Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Islam angry since Jan Sobieski handed them their hat at Vienna?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Islam angry since Jan Sobieski handed them their hat at Vienna?

    Thoughts?

    If not Vienna, at what point did their enduring, seething anger really start?


    On the Plains of Hesitation lie the blackened bones of countless millions who, at the dawn of victory, sat down to rest-and resting... died. Adlai E. Stevenson

    ACG History Today

    BoRG

  • #2
    Originally posted by Admiral View Post
    Thoughts?

    If not Vienna, at what point did their enduring, seething anger really start?


    Possibly the successful industrial era in the West which gave Western industrialized nations a comparatively high standard of living and leaving envious Muslims behind in the poverty of the High Middle Ages. Islam experienced nothing of the kind, except for some desperate attempts to modernize the Ottoman Empire, which failed by the way, leading to its dissolution. Even the oil industry in Arabia is not of their own making but created by Western engineers and financed by Western capital.

    "Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a ugly brawl."
    --Frederick II, King of Prussia

    Comment


    • #3
      Colonialism. Iran, for example, has plenty of reasons to hate Russia, the UK and USA, all from the late 19th and 20th centuries.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Admiral View Post
        Thoughts?

        If not Vienna, at what point did their enduring, seething anger really start?


        I would imagine the Crusades had something to do with it.
        "Profanity is but a linguistic crutch for illiterate motherbleepers"

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by johnbryan View Post
          I would imagine the Crusades had something to do with it.
          No. Nothing. Warfare for the sake of religion has been ever present. Even modern civilization somehow cannot rid itself from the anachronistic concept that is religion.


          The crusades have absolutely nothing to do with the hatred for the west. It's mainly two reasons - xenophobic hatred for the outsiders and their heathen religion, and grievances from the past 100-150 years. The former takes precedence, I'd say. The average Pakistani serf is equally ignorant of both the crusades and colonialism, only knowing what the Mullahs tell them.

          Comment


          • #6
            Colonialism, Crusades and the loss of Spain...more than one for sure but the Colonial peroiod surly plays a big role today. Two faiths that were meant for each other to conflict from the start. Two faiths with the same roots that worship one and the same God.

            IMO, Vienna taught that they could never force thier belives against the West through military means. They havn't tried since iirc. Could be they learnt from history.
            "Ask not what your country can do for you"

            Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

            you’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
              Crusades and the loss of Spain
              The average Muslim couldn't care less. As for the upper classes, history has shown time and time again that the upper classes will manipulate ideology in whatever way it is most expedient for them at that moment.

              Comment


              • #8
                Vienna? Spain? Crusades? Diu 1509? Iran 1953?

                Does it matter? The 11th and 21st centuries cannot coexist peacefully. Time to glass 'em all and let God and/or Allah sort 'em out...
                Last edited by The Doctor; 17 Sep 12, 16:26.
                Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
                  Vienna? Spain? Crusades? Diu 1507? Iran 1953?

                  Does it matter? The 11th and 21st centuries cannot coexist peacefully. Time to glass 'em all and let God and/or Allah sort 'em out...
                  Let me remind you that Christian fanaticism is no better than Muslim fanaticism. I agree, 11th century mentalities should be gotten rid of. Like yours.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    The strain of thought OBL represented began with thinkers that emerged after the Mongol sacking of Baghdad. Its resurgence is a relatively recent phenomenon dating mainly from defeats against Israel. Before that there was a process of secularization which began in the Ottoman Empire. The crusades were a "gentleman" contest later occasionally, with some crusaders like the Templars becoming sympathetic to the faith. For similar reasons there was antagonism between new arrivals and older crusaders. There was not really any faith based counter crusade, more the usual power politics.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      How about 30 years after Mohammad's death when modern Islam was created.......

                      http://www.channel4.com/programmes/i...rammes-critics
                      "To be free is better than to be unfree - always."

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Still not it. Before Islam, the Zoroastrian Persians and Christian Romans had been killing each other under the pretext of religion for hundreds of years. The actual reason was the economic and political rivalry between the two monarchs, but whenever they went to war it was by the grace of their god.

                        Doesn't matter what religion it is, someone will always find a way to use it as an excuse for war and murder.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by suntzu View Post
                          The strain of thought OBL represented began with thinkers that emerged after the Mongol sacking of Baghdad. Its resurgence is a relatively recent phenomenon dating mainly from defeats against Israel. Before that there was a process of secularization which began in the Ottoman Empire. The crusades were a "gentleman" contest later occasionally, with some crusaders like the Templars becoming sympathetic to the faith. For similar reasons there was antagonism between new arrivals and older crusaders. There was not really any faith based counter crusade, more the usual power politics.
                          Yep. The Golden Age was already in decline before the sack of Baghdad but the destruction it wrought changed Islamic thought and culture forever. I guess that when Islam is under - or perceives itself to be under - threat, it regresses and becomes more insular and inflexible.

                          Iraq in 1258 was very different from present day Iraq. Its agriculture was supported by a canal network thousands of years old. Baghdad was one of the most brilliant intellectual centers in the world. The Mongol destruction of Baghdad was a psychological blow from which Islam never recovered. Already Islam was turning inward, becoming more suspicious of conflicts between faith and reason and more conservative. With the sack of Baghdad, the intellectual flowering of Islam was snuffed out. Imagining the Athens of Pericles and Aristotle obliterated by a nuclear weapon begins to suggest the enormity of the blow. The Mongols filled in the irrigation canals and left Iraq too depopulated to restore them.
                          http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/WestTech/xmongol.htm
                          Matthew 5:9 Blessed are the cheesemakers

                          That's right bitches. I'm blessed!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            A battle that began on September 11 ?
                            The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. Thomas Jefferson.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Cosmos View Post
                              A battle that began on September 11 ?
                              Long before that.

                              Even in the modern era.

                              Before 9/11, Number One Son brought me my Time magazine with a cover like this and asked who this man was.

                              My answer: "It's a man who wants to kill you!"



                              Philip
                              "The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts."— Bertrand Russell

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X