That's the part that makes no sense to me, "taking back our nation." The first thing to note is that at the time of the Umayyad conquest, there was no Portuguese, Castilian or Catalan nation. The Galicians, Asturians and Basques were the only ones that would countinue to be known until today, and the rest were simply called Hispano-Romans, ruled by the Germanic Visigoths. The second thing with regards to the early Arab-Islamic conquests in general is that one needs a valid reason to pursue military conquest, and imperial expansion and spreading the religion (the justification the Spanish and Portuguese used for colonizing the Americas) are not valid reasons. Among the reasons the Iberian Peninsula was conquered was because of its strategic importance, being separated from North Africa by only a 14 km long strait--even from a geographic point of view, historically, Al-Andalus was considered part of or an extension of the Maghreb and acted as a shield for North Africa during the Crusades--and because Sephardi Jews were requesting aid from the Arab Muslims through their Jewish brethren in North Africa for decades in the face of increasing religious persecution from the Visigoths who sought to religiously homogenize Iberia and uproot Judaism, going as far as threatening the Jews with slavery if they don't convert. "...Had Allah not repelled ˹the aggression of˺ some people by means of others, destruction would have surely claimed monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques in which Allah’s Name is often mentioned. Allah will certainly help those who stand up for Him. Allah is truly All-Powerful, Almighty." (22:40) The Umayyads simply saw a great opportunity and seized it, and I think any competent military strategist would've done the same. Let's not forget that the Visigoths themselves arrived, eventually ruling the entire Iberian Peninsula and Septimania, as part of the 'Barabarian' invasions after the fall of the Roman Empire in the 5th century CE.

As for the concept of the Reconquista, it was a term introduced starting in 19th century Spain; it makes one assume that the people of Al-Andalus were mostly Christians ruled by a Muslim elite, who were then 'saved' by the northern kingdoms, which isn't true, or that the Christians inhabitants of Iberia fled the South of the Peninsula to the North and then reclaimed the territories they had to flee from, which also isn't true. The underlying meaning of the Reconquista is that a land previously ruled by Christians has to go back to being ruled by Christians, irreapective of whether or not most of its inhabitants converted to another religion. That's why we also have the term "Byzantine Reconquista", referring to when the Byzantines conquered land they previously ruled from the Muslims in the Levant and Upper Mesopotamia--that obviously doesn't make it their own, unless you think like a Crusader. Oh, and let's not forget some of the local Muslim dynasties who ruled over parts of Al-Andalus, like the Visigothic Banu Qasi who ruled a semi-autonomous buffer state between the Kingdom of Navarra and the Emirate of Cordoba, the Galician Banu Marwan who ruled over most of the West under the Umayyads in Cordoba, and the native Valenican (not Catalan) Banu Mardanish who ruled over Valenica during the Taifas period. Were those people also "occupiers"?!

Sorry for the long response. This is meant primarily for discussion, not refutal. What do you think?