Crusades

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Voltron, May 24, 2004.

  1. Voltron macrumors newbie

    Voltron

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    #1
    This fell into my mail box. Some might ask why post it in this forum? I think it is too controversal for the normal forums.
    I might go order this book.
    http://www.conservativebookservice.com/bookpage.asp?prod_cd=C6424&sour_cd=CBE025501
     
  2. IIvan macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2003
    #2
    Good god man!! so conservative you want to try to justify the crusades? Just let it go.

     
  3. Neserk macrumors 6502a

    Neserk

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    #3
    That is an insult to conservatives everywhere. I've known quite a few of them and *none* would ever justify the crusades!
     
  4. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #4
    How about the Inquisition? Can we go back and show what a wonderful time that was as well?
     
  5. Frohickey macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    PRK
    #5
    Only if you have Spanish in you. ;)
     
  6. Voltron thread starter macrumors newbie

    Voltron

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    #6
    seems to me people are responding to the concept or the idea and not the evidence or the reasoning behind it. The guy who wrote that book makes it sound plausible. I havn't read the book and probably won't really buy it, but I'm open minded enough to contemplate that he might be right. That is the deffinition of open mindedness aint it? Not closing your mind to an idea without actually delving into the arguments pro and against?
     
  7. Neserk macrumors 6502a

    Neserk

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    #7
    As soon as someone puts "liberal" or "conservative" as a selling point I stop listening. While I consider myself liberal I would never use that to sell my ideas. I prefer logic and reasoning. But that is just me.
     
  8. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #8
    Noooobody expects the...

    Never mind. :eek:

    Anyway, I googled this author. Turns out he's a major darling of the Right. Now, what interest the Right has in making the Crusades look more justified is a bit of a mystery to me. Well now on second thought...
     
  9. diamond geezer macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2004
    #9
    I wonder how the Emporer felt when his "brothers" from western Europe turned up, sacked Constantinople and raped all the nuns.

    The Crusaders continued on raping and killing both Christians and Muslims as it was to difficult telling them all apart.

    Didn't Jerusalem have a large Christian population, whom had been living in peace with their Muslim neighbours?

    They also were all put to the sword by their western brothers.

    Some people seem to think that Muslims are trying to take over the World, like some people believe in that Elders of Zion c#@p.
     
  10. wwidgirl macrumors member

    wwidgirl

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    #10
    Many of your "politically incorrect" facts are pretty well-known to anyone with even a cursory knowledge of Islamic History. Islam spread rapidily from around 700-1100. What is surprising is that it was spread with comparatively very little violence in comparison to Christian expansion (ie. the Byzantine Empire). Jews and Christians were not forced to convert (again compare to the violent conversion of "heretics" and "infidels" by the Christians) but were instead made to pay a tax (the Jizya) so it was not in the interest of the Muslims to have people convert to Islam.

    The concept of the Jihad was not conceived until AFTER the Crusades and it is argued that Jihad originated from the idea of the Crusades (Holy War).

    Muslim expansion was often by the sword but how is that different from Christian expansion at the time? Comparatively, Muslim expansion was much more peaceful than Christian expansion.

    "• It is often asserted that Crusaders were merely lacklands and ne'er-do-wells who took advantage of an opportunity to rob and pillage in a faraway land. Recent scholarship has demolished that contrivance. The truth is that the Crusades were notoriously bad for plunder. A few people got rich, but the vast majority returned with nothing."

    Actually this is not true. This is rarely "asserted" by people who know anything about Islamic history. There were many reasons for the Crusades. Some of those are: to stop in-fighting in Europe because of lack of land; to regain the Holy lands from the infidels; to expand the infleunce of the Catholic Church; and to regain access to pilgrammage sites. And most of the Crusaders were Noblemen. Little was in fact gained by the Crusades except a re-opening of trade Routes via the italian cities.
     
  11. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #11
    economical the crusades were _the major_ event for western europe...but that doesn't justify them...

    1.Byzanz/Konstatinopel got tearn apart by christian armies...

    2. the besieges of Vienna were like 300 years after the Crusades: Austria fought 9 wars against the osmanic empire ("the turkish wars") how many were started by turkish: most of them...how many where started because some other western european nation said:"attack austria and we give you that and that" funny...those are nearly the same which were started by the turkish...(yeah dead french kings i am looking at you) :rolleyes:
    Vienna was one of the central cities of the "Sacrum Imperium Romanum Nationis Germanicae"...do you really believe the besige was ended by weather ? it started snowing _after_ the siege:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Vienna

    3. the ottomanic empire was far from being united all the time
    was it a danger to western nations...yes
    was it as dangerous as the huns 700 years before ?...no way

    4.before,during and after the crusades the european forces had enough power left to fight each other all the time
    yes the balcan changed it's owner a few times but that was it...the "the turkish wars" were far from "the whole christian world is collapsing"
     
  12. Krizoitz macrumors 6502a

    Krizoitz

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2003
    Location:
    Wakayama, Japan
    #12
    I love how so many peopl etry and take the crusades, one of the most complex socio-religious-political events in history and simplify it to "it was all this sides fault". Both sides were involved in the war and the attrocities. Many of the wars justifications were supposedly for religious reasons. Mostly it was about power and money and land. Both sides wanted it. Both sides had reasons, some of them good some of them not so good. They happened. We learn from them, we move one. Trying to use the Crusades as a reason to justify any of the current violence, to me, seems like a little bit of a stretch. I think we need look no further than fanatical religious leaders (on both sides) and people being raised in a culture of hatred, a culture that views the other as less than human, to find the cause of the problem.
     
  13. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #13
    This troll'l post any piece of **** item he comes across as if it were worthy of debate.

    Hey, I hear conservativenewsservice.com is running an article that proves that 2+2=5. Discuss. And, please, don't be such a typical dirty liberal as to dismiss the idea out of hand, keep an open mind.
     
  14. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #14
    exactly... for me this whole talking about crusades bla-bla muslim/christian aggression bla bla justification... seems so... irrelevant...
    i guess the correct response for such threads should be :"crusades/religous motivated campaigns ? no thanks...we already had that" and then just move on ;)
     
  15. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #15
    This is the most ludicrous thread ever.

    Half of the items in Voltron's list (must...try...harder...to...ignore) reference occurances in the 15th and 16th centuries. The only problem? The crusades had been going on since the 11th century.

    By the the 15th century, the crusades had trasformed into something far different from their original intent. At that point, the crusades were a minor part of a larger battle between the Ottoman empire and Europe. Just as every major European country in that time period was vying to expand their empire, so was the Ottoman.

    No, the crusades were born as a result of the Byzantine empire (a Christian people) trying to settle in Palestine, which at the time was in Turkish control. When they failed, losing their army to the Turks, they began to plead with the West for assistance. That assistance came in the form of the Crusades.

    The Crusades were brutal. They were bloody. Some of the acts of the Crusades were even just plain evil (the sacking of Jerusalem in 1099 or Constantinople in 1204 to name but two). But, to be realistic, that was how empires were run in those days. "Expand the empire" was the battlecry of nearly eery nation in that time. War was not the exception that it is today.

    So, on one hand, the Chrisitians, in the name of the church, committed some horrible and evil acts. On the other hand, they weren't that much different than every other group back then. To try to deny either of those facts would be an exercise in futility.

    All of the facts of the crusades are layed out here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusader

    I suggest anyone who thinks the Christians were totally right and just or totally evil to read up on it and discover the truth.

    Taft
     
  16. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #16
    So I return to my question: why are we even discussing the Crusades? Who is interested in trying to make this a relevant topic for today, and why?
     
  17. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #17
    Good question. Easy answer: Voltron, who is pushing the agenda of "make your enemy look like absolute evil." The underlying premise is that violence against Muslims was justified by necessity throughout history. In this alternate universe, all Muslims want to forcibly convert the world's populations to radical Islam and wipe out all traces of other religions. Especially Christianity. And since all Muslims believe this, they are all a step away from becoming terrorists.

    And of course, such rhetoric would give us even more reason to clamp down on Muslims in this country. You know, for safety reasons. They are, after all, the enemy of Christianity, which is a fundamental belief that all true Americans share. Therefore, they are enemies of America, too.

    Its the same bile which spews from Coulter's frigid lips. Go read her last 10 or so columns. Its enough to make you lose faith in humanity altogether. Even more sad, previously moderate pundits such as David Horowitz have also been towing this line as of late. Especially in relation to the Palestinian vs. Isreali conflict. (ALL Palestinians are barbaric thugs out to squash the Jews in any way possible. etc. etc.)

    This lack of understanding of other cultures and the irrational fear that accompanies it is a very dangerous thing. This is the type of thinking that makes Islamic extremists to give their lives to stop the "evil capitalist American infidels." Reverse it and you have "we must stop the evil, Godless, barbaric Muslim terrorists." Bad stereotyping at its worst.

    Taft
     
  18. Voltron thread starter macrumors newbie

    Voltron

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    #18
    No actually I posted it because I thought it was an interesting theory and might actually be true. No hatred here on my part, just curiosity. But you are going to think what you wish to think no matter what I say.

    Also I was entertaining the possibilities that it might be possible that the Crusades weren't such a blood thirsty travesty as I've been led to believe but perhaps a defensive measure against others. I wasn't there so I don't know, but it is interesting.
     
  19. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #19
    you know here the austrian flag comes from ? (red-white-red)

    you might find this interesting as well
     
  20. Frohickey macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    PRK
    #20
    I thought that Intel recalled every single Pentium chip that had the math error. :p
     
  21. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #21
    Sadly, I think you are correct. I have to wonder why the National Review thinks this book about the Crusades is so relevant to the 21st century. It all seems to play into a very specific political world view, and nothing, no matter how ancient, is out of bounds if it can lend any support to that view.

    BTW, for my money, Horowitz has never been moderate. He started out as a Marxist, and then went abruptly to right-wing reactionary, without any pause to examine the territory in between.
     
  22. Krizoitz macrumors 6502a

    Krizoitz

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2003
    Location:
    Wakayama, Japan
    #22
    This one is true, 2+2 DOES = 5....for sufficiently large values of 2 :)
     
  23. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #23
    And for US military planners. :rolleyes:
     
  24. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #24
    I thought that would give you 2+2= 4.000000000000012834
     
  25. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #25
    Not significant
     

Share This Page