Throughout history Muslims have justified and rationalised every single act of Islamic murder and violence as 'defensive'. Indeed Muslims, not long after the death of Muhammad, conquered almost one third of the world 'defensively'. Think of Hamas blowing up infant schools in Israel 'defensively' because ‘all children end up in the IDF’ or of the 'defence' that was 9/11. In addition, people must also remember that Hitler invaded both Czechoslovakia and Poland supposedly for defensive reasons. Indeed virtually all acts of aggression in history have been done with the words ‘defence’ coming out of the mouths of the aggressor.
The fits into the general situation in which Muslims use a whole host of words in ways diametrically opposed to howthey are usually used in the West. For example, words like ‘peace’, ‘justice’, ‘truth’, ‘rights’ and so . So just as when we use the word ‘defence’ in an Islamic context we should think in terms of ‘Islamic defence’, so too with ‘Islamic rights’, ‘Islamic truth’, ‘Islamic peace’, ‘Islamic justice’, etc.
This has something to do with what Muhammad says in the early parts of the Koran when he was lying about Islamic peace and Islamic interfaith (to use a contemporary word) because he knew he was weak at the time and needed to pacify his many stronger enemies. (These ‘peaceful’ passages were all ‘abrogated’ by Muslims anyway; and substituted with more warlike and violent ones.) And perhaps because of Muhammad’s early use of the word ‘defence’ (or the words ‘defensive war’) Muslims , though certainly not all of them, have ever since felt the need to justify their violence and killings in terms of defence. It really is silly and just an example of Muslims going through the motions in their attempt to convince the kuffar that they are not into war for its own sake or, more truthfully and importantly, that they are not attempting to ‘conquer the entire world for Allah’.
There have been well over 30,00 fatal jihadist attacks since 2001 - every single one of them will have been classed as 'defensive' by the Muslims who carried them out an also by their many defenders and apologists here in the West. This, again, falls into the pattern in which Noam Chomsky called 9/11 ‘defensive’ and indeed he does the same about all terrorist outrages both here in the West and even in Muslim countries. In each case, because Muslims are simply children to these racist Leftists, they have no free will or conscience thus each and every time they do something terrible it’s always a case of the Devil made them do it. That Devil is usually 'capitalism', 'racism', 'Islamophobia', past 'colonialism', present 'imperialism'... anything which takes responsibility away from Muslim children and places it in the laps of white, Western adults.
Even Islamic rape is often deemed to be defensive to many Muslims. Burning down churches is defensive. Confiscating and burning Bibles is defensive. Every act of violence and killing of non-Muslims by Muslims is by Islamic definition defensive to Muslims.
So treat the Islamic word 'defence' semantically (as being without the same Western meaning), just as you should do with Islamic 'peace', 'truth', justice', etc. In all cases, Islamic concepts are often the exact inversion of their Western equivalents. Racist Leftists and Left-Liberals should seee this and therefore finally realise that Muslims often truly are examples of ‘the Other’ they otherwise wax so lyrically about. They should stop thinking that all Muslims are just like their dinner-party chums in Islington or wherever (who just happen to also have brown skin); that’s when they aren’t treating foreign Muslims as children.
This is a Facebook page called ‘Islamic Defence’: