Of course...

Of course, in instances where this movement jeopardizes the existence of Islam or threatens the laws of Islam and society’s security and repelling this danger depends on an armed movement, armed uprising becomes obligatory. In short, in the Shia way of thinking, complacency with respect to opposing and oppressive events is condemned.

A Muslim must give importance to everything that is related to the honour and grandeur of Islam and Muslims and to elevating the word of Allah and must always act according to his duty. Still, the armed uprising is not among the conditions of the Imamate of the Imam as has been attributed to the Zaydi sect. It is not the case that every leader of an armed group, if from the descendants and family of the Holy Prophet (PBUH&HP), is regarded as Imam.

And one who apparently had no armed uprising and struggle cannot, for this reason, be declared not to be the Imam, as was the case with Imam Zain al-‘Abidin, Imam Muhamad al-Baqir, and Imam Jafar as-Sadiq (PBUTH). This is because: First, their non-armed policies were more effective than armed uprisings in elevating the name of Islam, guarding the truth, and protecting the shari’ah in their time.

Thus, Imam Ali (PBUH), after the death of ‘Uthman, did not leave the people without an answer when they rushed to him from all directions to pledge allegiance with that commotion and longing.