Coalition of the Confused

Hosted by Jenifer (Zarknorph)

Confused malcontents swilling Chardonnay while awaiting the Zombie Apocalypse.

  • 846
    MEMBERS
  • 48807
    MESSAGES
  • 69
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

Archaeology News   Science

Started 11/11/18 by Jenifer (Zarknorph); 32331 views.
RGoss99

From: RGoss99

May-31

while not quite the same, if one looks at the motivations of the individual crusaders, their leaders, "investors" and organizers, not a lot of difference.

Do you really think that all the younger sons who went on crusade did it for religous reasons?

BerrySteph

From: BerrySteph

May-31

RGoss99 said:

while not quite the same, if one looks at the motivations of the individual crusaders, their leaders, "investors" and organizers, not a lot of difference. 

People invested in Crusades, this is true - and Saudi Princes are thought to have invested heavily in ISIS.

RGoss99 said:

Do you really think that all the younger sons who went on crusade did it for religous reasons?

Yes - the foot-soldiers said to have attacked the homes of Jews in Germany and Christians in Jerusalem were fired by Xian mission.

Very, very different from the sons of the earth defending Iraq from the Americans.

Now, ISIS was then joined by a lot of converts from Western countries, people believing they were Muslims despite short-cirtuiting any recognised induction and conversion process.

The first group were Christians from 700 years ago and we'll never see their likes again (unless a US President declares a Crusade of course, as would never happen) the second group was natives seeking to govern themselves - but the third group were the hostage beheaders and that's a problem that is Islamic.

Does that make sense? Ancient Christianity might have had a terrorist inducing problem (but probably didn't) whereas modern Islam does.

RGoss99

From: RGoss99

May-31

While history books probably support your point, but my experience with documentation of that period suggest that the religiosity of that period was grossly exaggerated. Of course the establishment promoted it because it meant control, but the writings of the monks, and stories of the returned knights suggest that the Trump equivalent of lockerroom cynical talk was not that much different. 

I am afraid you are containated with a rather Hollywood image, promoted in those times by those who had something to gain by their versions. Sort of like a former student of mine teaching a photgrapy course based on his training in the military. When he was my student he was a drug dealing gang banger. He got caught, and a judge, doing what would probably not happen today, gave him a choice of jail or Nam. The conquest of Mallorca, in the 1200s was a part of the Crusades, many of your "foot soulders" were simply younger sons with no prospects so the crusades were more a way of improving their lot, then a religious experience. Crusaders were often equal opportunity terrorists, partially responsible for destroying the <<Christian>> Byzantine empire, raped, looted, destroyed property - simply rationalizing their crimes based on religion. As with some ISIS I suspect their "adventures" are as much about participating in the only show in town as religious belief.

BerrySteph

From: BerrySteph

May-31

RGoss99 said:

While history books probably support your point, but my experience with documentation of that period suggest that the religiosity of that period was grossly exaggerated. Of course the establishment promoted it because it meant control, but the writings of the monks, and stories of the returned knights suggest that the Trump equivalent of lockerroom cynical talk was not that much different. 

Well, you say that the religiousity of the Crusaders may be greatly exaggerated - but in that case you can say the same of most members of ISIS.

We can barney on that - but my point is that ISIS was joined by people who believed themselves Muslims without having gone through any formal induction. Those people were almost inevitably dangerous.

RGoss99 said:

Sort of like a former student of mine teaching a photgrapy course based on his training in the military. When he was my student he was a drug dealing gang banger. He got caught, and a judge, doing what would probably not happen today, gave him a choice of jail or Nam. 

I came across that stuff in the 70s as well. With an emphasis on how wealthy his dad was.

RGoss99 said:

As with some ISIS I suspect their "adventures" are as much about participating in the only show in town as religious belief.

I think you're being unfair to ISIS - which mostly consisted of natives fighting occupation. Equating them to Crusaders (religious or not) is pretty gross.

In reply toRe: msg 242
bml00

From: bml00

Jun-1

BerrySteph said:

I think you're being unfair to ISIS

                                                                                          No other comments required

BerrySteph

From: BerrySteph

Jun-1

bml00 said:

I think you're being unfair to ISIS                                                                                           No other comments required

Decent people support Jewish resistance to Nazis in Poland - and Muslim resistance to Americans and Israelis everywhere.

Of course, if you're a gunman and the peasants are disarmed, you might ignore the disgusting evil of what you're doing.

In reply toRe: msg 244
bml00

From: bml00

Jun-1

                Another destroyed debate

BerrySteph

From: BerrySteph

Jun-1

Pointless hijacking

In reply toRe: msg 246
bml00

From: bml00

Jun-1

                                                                                                                   The debate is over

BerrySteph

From: BerrySteph

Jun-1

bml00 said:

The debate is over

You've bulldozed dozens of churches and 100s of mosques.

Even deliberately bulldozed the synagogues of the brown Jews!

TOP