Login or register

x

FunnyJunk Notification

The Reason for Crusades

IamSofaKingdom

Favorite Comment

✖ Top Next Comment

The Reason for Crusades. I guess Obama said something about the Crusades or the Muslims but a man by the name of Dinesh D'Souza (a pretty well educated man and

I guess Obama said something about the Crusades or the Muslims but a man by the name of Dinesh D'Souza (a pretty well educated man and a charismatic speaker imo) used this image to point out that the Crusades were in response of incredibly aggressive attacks from Muslims and that they are likely the primary reason that the Muslim expansion was halted before taking over Europe.

Update: Many people are mentioning how Dinesh is a pretty trashy person, that's fine, I am not defending him. I simply mentioned that the one time I went to a speech of his (2008 or 2009) that it is was a good one and he was well informed. Not debating if he is a ****** person, I have no idea.

Well, I thought it was interesting.

P.S. Almost forgot to add link to source (his posting of it on FB) www.facebook.com/DSouzaDinesh/photos/a.279556495404346.96395.216709768355686/1059025257457462/?type=1&fref=nf

Tags: none | except that one | and that one

I MUSLIM (1) BATTLES
CRUSADE BANE

...

+570

Views:	26290
Favorited:	71
Submitted:	02/14/2015

Share On Facebook

submit to reddit

+Favorite Subscribe to IamSofaKingdom

Comments(195):

Leave a comment Refresh Comments Show GIFs

[ 195 comments ]

Anonymous comments allowed.

129 comments displayed.

+235

#26 - whiskeyjacker (02/15/2015) [-]

That's.... not really correct. For the christian map I'm pretty sure they're only including the first crusade. There were countless other holy wars which would fall in the area of a 'crusade' If we are assuming that the definition of a crusade is a war with the support of the church for example the Baltic crusades, the Reconquista in Spain and the retaking of Sicily by the Normans.

This map is bull. You've taken 600 hundred years of muslim history and compared it to 20 years of european history.

That's.... not really correct. For the christian map I'm pretty sure they're only including the first crusade. There were countless other holy wars which would fall in the area of a 'crusade' If we are assuming that the definition of a crusade is a war with the support of the church for example the Baltic crusades, the Reconquista in Spain and the retaking of Sicily by the Normans.

This map is bull. You've taken 600 hundred years of muslim history and compared it to 20 years of european history.

0

#41 to #26 - compared ONLINE (02/15/2015) [-]

Thanks for using a comparison, hope you are well.

-1

#102 to #26 - koral (02/15/2015) [-]

>>#45,
damn Portugal was part of the Reconquista too not just Spain

0

#112 to #26 - imnotkickthecat (02/15/2015) [-]

Well the crusades also lasted a few hundred years too.

0

#128 to #26 - graboidzero (02/15/2015) [-]

"Reconquista" and "retaking" practically mean the same thing and both very clearly imply kicking out an invader... You don't even need political, historical or religious context to figure that out, just saying...

I'll look into the 500 years VS 20 years comparison for I also feel they left a buttload out of this map. I'd also like to see them add the ISIS battles, for factoid sake

-6

#74 to #26 - anon (02/15/2015) [-]

right that makes it way better to kill like 100 mio people in the name of allahu abakar

right that makes it way better to kill like 100 mio people in the name of allahu abakar

+3

#37 to #26 - derius (02/15/2015) [-]

It seems to me that there's even more than 600 hundred years of Muslim history, because the battles on the map seem to reach Hungary and Austria. The Ottoman-Hungarian wars took place in 15th and 16th century and the infamous Siege of Vienna was 1529. The Ottomans held large parts of Europe(mostly Balkan)even into the early 19th century.

But your point is valid.

+10

#46 to #26 - lyiat (02/15/2015) [-]

If the Pope didn't declare it, it isn't an official crusade. A crusade had to be declared by the Roman Catholic Chruch. Most of the 'Iberian Crusades' and the Reconquista weren't declared Crusades and have only been considered so hundreds of years after they took place.

-1

#175 to #46 - anon (02/15/2015) [-]

Then this map is still **** . So what, every single battle by Muslims can be blamed on the religion, but it only counts as a Christian invasion if the pope ordered it? **** off.

0

#179 to #175 - lyiat (02/15/2015) [-]

You're ******* blind if you think that's what I said. At all. The Roman Catholic Church is not ******* Christianity. I simply said that it's not a ******* crusade. Blow it out your ass.

-1

#183 to #179 - anon (02/15/2015) [-]

"Q.Q mean old anon called me out on my **** that myself and the content are misrepresenting what little evidence we have ((((("

lel

+4

#43 to #26 - anon (02/15/2015) [-]

But can we at least agree everyone was being a dick to eachother, enslaving, raping, pillaging if given the opportunity, and it wasn't just the Christian crusades being evil war mongers?

+4

#120 to #26 - schnizel (02/15/2015) [-]

>AD 632 -- Muhammad’s death.
>AD 635 -- Christian Damascas fell to invading Muslims.
>AD 636 -- Christian Antioch fell to invading Muslims.
>AD 638 -- Christian Jerusalem,and later Alexandria,fell to invading Muslims.
>AD 650 -- Muslim armies reached Cilicia and Caesarea of Cappodocia. In the same period Muslim forces carried out raids on Cyprus, Rhodes, Crete and Sicily, carrying off thousands of Christian slaves.
>AD 668 -- Muslim armies laid siege to Constantinople. They were repulsed.
>AD 711 -- Muslim armies invaded Spain. By AD 715 they had conquered most of Spain.
>AD 717 -- Muslim armies again laid siege to Constantinople. Again repulsed.
>AD 732 -- Muslim armies invaded France. Charles Martel stopped them at Tours.
>AD 792 -- The Muslim ruler of Spain, Hisham, called for a new invasion of France. An international Islamic crusade was assembled, and was repulsed by the French.
>AD 827 -- Muslim warriors invaded Italy and Sicily, terrorised monks,and raped nuns. Sicily was held by Muslims until AD 1091.
>AD 846 -- Muslim armies reached Rome, where they forced the Pope to pay them tribute.
>AD 848 -- France was again invaded by Muslims. And again repulsed.
>AD 1059 -- Pope Urban II launched the FIRST Crusade.
Baltic crusades were pretty much handled by the Teutonic knights.
Reconquista which means reconquering Spain which was about retaking the peninsula.
And Normans wanted to retake Sicily from the Arabs, in a way, at least it was the Europeans taking it.

+4

#134 to #26 - thepizzadevourer (02/15/2015) [-]

In case you didn't notice, two of the examples you gave were people REtaking lands they used to own from Muslim invaders/various rebel groups. They were left off the map for good reason; the primary motivation was driving out invaders rather than a holy war. The fact of the matter is, Muslims had been aggressively expanding into European territory for LONG before the Crusades happened. Obama (as well as a lot of people) made out like the Crusades were some unprovoked ideological war, when in reality it was partially business as usual during the middle ages and partly in response to Muslim incursions. Pic related: it shows the extent of Muslim conquests from 622-750. The First Crusade wasn't declared until 1095.

In case you didn't notice, two of the examples you gave were people REtaking lands they used to own from Muslim invaders/various rebel groups. They were left off the map for good reason; the primary motivation was driving out invaders rather than a holy war. The fact of the matter is, Muslims had been aggressively expanding into European territory for LONG before the Crusades happened. Obama (as well as a lot of people) made out like the Crusades were some unprovoked ideological war, when in reality it was partially business as usual during the middle ages and partly in response to Muslim incursions. Pic related: it shows the extent of Muslim conquests from 622-750. The First Crusade wasn't declared until 1095.

+34

#45 to #26 - noobpeller (02/15/2015) [-]

I'd argue that the reconquista was just the Spanish kings' way of saying "get the hell out of our space" rather than a christian struggle. I mean, before the muslims came, Spain was pretty divided, with separate "kingdoms" (think Italy before unification), but then all of a sudden another challenger approaches that friggin tears through what was then known as the Iberian peninsula. It got to a point where the "official" Iberian kingdoms were stuck on the top sliver of the peninsula (what would be Asturias. The other northern sliver belonged to France). And the caliphate kept pushing north to try and get all of the Peninsula, so the Spanish kings were like "we might hate each other, but we hate these people more", which is why they pushed southward a la reconquista. Was religion involved in their decision? Sure, why not. This is 14-15th century Europe. Religion is a big deal. Was it the main cause for it? No. Kings just wanted to get their space back to get the sweet sweet benefits that were going to the Muslim caliphs instead of them.

I'd argue that the reconquista was just the Spanish kings' way of saying "get the hell out of our space" rather than a christian struggle. I mean, before the muslims came, Spain was pretty divided, with separate "kingdoms" (think Italy before unification), but then all of a sudden another challenger approaches that friggin tears through what was then known as the Iberian peninsula. It got to a point where the "official" Iberian kingdoms were stuck on the top sliver of the peninsula (what would be Asturias. The other northern sliver belonged to France). And the caliphate kept pushing north to try and get all of the Peninsula, so the Spanish kings were like "we might hate each other, but we hate these people more", which is why they pushed southward a la reconquista. Was religion involved in their decision? Sure, why not. This is 14-15th century Europe. Religion is a big deal. Was it the main cause for it? No. Kings just wanted to get their space back to get the sweet sweet benefits that were going to the Muslim caliphs instead of them.

+1

#146 to #45 - whiskeyjacker (02/15/2015) [-]

While the original Reconquista was secular in nature by the 11th century it could be labelled a crusade for several reasons.
1) The pope began granting indulgences to European knights who fought the moors in Iberia.
2) The catholic church supported and took part in the formation of several holy orders such as the Knights of Santiago for the purpose of gihting moors.
3) It became a multinational effort as french, burgundian, Iberians and other united several times for the purpose of retaking land.
While debating whether the Reconquista is a true 'crusade' per se bears merits. There can be little doubt it falls in the realm of a 'holy war'.

0

#20 - anon (02/15/2015) [-]

And now the Muslims have adopted the sneaky tactic of slowly moving their entire population into our civilized countries, while we're happy to let them rape, steal and murder anyone who is not a Muslim because to actually stop them would be 'racist'.

0

#39 to #20 - anon (02/15/2015) [-]

Then again. Blame the politics and ******* liberals that let this happen.

-4

#22 to #20 - mcnizzlezz (02/15/2015) [-]

Are you ******* stupid?

0

#73 to #22 - joeykaze (02/15/2015) [-]

are you?

-3

#40 to #22 - anon (02/15/2015) [-]

Found the Muslim

+3

#59 to #20 - androidiix (02/15/2015) [-]

I remember the first time i went to the annual Muslim conspiracy meeting. We had to rent out a holiday inn. There millions of Muslims came from all over to discuss invading the west. It was an okay experience the food was 9/11. But the Jewish world domination palooza was too loud next door we had to call the cops.

I remember the first time i went to the annual Muslim conspiracy meeting. We had to rent out a holiday inn. There millions of Muslims came from all over to discuss invading the west. It was an okay experience the food was 9/11. But the Jewish world domination palooza was too loud next door we had to call the cops.

+7

#78 to #20 - masterboll (02/15/2015) [-]

Comment Picture

0

#154 to #78 - sanguinius (02/15/2015) [-]

You actually dont live in Europe at all or you just have your head stuck up in your own ass?

-1

#177 to #154 - masterboll (02/15/2015) [-]

"youre not as paranoid as i am, so you must have your head stuck up in your own ass"

"youre not as paranoid as i am, so you must have your head stuck up in your own ass"

+29

#21 to #20 - IamSofaKingdom [OP](02/15/2015) [-]

I know at least one leader who isn't Putin up with their **** .

Puns!

+2

#132 to #21 - Ruspanic (02/15/2015) [-]

what leader
is it Obama

0

#187 to #132 - IamSofaKingdom [OP](02/16/2015) [-]

George Bush 2 Revenge of the CIS

+121

#2 - letrollzor (02/14/2015) [-]

Relevant

Relevant

+3

#29 to #2 - somecreepyguy (02/15/2015) [-]

No mention of things that where not really crusades but still where direct action against Muslims. As a christian and a lover of history, i concede ad that, for the most part, the Christians where decidedly the bad guys in those wars.

But, to judge the crusaders themselves is stupid plain and simple. the crusaders where (for the most part) bloodthirsty savages, but people who acted on honest to God belief that god wanted them to protect the birthplace of their religion. they left behind their lives knowing that it was entirely possible to starve to death on the road there. the lesser lords and knights had very little to gain from serving in a force, they did not believe they would become the next king of Jerusalem, but wanted to protect innocent pilgrims and holy sites.

0

#168 to #29 - anon (02/15/2015) [-]

Would you mind giving me a couple examples of how they were the baddies? I feel like this comment section is way more biased against the Muslims while I knew both sides did some terrible **** .

0

#195 to #168 - anon (02/22/2015) [-]

well, the crusades where mostly wars of aggression(the ones we think of anyway), they where declared (for the most part to expand the influence of nobles who wanted more land, the Muslim countries where a lot more liberal thinking than the Christian counterparts, some of the crusades weren't even sanctioned by the catholic church, due to political and ideological reasons for crusading (not glorification of God or defense of the weak) later, the business of crusading led to a necessity for it, wealthy nobles and organisations needed it to continue, spurring more unwarranted crusading. things that are an affront to the religion that are supposed to be the whole reason they are there (faking relics and miracles, threatening the destruction of holy relics, not to mention the whole love thy neighbor thing)

But again, early crusaders, with genuine concern for Christian pilgrims and holy sites (looking at the knightly orders) may actually be "good guys" some nobles gave up land and titles to work as essentially a full time police force/ spec ops unit/ monk for belief in the cause . true knights in shining armor who willingly gave lives for what was seen as right are the polar opposite of the picture of barbarians we sometimes see today.

+39

#32 - navien (02/15/2015) [-]

we need a hero.

we need a hero.

+1

#89 to #32 - rundas ONLINE (02/15/2015) [-]

Remove kebab thread?

Remove kebab thread?

+1

#91 to #89 - rundas ONLINE (02/15/2015) [-]

Comment Picture

+1

#90 to #89 - rundas ONLINE (02/15/2015) [-]

Comment Picture

+1

#92 to #90 - rundas ONLINE (02/15/2015) [-]

Comment Picture

+2

#93 to #92 - rundas ONLINE (02/15/2015) [-]

Comment Picture

+3

#94 to #93 - rundas ONLINE (02/15/2015) [-]

Comment Picture

+18

#84 - anon (02/15/2015) [-]

Comment Picture

+27

#47 - silentwarrior ONLINE (02/15/2015) [-]

>Includes every muslim battle ever fought but only includes one christian campaign

Way to accurately portray both groups. While your at it, maybe include africa or the americas, which was also conquered and christianty spread by force. Islam was spread by force in many cases, but so was christianity.

-3

#57 to #47 - IamSofaKingdom [OP](02/15/2015) [-]

I can't be certain of it, I didn't make it, but I think it was just to make a point that "this much violence was enacted upon this people group and this is how they retaliated"

It would certainly make more sense to include all of the crusades but I think they were just using the first one as the response to the prolonged aggression against them.

That is just my guess though.

+3

#71 to #57 - silentwarrior ONLINE (02/15/2015) [-]

Even if they only used the response to that aggression, they are including history of battles well more than 600 years after first crusade. That is both misinfromation and misrepresentation. Also, what the map portrays is every single battle muslims have been in against christians except the first crusade. Wether it was one or the other that attacked first, they label it as muslim conquests.

If you for example took conquests from 17th onwards, the map would literally reverse itself. It's all about how you represent the information.

+1

#138 to #47 - godofhorizons (02/15/2015) [-]

And that was the point of the entire speech. Not that Christianity was evil and Islam good, but that evils have been perpetrated by many in the name of religion and we should judge people of a religion based upon what others in that religion have done.

+6

#115 - dinklgreuber (02/15/2015) [-]

And what about the Drang Nach Osten? "Great Drive East"
Do the Teutonic and Germanic northern Crusades not matter?

And what about the Drang Nach Osten? "Great Drive East"
Do the Teutonic and Germanic northern Crusades not matter?

0

#137 to #115 - fuzzyballs (02/15/2015) [-]

those guys didn't fight Muslims
they fought Pagans and Orthodox

0

#150 to #137 - dinklgreuber (02/15/2015) [-]

Still crusades against filthy backward folk, spreading heresy and whatnot
The Emperor protects

Still crusades against filthy backward folk, spreading heresy and whatnot
The Emperor protects

+2

#151 to #150 - fuzzyballs (02/15/2015) [-]

you're preaching to the wrong crowd here buddy
Blood for the Blood God

0

#153 to #151 - dinklgreuber (02/15/2015) [-]

AHA! I have found the Chaos scum hidden within!
Actually I lie, it is the Webway that shall guide us

AHA! I have found the Chaos scum hidden within!
Actually I lie, it is the Webway that shall guide us

+2

#155 to #153 - fuzzyballs (02/15/2015) [-]

Shame about that, cos I got 'arf a dozen Dreadmobs and a couple a Gargants wiv me.

0

#161 to #155 - dinklgreuber (02/15/2015) [-]

Why must I lower my innumerable facets of intelligence to speak with mere fungi? It is of no concern, I shall simply eradicate your existance
Oh and those Teutons killed many a Pagan

Why must I lower my innumerable facets of intelligence to speak with mere fungi? It is of no concern, I shall simply eradicate your existance
Oh and those Teutons killed many a Pagan

0

#164 to #161 - fuzzyballs (02/15/2015) [-]

dunno
did Paganism still exist at that time? I thought the Danish people were Christians by that time

0

#169 to #164 - dinklgreuber (02/15/2015) [-]

Paganism was around for a long time, and technically is still with us today

0

#172 to #169 - fuzzyballs (02/15/2015) [-]

I think you might have meant Balts?
those guys had Baltic Paganism, not the Nordic kind

the old Prussians, Lithuanians and Yotvingians and whatnot
basically the peoples in between Russia and Poland

0

#173 to #172 - dinklgreuber (02/15/2015) [-]

While I believe you to be correct, I think there was some misreading as I didn't speak of the Nords as far as I am aware.
Skyrim belongs to the Nords!

0

#162 to #161 - dinklgreuber (02/15/2015) [-]

Existence*
**** , and I was holding it together so well.

Existence*
**** , and I was holding it together so well.

0

#142 to #115 - willindor (02/15/2015) [-]

Sergei Prokofiev - Battle On The Ice

Great now I have this stuck in my head again.

0

#148 to #115 - theowerdawg (02/15/2015) [-]

yeah, The danes also went to fight estonia in the crusader age they won, but through myth they won by, having their current flag come down from God

+9

#85 - anon (02/15/2015) [-]

Anyone that thinks the lower part of this graphic represents all "Christian" violence knows nothing about history.

Although, anyone that thinks religion is the main motivator of war also knows nothing about history. Religion and politics went hand in hand for centuries, and any war for the sake of spreading religion was more a war for the sake of spreading influence, taking land, claiming resources and consolidating power. Religion has just been a nice excuse.

-1

#86 to #85 - IamSofaKingdom [OP](02/15/2015) [-]

The map is showing their military actions and movements but distinguishing the two parties by their religious views/stances. It isn't saying the wars were done for religion. I think this was a response to Obama saying something in favor of Muslims and apologizing for the crusades or something. I don't know, I don't keep up with politicians very well.

0

#117 to #85 - apexhawk (02/15/2015) [-]

Very true in most conflicts of the modern age. Not true for any of the crusades.

It is difficult for us to understand from a modern viewpoint, but religion truly was the greatest motivator for the crusaders, from the common people and footsoldiers to the nobles and kings leading them. Faith and the absolvence of sins were powerful motivators, and both christians and muslims truly believed that God was on their side in battle (at least until they suffered losses)

Sure, the crusades had political effects, like strengthening the pope's power and bringing the European nobility closer to each other, and opening trade routes to the east, but that is not why the crusaders marched for hundreds of miles to reach the holy land. Not to mention the fact that only few of the crusades actually led to creation of christian kingdoms in the region, or that those kingdoms were rather shortlived.

0

#135 to #85 - anon (02/15/2015) [-]

yet a lot of people think religion is the root of all this evil. I'm not religious myself, but even without religion there would be a lot of wars, but the leaders would just make other excuses. Religion is just a tool for war.

+13

#48 - welthyhorse (02/15/2015) [-]

Sooo many crusader battles missed off though. Main conflict of the 4th crusade was the siege of Constantinople, that’s not even on the ******* map. Neither are so many other crusader battles I can’t name of the top of my head. Go learn some history.

Sooo many crusader battles missed off though. Main conflict of the 4th crusade was the siege of Constantinople, that’s not even on the ******* map. Neither are so many other crusader battles I can’t name of the top of my head. Go learn some history.

+2

#111 to #48 - apexhawk (02/15/2015) [-]

Oh man the fourth crusade, that one's my favourite.

You leave for jerusalem with 1/3 of the number you were hoping for, find out you have no ships, almost get excommunicated for attacking a christian city, take up work fighting for the largest city of the christian sect ideologically opposed to yours, and finally sack said city and go home.

A job well done, I should say.

+13

#25 - bobfreakingdole (02/15/2015) [-]

Islamic conquests stopped long before the crusades, Charles Martel in the 8th century halted Muslim expansion through Iberia and the Byzantine empire wasn't part of Western Christendom and had no influence on the crusades except for being ****** over by them, at least in the sense of "Christendom is being actively threatened by the Muslims". Sure, the Muslims conquered a lot of **** but their conquests didn't have the same " **** them all because their Muslim and the are holding our holy land". I think the tone of the Crusades was more violent than the tone of Muslim expansion through Iberia

0

#136 to #25 - thepizzadevourer (02/15/2015) [-]

I don't think "We'll conquer it because we can" is exactly a more noble sentiment than "We'll fight because we have ideological differences".

+5

#144 - ibschmitty (02/15/2015) [-]

Ive had a continuing daydream where if form another crusade and we go over and fight IS on our own terms. Kind of under the idea of fighting radicalism with radicalism. Calling ourselves something like the Sons of the Final Crusade, it would be an all out holy war.

Ive had a continuing daydream where if form another crusade and we go over and fight IS on our own terms. Kind of under the idea of fighting radicalism with radicalism. Calling ourselves something like the Sons of the Final Crusade, it would be an all out holy war.

0

#157 to #144 - phoenixslight (02/15/2015) [-]

I have not formed an opinion on the rest of your comment but that name is bad ass lol

0

#174 to #144 - Einsty (02/15/2015) [-]

I'm holding a more careful worldview (lolnope, ave nex alea) , but this would make one hell of a game.

+1

#152 to #144 - battletechmech (02/15/2015) [-]

Make it like Hellsing but with Muslims instead of Protestants?

Make it like Hellsing but with Muslims instead of Protestants?

0

#181 to #152 - zenler (02/15/2015) [-]

damn that'd be badass

+4

#35 - nagasadow ONLINE (02/15/2015) [-]

Comment Picture

+2

#42 to #35 - blevs (02/15/2015) [-]

abbasid pls

+12

#3 - internetexplain (02/15/2015) [-]

And how many of those Muslim conquests were Holy wars like the Crusades?

Almost none.

See , this is why I keep calling everyone retarded , ignoring important details and facts makes no you better than the enemy you're trying to demonize.

Also , the map shows just a single Crusade , and there were at least 4 of them , 1 of which was won without a single battle : look up Emperor Friedrich II and the Second Crusade.

Also , Muslims aren't a people , don't be a retarded bigot , be an educated bigot , don't make your cause and yourself look more retarded than phanact is gay.

-3

#6 to #3 - heartlessrobot (02/15/2015) [-]

So, it's ok to slaughter them because they don't count as people?
GG

+5

#7 to #6 - internetexplain (02/15/2015) [-]

I didn't say people I said A people , as in a national identity and ethnicity.

+2

#50 to #7 - derius (02/15/2015) [-]

Man, I'm always appalled at the people's inability to distinguish the difference in the meaning of "people" and "a people".

+2

#72 to #50 - internetexplain (02/15/2015) [-]

yeah it's annoying.

-6

#4 to #3 - IamSofaKingdom [OP](02/15/2015) [-]

How in the hell would that first line justify any of the massive wave of raping and pillaging done by the muslims or discredit the actions of the Crusaders to stop it?

+6

#5 to #4 - internetexplain (02/15/2015) [-]

So , would you say Pearl harbor was Japan attacking the U.S or Buddhists attacking Christianity?

And before you get any stupid ideas , no , this is exactly yours and everyone elses logic on the subject.

Religious zealots made simple political strive out to be about Religion. They never were.

Also , do you think the crusaders were any better? They executed every single POW they made.
Every war has rape and pillaging , don't pretend this is religion related.

+4

#44 to #5 - angelious (02/15/2015) [-]

also should be noted that early ages muslims were quite nice...medicine and stuff like that was flourishing there, they helped the poor and had rules and regulations in place to help everybody.

and they didnt force anybody to chance religion. most people just did it because they were so nice....

-4

#8 to #5 - IamSofaKingdom [OP](02/15/2015) [-]

That first line of yours is self defeating. Japan attacked the US. The US retaliated.

Muslims attacked everyone, the Crusaders retaliated. Just because a religious pretext was added doesn't change the actions. Japan committed some of the worst war crimes in history. Look up unit 731 or the innumerable amount of mass executions, I bet you that they would have receive no mercy from their enemies. They were lucky the US dropped fliers in an attempt to limit civilian causalities.

Your argument is not related, it is barely focused in one spot. You are just bitterly jaded at everything. It isn't very becoming of someone who attempts to use an "explain" name.

That first line of yours is self defeating. Japan attacked the US. The US retaliated.

Muslims attacked everyone, the Crusaders retaliated. Just because a religious pretext was added doesn't change the actions. Japan committed some of the worst war crimes in history. Look up unit 731 or the innumerable amount of mass executions, I bet you that they would have receive no mercy from their enemies. They were lucky the US dropped fliers in an attempt to limit civilian causalities.

Your argument is not related, it is barely focused in one spot. You are just bitterly jaded at everything. It isn't very becoming of someone who attempts to use an "explain" name.

+2

#9 to #8 - internetexplain (02/15/2015) [-]

broken down into the TL;DR version

"Everything you said was right , but you're wrong anyway - retard , lel "

-5

#10 to #9 - IamSofaKingdom [OP](02/15/2015) [-]

Where, in any of my statement, did I say you were right? You came into the content arguing about the religion involved and I just told you that the religion on either side of the conflict is unimportant.

+3

#11 to #10 - internetexplain (02/15/2015) [-]

Which is exactly what I was saying the whole time and you tried to argue against.
Please , learn to read.

+1

#12 to #11 - IamSofaKingdom [OP](02/15/2015) [-]

"how many of those Muslim conquests were Holy wars like the Crusades?"

I respond with "how would that justify their actions" (aka what is the relevance) and then you proceed to argue with me. Instead of clarifying you took it as an attack and began to rant in a random manner, making it worse.

+1

#13 to #12 - internetexplain (02/15/2015) [-]

"Religious zealots made simple political strive out to be about Religion. They never were. "

"Every war has rape and pillaging , don't pretend this is religion related."

As I said , you can't read.

+1

#14 to #13 - IamSofaKingdom [OP](02/15/2015) [-]

political strive? Aside from questionable phrasing, is that a reference to the Muslim conquering and aggressive expansion? Conquerors amassing land through military strength was hardly a political move as much as simple resource.

Rape and pillaging would be good grounds to retaliate to with force, like the crusaders did. I never made a connection there between raping and pillaging and religion, you did that on your own.

+1

#15 to #14 - internetexplain (02/15/2015) [-]

"How in the hell would that first line justify any of the massive wave of raping and pillaging done by the muslims"

>poor phrasing
You're one to talk.

0

#16 to #15 - IamSofaKingdom [OP](02/15/2015) [-]

You came into the argument focusing on their religions and I responded with the actions. You started by asking about how many were holy crusades and I asked you how the hell would calling it a holy crusade justify their actions.

Your terrible wording lead to my question, which you then misread.

+1

#17 to #16 - internetexplain (02/15/2015) [-]

Let's agree that we both made assumptions based on misleading phrasing.
Unless ofc , you're bent on arguing pointlessly , then might as well go **** yourself.

+1

#18 to #17 - IamSofaKingdom [OP](02/15/2015) [-]

"Let's just agree we both made mistakes, while I insult you pretentiously".

Sure, whatever. Just stuck in a dumb argument while I play Dragons Dogma anyway.

"Let's just agree we both made mistakes, while I insult you pretentiously".

Sure, whatever. Just stuck in a dumb argument while I play Dragons Dogma anyway.

+1

#19 to #18 - internetexplain (02/15/2015) [-]

Sure you were.
Good bye.

0

#88 to #19 - cheeseboyofdoom (02/15/2015) [-]

You did a pretty **** job of explaining. Where can I file a complaint?

+2

#123 to #88 - youregaylol (02/15/2015) [-]

all explains are retarded from my experience

0

#180 to #5 - anon (02/15/2015) [-]

Careful, he'll block you like he did me if you keep proving him wrong so publicly.

0

#186 to #180 - internetexplain (02/16/2015) [-]

like I give a ****

0

#193 to #4 - alphahexa (02/19/2015) [-]

Your map is horribly wrong. I figured I would bring some of it to your attention. First of all, it completely leaves out any crusades outside of the scope of the map. Crusades against Pagan Slavs, Native Americans, crusades against other Christians such as the Albigensian Crusade, and others happened, but we can operate under the assumption that the post was meant exclusively in regard to Muslims. During the First Crusade, the crusaders conquered cities that aren't shown such as Caesarea, Heraclea, and Marsh. During the Second Crusade, Edessa was conquered by Christians as well other cities that are not shown on the map. Nothing is shown of the conquering of the territory that became the Principality of Cilicia. This included conquering the large cities of Tarsus and Sis. The Kingdom of Sicily was also fought against in Southern Italy by Christians and no battles are shown as happening there either. During the Fourth Crusade, crusaders from Europe sacked Constantinople, not shown on the map. The Crusades were purely about politics and making money for the Christians. If you are interested in this Crusade in particular, look up the Fourth Crusade and Latin Empire (1204-1261). During the Fifth Crusade, Crusaders occupied Damietta in Egypt, and marched south towards Cairo, but didn't make it (not shown on the map). None of the Reconquista is shown on the map either. There is a lot more than this, but I don't feel it is worth the time to actually point out every single mistake as there are so many. Hopefully you have the sense to realize the Crusades were not "defensive wars" or for defense of Christians considering their scope.

0

#194 to #193 - IamSofaKingdom [OP](02/20/2015) [-]

tl;dr.

Tons of people have already corrected and amended the map. Pretty much 90% of the highest thumbed comments.

tl;dr.

Tons of people have already corrected and amended the map. Pretty much 90% of the highest thumbed comments.

+3

#31 to #3 - anon (02/15/2015) [-]

all wars are holy wars for muslims

-1

#36 to #31 - hurzg (02/15/2015) [-]

How ******* brutal is that?

+6

#30 to #3 - phanact (02/15/2015) [-]

We come from places where we're mostly WASP's so of course they're all like OMG MUSLIM BAD BAD

I worked with muslims and they're great people
Don't try to change the mentality of people on the internet,.

+4

#1 - IamSofaKingdom [OP](02/14/2015) [-]

Before anyone gets their knickers in a knot, I know that Dinesh is Christian and a little strong armed about it but I have been to a speech of his in person and he is a good speaker. I say intelligent because he actually does research before he makes his statements, even if he is a little biased.

+2

#38 to #1 - popeflatus (02/15/2015) [-]

D-Souza is a dishonest apologist.

0

#51 to #38 - IamSofaKingdom [OP](02/15/2015) [-]

dishonest?

+1

#52 to #51 - popeflatus (02/15/2015) [-]

Lies about religion.

0

#54 to #52 - IamSofaKingdom [OP](02/15/2015) [-]

Well, I meant like an example or something. I hadn't heard of any but I also don't follow the guy or anything.

Does he lie about scripture or history or what?

+1

#61 to #54 - popeflatus (02/15/2015) [-]

He's a scummy **** .

rationalwiki.org/wiki/Dinesh_D%27Souza

www.salon.com/2014/07/22/dinesh_dsouzas_laughable_embarrassment_a_review_of_america_imagine_the_world_without_her/

0

#65 to #61 - IamSofaKingdom [OP](02/15/2015) [-]

I never even heard of that movie, but the first link reads like a parody website. It sounds incredibly troll like and I am way too lazy to look up every other sentence.

0

#66 to #65 - popeflatus (02/15/2015) [-]

The man thinks there are sky fairies without any evidence for their existence. He then acts in contradictory ways, like cheating on his partner.

0

#68 to #66 - IamSofaKingdom [OP](02/15/2015) [-]

Yea, some of it wasn't far fetched like having a divorce but then there were things like him saying he was pulling funding and quote saying he wanted to make sure they didn't have gay orgies? That sounds too over the top.

It doesn't help that you redirected me to "rationalwiki" instead of just regular wiki. This is the first website name I have ever seen that sounded like it was patting itself on the back.

Damn you for making me type and stuff when I am feeling so lazy.

0

#77 to #51 - didactus (02/15/2015) [-]

And a convicted felon.

+2

#87 - anon (02/15/2015) [-]

Way to ignore the other eight crusades, genius.

+2

#96 - anon (02/15/2015) [-]

HOLY **** !

THE POINT WAS NOT ABOUT THE CRUSADES. IT WAS THAT BELIEF AND FAITH CAN BE TWISTED AND DISTORTED TO DO TERRIBLE ******* THINGS AND THAT JUST ABOUT EVERYONE IS GUILTY OF IT AND THAT THE ******* MUSLIMS ARE NOT THE ONLY ONES DOING STUPID **** .

******* hell. Sorry for the full caps, but this post takes **** out of ******* context which pisses me off.

+1

#34 - anon (02/15/2015) [-]

To all the people who defend Islam:
I Hope you live in the Middle-East, because that should be paradise for you. Don't come to my part of the world spouting platitudes and try to convince me your way of life is peaceful compared to ours. If you live in the west it's only because you turned your own land into a sh*thole and are now trying to turn ours the same. Live here and do as the romans do like you make people in the Middle East do or...
P*ss right the f**l off.
Love the West.

0

#49 to #34 - theruinedsage (02/15/2015) [-]

"If you don't hold 1.5 billion people responsible for the actions of terrorists or their forefathers from more than a thousand years ago, you deserve to live in a third world country"

k

"If you don't hold 1.5 billion people responsible for the actions of terrorists or their forefathers from more than a thousand years ago, you deserve to live in a third world country"

k

-3

#53 to #49 - wthree (02/15/2015) [-]

It's not terrorists people are talking about, or even acts of terrorism. It's the fact that Islam in it's current form is far more extreme than other religions. You're average moderate muslim is about as extreme as your average fundamentalist christian.

+1

#58 to #53 - theruinedsage (02/15/2015) [-]

Might have something to do with a large portion of them living in poverty in rich countries, or living in so desolate areas that they are easily influenced by extremists.

I have know Muslims who are a absolute waste of oxygen, and others who are great people
Same for whites

Trying to preach that Muslims are inherently bad is moronic, and makes you nothing more than a waste of space.

0

#81 to #58 - wthree (02/15/2015) [-]

First of all, why are you comparing Whites and Muslims? Two different types of categories.

You cannot deny however, that there is something fundamentally wrong with Islam, much in the same way there was with Christianity pre-reformation. These views aren't isolated to non-western Muslims, but to western ones as well. The vast majority of Western Muslims believe homosexuality is morally wrong, for example.

Not all Muslims are bad people, most are probably decent, but that doesn't change the fact that they hold bad views as a direct result from their religion and it's inflexibility.

0

#109 to #81 - theruinedsage (02/15/2015) [-]

I compared the two because many also consider it a race issue

Christianity pre-reformation is still around. It's called orthodox Christianity and Catholicism Which has also had it's fair share of terrorists in modern history .
If you take Christianity literal, it's as ****** up as Islam. It literally says to kill people for planting different crops side by side, and for wearing mixed textiles.

The difference is that we don't take it literal anymore. Some do, but they are usually a minority
Which is not the case with Islam. But that's not because of Islam being "wrong", but rather a result of how uneven Islamic countries are, and how the envy of the west is turned to hatred by extremists. Such fundamentalism has been weeded out in the west, but that has yet to happen with Islam. Fundamentalism is the problem, not Islam.

0

#122 to #109 - iamkagji (02/15/2015) [-]

Christianity is supposed to ignore most of the Jewish laws in Leviticus, 90% of them are overturned in the new testament which is the christian book. So your core argument christianity being just as ****** up as islam is wrong

0

#165 to #122 - anon (02/15/2015) [-]

Well the old testament laws were created to define the Jews from the rest of the world as God's chosen people, it would make no sense for Christians to follow these laws. So yeah this guy has no idea what he is talking about. Hell not even Jews follow the laws and they should.

0

#166 to #165 - iamkagji (02/15/2015) [-]

You're anon, I'm not even going to read what you posted

0

#121 to #109 - wthree (02/15/2015) [-]

People who consider it a race issue are idiots, and it's really only apologists trying to deflect a real issue of religion and culture.

"If you take Christianity literal, it's as ****** up as Islam. "

Exactly

The issue with Islam is that it cannot undergo a reformation in the same way Christianity did. Because the very nature of the Qu'ran is meant to be eternal and unchanging.

0

#110 to #109 - compared ONLINE (02/15/2015) [-]

Thanks a lot for using a comparison, hope you are well.

+1

#182 - Vandeekree ONLINE (02/15/2015) [-]

Yes yes, the Europeans were only left hard hearted and bitter from the earlier aggression of the Arabs who were left bitter by the aggression of the late Romans who were left bitter by the Hebrews who were left bitter by the greeks who were left bitter by the Babylonians who were left bitter by the Israelites who were left bitter by the Assyrians who were left bitter by the Egyptians who were left bitter by the Canaanites who were left bitter by some before that, not sure who but it was someone...

+1

#163 - Zaxerman (02/15/2015) [-]

I really didn't want to read the comments on this picture, because I was pretty sure they would be filled with general ugliness, but I'm impressed at the lack of bigotry. Go you FJ!

I really didn't want to read the comments on this picture, because I was pretty sure they would be filled with general ugliness, but I'm impressed at the lack of bigotry. Go you FJ!

+1

#158 - anon (02/15/2015) [-]

Yes, so?

Muslims, Jews and Christians were actually co-existing peacefully in Jerusalem until the crusaders came and massacred the non-Christians. I actually care more about the outcome of battles than about the number of battles.

0

#159 to #158 - anon (02/15/2015) [-]

They also massacred the Christians. Basically everyone.

[ 195 comments ]

Leave a comment

Top Content in 24 Hours

<

>

Friends (0)