Why can't Europeans admit that Muhammad is on par with Alexander the Great and Napoleon?

Alexander fucked little boys

Muhammad fucked little girls

????????

Because he didn't hellenise the world synchronising east and west for a time, but rather conquered christians kingdoms preventing the roman empire reforming

What did Alexander the Great look like? Would he look like a European, or something else, today?

Khalid bin al Walid maybe

I do t even know why people are comparing them with military leader a more apt comparison would be jesus and buddha, if you want to compare muhammad to alexander or nappy ypu must do so by comparinh their overall influence to the world not by how many battles they won

This.

Muhammad was more than his sword and his legacy is far greater than alex or nappys desu.

And this does not disprove my low causality statement. Unless you want to argue "extremely heavy" is a number.

Arguably, he was better than both of them.
He changed the order of the world, rather than just create an empire that was gone in a flash like Napoopan and Aleksandr.

>Napoleon and Alexander's empires didn't change the world
Nigga what?

alexander changed the middle east forever lol.
just like napoleon changed europe's future. if napolean didnt exist then germany would still exist of luxembourgs and bavarias and no world wars would ever be started

>Muhammad

Don't you mean Khalid ibn al-Walid?

Pretty sure he just liked being fucked by his mate didn't he?

In a sense, we are all descendants of the gods. At any rate, Alexander was not teaching radical new lessons on religion and philosophy that were based on a pack of lies.

Muhammed waged a war against quite a few tribes for islam. There was one time where he left no prisoners alive after capturing them. He killed ~2000 people with his own sword that day.

Because we're not even sure he existed. Also aside from forbidding pork and wrapping women, his alleged legacy is really thin.

>On par

LMAO. Nobody knows who those two kuffar are today meanwhile everyday BILLIONS of people say Muhammed's name as the rightful last prophet of God, name their children Muhammed and follow his example (Sunnah)

The only people following Alexander's example are Hollywood degenerates.

You ever met anyone named Iskander?

Because you should use Khalid ibn Walid for that instead. He's after all the sword of Allah

muslim islamic history fag here

When we think of Alexander the great we think of his sweeping conquest, his battles fought in the mist of persian hordes, his march into india and the great retreat thru the desert. We cant really say the same for Rasullah he never conquered all that much essentially just the red sea coastal strip. A better comparison for Rasullah would be philip the father of alex. that isd building up the military and political infrastructure needed for the great conquest of their susserors. something that oft forgotten about Rasullah is that he was an administrator par excellence. His first act after entering medina was to order a census taken of the Muslim male population and then to institute military training sometimes under the guise of public games(horse riding and archery contest) and reforming the method of war from the old arab mass banzai charge into a disciplined formation.( old arab warfare consisted of two sides charging each other until one side got tired, Rasullah's innovation was to place spearmen up front with interlocked shield to absorbed the charge while archers stood in the back row and pelted the in coming rush, this was repeated several times until the pagan gave up then the Muslims charged and hunted down the pagans)
likewise creating a public education system, a welfare system, attracting immigrants, promoting racial equality and lastly creating the sharia which as a system of law has been and still is being used from morocco to Mindanao from the cape to Britain(in marriage at lest).

>Why can't Europeans
Read his post again, Ahmed

Or Sasha?

Like a Slav. Because the region of ancient Macedon is the Balkans

Alexander's father was part of a Dorian royal family, and his mother was a Molossian. So a mixed-race Hellene/Barbarian.

>Molossian
>Hellene/Barbarian
Molossians were a greek tribe.

hes not part of western culture
its more that we dont give a shit about him

Because those men are known for their great military conquest and ability to take on effectively the whole world singlehandedly.

Muhammads military conquests aren't really that impressive compared to these two either in scale, tactics or strategy nor were the arabs and jews in Arabia particularly daunting foes. That said if you combined him with Khalid ibn al-Walid as one person (and made sure he didnt get poisoned or dismissed) you would have a Napoleon figure

Because he fucking wasn't.
Name one battle won by Muhammad the same way Alexander defeated Darius at Gaugamela. Name one battle won by Muhammad the same way Hannibal defeated the Romans at Cannae. How can you argue that defeating a bunch of goat fuckers in a barren desert is at all comparable to Napoleon bringing Europe to heel? How can you compare Muhammad's opportunism to the military genius of Caesar?
You are deluded. Simple as that.

>"Like a Slav"
>slavs decended on the balkans almost 1,000 years after Alexander
what are you doing on Veeky Forums?

Ah, so he spoke Serbian?

he created islam but he wasn't an adventurer like alexander its wrong comparisson

>its more that we dont give a shit about him
Speak for yourself you fucking retard.

did i hurt your feelings, sandie?
western countries have something called eurocentrism and thats why you dont see anything related to for example china taught there during history lessons unless its related to colonization so for all intents and purposes muhamamd is just another barbaric childfucker that is irrelevant to european culture while alexander and napoleon certainly are

>muhamamd is just another barbaric childfucker that is irrelevant to european culture
Saying Muhammad is irrelevant to European culture is like saying Carthage was irrelevant to Rome. Shut the fuck up already you retard, I learned plenty about Islam in school.

nu ex muslim ranting.
who the hell this muhammed killing 2000 people with his own hand?
aren't you too much playing dynasty warriors kid?

The Ottomans ruining the Balkans has nothing to do woth European culture. The only influence islam had on Europe was stunting the growth of some of the greatest and oldest examples of European culture. So not influence really, but bastardized sub-culture.

>Muhammad didn't even unite the Arabs in his lifetime
But he did.

You mean Khalid ib Walid.

Haha yeah of course were just going to ignore the entire 6th-12th century amirite heh of course when you talk about islamic influence and europe it can only means the ottomans right lmao

Dumb shit

>muh ottomans
The Middle East had a huge impact on the world and especially Europe. Historically they completely shifted the balance of power and rivalry between Rome and Persia.

Muhammad is the one who kick started it all and saying he's not important enough to study just means you went to some brainlet highschool.

Nappie's the reason why nation states (and nationalism) emerged throughout Europe, and evetually the world. His influence pretty much planted the seed for what would be both World Wars, and how countries still are ruled to this day.

Muhammad was an important and influential historical figure, yes, but you're vastly underestimating the influence that spreading the ideals of the Revolution had on the world.

The Rise of Islam didn't reaĺly have an effect "far greater" than the hellenization of the Middle East either.

Why is this board obsessed with Stalin who fucked a 13 yo girl but not with Mohammed who fucked a 9 yo girl?

/pol/ BTFO

While Alexander conquered and conquered only for his legacy to shatter at his death and Napoleon conquered and conquered only to be defeated because of his own strategic mistakes, The Prophet conquered but also left a legacy. Muhammad, peace be upon him, was a greater man that Napoleon and Alexander. His actions were not taken to serve his ego, unlike the other two (Napoleon invading Russia and Alexander willingly choosing to march through a desert to prove that he can survive attrition when in reality it was the poor men that followed him who suffered), but a greater cause.

Alexander was a pussy lol

I am muslim, but let's be honest, his empire stretched from Europe to India. The only thing that kept him from going furhter where his soldiers that got sick of the conquests.

> Why can't Europeans admit that Muhammad

Along with all the other points already made, the issue is simply the splitting of glory between multiple leaders, some even after his death, which all multiply into his legacy.

Similarly, Genghis Khan did not really participate in nearly half "his" conquest and most of "his" battles when he was alive, so the glory is spread around quite a number of his generals, most notably Batu and Subotai.

Unlike Napoleon and Alexander, which were basically at the head of every campaign their faction fought.

The only people who would think that winning wars against Arabs is something to brag about would be other Arabs.

Blonde, blue eyed, slightly swarthy skin coloured with a large birdged nose.

Because hes a dirty camel jockey

>/pol/ idealizing a literal cuckold who surrendered twice and assumed the throne under the auspices of legitimizing a profoundly liberal revolution.
He was only being nice to the Muslims because he got excommunicated and needed all the help he could get to fight those shopkeepers.

Well done user

Nah Napoleon almost converted to Islam

Oy vey, having sex with teenagers is bad, goy, look at this hadith (unverified), you don't want to be a ped, do you? Let your Women turn 40 with unused wombs goy

Yeah no. They were hellenised later, and there was mixing, but that's a bridge too far.

Also, it's still mixed race even if we pretend that they were always hellenes, because they're not dorians.

Only a retard thinks like this. The Arabs were always OP in the dessert.

where's this quote from?

But Carthage was irrelevant to Rome once destroyed, there were never any Punic uprisings, so the whole of the empire which is what we think of when we say Rome, Carthage is obliterated

>Yeah no. They were hellenised later
they were the first Greeks to settle Epirus, saying Molossians aren't Greek is the same as saying Syracuse wasn't Greek.

Because le ebin bedo meme