Were the Crusades the first World War?

I don't know what the "bogey" means in your usage.

Don't blame me, you dug this hole yourself. With your CNN quip, you have effectively canceled yourself out of any chance of being considered seriously. Many people disagree with me on points or positions, but at least I don't make wild, obviously false statements. I would rather have credibility than try to stomp people and fail.

Haha.. In warfare propaganda and espionage is very important.
You are doing that constantly.
Buzz off.

Nothing has changed from the invasion of the romans and the vikings until now.
All greed. Nothing but greed.
 
Interesting angle, switching back to something that at least is partially true. Greed unfortunately, is all-too-often a major factor.

I thought that your next reply would have been something along the lines of claiming that Al-Jazeera was pro-Israel.
 
I'm holding my breath and expecting something from the left field, literally by the way.

Reinaert, how would you classify your political inclination? Is there a name for it?
 
... thus with a single sentence does a man prove a complete lack of credibility.
regulus, you are a 44 years old american living in NJ. do you really believe that there is a political left in US?
 
Barbarian, I have read your posts. Your credibility may be less than that of Reinaert, if that is possible. Let's avoid discussions that make us all look like idiots. Can you imagine a new person coming on to this forum and seeing a debate on whether or not a political left exists in the US? It would be the same as debating if there is a far right or not in European countries. Our situation here in the US is known to all, so don't pretend not to know about it.

Now, like I first wrote on this thread, if you want to discuss these things, start a new thread just about that. This thread was whether or not the crusades were the First World War. I think that the First World War was the Seven Years War.

Let’s avoid the political equivalent of arguing whether or not jumping into a lake makes one wet.


 
Let's avoid discussions that make us all look like idiots.
i dont think you need my help about how you look like. if you dont want to speak about nothing other than WWars why do you open a new discussion about peoples credibility. i dont care about your credits. who do you think you are?
 
i dont think you need my help about how you look like.


Bravo - and arguing with you would certainly ensure that the label would stick.
One of my favorite phrases is that "I am not as stupid as I look."

It appears that I must also find this thread wrecked due to the gyrations of the Reinaert/Barbarian duo. One sings and the other dances.
Good day to you.
 
Bravo - and arguing with you would certainly ensure that the label would stick.
One of my favorite phrases is that "I am not as stupid as I look."

It appears that I must also find this thread wrecked due to the gyrations of the Reinaert/Barbarian duo. One sings and the other dances.
Good day to you.

well. i must admit that i made some mistakes in this discussion. sorry for that, but, i dont like your ratings, ideas, anything. and i see that you feel the same about me. so no need to worry any more. i will not discuss with you anymore. peace.
 
The Crusades may have been driven more by economics than religion.
 
Not only the Crusades, but also I guess every other alleged religious war...

It is interesting to really look at all the theaters of the Seven years War.
There also was a book "The Scratch of a Pen' 1763 and the transformation of North America". It argues that the events and personalities of that year had a greater effect towards the eventual war with the colonies than anything or anyone else.

The author outlines how the colonists "never saw themselves as British citizens more than at that time period" and that the seeds for change were sown right alongside it.

Britain became such a powerhouse after the war. I always wonder how different things would have been if Parliament had played its cards just slightly differently with the colonies.
 
Tsuyoiki and all,

The crusades were Invasions by the European Christians vs. the Muslims in the Holy Land. Beginning circa 1098 to 1272. Religion was the motivating factor.
http://www.historyguy.com/the_crusades.htm

According to this URL from a google search under: what determines a war, a world war?
http://wiki.answers.com/QWhen_is_a_war_classed_as_a_world_war

A world war constitutes "major" countries of the world,
Christian Europe did not consist or was "the world" during the crusades. Africa, America, Asia, India etc were not involved in this religious conflict that lasted almost 200 years.

Melusine
 
First of all Tsuyoiki's post is from 5 years ago and I don't think she comes here anymore. Don't expect her reply.

Secondly, the last time I checked Palestine where crusaders where going was in Asia.
Thirdly, I'm sure that some Arab/Muslim forces were coming from Africa. Looks like 3 continents were involved and biggest countries on them.
Also, if you list continents, I wouldn't include India in this list.

Tell us, if only religion reason had lead to crusades, why was rich, christian Constantinople attacked and pillaged in one of the crusades?
 
Tsuyoiki and all,

The crusades were Invasions by the European Christians vs. the Muslims in the Holy Land. Beginning circa 1098 to 1272. Religion was the motivating factor.
http://www.historyguy.com/the_crusades.htm

Melusine

No, It wasn't. Greed was the major factor. Like all wars.
The second factor was to get rid of a lot of nasty men, who were rampaging through European countries.

Yeah.. www.historyguy.com Sounds really credible ;)
 
No Reinaert, there was no united european political program the get rid land off nasty men. The ruling parties/kings in Europe didn't have this united social platform. If you are aware of any documents from way back stating otherwise, you are welcome to change my mind.
You are giving to much credit to one force being able to organize complicated ventures for 200 years. Usually there is bunch of small elements coming together in certain order to culminate in a big effect, like crusades this time. The elemental, quantitative, partial, many different things, if they work together they often mask and mislead people in believing that there is one universal, united force or organization controlling things.

I agree that greed or getting rich was one of main factors going to crusades, or many other war. Other factors are:
- Religion and promise of comfy afterlife. Life doesn't end after death, so no big deal if I die.
- The "Holy Land" was long time in christian hands, and was conquered by Muslims. This was a huge reason in Europe to go save the Christ homeland from infidels.
- Male predisposition to war is another big one. Give young guys a good reason and weapons to fight, and they are more than ready. For their whole childhood tell them romantic stories about great ancestor warriors (indoctrination), and you have an army of new martyrs. You don't need to twist guys arms to listen to the war stories, that's our genetic predisposition too.
- Also, the times were quite good in Europe, there was money to spend for the crusades. Not sure what was the cost of crusades, but we are talking about moving hundred of thousands of people and equipment through Europe and the sea. There were no new crusades organized in 1300 hundreds when big famine and black death came and ruined Europe.
 
No Reinaert, there was no united european political program the get rid land off nasty men. The ruling parties/kings in Europe didn't have this united social platform. If you are aware of any documents from way back stating otherwise, you are welcome to change my mind.
You are giving to much credit to one force being able to organize complicated ventures for 200 years. Usually there is bunch of small elements coming together in certain order to culminate in a big effect, like crusades this time. The elemental, quantitative, partial, many different things, if they work together they often mask and mislead people in believing that there is one universal, united force or organization controlling things.

I agree that greed or getting rich was one of main factors going to crusades, or many other war. Other factors are:
- Religion and promise of comfy afterlife. Life doesn't end after death, so no big deal if I die.
- The "Holy Land" was long time in christian hands, and was conquered by Muslims. This was a huge reason in Europe to go save the Christ homeland from infidels.
- Male predisposition to war is another big one. Give young guys a good reason and weapons to fight, and they are more than ready. For their whole childhood tell them romantic stories about great ancestor warriors (indoctrination), and you have an army of new martyrs. You don't need to twist guys arms to listen to the war stories, that's our genetic predisposition too.
- Also, the times were quite good in Europe, there was money to spend for the crusades. Not sure what was the cost of crusades, but we are talking about moving hundred of thousands of people and equipment through Europe and the sea. There were no new crusades organized in 1300 hundreds when big famine and black death came and ruined Europe.

You talk nonsense!
 
Reinaert, I totally agree with you about the greed part , but lets not forget power. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutelly. Do, look at history and the "players" as to who/whom wanted the power. amd treasures in "The Holy Land".

And as for LeBrok, I second the reply ( by Reinaert). You (leBrok) talk nonsense.

Melusine
 
I can't believe Reinaert have a fan from USA, the land of CIA. He is not going to like it. lol

Sorry to criticise your geographical and historical knowledge Melusine, you're sounding a bit defencive. But don't frown too much, constructive criticism is a fist step to improvement. :)
 

This thread has been viewed 45854 times.

Back
Top