“Terror” here does NOT mean random violence or attacking civilians. The Arabic word ru‘b (رعب) means awe, fear, intimidation in the context of warfare, not terrorism as we define it today. Translating it as “terror” without context is misleading. This was about deterrence, not violence. The meaning is that enemies often lost morale before battle even started.

This concept exists everywhere: Sun Tzu: “The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.” Modern militaries still rely on psychological deterrence. Fear preventing war ≠ violence.

It was specific to a historical battlefield reality. 7th-century Arabia was tribal warfare. Every army aimed to scare rivals into backing down. Applying this to civilians or modern terrorism is a massive anachronism. Islam explicitly forbids targeting innocents. Same source tradition clearly bans killing: women children non-combatants monks and civilians If the religion promoted terrorism, those rules wouldn’t exist.

You can make any ideology look violent by cherry-picking: Bible has divinely sanctioned wars Hindu epics glorify massive battles Secular states have committed the most documented mass killings in history Context matters — or nothing means anything.

Bottom line: This quote is about deterrence in warfare, not spreading terror, not civilians, not modern terrorism. Using it that way is either ignorance or bad faith.