Are there any peaceful muslim nations?

Some people just like to hate and you are unfortunately one of them.

Some religions like to hate. Islam is one of those. There is no hate in my posts, just facts. The hate comes from Islam, not me.

That's the problem, you are saying thing without any facts.

Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot. (See also: Response to Apologists)

Quran (17:16) - "And when We wish to destroy a town, We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives, but they transgress therein; thus the word proves true against it, so We destroy it with utter destruction."

"The Prophet had suddenly attacked Bani Mustaliq without warning while they were heedless and their cattle were being watered at the places of water. Their fighting men were killed and their women and children were taken as captives" (Bukhari 46:717)

What I said about the Hindu massacres were facts, and still are.

Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot. (See also: Response to Apologists)

Quote:
"The Prophet had suddenly attacked Bani Mustaliq without warning while they were heedless and their cattle were being watered at the places of water. Their fighting men were killed and their women and children were taken as captives" (Bukhari 46:717)

The fact that there are more Hindus in subcontinent today than Muslims is enough to refute your claim.

You choose one verse with no context and copied a commentary from Christian websites

Islamophobia.

Other Recent "Misunderstandings
of Islam"

2019.06.18 (Cameroon)
Islamists murder a Christian woman and a teenager.

2019.06.17 (Afghanistan)
Fundamentalists blow the legs off a woman and vaporize her 10-year-old daughter.

2019.06.17 (Pakistan)
A blogger who questioned traditional Islam is knifed to death.

2019.06.16 (Nigeria)
Three suicide bombers murder thirty innocents at a tea shop and film center.

2019.06.15 (Thailand)
An elderly Buddhist couple are shot to death while walking home from their work at a restaurant.

2019.06.15 (Somalia)
A suicide car bomber sends eleven bystanders to Allah.

(Note: Data for each attack is sometimes pulled from multiple sources. The provided link may not be in complete agreement with the updated detail for the incident).

You got your religion and I got mine.

If you are pointing towards ISIS and Al-Qaida, then you should know who created them.

But regardless of what caused 9/11, my question is that for the death of 3000 innocent people US got license to attack Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and now Iran is going to be next. What should we make out of this?

We did indeed aid the Afghanistan resistance to the Soviet invasion, but we did not create ISIS.

But I won't stop there.
America is also partially responsible for creating an environment where ISIS could survive.

We don't have the greatest track record for helping the people of the Middle East. We helped take down Muammar Gaddafi, who was without a doubt better for Libya than the current “government” there; to quote old Ben Kenobi, “you'll never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy,” which is really a shame, since Gaddafi (who was by no means great) had a lot of policies that encouraged education (literacy rate skyrocketed, programs that even had the government pay your bills to help you get an education abroad) and protected his people.

America did support Hussein when he was fighting Iran, but we used his invasion of Quwait to take him down (even though Quwait started the conflict by trying to seize Iraqi oil fields).

So you can understand why Syria is hesitant to let go of the Ba'ath Party (which Russia has supported for decades, since the times of the “Empire of Evil™”) and Bashar al Assad.

He's not perfect, but he's a hell of a lot better than ISIS, who has had a strong presence in every country whose government we've taken down.

Assad also demonstrably didn't gas his own people, there's plenty of evidence that the Syrian government has no chemical weapons and the rebels were the ones who carried out the attack.

The American government has been supporting anti-Assad rebels. As in, Al Nusra, which is an affiliate of Al Qaeda, and the FSA (Free Syria Army) which has ties to ISIS. These are the main groups fighting Assad, and, as they're all now Islamist terrorist groups, they've lost any shred of legitimacy they may have originally had in their struggle against Assad.

So yes, the Western World (not just America) is responsible in part for creating ISIS, directly and indirectly.

decent-enough leaders like Gaddafi, Saddam, Assad and the Shah of Iran,

Are they justified in their kidnappings and murders?

I believe our intervention in Afghanistan was entirely justified by the 9/11 attack.

You need to read your bible