From the article: Jihad, either in the form of the “greater jihad” (the struggle all Muslims must wage against sin) or the “lesser jihad” (the armed struggle with nonbelievers), was integral to bringing wholeness and unity to a divided world.
They say its still as true today: Jihad
“Victory is beautiful but it will be more beautiful to fulfil the pledges. The smallest Jihaad is over and the biggest Jihaad is ahead.”This expression of ‘the smaller Jihaad to the bigger Jihaad’ has been used time and time again to diminish the importance, reward and requirement for the Muslims to perform Jihaad Fi Sabeel Lillah i.e. physical struggle...
...the saying and actions of Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) show that Jihaad definitely is to start (offensive) fighting the kuffar to make the Words of Allah the highest and to propagate (da’wa) the call of Islam. Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said:
"I have been ordered to fight the people until they bear witness that, ‘there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is His Messenger’ and they establish the prayer and the zakat. And if they do this, then from me is protected their blood and their wealth except by the right granted by Allah."As for his (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) actions, they are full of actions that show Jihaad is to start the fighting. So when he went out to Badr to take the caravan belonging to the Quraysh, this was going out to fight, this is offensive – as Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) initiated the action before the Quraysh. Likewise, when Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) invaded Hawazin in the battle of Hunayn, when he (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) seiged Ta’if and the battle of Mutah to fight the Romans and the Battle of Tabuk – all of these are evidences to show that Jihaad is to start fighting kuffar (offensive). This should clarify the erroneous view that in origin Jihaad is defensive...
From the article: It is commonplace to claim that the Crusades scarred the imagination of the Muslim world for centuries. While modern Arab nationalists and Islamists have at times pointed to the Crusades as a source of anti-Western views in the Middle East, this is simply incorrect.
It has to be noted that the Muslim invasion of Europe that was stopped in its tracks by Charles Martel in 732 preceded the first Crusade (called by Pope Urban II) by about 300 years. This was a Islamic jihad from the start. When asked why he had kept going so far into (Christian) Spain, the Muslim commander Tarik stated "To serve Islam." It's the RoP MO to whine and play "victim" after they lose the conflicts that they start.
...reading.