his great military skills. (he is my personal favourite because he like me is a Kamboh and his cavalry was entirely made up of Kambohs  )

Added to this are of course the Arab generals but you have already mentioned alot about them so no point in saying more.


----------



## dolphin

The ones i've studied and are of great interest historically (as well as being Muslims) i would say:

!. Kublai khan
2. Tamerlane
3. Saladin

Many of their military tactics have been studied to a great extent by western scholars or philosophers.

There are many others as mentioned in previous posts. I respect them all and wouldn't consider ranking them. They all are great warriors in some respects.


----------



## Kambojaric

dolphin said:


> The ones i've studied and are of great interest historically (as well as being Muslims) i would say:
> 
> !. Kublai khan
> 2. Tamerlane
> 3. Saladin
> 
> Many of their military tactics have been studied to a great extent by western scholars or philosophers.
> 
> There are many others as mentioned in previous posts. I respect them all and wouldn't consider ranking them. They all are great warriors in some respects.



Brother, eventhough Kublai Khan is no doubt one of the great generals of history he wasnt a muslim. He is of course most famous for his failed seaborne invasions of Japan which failed due to bad weather. 
Otherwise Saladin and Tamerlane are no doubt great muslim leaders though i on a personal note dont like Timur as much. At the Battle of Ankara he defeated the new rising muslim power in Europe, the Ottomans. This defeat was shattering for the Ottomans who had fast been expanding into Europe at this point. They eventually recovered but still it took them another 40, 50 years to establish themselves again at the same level as they were before Timurs invasion. This 40, 50 years was a time that could have been used to exapnd further into the Balkans. Unfortunatly another muslim leader had to stop them from doing that!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## duhastmish

*The greatest of them all !!!*


he was the greatest warrier to walk on this planet. 


h
*SALADIN *

he was one person even opposition loved.


----------



## Prometheus

edi said:


> Introduce your favorite Great muslim worrior.




My vote to Sher Shah Suri
Sher Shah Suri - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## dolphin

Hamza Iqbal said:


> Brother, eventhough Kublai Khan is no doubt one of the great generals of history he wasnt a muslim. He is of course most famous for his failed seaborne invasions of Japan which failed due to bad weather.
> Otherwise Saladin and Tamerlane are no doubt great muslim leaders though i on a personal note dont like Timur as much. At the Battle of Ankara he defeated the new rising muslim power in Europe, the Ottomans. This defeat was shattering for the Ottomans who had fast been expanding into Europe at this point. They eventually recovered but still it took them another 40, 50 years to establish themselves again at the same level as they were before Timurs invasion. This 40, 50 years was a time that could have been used to exapnd further into the Balkans. Unfortunatly another muslim leader had to stop them from doing that!




Yes my mistake with Kublai Khan. He had great military philosophy though and I have respect for him for this purpose.

Tamer was a ruthless leader and there are many scenes throughout his life whereby he committed such atrocities for example when the people of Damascus were subjected to all sorts of torture:

Ibn Khaldun writes:

*"It continued to burn until it reached the Great Mosque. The flames mounted to its roofs (the Umayyad Mosque), melting the lead in it, and the ceiling and the walls collapsed. This was an absolutely dastardly and abominable deed but the changes in the affairs are in the hands of Allah s.w.t- he does with his creatures as he wishes, and decides in his kingdom as he wills."*

There is great controversy as to why Tamer ordered the mosque to be burnt. However either due to the governor sending four virgins, which Tamer decided to butcher and hang on the city walls to become burnt eventually here, or as Schiltbeger, the Bavarian whose accounts are littered with inconsistencies claims that a bishop and his priests pleading for their life were sent to the mosque with their families for protection, and later Tamer ordered it to be ignited.

Anyway despite Tamer committing such crimes, he remembered Allah s.w.t a great deal and comments on the Ottoman war:
He claims to have never wanted the war* because I knew that your troops were always at war with infidels. I have used all possible ways of mildness; and my intention was, if you have harkened to my counsels, and consented to a peace, to have given you powerful succours, both of money and troops, to carry on the war for religion with greater vigour, and to exterminate the enemies of Mohammed (S.A.W)." And continues... "To return thanks to Allah s.w.t for my good fortune in this battle, I will neither treat you nor your friends ill; and you may rest satisfied as to that point."*

Also from an Islamic perspective, despite him subjecting even Muslims to great horror, his final words were:

*"I know my soul is about to leave my body and I am to be taken to the throne of Allah s.w.t who gives life, and takes it away. I beg you shed no tears at my death. Rather than tearing your clothes and running around like madmen, pray to Allah to have mercy on me. Say Allahu Akhbar, and recite Fatiiha, to comfort my soul. Since Allah enabled me to give laws to Iran and Turan so that throughout those kingdoms the great do not oppress the poor, I hope he will forgive my sins, which are without number. .Remember to do everything I have told you to keep peace and public order. Always keep yourselves informed about the affairs of your subjects. Be valiant and keep your sword in your hand with courage that like me you may enjoy your long reign and a vast empire. I have purged Iran and Turan of their enemies and disturbers of the peace and I have brought them justice and prosperity. If you follow my last wishes and make justice the guide of all your actions, the empire will long remain in your hands. But if discord and disunity creep in, ill fortune awaits you. Enemies will start wars which will be difficult to end and irreparable damage will befall the state and religion."*
At 8pm Tamer recited "La Ilaaha illallah" and passed away

Throughout his life events he would return to pray following the atrocities he committed. Allah s.w.t always sends great people on this dunya for a purpose; Allah s.w.t knows best what this purpose was specifically, though during Tamers time Muslims were not united following the Islamic renaissance period due to money and greed and something needed to happen. History repeats itself. 

He was definitely and last and greatest conqueror of the world. 

Reference:
Justin Marozzi (2005). Tamerlane: Sword of Islam, Conqueror of the World. London: Harper.


----------



## CHTYA_nandan

Sorry for my ignorance but wasnt your prophet too a warrior?? So for you all, it must be him who is the greatest muslim warrior??


----------



## dolphin

CHTYA_nandan said:


> Sorry for my ignorance but wasnt your prophet too a warrior?? So for you all, it must be him who is the greatest muslim warrior??



err...yeah of course. But we are talking about all historic muslim conquerors. He Muhammad S.A.W was definitely the first and an inspirational leader of all muslim leaders to come.


----------



## dolphin

The Seljuks were cool!


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Tipu the magnificent....
Salahudin Ayubi
Hazrat Ali Ra
Hazrat Khalid Bin Waleed RA
Hazrat Usman RA
MM.Alam
Sarwar Shaheed Shaheed
Captain Sher Khan \\
Major Aziz Bhatti \\
All shaheeds 
and Unsung heroes of Operation Thunderstorm(Bunner)
Swat
Waziristan
And all the wars in which they sacrifised there lifes in.
May God ALLAH ALMIGHTY BLESS THEM ALL.


----------



## civilarmy

1.ahmed shah baba
2.khushal khan khattak
3.sallahudin ayubi
4.khalid bin walid
5.yusufzai khan
and last its our sher colnel sher khan shaheed he was also a true pakistani warrior he killed 20 indian soldier alone..mashallah.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## niaz

civilarmy said:


> 1.ahmed shah baba
> 2.khushal khan khattak
> 3.sallahudin ayubi
> 4.khalid bin walid
> 5.yusufzai khan
> and last its our sher colnel sher khan shaheed he was also a true pakistani warrior he killed 20 indian soldier alone..mashallah.



Ahmed Shah Baba or Ahmed Shah Abadali (later called Durr-e-Dauran) was no doubt a very able commander. He is however historically rated far below his master and employer Nadir Shah Afshaar of Iran.

Afghanistan as a country did not exist before Ahmad Shah Sadozai; his reverence among the Afghans is therefore understandable. However to rate as No.1 Muslim warrior specailly above Khalid bin Walid (RA) appears to be extreme. 

Ahmad Shah&#8217;s initial promotion as Commander of the Adbali contingent was due to the fact that Nadir Shah was fighting Hussein Khan of the Ghilzai tribe who along with brother Mahmud Khan had plundered Iran. After Nadir Shah captured Kandhar from Hussein Khan in 1731, he expelled Ghilzais from Kandhar; their adversaries (Abdalis) were given Kandhar to live and one of their clan (Ahmed Shah) was made chief of the Abdali contingent. It is a pity that while a minor commander of Nadir Shah is listed, Nadir Shah is ignored.

For the record, Ahmad Shah probably fought more than two dozen campaigns is his life time; only two were against the Sikhs (1751) and Marhattas (1761); all others were against fellow Muslims. This includes capture of Herat from the Shah Rukh, grandson of Ahmed Shah&#8217;s benefactor Nadir Shah.

Inclusion of Khushal Khan Khattak is also strange. Khushal Khan is famous more for his poetry than his military prowess. To the best of my humble knowledge, his only campaign of note is when Pashtun clans led by Khushal Khan ambushed a Mughal army under Amir Khan, the Regional Governor in the Khyber Pass in 1672. However Emperor Aurangzeb quelled the rebellion a couple of years later. Khushal Khan died in 1689 without any additional action to his name.

This illustrates how subjective the list of great Muslim warriors can be.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ahmad

niaz said:


> Afghanistan as a country did not exist before Ahmad Shah Sadozai;



It existed and its name was Khurasan. Ahmad Shah Abdali himself belonged to a country called Khursan. Famous Mahmoud Ghaznavi also belonged to Khurasan.


----------



## waraich66

Ahmad said:


> It existed and its name was Khurasan. Ahmad Shah Abdali himself belonged to a country called Khursan. Famous Mahmoud Ghaznavi also belonged to Khurasan.



I think Greatest warrior of Islam will be who conquored hearts of people , Nazamudinaulia RA, Shams Tabrez RA,Baba fareed RA,Ali Hajwari RA,Baba Bakht Jamal RA of Jhagi Sareef(my grand grand father) .

Islam never spread with power of sword but power of love

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Old School

It is a very interesting thread for people like myself who spend a lot of time in understanding Command and control (C2). A great general is the one who has deep understanding in the C2 principles and who is neither shy of executing these principles in the battle field.
By the way, the best way to find out a great general is to first look at his adversaries. Alexander the Great was tested at the Battle of Arbela which we still study at the war college.


----------



## Ahmad

Fundamentalist said:


> I think Greatest warrior of Islam will be who conquored hearts of people



thats right.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## civilarmy

niaz said:


> Ahmed Shah Baba or Ahmed Shah Abadali (later called Durr-e-Dauran) was no doubt a very able commander. He is however historically rated far below his master and employer Nadir Shah Afshaar of Iran.
> 
> Afghanistan as a country did not exist before Ahmad Shah Sadozai; his reverence among the Afghans is therefore understandable. However to rate as No.1 Muslim warrior specailly above Khalid bin Walid (RA) appears to be extreme.
> 
> Ahmad Shahs initial promotion as Commander of the Adbali contingent was due to the fact that Nadir Shah was fighting Hussein Khan of the Ghilzai tribe who along with brother Mahmud Khan had plundered Iran. After Nadir Shah captured Kandhar from Hussein Khan in 1731, he expelled Ghilzais from Kandhar; their adversaries (Abdalis) were given Kandhar to live and one of their clan (Ahmed Shah) was made chief of the Abdali contingent. It is a pity that while a minor commander of Nadir Shah is listed, Nadir Shah is ignored.
> 
> For the record, Ahmad Shah probably fought more than two dozen campaigns is his life time; only two were against the Sikhs (1751) and Marhattas (1761); all others were against fellow Muslims. This includes capture of Herat from the Shah Rukh, grandson of Ahmed Shahs benefactor Nadir Shah.
> 
> Inclusion of Khushal Khan Khattak is also strange. Khushal Khan is famous more for his poetry than his military prowess. To the best of my humble knowledge, his only campaign of note is when Pashtun clans led by Khushal Khan ambushed a Mughal army under Amir Khan, the Regional Governor in the Khyber Pass in 1672. However Emperor Aurangzeb quelled the rebellion a couple of years later. Khushal Khan died in 1689 without any additional action to his name.
> 
> This illustrates how subjective the list of great Muslim warriors can be.



the history is right but if u can see the most powerfull nd undefeatable warriors in muslims they were pashtuns bcuz they fought with every super power of the world if its alexander or british empire or mughals mongols nd many more.snd still u can see pashtuns r fighting with superpowers with all westren powers.


----------



## waraich66

civilarmy said:


> the history is right but if u can see the most powerfull nd undefeatable warriors in muslims they were pashtuns bcuz they fought with every super power of the world if its alexander or british empire or mughals mongols nd many more.snd still u can see pashtuns r fighting with superpowers with all westren powers.



Jatt ruled Pushtoon (Raja Ranjeet Singh),its mean Jatt are super warrior nation.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ahmad

I wonder what we mean by great MUSLIM WARRIOR? Fighting and going to other people's land and killing muslims/non muslims dont make them good people or good muslims, why should i like them just becuase they captured here and there? We need to only list those guys who have done some positive achievements, dont just give their names only, but mention their achievments too, so we all know what they have done? Secondly, there are many other great warriors who never knew about sword, but their pens conqured everywhere. For me the military muslim heros is Salahudin Ayubi who liberated Palestine. The non military heros are are: Alama Iqbal, Hafiz Shirazi, Saadi Shirazi, M.J.Mohammad Balkhi(Rumi), Ali Sina Balkhi etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## civilarmy

Fundamentalist said:


> Jatt ruled Pushtoon (Raja Ranjeet Singh),its mean Jatt are super warrior nation.



lol sorry man pashtons r ruled by no one go back nd see the history.
pashtons defeated all jatts nd matts..


----------



## waraich66

civilarmy said:


> lol sorry man pashtons r ruled by no one go back nd see the history.
> pashtons defeated all jatts nd matts..



Ranjit Singh in order to further subdue the Afghanis ordered Hari Singh Nalwa and Prince Sher Singh to remain in North West Frontier province. He also ordered them to construct series of small forts all along the highway leading to Khyber pass. He correctly had assessed the importance of Khyber pass., and thus organized the defenses of his frontier with Kabul. Hari Singh Nalwa was given governorship of North West Frontier province which he ruled with firm hand. Even to this day, Afghanis remember Hari Singh Nalwa as "the only general who thoroughly defeated and humiliated them"

Battle of Naushera, opened gateway to NWFP


Haripur in Hazara Division in the North-West Frontier Province of Pakistan is named after him.

Nalwa had a number of conversations with British, French and German royalty, in which they conversed as equals. Baron Charles Hughart remembers him fondly in his memoirs on travelling through the Peshawar region, in which he was given a portrait of Nalwa from the man himself. Hari Singh Nalwa spoke, wrote and read Persian as well as the Indian languages, and was familiar with world politics, including details about the European states. *If Nalwa had lived, many feel that the British would never have been able to hold or enter the Punjab. He beat the Afghans at Attock Fort and held Afghanistan, something which the British failed to do*. As Sir Lepel Griffen states: "Hari Singh Nalwa, the man with the terror of whose name Afghan mothers used to quiet their fretful children..." As was often the case with his battles, he did so at the request of Hindus living in this region, for they prevailed upon him to free them from the religious tax imposed upon them by the Mughal rulers. 

Hari Singh earned the name 'Nalwa' after he killed a tiger, as Baron Hugel, a European traveller writes in "Travels in Kashmir & the Punjab: " I surprised him by knowledge whence he had gained the appellation of Nalwa, and of his having cloven the head of a tiger, who had already seized him as its prey. He told the Diwan to bring some drawings and gave me his portrait, in the act of killing the beast."


----------



## Vassnti

A great general is respected by his own a great warrior is respected even by his enemies that would have to go to Saladin.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## niaz

Ahmad said:


> It existed and its name was Khurasan. Ahmad Shah Abdali himself belonged to a country called Khursan. Famous Mahmoud Ghaznavi also belonged to Khurasan.



Khurasan was a very loose term and it referred to all areas east of the land of Tus up to the Amu Darya; mainly eastern most provinces of Iran. Lands beyond the Amu Darya referred to as Turan. This was considered part of greater Iran and dynasties that ruled Iran after the Arab conquest such as Tahirids, Samanids, Ghaznavids originated from Khurasan. Mahmud of Ghazni was a Tajik as you are aware.


The land that is known as Afghanistan today of course existed since the dawn of times. Just as land which is now Pakistan always existed. But the name Pakistan did not exist before 1947. 

What I meant was that the region in question was not called Afghanistan (Land of the Afghans). Even today many Tajiks claim that Pashtuns only constitute about 40% population of Afghanistan. There are a lot of Tajiks, Uzbecks, Hazaras, Turcoman etc who are natives of the region but the name is still Afghanistan which is because of Ahmad Shah Sadozai Durrani. Thus Pashtuns are thus quite right to honor and revere him. He was indeed a great man.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## civilarmy

Fundamentalist said:


> Ranjit Singh in order to further subdue the Afghanis ordered Hari Singh Nalwa and Prince Sher Singh to remain in North West Frontier province. He also ordered them to construct series of small forts all along the highway leading to Khyber pass. He correctly had assessed the importance of Khyber pass., and thus organized the defenses of his frontier with Kabul. Hari Singh Nalwa was given governorship of North West Frontier province which he ruled with firm hand. Even to this day, Afghanis remember Hari Singh Nalwa as "the only general who thoroughly defeated and humiliated them"
> 
> Battle of Naushera, opened gateway to NWFP
> 
> 
> Haripur in Hazara Division in the North-West Frontier Province of Pakistan is named after him.
> 
> Nalwa had a number of conversations with British, French and German royalty, in which they conversed as equals. Baron Charles Hughart remembers him fondly in his memoirs on travelling through the Peshawar region, in which he was given a portrait of Nalwa from the man himself. Hari Singh Nalwa spoke, wrote and read Persian as well as the Indian languages, and was familiar with world politics, including details about the European states. *If Nalwa had lived, many feel that the British would never have been able to hold or enter the Punjab. He beat the Afghans at Attock Fort and held Afghanistan, something which the British failed to do*. As Sir Lepel Griffen states: "Hari Singh Nalwa, the man with the terror of whose name Afghan mothers used to quiet their fretful children..." As was often the case with his battles, he did so at the request of Hindus living in this region, for they prevailed upon him to free them from the religious tax imposed upon them by the Mughal rulers.
> 
> Hari Singh earned the name 'Nalwa' after he killed a tiger, as Baron Hugel, a European traveller writes in "Travels in Kashmir & the Punjab: " I surprised him by knowledge whence he had gained the appellation of Nalwa, and of his having cloven the head of a tiger, who had already seized him as its prey. He told the Diwan to bring some drawings and gave me his portrait, in the act of killing the beast."



he was in peshawar city he never fought with tribes bcuz he was scared nd yeah he also ran away like cowards with his army to hindustan...and bro afghan pukthons or pakistani pukhtons they hav a long history and they were never ruled or destroyed nd nawal singh never conquered pakhtons the real pukhtons not peshawari pukhtons...nd sing lost alot of wars from tribes who use to live in areas of waziristan swat nd mardan...


----------



## Ahmad

*Khurasan was a very loose term and it referred to all areas east of the land of Tus up to the Amu Darya; mainly eastern most provinces of Iran. Lands beyond the Amu Darya referred to as Turan. This was considered part of greater Iran and dynasties that ruled Iran after the Arab conquest such as Tahirids, Samanids, Ghaznavids originated from Khurasan. Mahmud of Ghazni was a Tajik as you are aware.*

Dear Niazi,

The area which is today Afghanistan and eastern part of Iran which was Khurasan had their independent strong governments especially after the emergence of the Safarids and before that the Tahirids, and then the Samanids and Ghaznavids ,and as you rightly mentioned all of these dynastis were tajiks, as a matter of fact the achievments and pride of afghanistan basically goes to this era of thier history. they controlled Iran, not the other way around, so i dont understand how they didnt have a name for that vast country while they had strong governmetns for that. i am tajik myself, but i personally not fond of Mahmoud because of indian invasions which we didnt need it, apart from that he had some brilliant achievments in literature/poetry promotion as well as establishing strong goverment which lasted many years to come.

*The land that is known as Afghanistan today of course existed since the dawn of times. Just as land which is now Pakistan always existed. But the name Pakistan did not exist before 1947. *

Yes, but afghanistan had a name for it.

*What I meant was that the region in question was not called Afghanistan (Land of the Afghans). Even today many Tajiks claim that Pashtuns only constitute about 40% population of Afghanistan. There are a lot of Tajiks, Uzbecks, Hazaras, Turcoman etc who are natives of the region but the name is still Afghanistan which is because of Ahmad Shah Sadozai Durrani. Thus Pashtuns are thus quite right to honor and revere him. He was indeed a great man.*

Tajiks are the natives of that country and their history goes quite long in the region as well as afghanistan. as you rightly said that the term afghan only represent the pashtoon side while it has nothing to do with 60% of the population. i personally dont care about the name things, even if they call it a peanut i wont be bothered as long as there is peace and prosperity, but it is an issue to alot of other people and this name has sadly caused alot of problems. the name afghanistan mainly came into emergence during Amanullah khan Shah Shuja, during Shah Shuja time the british in their letters intentionally replaced the term khurasan to afghanistan.


----------



## Avatar

Fundamentalist said:


> I think Greatest warrior of Islam will be who conquored hearts of people , Nazamudinaulia RA, Shams Tabrez RA,Baba fareed RA,Ali Hajwari RA,Baba Bakht Jamal RA of Jhagi Sareef(my grand grand father) .
> 
> Islam never spread with power of sword but power of love



How exactly did Islam spread to India ?


----------



## Ahmad

Avatar said:


> How exactly did Islam spread to India ?



Probably by sword. Islam has spread throughout the world both by sowrd and people accepted it volunterly. Persia(today Iran), Khurasan(today Afghanistan), Samarqand, Bukhara, Tajkistan, Turkmenistan, today pakistan etc were introduced to islam by force, other places such as indonesia, malaysia, philipines etc accepted islam due to peaceful means.


----------



## JonAsad

Avatar said:


> How exactly did Islam spread to India ?



ignorant .... if islam was spread by sword in India then i think every hindu should have become a muslim by the time Angarez Invade.
800 years i say isn't it enough to convert every single hindu to muslim?? by sword i mean.

Read history of great emperors like babur and Co when they ruled India

Here is an interesting read 

http://www.whyislam.org/SocialOrder/Jihad/WasIslamSpreadBytheSword/tabid/116/Default.aspx

Cheers


----------



## JonAsad

I think Haji Mahmood Shams aka *General Zheng He* was a great Muslim General

Zheng He - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## JonAsad

Ahmad said:


> Probably by sword. Islam has spread throughout the world both by sowrd and people accepted it volunterly. Persia(today Iran), Khurasan(today Afghanistan), Samarqand, Bukhara, Tajkistan, Turkmenistan, today pakistan etc were introduced to islam by force, other places such as indonesia, malaysia, philipines etc accepted islam due to peaceful means.



Ahmad read this
" An article in Reader's Digest Almanac', year book 1986, gave the statistics of the increase of percentage of the major religions of the world in half a century from 1934 to 1984. This article also appeared in The Plain Truth' magazine. At the top was Islam, which increased by 235%, and Christianity had increased only by 47%. May one ask, Which war took place in this century which converted millions of people to Islam"

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JonAsad

Islam is the fatstest growing religion of the World right now. Simple googling will relieve that. I am not talking about natural growth like Muslim children brought up as Muslims or Christians parents giving birth to christians i am only talking about the conversions.

Do you all think it is still spreading by Sword?? 
Elaborate if u think


----------



## Ahmad

jonasad said:


> Ahmad read this
> " An article in Reader's Digest Almanac', year book 1986, gave the statistics of the increase of percentage of the major religions of the world in half a century from 1934 to 1984. This article also appeared in The Plain Truth' magazine. At the top was Islam, which increased by 235%, and Christianity had increased only by 47%. May one ask, Which war took place in this century which converted millions of people to Islam"



can you please give me the link?

what i said was the occasions a few centries ago, not a recent history.


----------



## Ahmad

jonasad said:


> Islam is the fatstest growing religion of the World right now. Simple googling will relieve that. I am not talking about natural growth like Muslim children brought up as Muslims or Christians parents giving birth to christians i am only talking about the conversions.
> 
> Do you all think it is still spreading by Sword??
> Elaborate if u think



i am sure there are conversions, but the rate of conversions wouldnt be that high to put the spread of islam over 200&#37;, if true what is said, then the other religions will have no follower within a century. secondly, how much do we know about the conversions of some muslims from islam to the other religions?


----------



## Frankenstein

*After Muhammad (PBUH) its Khalid bin Walid, Greatest Muslim Worrier of all time AKA Sword of Allah*


----------



## JonAsad

Ahmad said:


> can you please give me the link?
> 
> what i said was the occasions a few centries ago, not a recent history.



Read the link and you'll find out its for all occasions 

Was Islam Spread By the Sword?

Cheers


----------



## JonAsad

Ahmad said:


> i am sure there are conversions, but the rate of conversions wouldnt be that high to put the spread of islam over 200%, if true what is said, then the other religions will have no follower within a century. secondly, how much do we know about the conversions of some muslims from islam to the other religions?



i didnt say that other religions are at Halt i just gave you the information that Islam is the Fastest growing religion of the world now *regardless* of if Muslims are in Power to use the sword to spread it. Islam is still spreading rapidly now as it was then in case of India. Hope you get the point.


----------



## ARSENAL6

Ahmad said:


> Probably by sword. Islam has spread throughout the world both by sowrd and people accepted it volunterly. Persia(today Iran), Khurasan(today Afghanistan), Samarqand, Bukhara, Tajkistan, Turkmenistan, today pakistan etc were introduced to islam by force, other places such as indonesia, malaysia, philipines etc accepted islam due to peaceful means.



No I think not please don't get mixed up with Western, eurpoean action around the world who have decimcrated many civilation for last 1000 years.

Islam was speread due to its peaceful, logical and reasoning.

The only time Islam went to war was Constantinople and even then iti was justified due the Evil King of the Roman Empire who was a Tyrant.
Most war fought were defence . nothing more.


----------



## JonAsad

Ahmad said:


> how much do we know about the conversions of some muslims from islam to the other religions?



there no need for me to discuss that mate


----------



## KS

jonasad said:


> ignorant .... if islam was spread by sword in India then i think every hindu should have become a muslim by the time Angarez Invade.
> 800 years i say isn't it enough to convert every single hindu to muslim?? by sword i mean.



/tabid/116/Default.aspx[/URL]

Cheers[/QUOTE]

all the ppl couldn be converted because many gave their lives and the rest were ready to give their lives instead of converting to Islam.nd how much ppl can they exactly kill..?

I din mean Islam was spread entirely by sword but in India it was the majority method


----------



## JonAsad

Karthic
Give me references for what you are saying
I will not argue with you for what you personally think as it will have no substance.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## niaz

Ahmad said:


> Probably by sword. Islam has spread throughout the world both by sowrd and people accepted it volunterly. Persia(today Iran), Khurasan(today Afghanistan), Samarqand, Bukhara, Tajkistan, Turkmenistan, today pakistan etc were introduced to islam by force, other places such as indonesia, malaysia, philipines etc accepted islam due to peaceful means.



Think we are confusing expansion of Islamic state with the spread of Islam (conversion). I am ignoring expansion during Banu Umayyad. The motive at that time was pure expansion and exploitation of opportunity. However, up to the Rashideen, most of the expeditions were punitive. Only two campaigns; against Egypt and against Iran can be classified as expansionist as neither of the two countries attacked Muslim state.

Spread of Islam and large scale conversions on the other hand were not thru sword. On the contrary, once the infidels found that if you embraced Islam by declaring La ilaha Illallah, Mohammad-ur-Rasullallah invading forces were forbidden to loot your goods or enslave you and you dont have to pay Jizia or poll tax; the conquered population started declaring themselves Muslim as soon as it was known that Muslim army had won

Situation became so bad that later campaigns during Hazrat Omar (RA) were becoming financial liabilities. The great Caliph Omar (RA) was forced to introduce Ushr tax; that is one tenth of the agricultural produce to recover administrative and other costs. For the record most captured territories such as Syria,Iraq, Iran, Egypt and Yemen generated large agricultural produce whereas Mecca and Medina did not.

It is a great misconception that there were mass forced conversions. Some probably but not as a general rule.


----------



## ای ایران

niaz said:


> It is a great misconception that there were mass forced conversions. Some probably but not as a general rule.



There is no misconception about it from our (Iranian) point-of-view. Islam was spread in Iran and throughout the former Sassanid empire by conquest and subsequently largely through pressure, duress and force over a period of several centuries. This was true more-so in the east and northeast of Iran. There were many inducements made for Iranians to convert in order to receive social and economic benefits which were otherwise denied to the largely Zoroastrian Iranians. The process of conversion in Iran was slower in some areas than in others, but the overall process took a long time and never managed to Islamize or Arabize Iran. Revolts and rebellions against the Arabs and Islam were not uncommon in the north and northeast of Iran decades after the Sassanian collapse. When more zealous Moslem rulers were in power, inducements were often replaced with pressure or persecution. This is the reason why several waves of exile of Zoroastrians from Iran to India took place at various times between the 7th to 18th / 19th centuries.

It is my view that Iranians eventual acceptance of Islam had been possible largely because of the successful revolt against Arab domination and the revival of the Persian identity, language and culture in Iran after 2 centuries of Arab rule. Iranians were not only able to expel the Arabs but were able to then adapt, mould and influence the development of Islam, much like the Turks would later do themselves in their own areas of influence. It was this later ability to adapt and to then shape Islam in a way of our choosing which is why Iranians eventually came to terms with being Moslem and therefore, had no need to revert back to Zoroastrianism.

But once again there is no misconception from our history and from our point-of-view of how Islam was brought to Iran and what was once a greater Iranian cultural sphere - this was by force.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hammy007

islam in pakistan was spread by muslim saints whos shriness are spread all across subcontinent, and not through invading armies, it maybe a different case for other nations. similarly in indonesia islam was spread by invitation and not at all by arab armies.

invasion has never forced people of subcontinent to follow a certain religion, neither british nor arabs or mughals have forced them to become muslims or christians etc by bribe or fear of loot or plunder or by any means possible.

jiziya is a very different case, jiziya was never intended to force people into islam, it was a tax a lot lighter than what muslims had to pay in terms of zakat. jiziya was a very small money which non muslims had to give rich or poor alike, while a rich muslim had to pay more money in terms of zakat.


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

ie iran r u jewish iranian?


----------



## Huda

I THINK ALL MUSLIMS WARRIORS ARE GREAT


----------



## ای ایران

*"Pakistani Nationalist: ie iran r u jewish iranian?"*

No.


----------



## KS

jonasad said:


> Karthic
> Give me references for what you are saying
> I will not argue with you for what you personally think as it will have no substance.



It s not wat i think....
I have already said i will not say Islam in INdia was spread only by saints or only by sword..
it was a combination of both with the sword being the major factor.. and as a previous poster said it was largely to escape the oppression that was meted out to the non-beleivers or infidels rather than due to a genuine understanding of the Prophets teachings.


----------



## waraich66

niaz said:


> Think we are confusing expansion of Islamic state with the spread of Islam (conversion). I am ignoring expansion during Banu Umayyad. The motive at that time was pure expansion and exploitation of opportunity. However, up to the Rashideen, most of the expeditions were punitive. Only two campaigns; against Egypt and against Iran can be classified as expansionist as neither of the two countries attacked Muslim state.
> 
> Spread of Islam and large scale conversions on the other hand were not thru sword. On the contrary, once the infidels found that if you embraced Islam by declaring &#8220;La ilaha Illallah, Mohammad-ur-Rasullallah&#8221; invading forces were forbidden to loot your goods or enslave you and you don&#8217;t have to pay &#8216;Jizia&#8217; or poll tax; the conquered population started declaring themselves Muslim as soon as it was known that Muslim army had won
> 
> Situation became so bad that later campaigns during Hazrat Omar (RA) were becoming financial liabilities. The great Caliph Omar (RA) was forced to introduce &#8220;Ushr&#8221; tax; that is one tenth of the agricultural produce to recover administrative and other costs. For the record most captured territories such as Syria,Iraq, Iran, Egypt and Yemen generated large agricultural produce whereas Mecca and Medina did not.
> 
> It is a great misconception that there were mass forced conversions. Some probably but not as a general rule.



Ushr can not be termed as Tax , Tax is haram in Islam , Jazia was implemented only for non muslims by Prophet Muhammad PBUH.


----------



## niaz

Fundamentalist said:


> Ushr can not be termed as Tax , Tax is haram in Islam , Jazia was implemented only for non muslims by Prophet Muhammad PBUH.



You may call it by any other name, but 'Ushr' is levied at 10% of the agricultural produce and was introduced during the time of 2nd Caliph.


----------



## niaz

&#1575;&#1740; &#1575;&#1740;&#1585;&#1575;&#1606;;810466 said:


> There is no misconception about it from our (Iranian) point-of-view. Islam was spread in Iran and throughout the former Sassanid empire by conquest and subsequently largely through pressure, duress and force over a period of several centuries. This was true more-so in the east and northeast of Iran. There were many inducements made for Iranians to convert in order to receive social and economic benefits which were otherwise denied to the largely Zoroastrian Iranians. The process of conversion in Iran was slower in some areas than in others, but the overall process took a long time and never managed to &#8220;Islamize&#8221; or &#8220;Arabize&#8221; Iran. Revolts and rebellions against the Arabs and Islam were not uncommon in the north and northeast of Iran decades after the Sassanian collapse. When more zealous Moslem rulers were in power, inducements were often replaced with pressure or persecution. This is the reason why several waves of exile of Zoroastrians from Iran to India took place at various times between the 7th to 18th / 19th centuries.
> 
> It is my view that Iranian&#8217;s eventual acceptance of Islam had been possible largely because of the successful revolt against Arab domination and the revival of the Persian identity, language and culture in Iran after 2 centuries of Arab rule. Iranian&#8217;s were not only able to expel the Arabs but were able to then adapt, mould and influence the development of Islam, much like the Turks would later do themselves in their own area&#8217;s of influence. It was this later ability to adapt and to then shape Islam in a way of our choosing which is why Iranians eventually came to terms with being Moslem and therefore, had no need to revert back to Zoroastrianism.
> 
> But once again there is no misconception from our history and from our point-of-view of how Islam was brought to Iran and what was once a greater Iranian cultural sphere - this was by force.





I have not denied that there were some forced conversions but majority were voluntary. You have yourself accepted this:

Quote

It is my view that Iranian&#8217;s eventual acceptance of Islam had been possible largely because of the successful revolt against Arab domination and the revival of the Persian identity, language and culture in Iran after 2 centuries of Arab rule. Iranian&#8217;s were not only able to expel the Arabs but were able to then adapt, mould and influence the development of Islam, much like the Turks would later do themselves in their own area&#8217;s of influence. It was this later ability to adapt and to then shape Islam in a way of our choosing which is why Iranians eventually came to terms with being Moslem and therefore, had no need to revert back to Zoroastrianism

Unquote

I have read Iranian history in detail and also am aware of the famous story of &#8220;hormuzaan&#8221;. Actually, Iranians (Barmaki) were running Muslim empire within a century.

To strengthen my argument that conversions to Islam were largely voluntary; let me ask you how did the Mongols and Tartars accept Islam? 

Chengiz captured Islamic empire of Khwarizm Shah and laid waste to most of Iran. Sons of Halaku ruled it as Il Khans, but after a century or so all converted There was neither compulsion there nor inducement. Even the Uzbeks; decedents of Jochi, who ruled Christian lands before they were expelled converted to Islam. 

Centre of intellectual activity shifted eastwards a couple of centuries after advent of Islam. Nishapur/Tus was the hub of activity producing great men such as Nizamul MulkTusi, Omar Khayyam, Al Ghazali and even Firdousi. Even the great Imam Abu Hanifa was born at Kabul and of non Arab parentage.

In the Iberian Peninsula, Muslim ruled for 700 years, if there were forced conversions, most of the Spain would be Muslim today. On the other hand after the reconquest, Muslim population was given the choice of either converting to Christianity or leaving the country. 

In the subcontinent, capital of the Afghan and Mughal empires was at Delhi and Agra, but percentage of Muslim population there is no more than 15 to 20&#37;. On the other hand Muslims constitute the majority in the Western and Eastern peripheries. 

IMO a lot of educated Muslims, not being fully aware of the history have accepted the Western propaganda as absolute truth.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Junaid375

spread of islam by sword and forced conversions theories fail miserably when it comes to indonesia (largest muslim population) and malaysia
please dont discuss "expansion of islamic empire" and "propogation of islam" under this thread.

make another thread if you all want to discuss those topics.

if top 3 list to be compiled

1. Khalid bin walid (RA)
2. saad bin abi waqqas (RA)
3. salahuddin ayyubi

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Junaid375

Karthic Sri said:


> /tabid/116/Default.aspx[/URL]
> 
> Cheers



all the ppl couldn be converted because many gave their lives and the rest were ready to give their lives instead of converting to Islam.nd how much ppl can they exactly kill..?

I din mean Islam was spread entirely by sword but in India it was the majority method[/QUOTE]

what do you mean by "majority method" please explain 
if you want to know what happens when a Ruler wants to impose a Religion ? read about Spanish Inquisition

has anything like that happened in India ?

Reactions: Like Like:
 2


----------



## Kambojaric

Junaid375 said:


> all the ppl couldn be converted because many gave their lives and the rest were ready to give their lives instead of converting to Islam.nd how much ppl can they exactly kill..?
> 
> I din mean Islam was spread entirely by sword but in India it was the majority method



what do you mean by "majority method" please explain 
if you want to know what happens when a Ruler wants to impose a Religion ? read about Spanish Inquisition

has anything like that happened in India ?[/QUOTE]

Have explained this to these indians several times, but they are so convinced in this propoganda they have been fed. They cant show any one example of massive forced conversions like the inquisitions in Spain and Portugal. 
Ottoman Empire ruled the Balkans for 500 years hence if you follow these indians theories that muslim kings were religious bigots whose only aim was to make their subjects muslim then i just ask them, why are Greece, Armenia, Bulgaria, Serbia, Montenegro, Romania, Cyprus, Southern Ukraine, Croatia, Georgia and Hungary, Christain countries today?????


----------



## KS

Hamza Iqbal said:


> what do you mean by "majority method" please explain
> if you want to know what happens when a Ruler wants to impose a Religion ? read about Spanish Inquisition
> 
> has anything like that happened in India ?



Have explained this to these indians several times, but they are so convinced in this propoganda they have been fed. They cant show any one example of massive forced conversions like the inquisitions in Spain and Portugal. 
Ottoman Empire ruled the Balkans for 500 years hence if you follow these indians theories that muslim kings were religious bigots whose only aim was to make their subjects muslim then i just ask them, why are Greece, Armenia, Bulgaria, Serbia, Montenegro, Romania, Cyprus, Southern Ukraine, Croatia, Georgia and Hungary, Christain countries today?????[/QUOTE]

Then hw do u excplain the low presence of Muslims in south India and relatively more presence in north India..?that is because the south was relatively unaffected by muslim invasions.

nd hw u heard of aurangazeb ...?


anyways its useless to discuss hw islam spread as it has spread and today the muslims in India are as Indian as any hindu.
U guys carry on with ur whos the great warrior.


----------



## waraich66

Great Muslim Warrior always fought with divine power , Mullah Omar fighting alone with ISAF (US+40 Countries) can be named as latest great muslim warrior.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ahmad

Fundamentalist said:


> Great Muslim Warrior always fought with divine power , Mullah Omar fighting alone with ISAF (US+40 Countries) can be named as latest great muslim warrior.



yes, and for me Baitullah and Hakeemullah are the greatest warriors.


----------



## Hammy007

Ahmad said:


> yes, and for me Baitullah and Hakeemullah are the greatest warriors.



no no, for you cyrus the great, omar khayyam are the greatest ones lol


----------



## Ahmad

Hammy007 said:


> no no, for you cyrus the great, omar khayyam are the greatest ones lol



you know i was sarcastic to him lol, Hakeemu and Baitu would be the last persons in this world for me to admire. i really hate when some people admire the killers of my people. and about the Great Cyrus, he wasnt a muslim, but he is clearly our hero. Omar Khayam,mmmm , he is one of the greatest men for us. Omar Khayam and Great Alama Iqbal are among those people whom have captured our hearts.


----------



## dexter

MUHAMMAD BIN QASIM , TIPU SULTAN etc
There are many GREAT MUSLIM WARIORS IN ISLAM so you have to make a separate thread on each muslim warrior!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## smartsyco

Hazrat Khalid Bin Walid RA
Salah ud din ayubi
and 
haider ali father of tipu sultan


----------



## Abasin Turi

for me it wod be abuduallah ali from kurram agency. who fought against the talibans and defeat them and protected the PAK land from the unpak.. =D


----------



## Ahmad

Abasin Turi said:


> for me it wod be abuduallah ali from kurram agency. who fought against the talibans and defeat them and protected the PAK land from the unpak.. =D



i dont know who this guy is, but since he fought the criminal taliban, then he is indead a great muslim.


----------



## Abasin Turi

Ahmad said:


> i dont know who this guy is, but since he fought the criminal taliban, then he is indead a great muslim.



yup an ordinary Muslim.. who fulfils his duties accordingly, who feeds his family and love it , help the poor as much as he can. you wod never find him talking harsh to anyone and try to keep people happy around him sometimes he gets into stupid fights. he argues with his neighbour but still when it comes to his Land, you wod find him first in the row. ready to sacrifice himself, family, property everything. just for his pure land and religion..! so yes for me he's the true Islamic hero. =)


----------



## TruthSeeker

*Kareem R. Khan, American Hero*








Khan died when an improvised explosive device blew up on August 6, 2007 in Baqubah. He had already won a purple heart.

Spurred by the Septermber 11 attacks on the World Trade Center, Khan, a 2005 graduate of Southern Regional High School, wanted to show that not all Muslims were fanatics and that many, like him, were willing to lay their lives down for their country, America. He enlisted immediately after graduation and was sent to Iraq in July 2006.

So when his father, Feroze "Roy" Khan, saw three soldiers walking up to his door on Monday, he knew what it meant.

Specialist Kareem Khan, 20, was killed with four others earlier this week when a blast destroyed a house he and members of his division, the Stryker Brigade Combat Team, were clearing in Baqouba, Iraq.

Khan's faith in Islam is important now to his father and stepmother, Nisha Khan, because they want to make sure people in America know that Muslims like Kareem were willing to fight for their country.

"His Muslim faith did not make him not want to go. It never stopped him," said Feroze Khan. "He looked at it that he's American and he has a job to do."

The last package Nisha Khan, 40, sent her stepson included a necklace that had Kareem's name in Arabic, next to the word "Bismillah," which means praise to Allah. 


Colin Powell's Tribute to Muslim-American War Hero, Kareem R. Khan - Steven Waldman

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Whsts his origin..Pakistan or Afghanistan?...RIP


----------



## TruthSeeker

Pakistani Nationalist said:


> Whsts his origin..Pakistan or Afghanistan?...RIP



I couldn't find any note on his heritage or his father's, Feroze Khan.







At rest in Arlington National Cemetery.


----------



## U-571

self deleted...


----------



## waraich66

TruthSeeker said:


> *Kareem R. Khan, American Hero*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Khan died when an improvised explosive device blew up on August 6, 2007 in Baqubah. He had already won a purple heart.
> 
> Spurred by the Septermber 11 attacks on the World Trade Center, Khan, a 2005 graduate of Southern Regional High School, wanted to show that not all Muslims were fanatics and that many, like him, were willing to lay their lives down for their country, America. He enlisted immediately after graduation and was sent to Iraq in July 2006.
> 
> So when his father, Feroze "Roy" Khan, saw three soldiers walking up to his door on Monday, he knew what it meant.
> 
> Specialist Kareem Khan, 20, was killed with four others earlier this week when a blast destroyed a house he and members of his division, the Stryker Brigade Combat Team, were clearing in Baqouba, Iraq.
> 
> Khan's faith in Islam is important now to his father and stepmother, Nisha Khan, because they want to make sure people in America know that Muslims like Kareem were willing to fight for their country.
> 
> "His Muslim faith did not make him not want to go. It never stopped him," said Feroze Khan. "He looked at it that he's American and he has a job to do."
> 
> The last package Nisha Khan, 40, sent her stepson included a necklace that had Kareem's name in Arabic, next to the word "Bismillah," which means praise to Allah.
> 
> 
> Colin Powell's Tribute to Muslim-American War Hero, Kareem R. Khan - Steven Waldman



Muslims should not join American army fighting in Afghanistan .


----------



## humanfirst

Fundamentalist said:


> Muslims should not join American army fighting in Afghanistan .



What is your openion on muslims fighting pakistani army because of it's support given to usa in war on terror.They fight the pakistani govt the same way afghan taliban fight usa,like suicide bombing,blowing girl's schools etc..since pakistan govt fully support wot,provides nato transit,permission to drone strikes etc..Do you think it's legitimate to fight pakistani army?Do you consider those fighting pakistani army heroes too?


----------



## S.U.R.B.

Hazart Ali.

Hazart Khalid bin Waleed.

Hazart Saad bin Abi Waqas.

Salahuddin Ayubi.

Well then i have to post this Video again.


----------



## Hyde

*1) Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)* has fought the war and showed his tactics in the battle of Badr (or should i say the battle of survival) so i would rank him the best warrior of Islamic History

*2) Khalid bin Waleed* (I am a great fan of him and highly inspired by his tactics) I can write a whole book praising his abilities as a soldier and trust me that book will not be enough. He deserves more  He was called Saif-ullah, The sword of Allah/God).

*3) Hazrat Ali R.A.* (A great warrior of Islam who according to unofficial sources killed 50,000 peoples in different battles - He was called the Asad-Ullah, The Lion of Allah)

*4) Salahuddin Ayyoubi* (for his skills as a Sultan - The way he tackled with "Fidayis" was awesome and then it comes his tactics in the war which is also highly appreciable)

*5) Tariq bin Ziyad* (for his invasion to Hispania (Spain, Portgual and today's Gibralter..... he was arguably the great warrior after the Sahabas)

*6) Hazrat Sa'ad bin Abi Waqas R.A.* (He is known as the first companion to have shot an Arrow in the defense of Islam)

*7) Moosa Bin Naseer* (A great general of Islam and the master of Tariq bin Zayad. Left a legacy in the battles of Hispania and Africa though - I still curse the caliphs for treating him so badly in the later part of his life)

*8) Abu Ubaidah ibn al Jarrah R.A.* (A companion of Khalid ibn-e-Walid - played a key role in the expansion of Rashidun Empire)

*9)Hazrat Imam Hussain R.A.* - (What a Warrior he was - The words cannot describe his legacy. I would rank him as the second best warrior in Islam after Prophet Muhammad PBUH and listing him here only because his name did not come in my mind before. The warrior is not considered the best by only winning the war. Sometimes the same warrior loses the war but saves the whole of his community. He saved the Islam in the battle of Karbala and his sacrifices cannot be described in the words. I salute him for his greatest Sacrifice of Islam. He killed number of peoples before he was martyred and his participation in the battle of Karabala is considered the saving the essence of Islam among Muslims. I Salute him from my souls)

*10) Hazrat Sheis/Sheth* ( A great warrior in the battle of Persia - not much known among Muslims but i loved the book of Naseem Hijazi called "Fatah Shustar" where he was the main hero in the whole book - I was very much inspired by him - I believe he was not a Sahabi but he was among the tabi'eens as he on one ocassion met with Hazrat Umar R.A.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Zillay_Khan

In the name Of Allah (swt) the most benfecient the most merciful , peace and blessings be Upon the Noble Messenger , a mercy for the inhabitants of the heavens and the earth and all creation, the liberator of slaves the shield of the widows and the Guardian of the orphans, And upon his holy Household, and his virteous Companions.

Asalam alikum , I pray all of you are in the best of health and iman. This thread caught my attention so i thought why not add a little upon it. First what must be borne in Mind, we are talking of Muslim Warriors hence the person nominated Must have a Great Position in both deen and duniya , i,e both faith and in the battlefeild, The Hero'es achievment must be such , that had he not done so, no other would have been able to do so. The attempt to number or rank such Valient souls that make words such as valour and bravery seem so feeble and low , and there actions so praiseworthy and full of chivalry that had no comparison ,is so difficult because there are so many, yet we shall enumerate on those that saved the faith and the belivers of one God and completely diminished the forces of the devil and darnkness so that now the light of Iman shines In all corners of The world. Thank the lord almighty that when it comes to valour no people on the face of the earth share a history like us and we need not rely upon myth or fable such is the upbringing of the Holy Prophet (sawws).

Many brothers unfortunetly listed people here without no knowledge of islamic History, and the person whome I believe came close is Zaki but now I shall Give conclusive reasons with facts why I choose whome I choose.

*1)* It is The Greatest of The Lords Creation, The Liberator of humanity and the Greatest man who walked the earth, who saved the masses from clucthes of idolatary, salvery, rascism, and all social evils. Who spread Light in the world when it was full of darkness That as we all Know is *Muhammed *(sawws). Peace and blessings be upon him and his holy family and his noble companions. One sight of him was so awe inspiring that the looker would remark, "I have never seen such a person neither before nor after seeing him.&#8217; " [Ibn Hisham 1/401; Jami' At-Tirmidhi 4/303]

Ar-Rabi&#8216; bint Muawwidh said: "Had you seen him, you would have felt that the sun was shining." Jabir bin Samurah said, "I saw him at one full-moony night. I looked at him. He was dressed in a red garment. I compared him with the moon and found that &#8212; for me &#8212; he was better than the moon." [Mishkat Al-Masabeeh 2/518]

And as the Book of God says " "And verily, you (O Muhammad [pbuh] ) are on an exalted standard of character." [Al-Qur'an 68:4]

&#8216;Ali said: *&#8220;Whenever the fight grew fierce and the eyes of fighters went red, we used to resort to the Prophet [pbuh] for succour. He was always the closest to the enemy.&#8221; [As-Shifa 1/89]*

*2) * Is the Closest of the disciples of the Holy prophet whome he raised as his own son, who is his cousin and son in law, is the *Commander of The faithful Imam Ali ibn abi Talib (as*). Khalid convereted much later and was much elder then Ali , But ali was with the Prophet from day one, and by God at times his sword was the First line of defence the second line of defence and at times the only line of defence. In the battle of badr the first major battle of islam Imam Ali killed more of the disbelivers then all of the Muslim army combined and upon that all the historians are unaimous, he killed The standard bearers of the Meccan army one after another there top heroes fell at the sword of Ali (as).

In the battle of uhud , the mases fled, fearing a false news that spread and only a few handful steadfeast companions remained against a force far superior outnumberd by over a hundred to one, The Lion of Allah upon the Command of the Holy prophet (sawws) raised the Sword and wrecked havoc amongst the ranks of the pagans, there champions were slain, One man was fighting a army the most skilled swordsmen in all of arabia, and while doing so his sword broke and Zulfiqar descended from heaven the sword which was to become legendary.

Ibn athir records in hsi tarikh e kamil, "Ibn Athir says: "The Prophet become the object of the attack of various units of the army of Quraysh from all sides. Ali attacked, in compliance with the Prophet's orders, every unit that made an attack upon him (the Prophet) and dispersed them or killed some of them, and this thing took place a number of times in Uhud. In the meantime the Archangel Jibreel came and praised the devotion of Ali before the Prophet and said: *'It is the height of sacrifice which this officer is displaying'.* The Prophet confirmed the remark of Jibreel and said:* 'I am from Ali and Ali is from me'. *Then a voice was heard in the battlefield saying: La Fata Illa Ali, La Saifa Illa Zulfiqar"

Then In every battle of islam In the time of the prophet he did such acts of bravey that By God are to ample to narrate here, it is why me and indeed islamic scholars would not dare put the name of any other before Imam Ali when it comes to fighting, a martial arts is named after him , silet mubai and all sufi spiritual chains lead to him, and westerners non muslims have praised his valour much. *Did you know? that when he did all this from badr right upto hunain he was merely in his twenties*

Thomas Carlyle
(1795-1881) Scottish historian, critic, and sociological writer
&#8220;As for this young Ali, one cannot but like him. A noble-minded creature, as he shows himself, now and always afterwards; full of affection, of fiery daring. Something chivalrous in him; brave as a lion; yet with a grace, a truth and affection worthy of Christian knighthood.&#8221; [On Heroes, Hero-Worship, And the Heroic In History, 1841, Lecture 2: The Hero as Prophet.

Edward Gibbon
(1737-1794) Considered the greatest British historian of his time
"The zeal and virtue of Ali were never outstripped by any recent proselyte. He united the qualifications of a poet, a soldier, and a saint; his wisdom still breathes in a collection of moral and religious sayings; and every antagonist, in the combats of the tongue or of the sword, was subdued by his eloquence and valour. *From the first hour of his mission to the last rites of his funeral, the apostle was never forsaken by a generous friend, whom he delighted to name his brother, his vicegerent, and the faithful Aaron of a second Moses." *[The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, London, 1911, volume 5, pp. 381-2]

Simon Ockley
(1678-1720) Professor of Arabic at the University of Cambridge
&#8220;One thing particularly deserving to be noticed is that his mother was delivered of him at Mecca, in the very temple itself; which never happened to any one else.&#8221; [History of the Saracens, London, 1894, p. 331]

Upon simon ockley's point i would like to add it is well known the commander of the faithful was born inside the Holy kabah, hence a saga said " *The lords sword born in the sheath of the holy kabah"*

In the battle of ahzab the whole of arabian peninisula united and formed a grand army marched towards medina, allied with many tribes the meccan pagan army vastly outnumbering the Muslims came tp nip things in the bud, with them brought there greatest champions especialy the Giant " amr ibn abdu wudd" a man who was equaled to a thousand horse riders as legend said when attacked by a band of robbers he picked up a baby camel and fought away the robbers single handedly he was so huge his very sight was frightening. Upon the suggestion of hz salman farsi (ra) a trench was dug around medina. The meccans collectievly could not cross, 5 however glalloped there horses across the trench, these five were the giant amr, Ikrimah bin Abu Jahl, Hubayrah bin Wahab, Nawfal bin Abdullah and Zirar bin Khattab The five with complete piece of mind strode amongst the muslims amr the giant taunted them for one to dual him but the sight of him was so frightning that none woudl step forward. The commander of The faithful Ali (as) was at the other side of the trench,he was securing the gap from where amr and his companions entered. when the prophet called out who would fight amr, Ali heard and said "me". The situation is best summarised by some verses.

"Behold! They came upon you from above you and from below you, and when the eyes grew wild and the hearts gaped up to the throats, and ye imagined various (vain) thoughts about God! In that situation the believers were tried: They were shaken with a mighty Shock. And behold! The hypocrites and those in whose hearts there is disease (even) say: God and His Apostle promised us nothing but delusion! Behold! A party among them said: O people of Yathrib (Medina), you cannot stand (the attack), therefore turn back! And a band of them ask for leave of the Prophet, saying: Truly our houses are bare and exposed though they were not exposed; they intended nothing but to flee." (33:10-13)

But the True momineen were such that the Quran says "When the believers saw the confederate forces, they said: This is what God and His Apostle had promised us. *And God and His Apostle told us what is true. And it only added to their faith and their zeal in obedience. "Among the believers are men who have been true to their covenant with God:* Of them some have completed their vow (to the extreme), and some (still) wait; *but they have never changed (their determination) in the least."* (33:23) 

Perfect silence prevailed in the army of Islam in reply to 'Amr's shouting. Although the Prophet kept asking that one man should get up and relieve the Muslims from the mischief of that man ('Amr), but none was prepared to fight with him (except Ali bin Abi Talib). No alternative was, therefore, left except that this difficulty should be surmounted through Ali, the brave. The Prophet gave him his own sword, tied a special turban on his head and prayed for him in these words: "O Allah! Protect Ali from all sides. O Lord! 'Ubaydah bin Harith was taken away from me on the Day of Badr and, the lion of Allah, Hamzah was taken away in the Battle of Uhud. O Nourisher! Protect Ali from being harmed by the enemy''. Then he recited this verse: "O Nourisher! Don't leave me alone and you are the best inheritor".(Surah al-Anbiya, 21:89)

Ali walked as quickly as possible to cover the delay already caused. At this moment the Prophet uttered this historical sentence: *"Entire faith is facing entire infidelity". *Ali composed rajaz (epic verses), whose rhythm and rhyme conformed with that of his adversary's, and said: "Don't be in a hurry, because a strong person has come in the field to give you a reply".

The entire body of Ali was covered with iron armour and his eyes were shining through the helmet. 'Amr desired to identify his adversary. He said to Ali: "Who are you?" Ali, who was famous for the clearness of his accent, replied: "I am Ali, son of Abu Talib".

'Amr said: "I shall not shed your blood, because your father was one of my old friends. I am thinking about your cousin who has sent you in the field with so much confidence. I can pick you up on the point of my lance and keep you suspended between the earth and the sky so that you are neither dead nor alive".

Ibn Abil Hadid says: "Whenever my teacher of history (Abul Khayr) explained this portion he used to say: "In fact 'Amr was afraid of fighting with Ali, because he was present in the Battles of Badr and Uhud and had witnessed his valour. He therefore, wished to dissuade Ali from fighting with him".

Ali said: "You need not bother about my death. In both the cases (i.e. whether I kill or am killed) I shall be blessed and my place shall be in Paradise, but in all cases Hell awaits you". 'Amr smiled and said: "O Ali! This division is not just. Both Paradise and Hell belong to you ".

Ali reminded him that one day he ('Amr) had put his hand into the coverings of the Holy Ka'bah and had made a promise to Allah that as and when any warrior made three suggestions to him in the battlefield he would accept one of them. Ali, therefore, suggested to him that he should embrace Islam. He replied: "O Ali! Leave this for it is not possible". Then Ali said: "Abandon fighting and leave Muhammad to himself". He replied: "It is a matter of shame for me to accept this proposal, because tomorrow. the poets of Arabia will satirize me and will imagine that I did so on account of fear". Then Ali said: "Your opponent is on foot. You should also dismount so that we may combat with each other". He said: "O Ali! This is a very insignificant suggestion and I had never thought that an Arab would make such a request to me''

COMBAT BETWEEN THE TWO CHAMPIONS COMMENCES

Fierce fighting started between the two champions and both of them were enveloped in dust, so that the on-lookers were not aware of the developments. They could only hear the clashing of their swords. 'Amr aimed his sword at the head of Ali and although the latter warded off the blow with his special shield his head was, nevertheless, wounded. He, however, availed of the opportunity and gave a sharp blow on his feet. Consequently one or both of the feet of 'Amr were cut off and he fell down on the ground.

The voice of Takbir was heard from within the dust which was a sign of Ali's victory. The scene of the fall of 'Amr on the ground created such a fear in the hearts of other warriors, who were standing behind him, that they galloped their horses involuntarily towards the ditch and all of them, except Nawfal, returned to their camping-place. Nawfal's horse fell into the ditch. Those who were posted on the bank of the ditch began to stone him. He, however, said loudly: "To kill a person like this is contrary to the code of bravery. Let one of you come down so that we may fight with each other". Ali plunged into the ditch and killed him.

I can caryy on writing chapters But suffice it to say that not only in badr , uhud, ahzab, khaibar, hunain, dhat al silasil and ample others the commander of the faithful Ali was always the standard bearer of the Lords forces against the forces of darkness, it was he who sent the champions of the pagans to the dust, and is remebered as The LIon of God, who had more duels in combat then any other man in history and who was never defeated in battle, a true maginificence of the Lords Creation. 






A clip from the battle of khaiber where when teh fort was not being conquered Imam ali did what seemed the impossible the prophet said" &#8220;Tomorrow I will award the Standard of the Islamic forces to a man who loves Allah(swt) and his Prophet(sawaw) and Allah(swt) and his Prophet(sawaw) love him. He is the one who attacks forcefully and does not run away from the battlefield and he will not return until Allah(swt) grants victory on his hand&#8221;. This was said after the fort could not be conquered, Imam ali was Ill due to the illnes of the eyes he was called the prophet applied his saliva upon his eyes and then Kahibar was conquered inhabited by approx 20,000 jews who were mainly warriors.

*3) Imam Hussain.* Who is the Grandson of The prophet and the son of the Commander of the faithful Imam Ali , who saved islam, stood firm like the mountain of determination with 72 facing thousands of troops of the army of darkness. The alter of truth says he killed soem 2000 yazidy forces single handedly. Nevertheless fighting with no water for three days is enough of a challenge. The battle went from dawn till dusk.

Molvi Atta Muhammad wrote:

"Now the Zulfiquar of Husayn Ibn Ali was unleashed&#8230;He jumped into his enemies like Ali went for Khayber.. 410 enemies were killed by the hands of Husayn(as)"
Kitab Shahadatain, page 179, published Gorakh Pur. India

Even being thirsty Imam Husayn (as) managed to reach river Tigris and the enormous army of Ibn Sa`d wasn't able to do anything. [Tareekh Kamil, Volume 4 page 32].

Ibn Hajar Makki writes:

"If the army of Yazid had not ditched Husayn(as) by coming between Him and river, they would never have been able to over come Him because He was such a brave person who would never move from his place.When all of His companions got killed and Husayn(as) became alone, He made such a strong attack on the army of Yazid that He killed many of their strong men and then many groups collectively attacked Him"
Sawaiq e Muhirqah, page 118. (Egypt)

Ibn Athir Jazri and Tabari wirtes:

"When enemies started attacking Husayn(as) from both sides He(as) too jumped on them and then the situation was that when Husayn(as) would attack the enemies on left hand side He would perished them and when He would attack the enemies of his right hand side He would make all of them unconscious. *Narrator *says: "By Allah ! I haven't found anyone firm, brave and strong hearted than Husayn *infact I haven't seen anyone similar than him* although he was collapsed at that time due to the fact that his brother, nephew, friends and companions had been killed. By Allah ! The army of Yazid used to run from his attack as if a goats run after the attack of beast"
1. Tareekh Tabari, Volume 6 page 259
2. Tareekh Kamil, Volume 4 page 22

and as a shair said *" pak sar zameen kah , aur iskeh har maqeen kah ab to sarbarah Hussain hain"*






Then after these names I would include sahabah like hasrat abu dhujanah, the Lion of God hasrat Hamzah , hasrat khalid bin waleed
etc without numbering ranks, as all played vital roles at different and when required times, and then in almost every centuary we have shining names.

Peace be to you all


----------



## AlpErTunga

Alp_Arslan said:


> As-Salaams Is a muslim not one whos religion is Islam?





Alp_Arslan said:


> As-Salaamu Alaikum
> 
> Wat nonsense do we have here? Some1 praisin the 1 who brought down the Islamic System, cant believe there are some idle people around who do not use their intellect. Wat else can 1 say?



Caliphate had abolished by Britain, anyway. But a puppet caliph was on the Ottoman throne as a British civil servant. Do you know he didn't let muezzin give the call to prayer, not to "disturb" the commander of British invasion forces in Istanbul. While he was doing that and other insulting things, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk was fighting against Greek, French, Italian, Armenian and CALIPHATE forces in order to drive enemy out of our motherland.

After his independence war, colonial age ended with other independence movements like Pakistani and Indian independence movements. He is the last victor against to last crusade. He is as glorious as other Seljuki warriors who used themselves as a shield against to crusades. 

Today there is no traitorous caliph such as Vahideddin but our azan is spreading from our sherefes of mosques and our holy crescent and star is free over our motherland.

Also calling a muslim as "non-muslim" is infidelity.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## muse

AlpERTunga

Super post - thanks for that - it's unfortunate that this thread even exists but thank you for setting things straight. 



> Also calling a muslim as "non-muslim" is infidelity.



We don't envy the mods of this forum.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Al-zakir

AlpErTunga said:


> Caliphate had abolished by Britain, anyway. But a puppet caliph was on the Ottoman throne as a British civil servant. Do you know he didn't let muezzin give the call to prayer, not to "disturb" the commander of British invasion forces in Istanbul. While he was doing that and other insulting things, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk was fighting against Greek, French, Italian, Armenian and CALIPHATE forces in order to drive enemy out of our motherland.
> 
> After his independence war, colonial age ended with other independence movements like Pakistani and Indian independence movements. He is the last victor against to last crusade. He is as glorious as other Seljuki warriors who used themselves as a shield against to crusades.
> 
> Today there is no traitorous caliph such as Vahideddin but our azan is spreading from our sherefes of mosques and our holy crescent and star is free over our motherland.
> 
> Also calling a muslim as "non-muslim" is infidelity.



Good post. Although I won't disagree about Kamal Ataturk legacy but I failed to understand his quest for ultra secular Turkey. He would have been admirable by all if he could have established a modern Islamic republic.


----------



## storm seeker

mehmood ghaznavi for he introduced muslim regime in the place we are living


----------



## AlpErTunga

Al-zakir said:


> Good post. Although I won't disagree about Kamal Ataturk legacy but I failed to understand his quest for ultra secular Turkey. He would have been admirable by all if he could have established a modern Islamic republic.



This message will seem to be off-topic. But it is related to Mustafa Kemal, so to this topic.

We have to accept some propositions as "right". Is politics dirty today? Yes. Is religion divine and must it remain pure and clear? Yes. Should we combine politics and religion together? No. Because some people can sell even themselves in order to gain power in politics and religion cannot remain pure and clear. Today there are many superstitions in Islam thanks to power struggles in politics during the history.

Ataturk was a muslim. He was a muslim who likes listen to Kur'an-&#305; Kerim from his hafiz Yasar Okuyan Bey, almost every night. But he was an ordinary people, he was not extremist. He used to drink alcohol "raki" publicly. But caliph sultan Abdulhamit and other caliphs used to drink alcohol secretly. And today Abdulhamit is muslim and Ataturk is not, huh? Maybe people didn't see all of them drinking. But Allah did... So who can judge one another's religion? Nobody, but Allah.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## JonAsad

AlpErTunga said:


> This message will seem to be off-topic. But it is related to Mustafa Kemal, so to this topic.
> 
> We have to accept some propositions as "right". Is politics dirty today? Yes. Is religion divine and must it remain pure and clear? Yes. Should we combine politics and religion together? No. Because some people can sell even themselves in order to gain power in politics and religion cannot remain pure and clear. Today there are many superstitions in Islam thanks to power struggles in politics during the history.
> 
> Ataturk was a muslim. He was a muslim who likes listen to Kur'an-&#305; Kerim from his hafiz Yasar Okuyan Bey, almost every night. But he was an ordinary people, he was not extremist. *He used to drink alcohol "raki" publicly. But caliph sultan Abdulhamit and other caliphs used to drink alcohol secretly*. And today Abdulhamit is muslim and Ataturk is not, huh? Maybe people didn't see all of them drinking. But Allah did... So who can judge one another's religion? Nobody, but Allah.



Publicaly or secretly, both are sinners and cannot be a good example to be called as Great Muslim Warriors.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## muse

And yet lunes like Mahmud qualify? right? Or how about Taimur?

Who died and said you should decide sinner and saint? Show some shame, leave at least some job for God. Let Him decide sinner and saint.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AlpErTunga

JonAsad said:


> Publicaly or secretly, both are sinners and cannot be a good example to be called as Great Muslim Warriors.



You have no sin? If you have no sin, you can claim being a prophet after our last messenger of Allah, Hz. Muhammed S.A.V.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Vinod2070

muse said:


> And yet lunes like Mahmud qualify? right? Or how about Taimur?
> 
> Who died and said you should decide sinner and saint? Show some shame, leave at least some job for God. Let Him decide sinner and saint.



I think most people don't know history properly. They would be shocked in many cases if they read objective neutral history.


----------



## DaRk WaVe

Muhammad Yahya said:


> Muslims should not join American army fighting in Afghanistan .



The person who once said I will like to Join Canadian Armed Forces is saying this, What a hypocrite & a Taliban Sympathizer

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kyusuibu Honbu

For me it would be Zafar Khan,a general of Alauddin Khilji of the Khilji dynasty, ruler of the Delhi Sultanate.

Zafar Khan defeated an invading Mongol army near Jalandhar in 1297.

Also,In 1299, a horde of 200,000 Mongols entered India with the intention of conquest. Though vastly outnumbered, Zafar Khan showed desperate valor in battle. The Mongols were defeated, but Khan did not survive.

If it wasn't for him the history of India might have taken a new route for the better or worse.


----------



## Vinod2070

DaRk WaVe said:


> The person who once said I will like to Join Canadian Armed Forces is saying this, What a hypocrite & a Taliban Sympathizer



Actually a totally confused person, if you think about it.


----------



## Vinod2070

Bombensturm said:


> For me it would be Zafar Khan,a general of Alauddin Khilji of the Khilji dynasty, ruler of the Delhi Sultanate.
> 
> Zafar Khan defeated an invading Mongol army near Jalandhar in 1297.
> 
> Also,In 1299, a horde of 200,000 Mongols entered India with the intention of conquest. Though vastly outnumbered, Zafar Khan showed desperate valor in battle. The Mongols were defeated, but Khan did not survive.
> 
> If it wasn't for him the history of India might have taken a new route for the better or worse.



Are you sure of this history?

I have never read of such a vast Mongol force ever being defeated. This period was the time when Mongols were the unquestioned conquerors with no one to stop them.

Even one tuman (10,000 soldiers) of Mongols was enough to just roll on against vastly superior numbers in all directions. There was no force in India, China, Central Asia or Europe that could stand up to them.

The trail of blood and genocide that the Mongols left in Afghanistan, Persia, Central Asia, China and Middle East was the stuff of legends. India was just plain lucky not to come in their path.


----------



## JonAsad

muse said:


> And yet lunes like Mahmud qualify? right? Or how about Taimur?
> 
> Who died and said you should decide sinner and saint? Show some shame, leave at least some job for God. Let Him decide sinner and saint.



God for surely decide who is sinner or who is saint, i am nobody, but as for me i can surely say who is the sinner in this world or not, my scale of differentiating b/w them is simple, follow Quran, Hadiths and you are a Muslim, dont follow it, drink or Fcuk, you are a sinner.
any way you interpret me wrong, on one hand people are saying the likes of Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W), the Suhaba's were great Muslim warriors and on the same breath they are comparing sinners like Mahmud, Ataturk, Akber, w/e, how can they be in the same list to be compared. The later cannot be regarded as Great Muslims.

Great Muslim Warriors should be the ones who were Great Muslims and Great Warriors, not Great Muslims or Great Warriors.
Now you know what i ment, i will like you to comment on this.




AlpErTunga said:


> You have no sin? If you have no sin, you can* claim being a prophet after our last messenger *of Allah, Hz. Muhammed S.A.V.



Dont get personal and dont dare give me wrong examples on "How to be a Prophet for Dummies" 
There was no need to bring our Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W) in this.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## DaRk WaVe

Muhammad Yahya said:


> Great Muslim Warrior always fought with divine power , Mullah Omar fighting alone with ISAF (US+40 Countries) can be named as latest great muslim warrior.



Divine power, what divine power, Did angels came down to stop American Strike Packages or Taliban have all become bullet proof?

HE is not fighting alone there are thousands of his sympathizers like you who won't hesitate to come & blow up market places for the sake of the veiled Jihad & 72 Virgins, Sitting in Canada & supporting the thugs who have degraded the religion(which you follow) to the level that Muslim & Terrorist have become synonyms then people like you complain about 'Islamophobia', is there any shame or humanity left in you or you are expecting it all in the world here after ??

Pathetic you have made this thread dirty with the name of a mass murdering maniac & his glorification...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Tayyab1796

Tariq bin Ziyad 's act of instilling morale in his army by burning the boats is a proof of his committment for his task . By burning the boats his army was left with no choice but to win or end up in the Mediterrainin sea .


----------



## Kyusuibu Honbu

Vinod2070 said:


> Are you sure of this history?
> 
> I have never read of such a vast Mongol force ever being defeated. This period was the time when Mongols were the unquestioned conquerors with no one to stop them.
> 
> Even one tuman (10,000 soldiers) of Mongols was enough to just roll on against vastly superior numbers in all directions. There was no force in India, China, Central Asia or Europe that could stand up to them.
> 
> The trail of blood and genocide that the Mongols left in Afghanistan, Persia, Central Asia, China and Middle East was the stuff of legends. India was just plain lucky not to come in their path.



Mongol invasions of India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Historically very few kingdoms were able to repel the invasions by the dreaded Mongols,The ones i remember are Japan,Egypt,India Also Vietnam.


Also if you are interested you can check this out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions


----------



## muse

> God for surely decide who is sinner or who is saint, i am nobody, but as for me i can surely say who is the sinner in this world or not, my scale of differentiating b/w them is simple, follow Quran, Hadiths and you are a Muslim, dont follow it, drink or Fcuk, you are a sinner



You've outed yourself - not a smart thing to have done, but then..it's not about being smart as far as you are concerned, do I have that right? You are serving other, higher, causes than just plain men - you're kinda of a "deputy" -- 

To you the beloved of God, is a military commander issuing orders, seeing to the affairs of men - to others of us, he is God's Beloved, a humble man of patience, forgiveness, a man of deep experiences, a man in love with God.

For you the beloved of God is a simple one sided individual - a warrior, but to others that is the least of the things they would cite. I would encourage a more complex, a more full, a more "loving" view - it about much much more than do's and don'ts - Faith is a mysterious love and one best not challeneged by any, particularly those that know it not.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JonAsad

muse said:


> You've outed yourself - not a smart thing to have done, but then..it's not about being smart as far as you are concerned, do I have that right? You are serving other, higher, causes than just plain men - you're kinda of a "deputy" --
> 
> To you the beloved of God, is a military commander issuing orders, seeing to the affairs of men - to others of us, he is God's Beloved, a humble man of patience, forgiveness, a man of deep experiences, a man in love with God.
> 
> For you the beloved of God is a simple one sided individual - a warrior, but to others that is the least of the things they would cite. I would encourage a more complex, a more full, a more "loving" view - it about much much more than do's and don'ts - Faith is a mysterious love and one best not challeneged by any, particularly those that know it not.



The word sin, sinner, theres no rocket science in it to understand, in my view if some one is a sinner than he is not automaticaly in talibanic way destined to burn in hell, maybe he is more beloved to God, he may be a lot better, more devoted muslim than myself, who knows, the point to consider is this a man in love with God will not do anything which is forbidden by God, he may be a great warrior but to define a great muslim there are other things which we have to consider aswell. Its a very simple defination- Sinner: A person who sins (without repenting). If i say someone is a sinner, i am not declaring him a kafir, no way.

For example, take our father of nation, Quaid e Azam, he was a great great leader, was he a great warrior(txt book defination)-No, was he a great Muslim-No.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Vinod2070

Bombensturm said:


> Mongol invasions of India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Historically very few kingdoms were able to repel the invasions by the dreaded Mongols,The ones i remember are Japan,Egypt,India Also Vietnam.
> 
> 
> Also if you are interested you can check this out.
> 
> Mongol conquests - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Thanks. Even this link mentions that the numbers are vastly exaggerated. The real number may be 20,000-30,000.

AFAIK, Japan escaped from Mongols because the Mongol flotillas were devastated (two times?) by turbulence at sea. They were pure lucky.


----------



## muse

> take our father of nation, Quaid e Azam, he was a great great leader, was he a great warrior(txt book defination)-No, *was he a great Muslim-No*



You're a simple minded person, which is good. 


BTW, take Osama for instance, Is he a good Muslim? And what about the Saudi businessmen to send money to the TTP, are they good Muslims? Both Osama and the Saudi businessmen, they follow Quran and Hadith, they don't drink and they don't screw around - by your definitons, I would be very suprised if you answered in the negative


There isn't anything lower than a Jamaati.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JonAsad

muse said:


> You're a simple minded person, which is good.
> 
> 
> BTW, take Osama for instance, Is he a good Muslim? And what about the Saudi businessmen to send money to the TTP, are they good Muslims? Both Osama and the Saudi businessmen, they follow Quran and Hadith, they don't drink and they don't screw around - by your definitons, I would be very suprised if you answered in the negative
> 
> 
> There isn't anything lower than a Jamaati.



If Osama is following Quran and Hadith, then i think the west and the whole world is right in saying that Islam is a violent religion and muslims are terrorists. Do you believe that? My answer is in negative, no he is not following Quran and Hadith, hope you are not surprised.
Killing of innocent Human beings is also a sin and the committer a sinner and that is according to the teachings of Quran and Hadiths.

About the saudi's whole world knows what hypocrites they are, they do drink and they do screw, they screw more than anyone, yeah the end of the day they believe by giving jaziya, sadqa, zakat, all other bad deeds will be forgiven. Hypocracy at tits best, *Not good examples to give for Great Muslims.*


----------



## Jacobtheindoamerican

khaild bin walid and Saladin.Khaild bin walid i think was undefeated. The empire he was part of would stretched from Spain to small parts of India. Saladin kicked the inferior westerners away.

Some one mentioned Timur? He like his ancestors killed MANY Muslims in India,Persia,Turkey,etc. Mughals too, they broke many rules in Islam. Like drinking Alcohol, smoking, fell for temptation of the flesh, had emperors with Hindu rajputs, even killing other smaller Muslim empire when they know they can take it. Its politics.

khaild bin walid I think was true.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Time Assassin

Saladin, the leader of the Islamic empire during the 3rd Crusades. He respected his enemies, but knew how important Jerusalem was to his fellow Muslim Brothers.


----------



## Jacobtheindoamerican

Time Assassin said:


> Saladin, the leader of the Islamic empire during the 3rd Crusades. He respected his enemies, but knew how important Jerusalem was to his fellow Muslim Brothers.



The man treated his opponents well. He treated the Jews and Christian in his empire well. Unlike the some barbaric "Christian" hordes who where very anti-semantic and killed the Jews.. Saladin was respected by Christian, Jews, Muslims alike in that era


----------



## Sher Shah

no indigineous warrior from modern day Pakistan?


----------



## !!craft!!

Saladin.he truly was a great warrior.At the height of his power, he ruled over Egypt, Syria, Mesopotamia, Hejaz, and Yemen. He led the Muslims against the Crusaders . captured Palestine in Jerusalem. despite being the enemy of the Crusaders he won the respect of many of them, including Richard the Lionheart; rather than becoming a hated figure in Europe, he became a celebrated example of the principles of chivalry.it is said that when he died , they found there was not enough money to pay for his funeral had given most of his possessions and money away for charity, when they opened his treasury.


----------



## !!craft!!

oh one more thing.. Chand and ramazan mubarak to all ...


----------



## ganimi kawa

Saladin was one of the greatest warrior kings of not only muslims but the world!

No doubt about that!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hasbara Buster

What about Hasan Nasrallah who defeated the so called "undefeatable" Zionist army? Elhamdulillah.


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Welcome to Pakistan defence forum my turkish brother.Enjoy ur stay.


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Sher Shah said:


> no indigineous warrior from modern day Pakistan?



Captain Muhammad Sarwar


Major Tufail Muhammad


Major Raja Aziz Bhatti


Pilot Officer Rashid Minhas


Jawan Sowar Muhammad Hussain


Major Mohammad Akram


Lance Naik Muhammad Mahfooz


Major Shabbir Sharif


Captain Karnal Sher Khan 


Havaldaar Lalak Jan 

One of the Greatest!

Thank almighty n the mothers of Pakistan who give birth to such LIONS.

ALLAH HU!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Hasbara Buster

Pakistani Nationalist said:


> Welcome to Pakistan defence forum my turkish brother.Enjoy ur stay.


Thank you for your warm welcome brother


----------



## Super Falcon

What about Hazrat KHALID BIN WALEED SAIF ALLAH and Tariq bin zayed i think they are top 2 warrioris of ISLAM true courage Sheer determination Love of ALLAH and have Faith on ALLAH which we lack now as a muslim

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Sultan Tipu.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Kambojaric

Super Falcon said:


> What about Hazrat KHALID BIN WALEED SAIF ALLAH and Tariq bin zayed i think they are top 2 warrioris of ISLAM true courage Sheer determination Love of ALLAH and have Faith on ALLAH which we lack now as a muslim



Khalid bin Waleed is no doubt a huge military figure not just in the muslim world but in the whole world. He with a small force of 15 000 men defeated the combined armies of the Persian Empire, Byzantine Empire and their Christian Arab allies at the Battle of Firaz. Amazing!

Battle of Firaz - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Super Falcon

and what about a muslim warrior who took Sindh as a babul ISLAM from raja dahir forgoten the name of great warrior this is what we are dont even remember name of great people


----------



## Kambojaric

Think you mean Muhammad Bin Qasam


----------



## Solomon2

Suleiman the Magnificent. He could be humane and respectful as a conqueror, he protected the Jews not just in his Empire but to some extent in Christendom, he promoted culture and education, and he may have been the best legislator Islam has ever had. (_Sharia_ had its place, but criminal and civil law were separate matters.)


----------



## Masterchief

we have had many muslim braves like tipu sultan, chand bibi, etc i have even heard of one soldier named hav lalak jan of pakistan, they say he was a brave man .


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

gaurav yadav said:


> we have had many muslim braves like tipu sultan, chand bibi, etc i have even heard of one soldier named hav lalak jan of pakistan, they say he was a brave man .



He was a LION.

*Havaldar Lalak Jan Shaahed (Urdu: &#1604;&#1575;&#1604;&#1705; &#1580;&#1575;&#1606;; 1967 &#8211; 7 July 1999) was born in Yasin, in the Ghizer District, of Gilgit-Baltistan province). *After school he joined the Pakistan Army, and reached the rank of Havaldar.

*NLI Deployment*
As a junior officer in the Northern Light Infantry, Jan fought against India in the Kargil War of 1999. *He volunteered to be deployed on the front lines and drove back a number of attacks by the Indian army*.

*Tiger Hill in the Kargil Sector had been occupied by around 130 men of 12th NLI (Northern Light Infantry)* unit of the Pakistan Army. These men were under the command of Subedar Sikander, who was given the responsibility to hold back India's offensive long enough to force the Indian Division at Siachen to retreat. Havaldar Major Lalak Jan was his 2IC (second in command). *The men of 12th NLI were ordered by the Subedar to change their positions while firing back at the attacking Indian forces, doing which, they succeeded in bluffing the Indian command into believing that the size of the force was much larger.*
............
*On 1 July, 1999, the 18th Grenadiers Battalion (India) launched a fierce attack on Tiger Hill, under cover of heavy artillery shelling around the occupied bunkers*. *Subedar Sikandar placed his men in well-entrenched positions, and managed to repulse the attack without any loss of life on their own part. Exact casualty figures for the attacking Indian 18th Grenadiers Battalion, are not available*.

*On the morning of 2 July 1999, hoping to use the cover of the mist, the 18th Grenadiers launched another intense attack on Tiger Hills. Realizing the great difficulty in holding their previous positions that had been spotted and zeroed-in by the Indian artilliery deployed below, Subedar Sikandar ordered his men to retreat to secondary positions around a secret bunker. Once the men were secure, he directed Lalak Jan to descend Tiger Hill and, amidst the Indian Artillery shelling, plant the landmines in the area in front of the Indian forces. Though this was deemed a nearly impossible task *by all, the Subedar and the 2IC agreed that this task was very important, if they were to make a dent in the Indian offensive. *Planting the landmines was the only way for them to neutralize the Indian armor and artillery, as the men of 12th NLI did not have any heavy/armour-piercing weaponry; their light-attack unguided (RPG-7)s were inadequate for the task.* They were hoping that the mist under *which's cover the Indians were attacking, would help Lalak Jan as well, and that the Indians would not be expecting such an audacious and surprising move from the men holed up above.*

*[edit] Fighting in Mountains*
*Accepting the daunting task, Lalak Jan descended Tiger Hills in the mist. He was provided as fierce a cover as possible, to keep the Indians distracted. Lalak Jan, born and raised in the foothills of the Himalayan Mountain Ranges in northern Pakistan, used his natural mountaineering abilities to the fullest, and managed to plant the landmines in such a manner that the Indians would encounter them as soon as they tried to move forward to new positions higher up towards the hill.

Lalak Jan returned to 12th NLI's position, having successfully completed this mission.*
The trap was now set; The men had to lure the Indian forces into it. Subedar* Sikandar told his men to gradually reduce the firing to a standstill.*

About two hours after firing ceased from the Pakistan side, the Indians ventured forward, hoping that they'd managed to clear the area of the 12th NLI. The landmines planted by Lalak Jan wrought havoc to their forward movements. *The Indians are believed to have suffered heavy casualties, suffering losses in both men and armor. This incident was not publicized by the Indian side* however, due to which the exact amount of damage is not known. *The damage was severe enough, in any case, that 18th Grenadiers battalion did not attack the Tiger Hills positions for around half a week, until support arrived in the form of another Indian Unit, eight Sikh.*
*On 6 July, both the 18th Grenadiers battalion and the 8th Sikh launched a combined attack on Tiger Hills, in what many consider one of the fiercest battles of the Kargil Operation. Detachments of Indian soldiers launched an attack from the very high, steep side of the hills. The 12th NLI was not expecting an attack from this side, and it took them by surprise. The NLI fought this battle at a heavy cost. Over half the 12th NLI unit's strength was lost in the fighting that ensued, suffering 80 casualties out of the unit's total strength of around 130. Casualties including Subedar Sikander, who had commanded the unit in this battle so far. In the course of the fighting that ensued, some number of bunker fortifications held by the NLI unit were completely destroyed by the Indians, launching surprise attacks and dropping bombs into them.*
*Towards the end of the engagement, only Havaldar Lalak Jan and three other men remained*. The onslaught of the Indians was continuing and they were rapidly advancing towards capturing the hills. *Lalak Jan, now the senior most person around, placed his three men in strategic positions, assigning two to three positions per person, and ordering them to rapidly fire from different positions. These men, pitted against an enemy vastly superior in number and weaponry, managed to repulse the Indian onslaught, in a saga of sheer courage and great determination*.

*On 7 July 1999*, *the 18th Grenadiers battalion and the 8th Sikh unit launched yet another combined offensive. This time they succeeded in their attack. Two of Lalak Jan's men were killed, and Lalak Jan and his only other remaining comrade in arms, Bakhmal Jan were both seriously injured. Not giving up, Lalak Jan got hold of a LMG and while Bakhmal Jan provided him with the ammunition, and the two men desperately kept trying to repulse the Indian attack. Lalak Jan's left arm had been rendered useless after receiving bullet wounds to it. Bakhmal Jan, unable to sustain his grave injuries, died while supplying the ammunition to Lalak Jan.

From there on, in one of the most stunning demonstrations of determination and courage, Lalak Jan held up the two units of the Indian Army for four complete hours. Eventually the Indian offensive slowed down and finally they descended Tiger Hills.* The reason for this is not known,* but it is suggested that they preferred to opt for shelling the bunker in which Lalak Jan was positioned instead.*


*[edit] More Fighting in Mountains*
After the Indian offensive had subsided, reinforcements (50 to 60 men) were sent to Tiger Hill under *Captain Amer. When he saw the condition of Lalak Jan he told him to go back to the base camp on account of his severe injuries, his arm being shot and completely limp, and in no condition to be used. Lalak Jan told the captain that he did not want to die on a hospital bed, and would rather die in the battlefield. He reassured his Captain that he should not worry about the bullet wounds in Lalak's arm, that Lalak Jan could still be of some use in the battlefield.*
Around this time, the Indians started shelling from a secret, out-of-sight bunker in an adjacent hill. *The command of the handful of troops at Tiger Hill had been taken up by Captain Amer*. He realized that the fire was coming from a secret bunker and also directed fire towards it, but zeroing in and targeting the bunker proved exceedingly difficult. The exact reason for the failure of this fire by Captain Amer's forces is not confirmed.The bunker was not in range of the *light weaponry possessed by the Pakistanis atop Tiger Hill.*
*There was only one way left to counter the secret Indian bunker; it had to be blown up from a closer range.*

*Lalak Jan, despite his injuries, volunteered for the mission*, but his plea was rejected by the captain. Having significant experience of the mountains himself, the captain was of the opinion that he would be the best man to do it, himself. The captain relented in the end, on *Lalak Jan's persistent insistence that his audacious landmine installation experience and his mountaineering skills would enable him to have a fighting chance to complete this task,*
[edit] Final Operation and Fight
*Lalak Jan put a bag of explosives on his back, and while shouldering an AK-47 descended Tiger Hills for the second time, again amidst heavy Indian shelling. Managing to avoid being seen by the Indian forces, and utilizing his knowledge of the surrounding hills to take cover, he located the secret bunker and threw the explosives inside the bunker.*
*The bunker, which incidentally was also an ammunition dump, blew up in a very big blast. Lalak Jan managed to take cover, and the Indian Army lost more then 16 men inside and nearby the bunker. The other Indian soldiers saw Lalak Jan and opened fire on him. Surrounded from all sides by Indian fire, Lalak Jan made a valiant effort to resist and returned fire.*
*He sustained grave injuries, especially as a result of heavy mortar shelling, and managed to defend his position for some duration, frustrating the Indian attack, before dying at this post*.

* Martyrdom**On 15 September 1999, the commanding officer of 12th NLI sent two Special Service Group Comando groups to Tiger Hills to recover the body of Lalak Jan. The two forces were designated 'Ababeel' and 'Uqaab'(Eagle). Ababeel provided the fire cover while Uqaab went destroyed enemy(indian) bunker to retrieve the body of Lalak Jan. When his body was found*, [B]Havaldar Lalak Jan had his AK-47 firmly clinched to his chest.[/B]Pakistan awarded him the Nishan-i-Haider, Pakistan&#8217;s highest military award, for extraordinary gallantry. Only ten soldiers have ever received this honour. Jan was the first person from the Northern Areas of Pakistan to receive the award.

 SALUTE TO OUR HEROES.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kambojaric

Lalak Jan, now thats a name to remember, what a hero man!!! 

Rest in Peace


----------



## Kambojaric

Solomon2 said:


> Suleiman the Magnificent. He could be humane and respectful as a conqueror, he protected the Jews not just in his Empire but to some extent in Christendom, he promoted culture and education, and he may have been the best legislator Islam has ever had. (_Sharia_ had its place, but criminal and civil law were separate matters.)



True, not only was he a great conqueror, he was equally great in the world of law, thats why in the muslim world he is known as Suleyman Kanuni (Kanun means law)


----------



## Laughing_soldier

khaild bin walid
muhamed bin qasim
ali bin talib

pakistan

ayub khan
zia
akhtar abdur rehman
musharraf


----------



## kamarikhan4u

this thread is about warriors ,not about leaders ,so how come ummer comes before Ali,in my opinion
1)Ali
2)khalid bi walid
3)tariq bi zaya
4)mali ashter
5)salaudin
6)tipu sultan
7)zaraar
8)pakistani captain sherjan of kargil
i am sure i have missed many coz islamic history is full of brave soldires ,but these above mentioned are not least of someone


----------



## kamarikhan4u

if u say he was the best warrior i would agree,but the point he was bravest on this planet ,how could u ignore his son who fought in karbala.


----------



## khalidbinwaleed

No one can be compared with Khalid Bin Waleed... He was undefeated in more then 100 battles... He defeated armies of Persia and Roman Empire which were World Power of that time.. 

My list is

Khalid Bin Waleed
Sultan Salauddin Ayubi
Amr-Ibn- AlNas
Hamza Bin AbiTalib
Sulieman the magnificent 
Mauwiya bin Abu Sufyan
Sultan Mehmud Al-Fateh


----------



## waraich66

khalidbinwaleed said:


> No one can be compared with Khalid Bin Waleed... He was undefeated in more then 100 battles... He defeated armies of Persia and Roman Empire which were World Power of that time..
> 
> My list is
> 
> Khalid Bin Waleed
> Sultan Salauddin Ayubi
> Amr-Ibn- AlNas
> Hamza Bin AbiTalib
> Sulieman the magnificent
> Mauwiya bin Abu Sufyan
> Sultan Mehmud Al-Fateh



Khalid Bin Waleed defeated Roman Army 120000 (Approx.) with 35000 ( Approx.) Muslim Army in Battle of Yarmuk . Which was greatest victory in history of Battles.

http://www.theartofbattle.com/battle-of-yarmuk-636.htm


----------



## AsianLion

General Zia Ul Haq !!!!

General akhtar abdur rehman !!!

General Tariq Khan (WoT hero)


Nevertheless in those days he defeated the Ruskies.


----------



## kobiraaz

Saladin ayubi has a huge influence on me.He is great. Well known for his honesty and chivalry even among his enemies.Mamluk Sultan Baibar was just opposite of Saladin.He was known for his cruelty. But he was a great general. He was the one who cleared crusaders from arab land and brought an end to crusade. He fought on two fronts . . Against crusaders and mongols and the first to defeat mongols.


----------



## kobiraaz

Submit to Islam and be safe.
Or agree to the payment of
the Jizya (tax), and you and
your people will be under
our protection, else you will
have only yourself to blame
for the consequences, for I
bring the men who desire
death as ardently as you
desire life.
This letter was written by
Khalid, from his head-
quarters in Babylonia, to the
Persian monarch before
invading it. (History of the
World, Volume IV [Book XII.
The Mohammedan
Ascendency], page 463, by
John Clark Ridpath, LL.D.
1910.)


----------



## clmeta

Bangla fighter said:


> Submit to Islam and be safe.
> Or agree to the payment of
> the Jizya (tax), and you and
> your people will be under
> our protection, else you will
> have only yourself to blame
> for the consequences, for I
> bring the men who desire
> death as ardently as you
> desire life.
> This letter was written by
> Khalid, from his head-
> quarters in Babylonia, to the
> Persian monarch before
> invading it. (History of the
> World, Volume IV [Book XII.
> The Mohammedan
> Ascendency], page 463, by
> John Clark Ridpath, LL.D.
> 1910.)



1. General Tikka Khan
2. General Yahya Khan
3. General Niazi.

How about these warriors?

Friends trolls apart. Great warriors are those who fight for justice and fight for cause. Not those who fight for looting, plundering or colonising.
Hence remove perverts like Allahuddin Khilji and Mohammed bin Qasim from that list. They were foreigners who captured your land. And if these people are two be included then the greatest warrior on earth ever must be the British King whose empire never saw a sunset.

Tipu Sultan was great, because he was a son of the soil fighting to liberate his motherland.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## twofriends

Hazrat Ali Ibn e Talib AS

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## untitled

dip25 said:


> pls dont ....................



We dont need people like you on the forum
POST reported


----------



## ashokdeiva

dip25 said:


> pls dont put tat pedophile prophet muhmmed. He was a rapist nd killed many innocent ppl nd he was lucky at tat time both powers persian nd romans jst ended long nd bloody war as a reason both went weak nd there he used th chance nd spread th *satanic religion called pislam oh sorry its islam*. He only reversed th bible's old testament nd put some of his satanic idiotic features in it 2 satisfy his lust.


 
you could get banned for that bold part. This is PDF, you have to be diplomatic


----------



## ashokdeiva

clmeta said:


> 1. General Tikka Khan
> 2. General Yahya Khan
> 3. General Niazi.
> 
> How about these warriors?
> 
> Friends trolls apart. Great warriors are those who fight for justice and fight for cause. Not those who fight for looting, plundering or colonising.
> Hence remove perverts like Allahuddin Khilji and Mohammed bin Qasim from that list. They were foreigners who captured your land. And if these people are two be included then the greatest warrior on earth ever must be the British King whose empire never saw a sunset.
> 
> *Tipu Sultan was great*, because he was a son of the soil fighting to liberate his motherland.


 
I would not go with that, Tipu gave a lot of trouble to the people settled around Mysore when he expanded his territory. I am one of the desendents of Kalingarayar who fought againt Tipu when he invaded our land near Mysore. We displace ourself in Tamil Nadu to make sure our blood line continues.
He did imprison his own father who questioned him for us.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ashokdeiva

dip25 said:


> I know bro but i dont care i dont fear this bloody muslims.I hate pislam nd their followers.


 
you are getting banned brother. I thougt you could contribute by being diplomatic. But alas it seems you have already chosen your destiny


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

dip25 said:


> kill a muslim means killing a Satan. Bloody kill those bastards they follow that bastard named muhhamed bloody rapist, pedophile.


 
What's fcking wrong with you?

By your definition, we only see the Nato is committing the Satanic deeds in Afghanistan!!!


----------



## kingkobra

ashokdeiva said:


> I would not go with that, Tipu gave a lot of trouble to the people settled around Mysore when he expanded his territory. I am one of the desendents of Kalingarayar who fought againt Tipu when he invaded our land near Mysore. We displace ourself in Tamil Nadu to make sure our blood line continues.
> He did imprison his own father who questioned him for us.


 
tipu was one SOB...people know little about his true dark side..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## edifice

Mahmud Ghaznavi [979-1030] 
Mahmud Ghaznavi is known as one of the greatest conquerors the world has ever seen. He was one of the very few leaders who were never defeated in a battlefield. Born in 979, Mahmud became the Sultan of Ghazni in 998.
the maneuverings of the Hindu rulers of Punjab forced him to invade South Asia. He came to South Asia seventeen times and went back to Ghazni every time with a great victory. He fought against the strong forces of Jaipal, Annadpal, Tarnochalpal, Kramta and the joint forces of Hindu Rajas and Maharajas but all of them were forced to flee away from the battlefield due to Mahmud's war strategy as a general.
His judicial system was very good as everybody was equal before the law and justice was the order of the day. 
During his rule, Lahore also became a great center of learning and culture. Lahore was called 'Small Ghazni'

---------- Post added at 05:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:53 PM ----------

Dont Foget "The Lion of Desert" Umer Mukhtar


----------



## AsianLion

*Aurangzeb and Islamic Rule in India*

When historians look back at Muslim rule in India, their perspective greatly shapes the way they present historical characters. Some people are seen as great and enlightened leaders, while others are ruthless tyrants. No one is more controversial than the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb Alamgir, who ruled from 1658 to 1707.

By Hindus and Sikhs, he is seen as a cruel and ruthless emperor that restricted freedoms and imposed a religiously intolerant regime on the people. By Muslims he is seen as a devoted and religious-minded just sultan. This article will look past the rhetoric about Aurangzeb to understand him as a Muslim ruler in a Hindu-dominated country

*Background and Early Life*





An example of the Quranic calligraphy written by Aurangzeb

It is important when looking at the 49 year reign of Aurangzeb to understand his reign in context. The Mughals took power in India during the reign of Babur in the 1500s. Over 150 years later when Aurangzeb took power, the Mughal Empire was at is pinnacle. It controlled the majority of the Indian subcontinent and was one of the wealthiest (if not the wealthiest outright) empires in the world.

Aurangzeb was thus born into powerful and cosmopolitan state with immense riches in 1618. His father was the legendary Shah Jahan, the builder of the Taj Mahal in Agra. He was afforded the best scholars and teachers to educate him from a young age. As a young boy, he became well-versed in the Quran, the science of Hadith, and other aspects of Islamic sciences. He was known as a very enthusiastic reader. He read and wrote in Arabic, Persian, and Chagatai Turkic, the language of his ancestors. He was also trained in the art of calligraphy. Some of his calligraphic works are still in existence today.

*Promotion of Islam*
One of Aurangzeb’s main goals was to bring true Islamic governance to the Mughal Empire. Previous emperors, while all Muslim, had not all ruled according to Islamic law. His great grandfather Akbar, for example, regularly went against Islamic beliefs by adopting many non-Islamic religious beliefs and practices in his personal life as well as in his rule of the empire. Aurangzeb’s insistence on Islamic rule was based on his previous education and his strong religious convictions.





Al-Fatawa al-Hindiya, the book of Islamic law compiled by Aurangzeb

Aurangzeb took power before his father, Shah Jahan, had passed away. Despite the respect he had for his father, Aurangzeb vehemently disagreed with many of his fathers actions, considering them to be wasteful and extravagant. An example of his religious mindset was his criticism of the Taj Mahal, which was a tomb built by Shah Jahan for Aurangzeb’s mother, Mumtaz Mahal. Aurangzeb considered it to be against the religious laws of Islam to build a structure over a grave, particularly one that was so ornate and expensive. He declared “the lawfulness of a solid construction over a grave is doubtful, and there can be no doubt about the extravagance involved.” He also made it a point to publicly oppose excessive veneration of the graves of Sufis, as he noted that it was developing into a cult-like practice, away from the beliefs and practices of Islam.

In order to practice Islamic law in the empire correctly, Aurangzeb insisted on compiling Islamic law into a codified book that could be much more easily followed. He thus brought together hundreds of scholars of Islam from all over the Muslim world to organize such laws. The result was a landmark text of fiqh (jurisprudence) in the Hanafi school, known as the Fatawa-e-Alamgiri, meaning “The Religious Decrees of Alamgir”. It was known as the Fatawa al-Hindiya (الفتاوى الهندية) in the rest of the Muslim world and is well-respected as a compendium ofHanafi law.

Using the Fatawa-e-Alamgiri as a guidebook, Aurangzeb sent officials throughout the empire to enact Islamic law and end socially corrupt practices. As such, alcoholism, gambling, and prostitution were combated by the imperial government. Taxes that were not in line with Islamic law were also abolished, a policy that was very popular with the Mughal Empire’s subjects.

To make up for the loss in tax revenue, Aurangzeb adopted a very simple lifestyle and did not live in a lavish manner as his father had. Royal traditions that he considered extravagant were abolished, such as court musicians and festivities on the emperor’s birthday.

*Relations With Hindus and Sikhs*

While the accomplishments and religious-mindedness of Aurangzeb’s reign is indisputable there are those historians and academics who insist that the lasting legacy of Aurangzeb is intolerance and oppression. He is commonly cited as a temple-destroyer and someone who attempted to eliminate non-Muslims in his empire. For the truth, some more context is necessary.

With regards to his attitudes towards Hindus and Sikhs in general, he was clearly not prejudiced nor discriminatory. Dozens of Hindus worked in his royal court as officials and advisers. More non-Muslims in fact were part of his court than the court of Akbar, who is commonly cited as a the most religiously tolerant Mughal emperor. With Hindus and Sikhs occupying positions in his government and military, clearly Aurangzeb was not simply a religious bigot that refused to acknowledge the contributions of his non-Muslim subjects.

The second issue that comes up in analysis’ of Aurangzeb’s rule is instances of him destroying Hindu and Sikh temples and refusing to allow new ones to be built. That he ordered such actions is a historical fact that cannot be disputed.





Aurangzeb’s court included dozens of non-Muslim officials

Preservation of temples with Islamic religious justification is a long-running tradition in India. The first Muslim army to come to India in 711 under Muhammad bin Qasim promised religious freedom and security of temples to Hindus and Buddhists. The same policy had been followed for hundreds of years before the Mughals. However, Aurangzeb did not disregard the Islamic laws regarding protection of religious minorities. Aurangzeb himself even noted that Islamically, temple desecration was not permitted when in 1659 he wrote, “According to the Shariah [Islamic law], and the exalted creed, it has been established that ancient temples should not be torn down.” 1

So if Aurangzeb did not demolish temples for religious reasons, why did he do it? The answer lies in the political nature of temples in the 1600s.

Hindu and Sikh temples (unlike Muslim mosques) were not just places of worship. They also had political significance. Temples acted as political offices and state property, and the priests that were in charge of them were in the employ of the government. When seeking to get the support of Hindus in a particular area, Mughal emperors (and even Hindu kings in non-Mughal areas) would rely on the priests to rally the local population through the temple. As such, a temple was more than just a religious building, it was also a potentially powerful political tool.

With this understanding of temples and their significance, we can move on to understand Aurangzeb’s destruction of certain temples. No historical records show that he had an indiscriminate policy of temple destruction across India. The temples he chose to destroy were carefully selected and a small fraction of the total Hindu houses of worship in India. This is because when Aurangzeb chose a temple for destruction, it was a politically motivated act, not a religious one.

Seeing the opulence and subsequent financial strain of the Mughals during the reign of Shah Jahan, numerous local governors and priests decided to rebel against Mughal authority during the reign of Aurangzeb. When a rebellion broke out in one part of the empire, the local temple was the natural political entity that rebels could rally against. So long as the rebel leaders and their client temples existed, the threat to the Mughal government existed.





*Aurangzeb Reading Quran*

It thus became a policy when fighting rebellions against central authority, that the temple that spawned that rebellion also be destroyed. An example of this was a 1669 rebellion in Banaras led by a political rival, Shivaji, who used the local temple to rally support to his cause. After capturing Shivaji, Aurangzeb destroyed a temple in Banaras that was used as a political recruiting ground against his reign. Another example occurred in 1670 in Mathura when Jats rebelled and killed a local Muslim leader. Again, to end the rebellion Aurangzeb had to destroy the temple that had supported it.

Overall, the policy of desecrating temples was used as a political punishment for disloyal Hindu officials, not as a sign of religious intolerance as some may argue. A further argument that the lack of mosque desecration means he was religiously bigoted also holds no ground, as mosques did not double as political institutions as temples did. While the policy of obliterating a political opponent’s base of operations is one that may have its detractors, the arguments that Aurangzeb’s actions were religiously motivated are clearly baseless. Instead, Aurangzeb was a religiously-minded leader who strove hard to ensure an Islamic character permeated through all his actions as leader. This did not however mean religious intolerance as he followed guidelines for protection of non-Muslims that is mandated by Islamic law.


----------



## Vinod2070

AsianUnion said:


> Hindu and Sikh temples (unlike Muslim mosques) were not just places of worship. They also had political significance. Temples acted as political offices and state property



This is quite interesting.

In fact the reverse is true. Most troubles start after the Friday sermons in mosques which are full of political content.

I have never heard any political speech in a temple or Gurudwara on the other hand.

But as this logic of destroying political places of worship seems to find such resonance, may be the non Muslim countries should do that with all mosques that indulge in any political activity?


----------



## Multani

AsianUnion said:


> *Aurangzeb and Islamic Rule in India*
> 
> When historians look back at Muslim rule in India, their perspective greatly shapes the way they present historical characters. Some people are seen as great and enlightened leaders, while others are ruthless tyrants. No one is more controversial than the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb Alamgir, who ruled from 1658 to 1707.
> 
> By Hindus and Sikhs, he is seen as a cruel and ruthless emperor that restricted freedoms and imposed a religiously intolerant regime on the people. By Muslims he is seen as a devoted and religious-minded just sultan. This article will look past the rhetoric about Aurangzeb to understand him as a Muslim ruler in a Hindu-dominated country
> 
> *Background and Early Life*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> An example of the Quranic calligraphy written by Aurangzeb
> 
> It is important when looking at the 49 year reign of Aurangzeb to understand his reign in context. The Mughals took power in India during the reign of Babur in the 1500s. Over 150 years later when Aurangzeb took power, the Mughal Empire was at is pinnacle. It controlled the majority of the Indian subcontinent and was one of the wealthiest (if not the wealthiest outright) empires in the world.
> 
> Aurangzeb was thus born into powerful and cosmopolitan state with immense riches in 1618. His father was the legendary Shah Jahan, the builder of the Taj Mahal in Agra. He was afforded the best scholars and teachers to educate him from a young age. As a young boy, he became well-versed in the Quran, the science of Hadith, and other aspects of Islamic sciences. He was known as a very enthusiastic reader. He read and wrote in Arabic, Persian, and Chagatai Turkic, the language of his ancestors. He was also trained in the art of calligraphy. Some of his calligraphic works are still in existence today.
> 
> *Promotion of Islam*
> One of Aurangzeb’s main goals was to bring true Islamic governance to the Mughal Empire. Previous emperors, while all Muslim, had not all ruled according to Islamic law. His great grandfather Akbar, for example, regularly went against Islamic beliefs by adopting many non-Islamic religious beliefs and practices in his personal life as well as in his rule of the empire. Aurangzeb’s insistence on Islamic rule was based on his previous education and his strong religious convictions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Al-Fatawa al-Hindiya, the book of Islamic law compiled by Aurangzeb
> 
> Aurangzeb took power before his father, Shah Jahan, had passed away. Despite the respect he had for his father, Aurangzeb vehemently disagreed with many of his fathers actions, considering them to be wasteful and extravagant. An example of his religious mindset was his criticism of the Taj Mahal, which was a tomb built by Shah Jahan for Aurangzeb’s mother, Mumtaz Mahal. Aurangzeb considered it to be against the religious laws of Islam to build a structure over a grave, particularly one that was so ornate and expensive. He declared “the lawfulness of a solid construction over a grave is doubtful, and there can be no doubt about the extravagance involved.” He also made it a point to publicly oppose excessive veneration of the graves of Sufis, as he noted that it was developing into a cult-like practice, away from the beliefs and practices of Islam.
> 
> In order to practice Islamic law in the empire correctly, Aurangzeb insisted on compiling Islamic law into a codified book that could be much more easily followed. He thus brought together hundreds of scholars of Islam from all over the Muslim world to organize such laws. The result was a landmark text of fiqh (jurisprudence) in the Hanafi school, known as the Fatawa-e-Alamgiri, meaning “The Religious Decrees of Alamgir”. It was known as the Fatawa al-Hindiya (الفتاوى الهندية) in the rest of the Muslim world and is well-respected as a compendium ofHanafi law.
> 
> Using the Fatawa-e-Alamgiri as a guidebook, Aurangzeb sent officials throughout the empire to enact Islamic law and end socially corrupt practices. As such, alcoholism, gambling, and prostitution were combated by the imperial government. Taxes that were not in line with Islamic law were also abolished, a policy that was very popular with the Mughal Empire’s subjects.
> 
> To make up for the loss in tax revenue, Aurangzeb adopted a very simple lifestyle and did not live in a lavish manner as his father had. Royal traditions that he considered extravagant were abolished, such as court musicians and festivities on the emperor’s birthday.
> 
> *Relations With Hindus and Sikhs*
> 
> While the accomplishments and religious-mindedness of Aurangzeb’s reign is indisputable there are those historians and academics who insist that the lasting legacy of Aurangzeb is intolerance and oppression. He is commonly cited as a temple-destroyer and someone who attempted to eliminate non-Muslims in his empire. For the truth, some more context is necessary.
> 
> With regards to his attitudes towards Hindus and Sikhs in general, he was clearly not prejudiced nor discriminatory. Dozens of Hindus worked in his royal court as officials and advisers. More non-Muslims in fact were part of his court than the court of Akbar, who is commonly cited as a the most religiously tolerant Mughal emperor. With Hindus and Sikhs occupying positions in his government and military, clearly Aurangzeb was not simply a religious bigot that refused to acknowledge the contributions of his non-Muslim subjects.
> 
> The second issue that comes up in analysis’ of Aurangzeb’s rule is instances of him destroying Hindu and Sikh temples and refusing to allow new ones to be built. That he ordered such actions is a historical fact that cannot be disputed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aurangzeb’s court included dozens of non-Muslim officials
> 
> Preservation of temples with Islamic religious justification is a long-running tradition in India. The first Muslim army to come to India in 711 under Muhammad bin Qasim promised religious freedom and security of temples to Hindus and Buddhists. The same policy had been followed for hundreds of years before the Mughals. However, Aurangzeb did not disregard the Islamic laws regarding protection of religious minorities. Aurangzeb himself even noted that Islamically, temple desecration was not permitted when in 1659 he wrote, “According to the Shariah [Islamic law], and the exalted creed, it has been established that ancient temples should not be torn down.” 1
> 
> So if Aurangzeb did not demolish temples for religious reasons, why did he do it? The answer lies in the political nature of temples in the 1600s.
> 
> Hindu and Sikh temples (unlike Muslim mosques) were not just places of worship. They also had political significance. Temples acted as political offices and state property, and the priests that were in charge of them were in the employ of the government. When seeking to get the support of Hindus in a particular area, Mughal emperors (and even Hindu kings in non-Mughal areas) would rely on the priests to rally the local population through the temple. As such, a temple was more than just a religious building, it was also a potentially powerful political tool.
> 
> With this understanding of temples and their significance, we can move on to understand Aurangzeb’s destruction of certain temples. No historical records show that he had an indiscriminate policy of temple destruction across India. The temples he chose to destroy were carefully selected and a small fraction of the total Hindu houses of worship in India. This is because when Aurangzeb chose a temple for destruction, it was a politically motivated act, not a religious one.
> 
> Seeing the opulence and subsequent financial strain of the Mughals during the reign of Shah Jahan, numerous local governors and priests decided to rebel against Mughal authority during the reign of Aurangzeb. When a rebellion broke out in one part of the empire, the local temple was the natural political entity that rebels could rally against. So long as the rebel leaders and their client temples existed, the threat to the Mughal government existed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Aurangzeb Reading Quran*
> 
> It thus became a policy when fighting rebellions against central authority, that the temple that spawned that rebellion also be destroyed. An example of this was a 1669 rebellion in Banaras led by a political rival, Shivaji, who used the local temple to rally support to his cause. After capturing Shivaji, Aurangzeb destroyed a temple in Banaras that was used as a political recruiting ground against his reign. Another example occurred in 1670 in Mathura when Jats rebelled and killed a local Muslim leader. Again, to end the rebellion Aurangzeb had to destroy the temple that had supported it.
> 
> Overall, the policy of desecrating temples was used as a political punishment for disloyal Hindu officials, not as a sign of religious intolerance as some may argue. A further argument that the lack of mosque desecration means he was religiously bigoted also holds no ground, as mosques did not double as political institutions as temples did. While the policy of obliterating a political opponent’s base of operations is one that may have its detractors, the arguments that Aurangzeb’s actions were religiously motivated are clearly baseless. Instead, Aurangzeb was a religiously-minded leader who strove hard to ensure an Islamic character permeated through all his actions as leader. This did not however mean religious intolerance as he followed guidelines for protection of non-Muslims that is mandated by Islamic law.



Hazrat Aurangzeb rehmatuAllah elaih contribution toward fatawa collection is one his greatest achievements in Islam, for which he will get sadqa jariya until Qiyamah. in sha Allah

While preparing to sleep, he had the Letters of Imam Rabbani near his head-side. Such a great man.



Vinod2070 said:


> This is quite interesting.
> 
> In fact the reverse is true. Most troubles start after the Friday sermons in mosques which are full of political content.
> 
> I have never heard any political speech in a temple or Gurudwara on the other hand.
> 
> But as this logic of destroying political places of worship seems to find such resonance, may be the non Muslim countries should do that with all mosques that indulge in any political activity?



ya right. Sure, temples pandits don't engage in political activity



kingkobra said:


> tipu was one SOB...people know little about his true dark side..



tell us about his dark side then

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Samandri

There are countless muslim warriors in the islamic history but i would mention only those who stand out due to examplary personalities , deeds and heroism.
*1- Hazrat khalid bin waleed
2- Musa bin Nusair
3- Muhammad bin Qasim
4- Noor ud din zangi
5- Salahudin ayubi*
6- Sultan Muhammad fateh
Then there are those warriors who saved muslims in distress in one extraordinary heroic attempt, the saviours.
1- *Yusuf bin Tashfin*, ruler of North Africa who defeated alfanso and saved the muslims of spain from total annihilation. It stopped reconquesta for atleast two centuries.
2 *Qutuz* Mamluk sultan who stopped mongol invasions westward by defeating them at the battle of ain jaloot.
- *Ahmad shah Abdali* he saved indian muslims of North india from complete maratha rule over them, said labaik to requests of punjabi musalman of crushing sikh misls and prevented central asian muslims from being overrun by Qing china.

Then we have freedom fighters who may not have succeeded but left examples for us to follow, heroes of modren age , the guerrella fighters who gave shocks and surprises to mighty empires and colonial powers.
1- *Imam shamil* freedom fighter of dageshistan from russian occupation.
2- *Omar mukhtar* freedom fighter of libiya against italian occupation.
3- *Faqir of ipi* pashtun freedom fighter against british occupation, noted for innovative guerrella tactics.
There are lot more but my knowledge is limited.

Within subcontinent context, Mahmud ghaznavi and ghauri are at the top in establishing muslim power and presence in india. Ghori got once defeated by chauhan but ghaznavi was undefeated. Ilaudin khilji is noted for defeating mongols. Babur and sher shah suri are noted as military genuises. Aurangzeb expanded his empire to greatest extent. In 18th century, haider ali and tipu emerged as heroes and last hope.

There are countless muslim warriors in the islamic history but i would mention only those who stand out due to examplary personalities , deeds and heroism.
*1- Hazrat khalid bin waleed
2- Musa bin Nusair
3- Muhammad bin Qasim
4- Noor ud din zangi
5- Salahudin ayubi*
6- Sultan Muhammad fateh
Then there are those warriors who saved muslims in distress in one extraordinary heroic attempt, the saviours.
1- *Yusuf bin Tashfin*, ruler of North Africa who defeated alfanso and saved the muslims of spain from total annihilation. It stopped reconquesta for atleast two centuries.
2 *Qutuz* Mamluk sultan who stopped mongol invasions westward by defeating them at the battle of ain jaloot.
- *Ahmad shah Abdali* he saved indian muslims of North india from complete maratha rule over them, said labaik to requests of punjabi musalman of crushing sikh misls and prevented central asian muslims from being overrun by Qing china.

Then we have freedom fighters who may not have succeeded but left examples for us to follow, heroes of modren age , the guerrella fighters who gave shocks and surprises to mighty empires and colonial powers.
1- *Imam shamil* freedom fighter of dageshistan from russian occupation.
2- *Omar mukhtar* freedom fighter of libiya against italian occupation.
3- *Faqir of ipi* pashtun freedom fighter against british occupation, noted for innovative guerrella tactics.
There are lot more but my knowledge is limited.

Within subcontinent context, Mahmud ghaznavi and ghauri are at the top in establishing muslim power and presence in india. Ghori got once defeated by chauhan but ghaznavi was undefeated. Ilaudin khilji is noted for defeating mongols. Babur and sher shah suri are noted as military genuises. Aurangzeb expanded his empire to greatest extent. In 18th century, haider ali and tipu emerged as heroes and last hope.


----------



## Samandri

There are countless muslim warriors in the islamic history but i would mention only those who stand out due to examplary personalities , deeds and heroism.
*1- Hazrat khalid bin waleed
2- Musa bin Nusair
3- Muhammad bin Qasim
4- Noor ud din zangi
5- Salahudin ayubi*
6- Sultan Muhammad fateh
Then there are those warriors who saved muslims in distress in one extraordinary heroic attempt, the saviours.
1- *Yusuf bin Tashfin*, ruler of North Africa who defeated alfanso and saved the muslims of spain from total annihilation. It stopped reconquesta for atleast two centuries.
2 *Qutuz* Mamluk sultan who stopped mongol invasions westward by defeating them at the battle of ain jaloot.
- *Ahmad shah Abdali* he saved indian muslims of North india from complete maratha rule over them, said labaik to requests of punjabi musalman of crushing sikh misls and prevented central asian muslims from being overrun by Qing china.

Then we have freedom fighters who may not have succeeded but left examples for us to follow, heroes of modren age , the guerrella fighters who gave shocks and surprises to mighty empires and colonial powers.
1- *Imam shamil* freedom fighter of dageshistan from russian occupation.
2- *Omar mukhtar* freedom fighter of libiya against italian occupation.
3- *Faqir of ipi* pashtun freedom fighter against british occupation, noted for innovative guerrella tactics.
There are lot more but my knowledge is limited.

Within subcontinent context, Mahmud ghaznavi and ghauri are at the top in establishing muslim power and presence in india. Ghori got once defeated by chauhan but ghaznavi was undefeated. Ilaudin khilji is noted for defeating mongols. Babur and sher shah suri are noted as military genuises. Aurangzeb expanded his empire to greatest extent. In 18th century, haider ali and tipu emerged as heroes and last hope.


----------



## Samandri

There are countless muslim warriors in the islamic history but i would mention only those who stand out due to examplary personalities , deeds and heroism.
*1- Hazrat khalid bin waleed
2- Musa bin Nusair
3- Muhammad bin Qasim
4- Noor ud din zangi
5- Salahudin ayubi*
6- Sultan Muhammad fateh
Then there are those warriors who saved muslims in distress in one extraordinary heroic attempt, the saviours.
1- *Yusuf bin Tashfin*, ruler of North Africa who defeated alfanso and saved the muslims of spain from total annihilation. It stopped reconquesta for atleast two centuries.
2 *Qutuz* Mamluk sultan who stopped mongol invasions westward by defeating them at the battle of ain jaloot.
- *Ahmad shah Abdali* he saved indian muslims of North india from complete maratha rule over them, said labaik to requests of punjabi musalman of crushing sikh misls and prevented central asian muslims from being overrun by Qing china.

Then we have freedom fighters who may not have succeeded but left examples for us to follow, heroes of modren age , the guerrella fighters who gave shocks and surprises to mighty empires and colonial powers.
1- *Imam shamil* freedom fighter of dageshistan from russian occupation.
2- *Omar mukhtar* freedom fighter of libiya against italian occupation.
3- *Faqir of ipi* pashtun freedom fighter against british occupation, noted for innovative guerrella tactics.
There are lot more but my knowledge is limited.

Within subcontinent context, Mahmud ghaznavi and ghauri are at the top in establishing muslim power and presence in india. Ghori got once defeated by chauhan but ghaznavi was undefeated. Ilaudin khilji is noted for defeating mongols. Babur and sher shah suri are noted as military genuises. Aurangzeb expanded his empire to greatest extent. In 18th century, haider ali and tipu emerged as heroes and last hope.


----------



## Sam_Bajwa

Vinod2070 said:


> This is quite interesting.
> 
> In fact the reverse is true. Most troubles start after the Friday sermons in mosques which are full of political content.
> 
> I have never heard any political speech in a temple or Gurudwara on the other hand.
> 
> But as this logic of destroying political places of worship seems to find such resonance, may be the non Muslim countries should do that with all mosques that indulge in any political activity?



When temples are destroyed its for the good of religion but when mosques are destroyed its inhumane.



Multani said:


> Hazrat Aurangzeb rehmatuAllah elaih contribution toward fatawa collection is one his greatest achievements in Islam, for which he will get sadqa jariya until Qiyamah. in sha Allah
> 
> While preparing to sleep, he had the Letters of Imam Rabbani near his head-side. Such a great man.
> 
> 
> 
> ya right. Sure, temples pandits don't engage in political activity
> 
> 
> 
> tell us about his dark side then



Don't worry he will be reincarnated as a hindu in pakistan .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------

