Sorry Ismaele. Islamic law prohibits wars of agression.
However, Islamic law permits a preemptive strike or anticipatory self-defence against an enemy that is clearly preparing to attack, provided that the threat is imminent, real, and undeniable. While Islam strictly prohibits unprovoked aggression, it allows for actions to be taken to prevent a greater harm, such as the destruction of the Muslim community.
Key Principles and Conditions
Imminent Threat: Preemptive action is allowed only when there is credible evidence that an attack is imminent. It is not permitted based on vague fears or speculative assumptions.
Legal Basis (Qur'an 8:58): If treachery is feared from an enemy, Muslims are permitted to "throw back" their treaty on equal terms, allowing them to initiate action to prevent a surprise attack.
Proportionality: The response must be proportionate and aimed at repelling the aggression, not at causing wanton destruction.
Prevention of Greater Harm: The core objective is to prevent a larger catastrophe, following the principle that a greater harm is removed by a lesser harm.
Authorization: Such decisions are not for individuals but must be taken by a legitimate, recognized authority (e.g., a state leader or government).
Historical Precedents and Interpretation
Prophetic Action: Prophet Muhammad used the element of surprise to confront enemies (such as the Banu Nadir) who were actively preparing to attack Medina, ensuring they were faced before they could finish their preparations.
I think our disagreement is based on the meaning of the word “pre-emptive”. Most Westerners are conditioned to interpret “pre-emptive war” in a way different from Islamic writers, where concept approximates jihad al-talab. For those of us who study Islam, there is no also a lot of disagreement among scholars of Islam. You have the Qu’ran of course. Then you have the hadiths about which there is much argument . As for sources, you will find many.
One must consider that Iran has already been attacked by Israel and the US—they are not in state of peace.. I would be careful BTW about using polls sources on Iran that are based in the US or the UK and operated by the Iranian diaspora. That includes IranPoll (Canada) Gamaan, etc. In general I would be careful about the results of ALL polls! Someone once asked me why I was able to predict the results of every US election accurately despite the polls. I answered, “I don’t trust polls”. My success rate is higher than Nate Silver’s!
That's exactly the point of the article in the link in my first comment: do not rely blindly on polls, always check where they are based, their methodology, their funding sources, etc.
Islamic law allows for pre-emptive attack within certain boundaries and at certain conditions. However, I still consider very unlikely that Iran will attack first as it would give USrael the pretext for heavy bombing. I think the only scenario in which Iran would strike first is the case of attack with nuclear weapons, but they need to have sound proof and credible intelligence.
It’s pretty sad when people like this (Julian) use a large language model to produce a long reply but fail to indicate that within their reply. It really destroys their own credibility.
I don’t understand the “credibility” issue. I replied to Ismaele using information from an LLM (after verifying it) but didn’t bother to credit the LLM, which, of course, did not credit ITS sources clearly. It was pretty obvious that that this came from from AI Search. Or should have been. Which is why you noticed it. So you are raising what is an essentially non-issue. You did not comment on the substance of the article, as Ismaele did, which allowed me to engage with him in a meaningful way — you just nit-picked a minor point of accreditation. Comments are meant for discussion of the articles, not for such picky attacks like yours. You did not comment on the substance of my reply (as Ismaele did). So, do you support Iran’s position — or the West’s? Do you disagree with my arguments? That is what is important, not footnoting protocol in my view.
I do understand how LLMs work. My comment still stands that you fall to indicate that your comment was substantially generated by an LLM with uncredited sources. Name calling is not an argument.
You ARE being trollish, Stephen, at least insulting. That's not "name-calling". I didn't realize until now that you were talking about my reply to Ismael where I did quote Google's AI search, but neglected to say it came from its AI Search. My bad. But that was just an oversight. I could have just said, "I disagree". But I verified the AI search reply and it was accurate and cohered with my rather extensive background in Islamic controversies. Ismaele and I often disagree and I usually learn a lot of those disagreements. I regard him as a friend and I can do back and forth. easily. When he asks for sources, I give it to him. He is very informed. And if I ask HIM for sources, he gives them to me. His replies in this thread have been useful and insightful.
I DO double-check, Ismaele. And check the sources.. LLMs provide an often biased interpretation of available sources materials. I noticed you do not mention what “events” I ‘misinterpreted”. I have pointed out many times that internet sources are often biased or inaccurate. LLMs are useful when you are able to persuade them to provide information that circumvents their consensus algorithm.
It has to be said that Mr Trump did say that if protesters were killed, he would bomb Iran.
We know that protesters were killed - and the Western media did blame the Iranian government (rightly or wrongly).
Where does that leave Mr Trump now? Or is it more likely that those people whose attention focusses only on the headlines have forgotten his previous utterances?
That would explain the sudden fixation. It’s always “loads of rare earths” when the missile cupboard is bare. The irony, of course, is that the minerals themselves aren’t scarce; the constraint is the decades of accumulated knowledge, advanced processing technology, and industrial capacity required to turn them into usable inputs. China has that. Raytheon, meanwhile, tops out at roughly 600 air-defence missiles a year. Declaring regime change doesn’t magically solve either problem.
I've not mentioned it before Julian, but by christ you've got a very upper class British way of speaking. I'd very much doubt you'd understand a word I say with the strong accent I have.
My mom was born in Liverpool....LOL. I learned RP as most Canadian announcers and voiceover artists did. It is called "RP for a reason. "Received Pronunciation" is learned as an overlay over a local dialect. I do voiceovers in about four dialects. I am not too fussy about my adherence to RP rules, though -- so you will notice occasional deviation. Fortunately, even RP has "styles" these days, LOL. In the UK, I never used the accent -- except when I needed to complain about something. I used good old-fashioned Canadian, which is a little clearer than American with some British pronunciations, close to "Mid Atlantic". The other side of the family are/ were Gaelic speakers.
Thanks for the explanation Julian, I must admit I did wonder. I'm from further North than Liverpool on the East Coast. Like Liverpudlians we have a totally unique dialect that even those from Liverpool can't understand without a lot of explanation.
Interestingly, the video on the Raad 500, there's a dialogue box that says, "altered or synthetic content". Well, my guess is that they are probably expert in this kind of thing and are able to imagine things that aren't there.
Yes, I wasn't sure what that meant. However, I checked other sources and what they say about the characteristics and capabilities of these missiles is correct. And the use of carbon fiber is very important.
So why did Substack say that it was "altered or synthetic content"? Are they trying to press the corporate media angle on me?
After all, that's why I buy Ichi and Chappie those tins of tuna (in the form of coffee, you understand; I assume the local supermarket is happy to exchange cups of coffee for tins of tuna? Like a Dutch supermarket used to take German Marks, but give the change in Guilders?)
"CIA/MOSSAD operatives provoked violence and murdered not only ordinary people but policemen trying to keep order, then blamed it on the police!"
Just as in the Kiev Maidan. The hired snipers were on rooftops with orders to shoot the police and the demonstrators alike.
https://substack.com/@kayanneriley483280/note/c-200785962?r=h1bh8&utm_medium=ios&utm_source=notes-share-action
Nice article, but Iranian would never do pre-emptive strikes: they are not allowed by Islamic law.
As for Iranians wanting a regime change or not, here is what polls (manipulated and NOT manipulated!) really say: https://geopolitiq.substack.com/p/do-iranians-want-regime-change-heres
Sorry Ismaele. Islamic law prohibits wars of agression.
However, Islamic law permits a preemptive strike or anticipatory self-defence against an enemy that is clearly preparing to attack, provided that the threat is imminent, real, and undeniable. While Islam strictly prohibits unprovoked aggression, it allows for actions to be taken to prevent a greater harm, such as the destruction of the Muslim community.
Key Principles and Conditions
Imminent Threat: Preemptive action is allowed only when there is credible evidence that an attack is imminent. It is not permitted based on vague fears or speculative assumptions.
Legal Basis (Qur'an 8:58): If treachery is feared from an enemy, Muslims are permitted to "throw back" their treaty on equal terms, allowing them to initiate action to prevent a surprise attack.
Proportionality: The response must be proportionate and aimed at repelling the aggression, not at causing wanton destruction.
Prevention of Greater Harm: The core objective is to prevent a larger catastrophe, following the principle that a greater harm is removed by a lesser harm.
Authorization: Such decisions are not for individuals but must be taken by a legitimate, recognized authority (e.g., a state leader or government).
Historical Precedents and Interpretation
Prophetic Action: Prophet Muhammad used the element of surprise to confront enemies (such as the Banu Nadir) who were actively preparing to attack Medina, ensuring they were faced before they could finish their preparations.
My sources say otherwise, see for instance https://www.alislam.org/question/islam-muslims-army/
Yes, there are some interpretations of Islamic law saying that pre-emptive strikes are permissibile within the concept of self-defense (see a discussion here: https://yaqeeninstitute.org/read/paper/war-islam-and-the-sanctity-of-life-non-aggression-in-the-islamic-code-of-combat), but, in my opinion, they are quite stretched.
What are your sources? ChatGPT? Grok?! It looks like AI, anyway, based on the style of your answer.
Also, the battle of Banu Nadir was not a surprise attack at all. Prophet Muhammad even gave the Jewish tribe an ultimatum - see for instance:
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Banu_Nadir
- https://arabiantongue.com/the-battle-of-bani-al-nadir/
Not only that, but the battle of Banu Nadir was not pre-emptive, but in response to the attempted assassination and to previous aggression.
I think our disagreement is based on the meaning of the word “pre-emptive”. Most Westerners are conditioned to interpret “pre-emptive war” in a way different from Islamic writers, where concept approximates jihad al-talab. For those of us who study Islam, there is no also a lot of disagreement among scholars of Islam. You have the Qu’ran of course. Then you have the hadiths about which there is much argument . As for sources, you will find many.
https://yaqeeninstitute.org/what-islam-says-about/islam-and-violence#does-islam-allow-preemptive-war
https://www.islamawareness.net/Jihad/preemptive.html
One must consider that Iran has already been attacked by Israel and the US—they are not in state of peace.. I would be careful BTW about using polls sources on Iran that are based in the US or the UK and operated by the Iranian diaspora. That includes IranPoll (Canada) Gamaan, etc. In general I would be careful about the results of ALL polls! Someone once asked me why I was able to predict the results of every US election accurately despite the polls. I answered, “I don’t trust polls”. My success rate is higher than Nate Silver’s!
That's exactly the point of the article in the link in my first comment: do not rely blindly on polls, always check where they are based, their methodology, their funding sources, etc.
Ok, I think we can consider the matter settled.
Islamic law allows for pre-emptive attack within certain boundaries and at certain conditions. However, I still consider very unlikely that Iran will attack first as it would give USrael the pretext for heavy bombing. I think the only scenario in which Iran would strike first is the case of attack with nuclear weapons, but they need to have sound proof and credible intelligence.
P.S.: I think Iranian Foreign Minister spokesperson made quite clear yesterday (Sat. 17th Jan. 2026) that Iran does not intend to launch any pre-emptive strike: https://english.almayadeen.net/news/politics/tehran--us-strike-claims-meant-to-provoke-regional-tensions
It’s pretty sad when people like this (Julian) use a large language model to produce a long reply but fail to indicate that within their reply. It really destroys their own credibility.
I don’t understand the “credibility” issue. I replied to Ismaele using information from an LLM (after verifying it) but didn’t bother to credit the LLM, which, of course, did not credit ITS sources clearly. It was pretty obvious that that this came from from AI Search. Or should have been. Which is why you noticed it. So you are raising what is an essentially non-issue. You did not comment on the substance of the article, as Ismaele did, which allowed me to engage with him in a meaningful way — you just nit-picked a minor point of accreditation. Comments are meant for discussion of the articles, not for such picky attacks like yours. You did not comment on the substance of my reply (as Ismaele did). So, do you support Iran’s position — or the West’s? Do you disagree with my arguments? That is what is important, not footnoting protocol in my view.
A pity you do not understand how LLMs work or how to use them. That ignorance destroys the credibility of your trollery. :)
I do understand how LLMs work. My comment still stands that you fall to indicate that your comment was substantially generated by an LLM with uncredited sources. Name calling is not an argument.
You ARE being trollish, Stephen, at least insulting. That's not "name-calling". I didn't realize until now that you were talking about my reply to Ismael where I did quote Google's AI search, but neglected to say it came from its AI Search. My bad. But that was just an oversight. I could have just said, "I disagree". But I verified the AI search reply and it was accurate and cohered with my rather extensive background in Islamic controversies. Ismaele and I often disagree and I usually learn a lot of those disagreements. I regard him as a friend and I can do back and forth. easily. When he asks for sources, I give it to him. He is very informed. And if I ask HIM for sources, he gives them to me. His replies in this thread have been useful and insightful.
Even worse: they do not double-check what the LLM spits out, they do not refer any source and they misinterpret an event.
I DO double-check, Ismaele. And check the sources.. LLMs provide an often biased interpretation of available sources materials. I noticed you do not mention what “events” I ‘misinterpreted”. I have pointed out many times that internet sources are often biased or inaccurate. LLMs are useful when you are able to persuade them to provide information that circumvents their consensus algorithm.
Ok, still waiting for "your" sources, then.
I did not mention the misinterpreted events because there is only mentioned in this discussion: the battle of Banu Nadir.
BUT- with Russian & Chinese advance warning, they can fire a very large salvo before strikes in Iran occur.
It has to be said that Mr Trump did say that if protesters were killed, he would bomb Iran.
We know that protesters were killed - and the Western media did blame the Iranian government (rightly or wrongly).
Where does that leave Mr Trump now? Or is it more likely that those people whose attention focusses only on the headlines have forgotten his previous utterances?
I think someone in the Pentagon or the MIC reminded Trump of the shortage of air defense missiles. Raytheon can only manufacture 600 a year.
That would explain the sudden fixation. It’s always “loads of rare earths” when the missile cupboard is bare. The irony, of course, is that the minerals themselves aren’t scarce; the constraint is the decades of accumulated knowledge, advanced processing technology, and industrial capacity required to turn them into usable inputs. China has that. Raytheon, meanwhile, tops out at roughly 600 air-defence missiles a year. Declaring regime change doesn’t magically solve either problem.
Exactly.
I've not mentioned it before Julian, but by christ you've got a very upper class British way of speaking. I'd very much doubt you'd understand a word I say with the strong accent I have.
My mom was born in Liverpool....LOL. I learned RP as most Canadian announcers and voiceover artists did. It is called "RP for a reason. "Received Pronunciation" is learned as an overlay over a local dialect. I do voiceovers in about four dialects. I am not too fussy about my adherence to RP rules, though -- so you will notice occasional deviation. Fortunately, even RP has "styles" these days, LOL. In the UK, I never used the accent -- except when I needed to complain about something. I used good old-fashioned Canadian, which is a little clearer than American with some British pronunciations, close to "Mid Atlantic". The other side of the family are/ were Gaelic speakers.
Thanks for the explanation Julian, I must admit I did wonder. I'm from further North than Liverpool on the East Coast. Like Liverpudlians we have a totally unique dialect that even those from Liverpool can't understand without a lot of explanation.
Interestingly, the video on the Raad 500, there's a dialogue box that says, "altered or synthetic content". Well, my guess is that they are probably expert in this kind of thing and are able to imagine things that aren't there.
Yes, I wasn't sure what that meant. However, I checked other sources and what they say about the characteristics and capabilities of these missiles is correct. And the use of carbon fiber is very important.
So why did Substack say that it was "altered or synthetic content"? Are they trying to press the corporate media angle on me?
After all, that's why I buy Ichi and Chappie those tins of tuna (in the form of coffee, you understand; I assume the local supermarket is happy to exchange cups of coffee for tins of tuna? Like a Dutch supermarket used to take German Marks, but give the change in Guilders?)