Mongol hate thread

These undeveloped savages made islam the plague it is today by ruining the great empire(s) they've built. They contributed nothing to humanities progress and killed millions of civillians. I hope for them a very special place in hell.

Other urls found in this thread:

m.youtube.com/watch?v=FFfXDZvvmrg
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ash'ar
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muʿtazila
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_raid_against_Rome
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sack_of_Constantinople_(1204)
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

They were a religiously tolerant culture

...Who ruined islam for future generations, Fuck them

t. dan carlin

The original roaches

Have a read.

>Enable the silk road
>Maintain the largest empire of cultural and religious tolerance
>Systematically combat inside and outside threats
>Push the world towards advancement
>Ahmed is mad because you fucked his wife
Kek

Isn't it undeniable that islam would be a more "western" type religion if the mongols didn't totalt destroy them though?

t. John Green

What? They were already at war with "western" powers for a long time before the Mongols showed up.

No that's pretty deniable

No, what the fuck does religion have to do with it? Mongols and turks turned muslim and ruled their empires far better than the arabs. They didn't kill every single non believer they met unlike the arabs and that lead to trade and prosperity.

Without the mongols there would've been even more tension between christians and muslims and who knows what would've happened.

Western values are generelly today more tolerable and free. That's what i meant, if not for mongols i think islam would've evolved positively and not the other way around

They were still far from extremists at the time. During the time they would be counted as semi-agnostic

The only points people bring up against the mongols is that their succession laws were shit(granted) and that they indiscriminately killed and pillaged and raped, failing to realize that every civilization did that back then.

>can't recover after 800 years

>These undeveloped savages made islam the plague it is today by ruining

Wrong,

>Privately, Ghazan still practiced Mongol Shamanism and worshipped Tengri, honoring his ancestors' worship of heaven as a kind of proto-Islamic monotheism.[12] He showed tolerance for multiple religions, encouraged the original archaic Mongol culture to flourish, tolerated the Shiites, and respected the religions of his Georgian and Armenian client kings. Ghazan therefore continued his forefather's approach toward religious tolerance. When Ghazan learned that some Buddhist monks feigned conversion to Islam due to their temples being earlier destroyed, he granted permission to all who wish to return to Tibet where they can freely follow their faith and be among other Buddhists.

Arabs were persecuting and killing Buddhists in the middle east and he let them return to Tibet.

I assume you're talking about arabs in which case you're wrong. Arab governance over christian lands was brutal, the few people they didn't kill they taxed into starvation. They demolished churches and outlawed the public worship of other religions. Don't get me wrong, christians were no better, they also treated muslims like garbage. Mongols are praiseworthy because of how farm from religious extremism they were

Islam was cracking down on its own enlightenment before the Mongols even dared to show up at the gates of Baghdad, in favor of the staunch traditionalism that has defined it ever since. This process was complete by the 11th century, much less the 13th.

Nah dawg nah

m.youtube.com/watch?v=FFfXDZvvmrg
Most definetinaly a biased video, but there must be some truth to it right?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ash'ar
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muʿtazila
Guess which of those theological schools most of the arabs were part of.

Of course arabs had it good in their empire, of course there were arab inventors and philosophers, the same thing was happening everywhere else, it's called the Islamic golden age because they were drunk on gold and power after conquering the richest lands in the world. I could call it the mongol golden age after they took over most of it. The mongols didn't care if your name was Charles, Ali or Wong, they didn't care if you worshipped Bhudda, Allah or God, and they didn't burned people on the steak for no good reason. They are objectively better than the arabs.

>didn't immediately surrender on day 1
>good enough reason to behead millions

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_raid_against_Rome
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sack_of_Constantinople_(1204)
What's your point?

That mass murdering civilians because the king didn't immediately surrender is not a good reason.

Is mass murdering them because they believe in a different god a good reason?
Every conqueror was brutal, when cities were taken civilians were raped and killed every time. Mongols were even more brutal then the rest, so that in the future cities would shit themselves and not fight back. But after the city surrendered things were back to normal for the average joe.

Warlords probably find loot and plunder a good enough reason to do it

The entire population of massive cities though? No.

It doesn't matter what you think is right there are people out there who will kill other people to take their shit and if to get a lot of shit they need to kill a lot of people then so be it

What about modern Mongolians?

The city had already lost, they could have taken shit without complete extermination.

But when the mongol army will go to other cities they won't have to siege or assault them to get their shit because the people there will surrender immediately afraid of genocide.

What is your point man? To these nomadic raiders the urbanite population wasn't even considered to be the same species. These are people who do not hold the same values as you and they do not give a fuck about what you have to say regarding killing people being wrong and bad

>Wall can defeat them
They're no better than mexicans

But the wall(s) didn't stop them

I just don't consider it to be "a good reason"

They level the city and massacre the inhabitants, let a few run and let them spread the word about what just took place and the next city on the campaign trail may immediately surrender in fear of getting turned into a bone pyramid. To a conqueror that's a very good reason to raze a city.

What about the other steppe people they massacred?

Are you serious my dude is this like your first foray into this stuff? Gee other steppe nomads who could be formidable adversaries in combat and also have political legitimacy among the tribes of the confederacy based on their shared nomadic heritage and thus could germinate dissension. If they're not on board with your war plans and could possibly cause you trouble removing them may be an attractive option if there is nothing else to be gained with them around.

You should step away from the history books if it affects your delicate 21st century sensibilities.

So they should have not bothered with the imperial expansion in case it upset someone 1000 years later on a taiwanese steel workers bulletin board?
What if in another 1000 years it turns out to be a stroke of genius? Will you apologise? Faggot.

Finnish people are fine, even if a little autistic.

>They didn't kill every single non believer they met unlike the arabs and that lead to trade and prosperity.
Expertly memed.
Turks=/=Arabs

Not to mentione outlawed torture and btfo the aristocracy and believed more in the merits of people than their bloodlines.