The Iraqi historian Ali al-Wardi addressed the topic of conquest and occupation in his book “The Preachers of the Sultans.” On page (204) of his book, al-Wardi denounced the conquering invader and occupier, saying, “Some of these fools boast about the memory of the conquests carried out by their ancestors, but if they were fair, they would hang their heads in shame.” That is, al-Wardi sees nothing in the conquests but shame and disgrace, and this is a logical, ethical, and dangerous matter all at once.

On page (207), Al-Wardi wrote, “One of the strangest paradoxes is that we abhor Timur’s invasion of our lands and consider him the most vile of God’s creation, yet we glorify those conquests by which the Umayyads conquered the world, enslaved peoples, and violated sanctities.” Here, Al-Wardi condemns the issue of this pathological, schizophrenic duality,It is illogical for someone who laments the loss of the Andalusian colony to demand Palestine and the throwing of the Hebrews into the sea, as expressed by the Voice of the Arabs radio station from Cairo in the voice of Ahmed Saeed and Al-shoukairi, and even in the voice of President Ahmed Saeed, i.e., the hero of the Arab nation, Gamal Abdel Nasser! This schizophrenic duality had a negative impact on the status of Palestine and the Palestinians on the level of global politics, The world does not understand this paradox, that is, considering Spain and its possession by the Arab conquerors as perfectly permissible for them, while the occupation of Palestine by the Hebrews is forbidden and unjust.

This paradox and others contributed to the reversal of global public opinion against the Arabs, who have not succeeded in any political battle against Israel, let alone military, economic, scientific, organizational and administrative battles, The happiness of the eight million in Israel is incomparable to the misery of hundreds of millions of Arabs in various Arab countries, Israelis occupy the fourth position in happiness globally after Finland and two or three countries from Northern Europe, The duplicitous behavior of the Arabs facilitated and legitimized the occupation of Palestine to an important extent that may be small or large.

One of the most deceitful, false, and hypocritical things was placing the conquering self in a high and sacred position compared to the known criminals of history, Al-Wardi wrote on page (208) of his book, “Someone might say that the conquest of the Umayyads was different from the conquest of Timur Lenk, for the former was a just conquest in the path of God, while the latter was an unjust conquest in the path of Satan, and I do not see anything more absurd than this statement.” Here, absurdity was mixed with impurity and with contempt for the other, who lived through paying the jizya(tribute) while humiliated and experienced the unique application of the Pact of Umar in cases of colonialism. These peoples knew more about the details of the conquest than the conquerors were able to comprehend and record. There is no mention in Arabic literature of the situation of the conquered peoples, except for the statement that these peoples were very happy with the swords of the Bedouin of the peninsula and their beheading of tens of thousands of people, The first book about the situation of the conquered was by Husam Itani, which is banned from circulation in Arab countries.

The foundation of justice and morality has always been the ability to put oneself in another’s place. Would your stance change if you were in my position? Al-Wardi said on page (208): “We describe the Umayyad conquest as just because we benefited from it, and the people of Samarkand say about Timur’s conquest what we say about the Umayyad conquest, Everyone looks at things from the perspective of their own interest and forgets the interest of others,If we look at the matter from the perspective of general humanity, we would find that all conquests are unjust in the eyes of those who are subjected to them. Would believers accept paying tribute to those who occupy their lands? Moreover, it can be said that the conquests of the Arab Bedouins reinforced their savagery, their bad morals, and their dependence on plundering and looting the spoils of war for their livelihood, which explains the current corrupt conditions, They live off corruption, that is, from theft, plunder, and looting, and not from work and production by the sweat of their brow, They steal from each other internally, since there is no possibility of stealing externally, because there is no possibility of carrying out external invasion.”

Despite the backwardness of the Arab believers, we see them rejecting what they called the pollution of Europe, Does France want to consider Algeria as part of it and then Frenchify it?! God forbid!! And in order to prevent that, it is okay to sacrifice a million Algerians, We all found the position rejecting Frenchification to be correct, but some now, after the experiences of the independence trials, regret the million Algerian victims and the separation from France, Rationally and without emotions, they claim that it was better for Algeria if it had remained part of Franc,And there are many countries that wish they had been part of Germany, Sweden, America, or others,Many slogans have turned into chatter, and in some cases, the hostility towards colonialism has turned into inviting it back, as Iraq did after it was subjected to the invasion of ISIS, as the Algerian thinker Malek Ben  nabi analyzed.

Al-Wardi said on page 209, “Historians say that when the conquering Umayyad army entered Medina after the Battle of al-Harrah, they pillaged it for three days, slaughtering the city’s inhabitants with the sword as a butcher slaughters sheep, until their feet sank in blood.” This is said to be a lie and hatred of the true religion! The proof was with Le Bon. Speaking of Le Bon, we are astonished by the deification of him by the believers, who consider every European an infidel and a liar, except for Le Bon, as if his words were a clear verse. Even the vulgarity of his words and the mixing of contradictions did not raise any suspicion or doubt in their paralyzed minds, How can the conquest be just when, essentially, it is the appropriation of stolen land in the name of the thief? On the same page (209), the historian al-Wardi wrote, “There is nothing strange in this, for conquest is conquest in every time and place. The Umayyad conquest took place in Medina, and we know of it, but we do not know how it took place in distant lands, and how the people there suffered,The soldiers who did This act in the city of Ibn Abdullah, they do not care about an act like it or worse in the lands of the non-Arabs and the infidels.” Also, the news about the rivers of blood in the Wars of Apostasy was hatred and slander, Do you not remember what Le Bon said about the most merciful of the conquerors!

On page (203), the historian Al-Wardi wrote, “It is said that Musa Ibn Nusair captured three hundred thousand prisoners from his conquests in Africa, and he sent one-fifth of these prisoners to the Caliph in accordance with the rule of the fifth, etc, Then he wrote on the same page, “They mentioned that Musa Ibn Nusair returned from Andalusia with thirty thousand virgin captives, and they naturally went to the palaces of the Commander of the Faithful…etc.” Is this the character of the Arab conquerors!

This is the merciful conquest! Is it possible that virgins would fall into captivity willingly and by choice? The logical conclusion is that the conquering mujahideen kidnapped them from their homes after killing their men and looting what was in them, It is not reasonable for the mujahideen to go to the houses of the conquered cities, knock on the door and say: “Give us a virgin for the sake of God.” The truth behind the capture of each girl was a painful story of looting, bloodshed and violation of sanctities, Due to the large number of prisoners and captives among the most merciful of the conquerors, there was a “bankruptcy” in marketing them. Al-Wardi said, “The mujahideen captured a large number of prisoners in one of the battles of Andalusia, so much so that they began to get rid of them for the cheapest prices, so a prisoner was sold for one dirham and a camel was sold for five dirhams.”

It is necessary to distinguish between someone who opposes and despises the invasion, and someone who supports and is proud of it, This distinction has nothing to do with past events, but rather with the psychological readiness of the supporter to try to repeat what happened previously. We saw this readiness in the position of the Syrian Ottomans regarding Turkey and its occupation of parts of Syria, and in the position of the Arabists and the Muslim Brotherhood believers regarding the Bedouin culture, which still occupies the country, delays it, and hinders its progress, They want the Bedouin mentality to continue occupying people’s minds, because they consider themselves part of the occupier, Is it not logical in this case for the occupier to try to desertify the country he occupied, perhaps as revenge, ignorance, or to ensure the occupation lasts forever?

Regarding Syria, it can be said that an attempt was made to assassinate its identity and replace it with an Arab identity – a settler-colonialism! Where are the cultural traces of 1000 years of Arab Bedouin rule and 400 years of Ottoman rule? What did they leave behind? Nothing but ruin, And what did they destroy? Everything! ISIS completed the destruction with the Temple of Shamin, and Erdogan with the Temple of Shamsin, as if Syria has turned into Tora Bora!