Why were Muslims trying to invade France 400 years before the First Crusade?

wtf are you talking about? Your post makes no chronological or historic sense.

idk about paying them back with the crusades, Europe got btfoed there multiple times. if anything Europe right now and in the past 100 years or so has been getting their vengeance.

I'm talking about Franks, who converted to Christianity in 496.

The French are illegally occupying rightfully Muslim land.

Reminder that we're in 2017 and France STILL hasn't apologised for Tours.

It's painfully obvious you've never been to college and just image some liberal-run indoctrination program.

>the French fight to the death to protect their homeland from muslims
>a thousand years later they bend over willingly and beg them to replace them

not the other guy, but still doesnt make sense. Rome fell by then. As for conquering gual, what conquering? they were cleaning house if anything. Not to mention They had the consent of the Church, (whether the church allowed it out of fear or not we dont know) but you also have to consider the campaigns that reunited that area of the map, we know this because Their king was crowned Roman Emperor after.

>implying that the Franks are anything close to present day people of France.

also I'm guessing you mean present day because 1000 years later would put them around the time of the French Revolution?

Now this is some German-tier DIDNDU.

>...which is why the FN is the strongest policital party in France, every presidential candidate aside from the communist are advocating for less migrants and harsher terms on islam, and in the refugee crisis, France has only 20,000 refugees
Is that what you meant user?

actually arguing that they didusum because they reunited Europe proper and set the stage to centralize the Church effectively strengthening the catholic faith which united Europe against Islamic invaders for more than 1000 years. Or would you rather be Islamfag where you can't drink alcohol kiss hairy mustache chatch?

Loot

> the catholic faith which united Europe against Islamic invaders for more than 1000 years
> would you rather be Islamfag where you can't drink alcohol
I'm not a Catholic and I don't live in France, so I have no personal agenda here, but looking at Al-Andalusia at the time, I'd say it would be better for them to be captured by Muslims, at least in the short term. This would reopen cultural and economical links with the rest of the Mediterranean France lost after the fall of Rome.
> they reunited Europe proper
They couldn't "reunite" Europe proper, because Europe was never united. Roman Empire wasn't an European power, it was a Mediterranean power, and Caliphate was the closes thing to the Empire at the time. "Reunification of Europe" and "Patronage of christianity" is just cheap propaganda tricks by warmongering chieftains.

Yeah that is a good point, although the Muslims were hit hard

The Islam wasn't united. If my memory serves me right, the schism between shiism and soennism already happened and with it the Muslimworld began to split in numerous smaller empires, although they were bigger and more culturally developed than the Europeans, as was the entire Eastern region(Byzantium, old Sassanids)

so youre saying that under a Arab and Berber controlled France along with Al-Andalusia, that there would have been peace and a flourishing trade network of some sort among the Mediterranean? Successfully reuniting the old lands of the Roman Empire under Islamic faith?

>couldn't reunite Europe proper
Lands of France, spain, and some of the German states of the Middle ages were all well governed by Rome in its height. Kinda consider that united. Rome was a Mediterranean power but much of its extent was in Europe as well. Also don't disagree that the Arabs of the time were the closest thing to an empire at the time, but then again Europe didn't need to be one Empire, and never did after the Romans.

no doubt user.

its ok user, I got him. Hes obviously Cordobaboo.

> Cordobaboo
See

This, tbqh

>He's referring to the reality modern western historians have an orientalist infatuation with brown people and foist all blame onto white people for any historical incident between whitey and the poor little oppressed PoC.

...

>Mudslims thinking they are a match for the Venetian navy

lel

lel every time

EVERY FUCKING TIME SOME BUTTHURT MUSLIM OR NUMALE REDDITOR STARTS WHINING EUROPEAN WARS OF CONQUEST WHEN MUSLIM WARS OF CONQUEST ARE BROUGHT UP

who programmed you people and how did they program you well?

The Abbasid revolution of 750 which started the fragmentation of Muslim polities hadn't happened at that point yet. The Umayyads were still united. The switch of ruling dynasty, which moved its center of power further east was exactly what prevented further expansion in Europe. 50 years later the Abbasid caliph Harun al-Rashid and Charlemagne were best bros and would send each other gifts.

While the Shi'a did exist at that point, the divide wasn't as pronounced politically or theologically, and they were just another party - one that backed the Abbasids in the end.

>emperor converts to Christianity
>"invasion"

money, land, power. same as every other ruling force.
Charles put a stop to that though

>venetian navy
Do you mean the holy league navy and in specially the spanish navy? Venetian=turkish whore

ships were mostly from venice

Butthurt Byzantiboo detected.

Childhood is idolizing the Byzantines.
Adulthood is realizing Venice makes more sense.

>Muslims
>More culturally developed

There is nothing that supports this view of history. It was an exotic culture sure but they were either equal in development or less developed by the time of the first crusades.

Europeans had better armour and weaponry. Better agricultural methods and were masters of castle and ship and church building.

Both sides learned lots of new stuff from the other, the idea of "backwards europeans" is a dark ages meme.

I've graduated from a college and happen to know that half of the curriculum is liberal indoctrination, averaged across all disciplines.

Women's studies for example is entirely liberal indoctrination, which throws off the average for the hard sciences. Other disciplines are relatively free of this overt thought control, but are limited in what they can openly cover by pressure from the board.

This kills the reactionary edgelord.

>goes to raid France
>gets beat
>French wanks over this for hundreds of years

>strawman btfo anything

because theirs was a militant cult, that sought to lay low their brother with a sword

Reminder Venice was bro-tier to the Empire before the accident/fuck up of the 'WHERE'S MY MONEY LATINS?' 4th crusade

>implying the phrase "cultural marxism" is anything more than a buzzword

Pot, kettle, black.

>Venice
>"bro-tier"

No they weren't. As early as the 1120s, the Venetians had begun attacking Byzantine trading outposts and merchants in the Aegean in order to weaken the Byzantine presence there. All without provocation.

see: Venetian Crusade

...

>Venetian Crusade
>Emperor gives you rights
>Emperor takes them away
>reeeeeee
>eventually get them back
>continue to supply ships for the byzantine fleet
>continue to support the growth of the urban economy

nice shoop, really does capture the state of that mess

The poster was designed that way as a throwback to the original.

> an interpretation I disagree with is a strawman
You're strawmanning strawman

>goes to raid France

>raids do not include tens of thousands of men
>raids do not conquer territory
>raids do not besiege and conquer cities

That was not even the first invasion, that happened in 721, but they were beat by count Odo the Great;

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Toulouse_(721)

Then they managed to constantly attack and in the end defeat Odo and continue to the Franks only to get BTFO'd again.

Your teacher sucks at his job.

t. John Green

>venice
>doing anything wrong

they did absolutely the right thing putting the byzantines in their fucking place

i will never understand this board's infatuation with greek WEWUZery

Reminder that the 4th crusade was justified and based old man Enrico Dandolo put the Latin murdering Greek larpers in their place: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_of_the_Latins

The fall of Constantinople was also a good thing. It's what propelled us into modern age. Most scholars agree it's after that that the early modern period starts.

>My history teacher told me the Crusades started all this conflict
>all this conflict
Like most things it's all the French and the British fault, you see they claimed huge areas of land and decided that the best way to draw a map is with straight lines, which later resulted in a bunch of countries with a various populations who historically disliked each other.

The French even put the Alawites in charge of Syria for shits and giggles. And when all the other Muslims have a saying that goes "Drink the blood of an Alawite and you get a free pass into heaven" it would not take a genius to figure out that the current Syrian civil war was inevitable.

There is a reason why France and England are the ones who are subjected to most of the Muslim terrorist attacks!

>current Syrian civil war was inevitable.
>France caused this

Lol war Syria is also one of the last nations not on the world banking system. Along with Iran, North Korea...

Used to be Iraq, Libya....

>There is a reason why France and England are the ones who are subjected to most of the Muslim terrorist attacks!

I think you mean France and Germany

in the UK we've had like 2 in 15 years and one of those only killed one person

>All it takes is one google search to disprove me the post
But I will give your post a 7/7

>"all this conflict"

As if two fucking quasi-empires next to each other ever needed a particular reason for conflict

Reminder that that portrait is not of Dandolo but Andrea Gritti.

>avatarfagging
kys

>image some liberal-run indoctrination program.
I'm in college right now, and yes, it is exactly that. You probably just don't see that because YOU are indocrinated yourself.

All this is only after millions of desert rats have already come over to Europe you dolt. Not to mention all the anti-racism laws and desire by (((politicians))) to ((integrate)) the foreigners.

>THE MUSLIMS DINDU NUFFIN ITS ALL THE EVIL CHRISTIANS FAULT
Every time

We had bate any terrorist attacks in germany and all of them happened after the refugee crisis

*barely

>convert to christianity
>conquer the rest of gaul
uuh famalam I don't know where you learned history but Gaul was already completely conquered by the Romans before they converted to christianity

>The reality being different in itself that Islam (what modern bourgeois libruls view as 'brown') was a hostile, belligerent imperialist movement that offensively waged war on its Other.
the reality is somewhere in the middle. you're just as one-sided as the sjws; just on the other extreme.

Dandolo didn't lead the Crusade, he was just transport and just wanted his fucking money the Crusaders had promised him.
No Venetians were at the city in 1182 when the massacre occured (which was due to the Latins supporting the imperial candidate that lost), they'd been kicked out in 1171.

LMAO

First it isn't Toulouse but Poitiers, secondly, 20000 soldiers + the king of andalusia isn't a raid but an invading army

anyway

>Get BTFO by French
>Get colonized by French
>W-we d-din't lost it was j-just a raid !!!

>dunno where you learned your history

Well his teacher apparently thinks the Christians attacked Muslims first so its safe to say he won't have a very good education

>And yet openly Rotschild Globalist Macron polls higher then her.

>poll
Owned by the state like eveything in this socialist shithole

Reminder that Corsica is Muslim clay and you frogs have to go back

reminder that Corsica literally has a muslim head as a flag

Corsica was never under mudslime rule. Their flag is a decapitated shitskin to commemorate the invasions being successfully repelled. Same for Sardinia, except they have even more mudslime heads in their flag.

...

Muslims never conquered Corsica.

That is a heraldic niche and it represents a decapitated enemy.

except one small village you mean

>Sardinia

>Mujāhid returned to Sardinia in 1016 intending a more thorough conquest of the island.

>the area he controlled, the plain between the central mountains and the sea, corresponded roughly to the Judicature of Cagliari (regnum Calaritanum in the Liber, III, 45), whose judge he had defeated and killed.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pisan–Genoese_expeditions_to_Sardinia

I'm willing to bet by the end of this century, Western European schools will teach that the progressive ideals of Islam were brutally thwarted by the Catholic Church (who coincidentally caused and perpetuated the Dark Ages according to today's atheist hipsters), and that the roots of modern evil began when the brutish Franks didn't allow the cosmopolitan nature of Al-Andalus to spread.

Yes, for like 2 months before the rest of the judges came with the Genoans and slaughtered them

Well considering the Middle East or at least the Levant, Egypt and Anatolia were originally Christian for centuries before Muhammad was ever born....

Mmmmmmm

Maybe you should also paste the rest of the article

>The combined forces of Pisa and Genoa, arriving in May,[24] vastly outnumbered those of Mujāhid. The emir's troops were already restless because of a lack of sufficient booty, and so he tried to flee. His fleet was badly battered by a storm as it passed through a rocky cove, according to the Arabic sources,[43] and the Pisans and Genoese picked off the remaining ships, capturing Mujāhid's mother and his heir.[44] His mother seems to have been originally a European captured and sold into slavery, as she chose to remain with "her people" after her capture on Sardinia.[45] His son and heir, ‘Alī, remained a hostage for a number of years. Those Muslims who survived the wreck of their ships were slaughtered onshore by the local populace.[24]

i had a prof who spent some time explaining how the muslims dindin nuffin and Urban II just was a fanatic who just wanted to send the best of the realm to their death to weaken Europe so Popes could rule. I can't remember exactly how she said it but it was pretty much "Ya Christians died in the east under the Muslims, but they never suffered and torture/punishment done for not paying the Jizya was done in compliance with the law (sharia) therefore it was humane"

also somkeone mentioned that they had destroyed the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in 1009 which was symbolic throughout Christendom since it was tied to Constantine (first roman emperor to convert). And she implied pope/populace 80 years later wouldn't have even known about that church because 80 years was a long time in the middle ages. Ignoring the fact the Popes were some of the most historically informed and well read people in the west.

I feel the Crusaders were a waste of effort, treasure, and manpower when Anatolia should've been recovered by the Seljuks and Turkomans while simultaneously helping out the Christian kingdoms in Iberia.

However, that professor is one retarded bitch if she truly thought Muslims were these harmless people. What about Fraxinet? The Emirate of Bari or the Emirate of Crete? All those Muslim raids in the 9th and 10th centuries (which coincided along with the Vikings and Magyar attacks)?

There was Muslim aggression WAY before Deus Vult yet people actually gloss or whitewash it? Fuck that noise.

This Bias is Highschool and History Channel tier

You must be underage

Crusades and the Reconquista was an answer to the islamic invasion of Europa. Why they invaded Europe? because islam is expansionist by nature

>the reality is somewhere in the middle.
How is what he said objectively wrong? Did Islam's founder and the "Rightly Guided" caliphs not embark on imperialistic conquests of non-Muslim lands?

If pablo hernandez, dellagardesca, ali the levantine, johan, Brian, igor and vlad share the same faith then the church did a good job, specially if they get to charge taxes to cities

it's safe to assume he said the Franks converted to Christianity and not that the Franks converted Gaul to Christianity

>Reconquista
This and the Norman conquest of Sicily were the only truly justifiable counterattacks against Islam.

>capturing Mujāhid's mother and his heir

Holy shit

becuase there alredy full from all the africans and muslims