PBS defines Jihad as "striving in the way of God; this striving can take a number of forms, including the daily inner struggle to be a better person. However, jihad is often used to refer to an armed struggle fought in defense of Islam."
I do not wish to overlook offensive Jihad but I see that there are neither logical justifications nor grounds for this kind of Jihad in the present-day. However, Jihad at present is sadly seen differently from what it was initially meant to be.
Jihad has been subjected to political agendas more than it has been kept to the real Islamic conceptualization. The political manipulating of Jihad is not a new innovation for its origins go back to the age of the companions of the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH). During the first 30 years after the death of the Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) at least 3 major wars had occurred between the companions for political gains. The most famous battles are Aljamal (the Camel), Nahrwan and Sefeen. In the belief of Sunni Muslims we should disallow the discussion wars and disputes that occurred between the companions. Instead we were taught that we should continue to value them all.
Turning to contemporary fighting, several wars have occurred between Muslims under the flag of Jihad. The most well-known ones are the eight years war between Iranians and Iraqis, the liberation of Kuwait in 1991 and the Afghanistan Jihad, all of which had the direct and indirect support of the USA, Saudi Arabia and many western countries. In fact the USA had stirred up young Muslims and urged Arab and Muslim countries to support the Jihad against the Soviet Union. The message of Islamic scholars was very clear and eliminated any doubts about the obligation of Jihad in Afghanistan with the result that tens of thousands of Muslims around the world departed into battle. When the Soviet army was defeated in Afghanistan both the USA and Muslims countries wanted to convince Muslims that Jihad is not obligatory in other parts of the Islamic world such as Palestine, Somalia and now Iraq. This has in fact confused young Muslims and caused official scholars to lose their credibility.
Muslim scholars such as bin Baz and bin Othaimeen of Saudi Arabia set up conditions when considering whether or not Jihad is obligatory. The first of the most controversial conditions is when the Imam calls for Jihad. Presently, there is no such position in the contemporary world. The equivalent position nowadays is the king, president or prime minister etc. The second condition that makes Jihad obligatory is when the enemy invades a Muslim land. The term, Muslim land, used to refer to the land that is under the control of caliphate. At present we don't have the caliphate. Instead we have countries surrounded by international boarders. However, the mistakes that were made by the U.S.A. in Afghanistan in the 1980s have weakened any and all efforts by Muslim scholars and countries to prevent extremists from departing into battles in Iraq, Palestine, Chechnya and Somalia.
Finally we should bear in mind that people will never refrain from resisting occupation and oppression whatever the name of the resistance and regardless of the tools of the struggle.

Recent Comments
WHAT IS THIS SPEAK OUT STUFF on Abdullah Al-Tayer: AS IF THEY
frank on Abdullah Al-Tayer: CHRIS: why
Concerned The Christian Now Liberated on Abdullah Al-Tayer: Christophe
Christopher W. Chase on Abdullah Al-Tayer: Concerned
Concerned The Christian Now Liberated on Abdullah Al-Tayer: It is not
Mohammed on Abdullah Al-Tayer: David: Ple
David on Abdullah Al-Tayer: Some verse
Mohammed on Abdullah Al-Tayer: Rick: Brav
Rick Huffman on Abdullah Al-Tayer: I am a 54