There is no similarity. If there was any similarity at all, every Muslim on the planet would be dead. The only thing that prevented that from happening ages ago was the technology. If they had the technology back then they would have used it. We have it, and don't use it. There's the difference! Radical Islam should that their lucky stars we are considerably more civilized than they are. Keep pushing though, and we will have no choice but to get medival on their ass.
Similarity between the Crusades and today's religious wars
- Thread starter nitro
- Start date
No. The Crusades enjoyed wide popular support. Today's militant Muslims may wish they enjoyed such support but they don't.
Also, the Crusades were a response to centuries of Islamic militarism. (Wholly justified, imo.) Militant Islam isn't really a response to much of anything, it's just "pure Islam", in the sense that Islam has historically seen its role to spread itself over the world by any means available. Religious Muslims today see better alternatives to the sword - such as swamping non-Muslim countries demographically, as is happening in Europe - but militant Muslims seem to hanker for some old style conquering.
Oh how I wish that he was!
(Perhaps he is. I pray that it is so.)
That is the impression I have from reading the history. I can't help but see how anyone informed could possibly disagree, to be honest.
Why on earth would it matter if the people were illiterate? They didn't have to write down their opinions themselves for history to be able note them.
Perhaps this is some quasi-Marxist crap I haven't yet heard about history not being able to faithfully represent the voices of the masses because the masses were illiterate. That's what it sounds like.
And why is Crusades in quotes? That's what the people undertaking them understood them to be. It's a bit rich for you, 1000 years later, to place trendy quotes around them, dontcha think?
But the public was illiterate, so how can you know whether they had a clue or not?
The Bush clan and the neo con filth are the biggest supporters of Mudslime Terrorists!! Without terrorists, there is no terror. Without terror there would be no god damned neo con filth.
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/JQg4ftGBKQM"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/JQg4ftGBKQM" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>
I have been saying this forever now about the parallels between the two. Its very scary when you think about it what the implications are. People keep telling me I'm nuts, and maybe I am but in any case I'm happy to see there is another "nut" who agrees with me. Personally I see the relationship between the two as so obvious I do not know how others can't. And then, having seen that and knowing what we had to do in order to win the war with Japan, we likewise know how we must fight this war with Islam.
I'm curious how 'we' are more civillized than 'them'? Is civillization measured by the amount of 18 yr olds who carry a $2000 VISA balance? Or the amount of money we spend on arms each year, and the amount of countries in which that we have military bases in?
Is it our unprecidented destruction of the environment that sets us ahead?
Is destroying the necessities of life in 2nd and 3rd world countries using WMD considered civillized?
civillized how?
Civilized because a good portion of the US congress is trying to legalize torture, hidden prisons, renditions, and other assorted goodies. That brings up right in par with the civilized barbarians like saddamn, idi amin, chimp boy, dickie cheney and others.