originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: 4N0M4LY
I'm just trying to show that Muslims aren't the only people that are always looking for war. Since we are talking about the Middle ages, who started
the Crusades for one? The Catholics.
THE CRUSADES: A Direct Response To Islam’s Bloodlust
Some facts for your ill-informed friends/family/colleagues:
— The Crusades were a delayed response for CENTURIES of Muslim aggression, that grew ever fiercer in the 11th Century. The Muslims focused on
Christians and Jews…forcing conversions, plundering and mortally wounding apostates.
— The Crusades were a DEFENSIVE action, first called for by Pope Urban II in 1095 at the Council of Clermont.
— The Crusades were a response against Jihad, which is obligatory against non-Muslims entering “Muslim lands’”. (Muslim lands are any lands
invaded and conquered by Islam.)
— The motives of the Crusaders were pure. They were jihad-provoked and not imperialistic actions against a “peaceful”, native Muslim population.
The Crusades were NOT for profit, but rather to recover the Holy Land brutally invaded and conquered by Muslims…who conquered for profit and as a
notch on their superiority belt.
— The lands conquered by the Crusaders were NOT colonized under the Byzantine Empire. The Empire withdrew its support so the Crusaders renounced
The Islamic world ripped through the Christian world on a bloody Jihad crusade to propagate Islam. Muslim imperialistic conquest wars were launched
for more than 1,500 years against hundreds of nations and over millions of square miles (larger than the British Empire at its peak). The Jihad
crusade went from southern France to the Philippines, from Austria to Nigeria, and from central Asia to New Guinea.
The dictionary defines imperialism as “the policy and practice of seeking to dominate the economic and political affairs of weaker countries.”
This historical Islamic Jihad WAS imperialistic…and its goals remain the same.
Islam’s greed and lust for bloody domination of non-Muslims and their property CAUSED the Crusades…it doesn’t get simpler than that!
So what is the truth about the Crusades? Scholars are still working some of that out. But much can already be said with certainty. For starters, the
Crusades to the East were in every way defensive wars. They were a direct response to Muslim aggression—an attempt to turn back or defend against
Muslim conquests of Christian lands.
Christians in the eleventh century were not paranoid fanatics. Muslims really were gunning for them. While Muslims can be peaceful, Islam was born in
war and grew the same way. From the time of Mohammed, the means of Muslim expansion was always the sword. Muslim thought divides the world into two
spheres, the Abode of Islam and the Abode of War. Christianity—and for that matter any other non-Muslim religion—has no abode. Christians and Jews
can be tolerated within a Muslim state under Muslim rule. But, in traditional Islam, Christian and Jewish states must be destroyed and their lands
conquered. When Mohammed was waging war against Mecca in the seventh century, Christianity was the dominant religion of power and wealth. As the faith
of the Roman Empire, it spanned the entire Mediterranean, including the Middle East, where it was born. The Christian world, therefore, was a prime
target for the earliest caliphs, and it would remain so for Muslim leaders for the next thousand years.
With enormous energy, the warriors of Islam struck out against the Christians shortly after Mohammed’s death. They were extremely successful.
Palestine, Syria, and Egypt—once the most heavily Christian areas in the world—quickly succumbed. By the eighth century, Muslim armies had
conquered all of Christian North Africa and Spain. In the eleventh century, the Seljuk Turks conquered Asia Minor (modern Turkey), which had been
Christian since the time of St. Paul. The old Roman Empire, known to modern historians as the Byzantine Empire, was reduced to little more than
Greece. In desperation, the emperor in Constantinople sent word to the Christians of western Europe asking them to aid their brothers and sisters in
That is what gave birth to the Crusades. They were not the brainchild of an ambitious pope or rapacious knights but a response to more than four
centuries of conquests in which Muslims had already captured two-thirds of the old Christian world. At some point, Christianity as a faith and a
culture had to defend itself or be subsumed by Islam. The Crusades were that defense.
Pope Urban II called upon the knights of Christendom to push back the conquests of Islam at the Council of Clermont in 1095. The response was
tremendous. Many thousands of warriors took the vow of the cross and prepared for war. Why did they do it? The answer to that question has been badly
misunderstood. In the wake of the Enlightenment, it was usually 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. The Crusaders’ expressed sentiments of piety, self-sacrifice, and love for God were
obviously not to be taken seriously. They were only a front for darker designs.
During the past two decades, computer-assisted charter studies have demolished that contrivance. Scholars have discovered that crusading knights were
generally wealthy men with plenty of their own land in Europe. Nevertheless, they willingly gave up everything to undertake the holy mission.
Crusading was not cheap. Even wealthy lords could easily impoverish themselves and their families by joining a Crusade. They did so not because they
expected material wealth (which many of them had already) but because they hoped to store up treasure where rust and moth could not corrupt. They were
keenly aware of their sinfulness and eager to undertake the hardships of the Crusade as a penitential act of charity and love. Europe is littered with
thousands of medieval charters attesting to these sentiments, charters in which these men still speak to us today if we will listen. Of course, they
were not opposed to capturing booty if it could be had. But the truth is that the Crusades were notoriously bad for plunder. A few people got rich,
but the vast majority returned with nothing.