Werre the Crusades justified? Were there really Christians in dire need of protection from Muhammadans?
>>18108088Ha!Entire coastal villages disappeared due to Muslim slave traders
>>18108114>source: my ass
>>18108088>he forgets colonization
>>18108129Barbary wars, you nutsack
>>18108088What a masterclass in Narrative building >Muslim "conquest battles" amalgamation of nameless dateless dots in muslim or ex muslim lands. Easily spanning over 750 years. 0 context on if it was offensive against non mulsims, offensive against other muslims, or defensive against muslims or non mulsims. How many defensive battles of the reconquista are now dotted on this map of "battles of conquest" how many battles from the FUCKING CRUSADES are listed as "muslim conquest battles"> Oh our wee little crusade where we only exterminated the inhabitants of like 4 cities.These dots only portray the first crusade. One of the only ones that wasnt a complete failure, or pure yakubian on yakubian crime.>The defensive crusades"Pope urban, the conquests of the muslims were 400 years ago. Youre also a frank. How is this just defense from you? Nothing was taken from you or the Franks">"Well.. it HECKIN IS OKAY. I like FREAKIN JESUS"The self victimization is pathetic. In 2 minutes youll tell yourself whites colonizing the entire world and raping the landscape to death helped the native countries.>TLDRThe Christian law of double standards is apparent in this post. Any conflict that happens involving muslims, even a civil war, is a Jihadic Koranic Muhammadonic command from Allah the moon god, But only the crusades stories we like and that aren't embarrassing get filed into the romanticized trad cath version of history
>>18108406Kek. Didn't read any of this garbage but I knew it was pure cope. Muslims were and still are the pillaging rapist goatfuckers who have tried to sink Europe for centuries. Again and again they have tried to defeat Christendom and failed.
>>18108516Europe is not Christendom.
The crusades against muslims were epic and I like cool wars in history. Also the battle between Islam and Christianity was epic. Shame we only have gay wars now.
>>18108524Actually, it is. A non-christian can't be said to be a european.
>>18108088ZUTTZUTTINTHEBUTTZUT ALORS !!this is the besthttp://www.google.com/search?q=prophet+of+doom+craig+winn
>>18108529Europe is from a pagan myth. Christianity is from the Near East.
>>18108659Are you aucustic? I don't even think we can argue or discuss this given that we inhabit radically different universes when it comes to worldview.
>>18108516The euroach kike worshipper cries out in pain as they cannibalize you
>>18108255Barbary wars were payback for spanish atrocities against innocent moriscos, many joined swearing revenge upon the in the first placeFunny how pigskins always play the victim when the people they actually victimize fight back, a trait carried on to the zionist scum to this day
>>18108781>>18108786You live in Pakistan
>>18108781>kikeyour penis is permanently marked with a jewish amputation scar, retardyou're an inbred indian that follows a kike spin-off religion
>>18108790Yes I am from Lahore, and?>>18108791Circumcision is healthy and prevents smegma and cancer
>>18108799What's going on in Lahore?
>>18108799I never get smegma because I showermaybe for a impoverished thirdie that pours a bucket of water over himself weekly to get "clean", like yourself, smegma would be a problem
>>18108805Besides the awful heat not much
>>18108786What on Earth are you on?Barbary Wars were a coalition of European powers to destroy the Berber countries, which kept on attacking merchant ships and coastal towns. And Spain was part of the coalitionThe Muslim world was powerless against it and it effectively halted their slave trade through the seas
>>18108255The most successful corsair captains were European tough
>>18108088I'm a crusade supporter or supporter of anyone that kills Muslims by the loads, but crusades weren't necessary, there was no real jihad/war between Muslims and Christians for centuries, and Christians didn't have problems getting to Jerusalem, crusades were purely a pirate raid to get wealthy for the nobles.
>>18109327No it fucking ain'tIt happened precisely because the Byzantine Empire was desperate enough that it willingly asked the Pope and the Western states for aid against the Muslims, who kept on attacking its bordersThe western nations accepted the task because Muslims kept on harassing the Caravans meant for Europe, and they kept on raiding coastal villages for slaves
>>18108088No. The crusades were out of economic interest and not "protecting the holy land" or whatever. The muslims were not doing anything to justify it and the crusades likely made christcuck religioj unpopular in the nead east.Their first order of business for crusaders was to kill native Christians in the levant.There's a good reason that local Christians sided with saladin.
>>18109327>there was no real jihad/war between Muslims and Christians for centuriesByzantium had been on a perpetual state of warfare between Muslims attacking them for centuries and it never ended until they were conquered. Anatolia was more of the largest Christian regions on Earth and Turkish Muslims conquered it. Spain was also in the same situation, except the opposite happened. War between Muslims and Christians had two major frontiers until the 15th century. >and Christians didn't have problems getting to JerusalemWhile Byzantium still held Anatolia most of the journey was fine, but even before the Turks in the region often attacked pilgrims as Fatimid power left the region. It had been a serious problem for decades even before 1070.>crusades were purely a pirate raid to get wealthy for the nobles.Men almost bankrupted themselves doing it and they got little loot out of it. If all they wanted was wealth they would have stayed near home. Most of the major participants had other enemies they could have fought against closer to home. There wasn't much piratical about expelling Turkish invaders from Anatolia, not being allowed to loot these cities and giving all back to Byzantium.
>>18108088They always fail to mention the ~200 years of annual jihad into Byzantine territory.
>>18109641>>18109634>>18109338>byzacucks give away portions of anatolia to different turkic warlords to get mercs for their retarded civil war>byzantines realize they lost anatolia once the dust has settled>AIEEEE Please help us Pope Urban>immediately start shit with the crusaders>a few decades later byzacucks would keep saying I would rather be ruled by turks than LatinsByzaboos need to shut the fuck up. Everyone knows how they actually lost anatolia to the turks (they stupidly gave it away) and how dupliticious they acted towards the west during the crusader era
>only has the 1st crusade battles>not the 4th crusade slaughtering and sacking other Christians>not the Languedoc>not the BalticsWhat's the matter? I thought crusaders were heckin ZASED red pulled vaporwave heroes? Why hide their light?
>>18110081Not even the historical period I'm talking about, but sure thing Achmed.
>>18109634>>18109634>Turkish invadersThe proto-zionist filth know as crusaders literally invaded and slaughtered Palestinians on behalf of a pope who ordered their genocide calling them a subhuman and foul race, it had nothing to do with TurksJudeochristians have to live in an alternate reality to justify their atrocities, even St Francis said the crusades were invasions and completely gratuite offenses
>>18108088>Were there really Christians in dire need of protection from Muhammadans?Yes, the ones in christian areas, being incessantly attacked by muslims. Whether attacking the levant was really the best way to counterattack is doubtful, but the idea in itself was fine.
>>18110164Egypt was majority kike worshipper after 400 years of Muslim rule, temu zionists know as crusaders just wanted to plunder, rape, steal and pillage
>>18110202And the muslims wholeheartedly deserved it.
>>18110219No, but pigskin kike worshippers deserve total extinction and I'm glad their kind will be gone by the end of the century
>>18110225You will all die heat death thanks to global warming.
>>18110230Y'all not even dying but literally going self extinct because you don't reproduce and prefer to father doggerinos instead kek
>>18110232Well at least you're honest about your hatred of whites. It pisses me off that most brownoids pretend not to, and pretend to be our friends.
>>18110219Christcuck crusaders deliberately targeted nearby minority christcucks instead of Muslims and their biggest killcounts come from murdering unarmed combatants.
>>18108786>jewish pilpull retoric>calls others jewsso is the way of the mudslime
>>18110225>>18110232The Internet and modern world is laying waste to Abrahamism. Saying that Islam will last is wishful thinking, especially when Muslims in Europe and the US leave the region as soon as they become second/third gen or just completely defang it.Zoomers on TikTok are acutely aware of how Islam is associated with the middling, poor, backward, inbred, incel, brown, and ugly stinking biomass that is Muslim men, and they want to be as far from them as possible.
>>18110442>AbrahamismLeave Christians out of it, mate.We're doing fine
>>18110442Just one country in Africa has more births than all of Europe combined, not even mentioning how a lot of those births in Europe are also of non-european origin. Its never been more over for timmies
>>18110487>TimmiesHello saar very good!
>>18109327Your narrative is garbled. The Seljuk sultanate probably wasn't harassing pilgrims, but there were still nomadic Turks on the Anatolian plateau. Whether or not the sultan had any type of control over the nomads is up for debate, but I lean towards no, nomads traditionally didn't give a shit. These nomadic tribes were the ones killing and harassing pilgrims. This is what Alexios asked for help with. It was definitely known that crusaders would capture territory and in the agreement Alexios made the crusaders swear oaths to give any Byzantine land back to Constantinople.
>>18110567Why do jeets say that? Is the Fairly Oddparents popular in jeetland?
>>18110159>literally invaded and slaughtered Palestinians There was only a single massacre in Jerusalem. The majority of the population was still Christian and embraced Crusader rule.>it had nothing to do with TurksExcept the entire part where they went to Byzantium to explicitly help the emperor expel Turks from his land.>Judeochristians No such thing. Modern nonsense terms have no place in historical discussions.>>18110372>Christcuck crusaders deliberately targeted nearby minority christcucksNo they didn't. What the hell are you talking about? They worked alongside Maronite and Armenian Christians to fight the Turks.
>>18110456
>>18111019What do you mean?The biggest part of Christian theology is dividing sheep and goats
>>18110862Because jeets larp as black in their hatred of whites, and a black guy said it first I believe.
>>18110081Goddamn, you Muslim fucks spread your bullshit religious propaganda everywhere on this site.
>>18110225You will die seething and praying for a future that never comes.
>>18112150Read about the post manzikert civil war dumb byzaboo. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikephoros_MelissenosThis dude in particular made his bid for the throne based on turkish support where he garrisoned cities all over anatolia with Turks. When he gave up and submitted the turks kept the cities. I'm curious to see what your next cope will be
>>18110081>>byzacucks give away portions of anatolia to different turkic warlords to get mercs for their retarded civil warMajority of Anatolia was lost before those engaging in civil war sold out western Anatolian cities to Turks for support.>>AIEEEE Please help us Pope UrbanWhat's wrong with a state asking for assistance to reclaim their land?>>a few decades later byzacucks would keep saying I would rather be ruled by turks than LatinsNearly 400 years removed.
>>18112305>Majority of Anatolia was lost before those engaging in civil war sold out western Anatolian cities to Turks for support.what a liar. Turkic raiders were in eastern anatolia and armenia. They had no leader because immediately after Manzikert the seljuks went to fight the fatimids which is why you had byzantine generals recruiting the turks to fight in the war >What's wrong with a state asking for assistance to reclaim their land?I thought you wuz da real roman empire. Why do you need to beg others? >Nearly 400 years removedByzantines were making backroom deals with muslims during the first crusade. Later they would straight up enter into an alliance with Saladin simply because the presence of crusaders made them seethe.
One day byzaboos will admit their favorite empire was extremely retarded for garrisoning all their major cities with turk mercs causing them to lose their key territory Anatolia. I guess the first crusade coming as a result of such a pathetic display is embarrasing especially since the crusaders easily swatted the turks aside like they were nothing
>>18108088I hate Islam, I hate Christ for not protecting us from this subhuman religion.
>>18108088Was the Muslim conquest (of a lot more than the Holy Land) justified?
>>18108781>euroach kike worshipperMohammad and the first Muslims were literally heretical Yemeni Jews, there's a reason the original qibla (direction of prayer) was toward Jerusalem, not Mecca.
>>18112319>what a liar. Turkic raiders were in eastern anatolia and armeniaSo, the majority off Anatolia? They were already in Anatolikon. The city traded for Turkish support was Nicaea, which was almost at the coast. Earlier rebellions beforehand were still operating in western Anatolia.>I thought you wuz da real roman empire. Why do you need to beg others? Neither of these statements have to do with each other.>Byzantines were making backroom deals with muslims during the first crusadeThey didn't. Actually.>Later they would straight up enter into an alliance with Saladin simply because the presence of crusaders made them seethe.This is also wrong. They entered in a treaty with Saladin because the Crusader States had collapsed and there was no longer any viable Crusader State to deal with. Byzantine diplomacy was almost always friendly with the Crusader States, John offered and sometimes directly helped them and Manuel conducted joint operations with Amalric. Also your reply has absolutely nothing to do with what I said. This is just a non-sequitur.
>>18112377>So, the majority off Anatolia? They were already in Anatolikon. The city traded for Turkish support was Nicaea, which was almost at the coast. Earlier rebellions beforehand were still operating in western Anatolia.They were concentrated near the Caucasus. Do you nit know what eastern anayolia means? The only reason they spread and settled westward was because byzantines brought them in. >The city traded for Turkish support was NicaeaLol no it wasnt just one city. The byzantine generals participating in the civil war garrisoned multiple cities, forts etc with their mercenaries. I literally gave you the biggest example who was a guy who became warlord of western anatolia using turks. He submitted to Alexios but none of the turks did so Anatolia was suddenly not in the empire anymore. I cant believe you're trying to pass off bullshit about how it was only nicaea. Only with this new wide network could a new state be founded as opposed to minor warlordism. The turks would coalese into the seljuk sultanate of Rum when a minor seljuk prince entered the region as the anatolian turks didnt want to obey the main seljuk sultan. >Neither of these statements have to do with each other.They do. The real roman empire would have fought back. Stilicho, Aetius, Constansius, and Majorian did more with much less power and had genuine heroic qualities whereas Alexios was just a slimy rat >They didn't. Actually.Alexios literally had a secret discussion with Seljuks to cede Nicaea to him as the crusaders before the crusaders could breach the city. Thats the definition of backroom dealing. Its even worse because this was the enemy he went begging to the pope for help against. >This is also wrong. They entered in a treaty with Saladin because the Crusader States had collapsed and there was no longer any viable Crusader State to deal with.The crusaders were literally fighting for their lives in Acre greekling.
>>18110973Yes they did in 1099. Crusaderd indiscriminately killed locals. That led to local Christians like the Armenians becoming increasingly wary of european crusaders.
>>18112470>They were concentrated near the CaucasusDidn't read my post award>I cant believe you're trying to pass off bullshit about how it was only nicaea. In terms of a city actually sold off for support? It was. Melissenos was not selling off cities to the Turks but using them as garrisons to which they betrayed Alexios later. >They do. No it doesn't. You're just making up some LARP in your head. > Stilicho, Aetius, Constansius, and Majorian did more with much less powerAll of these had far more everything. Stilicho had the complete Western Roman army which was nearly 200,000 men large. Aetius could personally muster 50,000 and had the support of every other significant military leader in the West, and the East. Constantius' situation was similar to Stilicho's. Even Majorian still had more than what Alexios would have had.>had genuine heroic qualitiesAetius murdered his rivals, suppressed contenders and deceived his allies and extorted the court for power. Are these the heroic qualities you're talking about?>Alexios literally had a secret discussion with Seljuks to cede Nicaea to him as the crusaders before the crusaders could breach the cityYou imply that he is betraying the Crusaders here when they are both working for the same thing.>The crusaders were literally fighting for their lives in Acre greekling.By the time of the siege of Acre the kingdom of Jerusalem had already dissolved. Even when they regained land they were incapable of forming anything. Their institutions were destroyed, settlers slaughtered and military strength annihilated. Their existence on the coast was one of subsistence and they were incapable of fighting back.
>>18112368Muhammad literally drove out all the jewish tribes from Arabia and personally oversaw the slaughter of Banu Qurayza which jews still seethe about
>>18108088>>18108129>>18108163>>18110164>>18112365The image is cherrypicked, the "muslim conquest battles" are showing over a thousand years of unrelated wars in a time lapse wheras the crusade battles is just showing specific conflicts during a specific crusade, not all battles by Europeans in Northern Africa, the Near East, etc over a millennium like the top doeshttps://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4u8c3o/how_accurate_is_this_image_about_the_crusades_and/
>>18108786>pigskinsSo it's not about religion at all to you people, just race. Any whites considering Islam read this Muslim's posts, they hate you and want your family killed and raped.
>>18112116Aryans with BBC, truly a puzzling people.
>>18112538a literal myth, probably developed as a result of critics of Islam calling it too Jewish. Early sources portray Muslims and Jews as close allies and the Banu Qurayza probably never existed.
>>18112594>https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4u8c3o/how_accurate_is_this_image_about_the_crusades_and/Don't really care too much about the argument about the picture but this denial of the Islamic conquests actually being a thing is a laughable attempt at revisionism on the same level as 'the people who invaded the Western Roman Empire were actually part of it and super duper wanted to be part of it for real guys and Rome never actually fell lol' kind of argument. It's a complete denial of the severe and overwhelming changes made by a new regime and the complete collapse or withdrawal of an older one which had been there for half a millennium. The Caliphate was not an insider to the Roman East, they were complete foreigners to it who never interacted with it outside of trade until they attacked the Ghassanids, who did have relations with the Roman state. The Caliphate dismantled Roman institutions and administration, their rule was far more ad hoc and arbitrary and they enforced a caste system over their new Roman subjects, and significantly they were a completely different religion from the people they ruled unlike the conquerors in the West.
>>18112616The presence of jewish tribes in pre-Islamic Arabia was well documented and though not directly mentioned by name in the Quran it is agreed upon that it was referring to the battles with these jewish tribes
>>18108088>Were the Crusades justifiedObviously yes. The dark ever seeks to destroy the light, and so the light in Christ must do as they will in such circumstances to ensure their everlasting life.
>>18108786Barbary piracy far predates the fall of Granada and 1609 expulsion.>PigskinsMany corsairs were of European descent, either as former slaves, conquered Christians that converted, or renegade Europeans that joined the pirates and converted. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Janszoon
>>18112648>battles with these jewish tribesbut did those actually happen, or did said tribes just join the winning team and thereby lose their "Jewish" identity as Islam crystalized as a separate religion? The argument that the massacre was a myth suggests the latter.
>>18112668There are no notable examples of them converting, most were just expelled or killed.
>>18112520>In terms of a city actually sold off for support? It was. Melissenos was not selling off cities to the Turks but using them as garrisons to which they betrayed Alexios later.You keep using terms like sold off avoiding mentioning the words "garrisoning mercenaries". You dont even have to look at the turks in this period. Plenty of retarded stories of the byzantines doing dumb shit with their norman and later catalan mercenaries. >All of these had far more everything. Stilicho had the complete Western Roman army which was nearly 200,000 men large. Aetius could personally muster 50,000 and had the support of every other significant military leader in the West, and the East. Constantius' situation was similar to Stilicho's. Even Majorian still had more than what Alexios would have had.All these guys lived in a failed state with only significant control of Italy. You're coping hard right now.>Aetius murdered his rivals, suppressed contenders and deceived his allies and extorted the court for power. Are these the heroic qualities you're talking about?More like Aetius was the last like of defence for the roman empire and is portrayed as tragic hero. Stop projecting Aetius didn't blind children for one. >You imply that he is betraying the Crusaders here when they are both working for the same thing.Hmm I wonder why the crusaders pursued their own policy after this siege. Almost like they felt betrayed. >By the time of the siege of Acre the kingdom of Jerusalem had already dissolved. Even when they regained land they were incapable of forming anything. Their institutions were destroyed, settlers slaughtered and military strength annihilated. Their existence on the coast was one of subsistence and they were incapable of fighting back.Funny considering it lasted another century after supposedly being destroyed and maintained its remaining borders unlike a certain other empire.
>>18108786your parents are first cousins
>>18112705>You keep using terms like sold off avoiding mentioning the words "garrisoning mercenaries"Because the point being made is that they were paid in the form of territory, which in that case they were not.>ll these guys lived in a failed state with only significant control of ItalyWhen Stilicho came to power there was no issue with any territory in the West at all, he had full access to the resources of the West from Britain to Africa. Constantius had the exact opposite problem that Italy was being ravaged by Visigoths, Aetius still had the support of all of Gaul, which he presided over, Africa, Illyria and Italy. Only Majorian had such a small range of control and even he had a significant support from Illyria and Southern Gaul. >More like Aetius was the last like of defence for the roman empire and is portrayed as tragic heroIf not for Valentinian III, Majorian would have likely been killed by Aetius. Aetius was a far more extortionate leader than any of the others you mention. The only reason he even became Magister in Gaul was because he threatened to attack Italy with his army of Huns if he was not granted a rank. >Hmm I wonder why the crusaders pursued their own policy after this siege.The Crusaders worked alongside the Byzantines the entire time they were in Anatolia up until they reached Antioch with Tatikios acting as a guide and support for them. So that's plainly wrong. >Funny considering it lasted another century after supposedly being destroyed and maintained its remaining borders unlike a certain other empire.A group of disparate cities incapable of even basic offensive military actions is not a viable state. Even the kings of Jerusalem knew this and instead stationed themselves in Cyprus.
>>18108781You’re poojeet, ransir
