autigeremt 6,660 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 I have a great book suggestion and it's much more indepth than the simpleton video posted here. I don't think these guys do books. Attention span issues. There you go again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
autigeremt 6,660 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Abbāsid Dynasty, second of the two great dynasties of the Muslim Empire of the Caliphate. It overthrew the Umayyad caliphate in ad 750 and reigned as the [/url]ʿAbbāsid caliphate until destroyed by the Mongol invasion in 1258. Thank goodness Odegai Khan keeled over dead when he did or we might all be speaking Mongolian these days. For real. Amazing the things these people did trying conquer the world. One day (maybe) humanity can look back and shake it's head at how delusional we were. Until then I want my country to prevail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,125 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Disagree with the left , you're a simpleton. Same tune , over & over. Proggies know better because they are smarter & they care more. The good phd fails to discuss them. I mean they were the largest empire ever. The ottomans, persians and others were trying to expand their empires just like the Romans and others but lets gloss over that for some good ole fashioned islamophobia. And yes, the " simpleton " w/ the PhD failed to explain the meaning of life too, with in the whole 5 minutes of his quick guide of Jihad vs Crusades in the middle east. Yeah, what's all the fuss over Islam anyway ? Noting like a bit of Sharia law to get everyone under the same religious yoke, It seems USN is hankerin' for some old style, medieval era controlling of the masses, huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUDub 11,160 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Abbāsid Dynasty, second of the two great dynasties of the Muslim Empire of the Caliphate. It overthrew the Umayyad caliphate in ad 750 and reigned as the ʿAbbāsid caliphate until destroyed by the Mongol invasion in 1258. Thank goodness Odegai Khan keeled over dead when he did or we might all be speaking Mongolian these days. For real. Amazing the things these people did trying conquer the world. One day (maybe) humanity can look back and shake it's head at how delusional we were. Until then I want my country to prevail. Oh, they would have come very close. This was an era where conflicts in the western world were generally fought with knights in clunky armor and a lot of lightly armed fodder. They likely would have torn through Europe's armies like a rock through wet tissue paper. They were also second to none on siege tactics. Just ask the middle east. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBlueVue 177 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Muslims like christians at this time were all seeking to "expand their faith" Christians at the time were the much more violent of the two poisonous offshoots of judaism. I'm not going to finger point after point when any community college class can do the same for you. i have never, and will never take sides on one religion versus another. Put to proclaim Islam has always been the leader in physical conflicts is ignorant. Not really if you know much about Mohammed himself. He spread Islam primarily through conquest and that fact is not refutable. There is a big difference between peaceful proselytizing through missionary efforts and simply invading a territory and beheading those who refuse to recognize Allah by submitting to Sharia Law and converting to Islam. The Crusades was not about conquest nor expanding their faith my friend but rather about defending sacred territory. I didn't realize this thread was about taking sides but history, notwithstanding, Islamic Extremists ARE engaging in terrorist activities NOW in the name of Allah and, frankly, I dont see how that is even debatable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
autigeremt 6,660 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Abbāsid Dynasty, second of the two great dynasties of the Muslim Empire of the Caliphate. It overthrew the Umayyad caliphate in ad 750 and reigned as the ʿAbbāsid caliphate until destroyed by the Mongol invasion in 1258. Thank goodness Odegai Khan keeled over dead when he did or we might all be speaking Mongolian these days. For real. Amazing the things these people did trying conquer the world. One day (maybe) humanity can look back and shake it's head at how delusional we were. Until then I want my country to prevail. Oh, they would have come very close. This was an era where conflicts in the western world were generally fought with knights in clunky armor and a lot of lightly armed fodder. They likely would have torn through Europe's armies like a rock through wet tissue paper. They were also second to none on siege tactics. Just ask the middle east. They perfected a term used in firefighting....surround and drown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mims44 1,884 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Muslims like christians at this time were all seeking to "expand their faith" Christians at the time were the much more violent of the two poisonous offshoots of judaism. I'm not going to finger point after point when any community college class can do the same for you. i have never, and will never take sides on one religion versus another. Put to proclaim Islam has always been the leader in physical conflicts is ignorant. Not really if you know much about Mohammed himself. He spread Islam primarily through conquest and that fact is not refutable. There is a big difference between peaceful proselytizing through missionary efforts and simply invading a territory and beheading those who refuse to recognize Allah by submitting to Sharia Law and converting to Islam. The Crusades was not about conquest nor expanding their faith my friend but rather about defending sacred territory. I didn't realize this thread was about taking sides but history, notwithstanding, Islamic Extremists ARE engaging in terrorist activities NOW in the name of Allah and, frankly, I dont see how that is even debatable. Muhammed was commanded to get rid of all the idol worship the same as Christian/Jewish folk heroes were. And again, the crusades were about the people blindly following the church. And the church wanting to create a power vaccuum in Europe to more easily seize power.... which they did. You could also argue, as some historians do that the churches motivations were a bit more benevolent, seeing the large amount of infighting in Europe they came up with a plan to help ensure peace by giving the people a common goal and a common enemy. Saying the crusades were about controlling the holy land is like saying the civil war started because southerners didn't like Lincoln. While technically in a sense it is true, it is so broad that it becomes easy to miss the real point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUDub 11,160 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Abbāsid Dynasty, second of the two great dynasties of the Muslim Empire of the Caliphate. It overthrew the Umayyad caliphate in ad 750 and reigned as the ʿAbbāsid caliphate until destroyed by the Mongol invasion in 1258. Thank goodness Odegai Khan keeled over dead when he did or we might all be speaking Mongolian these days. For real. Amazing the things these people did trying conquer the world. One day (maybe) humanity can look back and shake it's head at how delusional we were. Until then I want my country to prevail. Oh, they would have come very close. This was an era where conflicts in the western world were generally fought with knights in clunky armor and a lot of lightly armed fodder. They likely would have torn through Europe's armies like a rock through wet tissue paper. They were also second to none on siege tactics. Just ask the middle east. They perfected a term used in firefighting....surround and drown. Quite literally. In one instance, Genghis Khan was so pissed off over the slaughter of his caravans that he rerouted a river and literally erased an entire city from the map. Aside from that, they were masterful in the use of catapults. Lots of, uh, interesting ammunition, to say the least. Genghis Khan was not a nice man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUUSN 823 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 It's Jihad! Jihad everywhere. Based this dudes criteria, Hannibal's march on elephants to attack the Romans are now classified as 'Jihad' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
autigeremt 6,660 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Abbāsid Dynasty, second of the two great dynasties of the Muslim Empire of the Caliphate. It overthrew the Umayyad caliphate in ad 750 and reigned as the ʿAbbāsid caliphate until destroyed by the Mongol invasion in 1258. Thank goodness Odegai Khan keeled over dead when he did or we might all be speaking Mongolian these days. For real. Amazing the things these people did trying conquer the world. One day (maybe) humanity can look back and shake it's head at how delusional we were. Until then I want my country to prevail. Oh, they would have come very close. This was an era where conflicts in the western world were generally fought with knights in clunky armor and a lot of lightly armed fodder. They likely would have torn through Europe's armies like a rock through wet tissue paper. They were also second to none on siege tactics. Just ask the middle east. They perfected a term used in firefighting....surround and drown. Quite literally. In one instance, Genghis Khan was so pissed off over the slaughter of his caravans that he rerouted a river and literally erased an entire city from the map. Aside from that, they were masterful in the use of catapults. Lots of, uh, interesting ammunition, to say the least. Genghis Khan was not a nice man. I think I'm correct when I state that he was responsible for more deaths than any other tyrant/leader in history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUDub 11,160 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Abbāsid Dynasty, second of the two great dynasties of the Muslim Empire of the Caliphate. It overthrew the Umayyad caliphate in ad 750 and reigned as the ʿAbbāsid caliphate until destroyed by the Mongol invasion in 1258. Thank goodness Odegai Khan keeled over dead when he did or we might all be speaking Mongolian these days. For real. Amazing the things these people did trying conquer the world. One day (maybe) humanity can look back and shake it's head at how delusional we were. Until then I want my country to prevail. ;)/> Oh, they would have come very close. This was an era where conflicts in the western world were generally fought with knights in clunky armor and a lot of lightly armed fodder. They likely would have torn through Europe's armies like a rock through wet tissue paper. They were also second to none on siege tactics. Just ask the middle east. They perfected a term used in firefighting....surround and drown. Quite literally. In one instance, Genghis Khan was so pissed off over the slaughter of his caravans that he rerouted a river and literally erased an entire city from the map. Aside from that, they were masterful in the use of catapults. Lots of, uh, interesting ammunition, to say the least. Genghis Khan was not a nice man. I think I'm correct when I state that he was responsible for more deaths than any other tyrant/leader in history. Something on the order of a 10th of the world's population was killed as a result of the Mongol conquests. Timur or, as we generally refer to him, Tamerlane, was responsible for the death of about a 20th. Roughly 17,000,000 people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.