Is there a Veeky Forums equivalent of this?

Yep.

t. JIDF member Schlomo Isaac levi Horowitz Goldenshekelsteinbergstein

...

this

pol is that way bud.

That one christian guy with the anti evolution copypastas

twelfth post best post

...

need one for christfags posting millions of youtube videos or rehashing old shitting arguments like the ontological

This is my favorite "/pol/ outside of /pol/" meme.
I like it extra much, because of how passionately it is defended.

cspipublishing.com/statistical/charts/Islam-BattlesDate.pdf

>the bombing of Yugoslavia by NATO was an act of Jihad, because Kosovars are muslim.

This

...

This.

There was a vocal minority in Kosovo that saw the war as a Jihad against Serbia though.

I am sure Bill Clinton praised Allah as he sent the jets.

They quite obviously aren't talking about the bombings, but the conflict as a whole. You should take that strawman down the Yellow Brick Road with you, Dorothy.

You should read through his "sources", that have multiple battles listed several times, and have idiotic claims like the naval battles between the USA navy and the Morocco pirates as "Jihad".
Did the USA wage Jihad on criminal organizations in Tunis by sending its navy to set fire to their ports?
The author of the map is a moron, grasping at straws, and anyone who quotes him, his map, or his infamous video, should stop posting on Veeky Forums,

The Barbary Wars were about Corsairs committing Ghazi, a form of Jihad, against Europeans and the United States... Are you sure you should be posting about others being morons?

The Barbary Wars was about piracy, not holy war. You are being retarded.

>he Barbary pirates, sometimes called Barbary corsairs or Ottoman corsairs, were pirates and privateers who operated from North Africa, based primarily in the ports of Salé, Rabat, Algiers, Tunis, and Tripoli. This area was known in Europe as the Barbary Coast, a term derived from the name of its Berber inhabitants
>In addition to seizing ships, they engaged in Razzias, raids on European coastal towns and villages, mainly in Italy, France, Spain, and Portugal, but also in the British Isles, the Netherlands and as far away as Iceland. The main purpose of their attacks was to capture Christian slaves for the Ottoman slave trade as well as the general Muslim slavery market in North Africa and the Middle East.[2]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_pirates

>Ghazi (warrior)
>(Redirected from Ghazw)
>"Ghazw" redirects here. For other terms derived from this one, see Razzia.
>Ghazi (غازي, ġāzī) is an Arabic term originally referring to an individual who participates in ghazw (غزو, ġazw), meaning military expeditions or raiding; after the emergence of Islam, it took on new connotations of religious warfare. The related word ghazwa (غزوة ġazwah) is a singulative form meaning a battle or military expedition, often one led by the Islamic prophet Muhammad.[1]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghazi_(warrior)

One man's Pirate is another man's Holy Warrior.

...

>the barbary wars or barbary pirates dont contain the word "ghazi"
>just bring up the "ghazi" article for no reason

They were pirates who stole money and people (easily converted into money), not holy warriors.
You are grasping at straws.

...

Razzia redirects to Ghazw which redirects to Ghazi. Notice the important distinction that the Corsairs only raided CHRISTIAN regions for slaves.

5/10, enjoyable but misses the g-spot
0/10
1/10, but only for "&humanities was a mistake"
0/10
4/10 but only because I hate creationists

>Razzia redirects to Ghazw which redirects to Ghazi.
If you ignore the first result in Google, and ignore the first article in Wikipedia, and then cite the second. Like I said, grasping at straws.
Razzia simply meant raiding for slaves. Yes, during religious wars you would also raid for slaves, but you can do it without the holy war.
Compare to murder, a thing that you can do in war, but you don't need war to do it.
A very simple concept when you think about it.

>Notice the important distinction that the Corsairs only raided CHRISTIAN regions for slaves.
Because it was illegal to have muslim slaves. If your slave converts to islam, you set them free. It was state law.
Still, they did in fact raid muslim coasts and take muslim slaves, check out Slavery in the Arab World by Murray Gordon.
So you are only correct in that "important distinction" when looking at official muslim propaganda, and not the practical implication of stealing people to sell them, which is what pirates did.

>a raid for slaves under religious pretenses is not a religious conflict in context because user says so
Got it. I almost forgot where I was for a moment.

>i didn't read your post so here is a strawman pls dont btfo me no more sir

I accept your surrender.

I read your post. It completely ignores context in favor of your personal narrative.

...

The context was:
1. People buy slaves.
2. There are peasants across the sea.
3. We have boats.

Those are monetary concerns. And as stated, and given a source, there were enough cases of muslims capturing and selling other muslims, it was just black market, because of state law.

The context was:

>These people are a different religion than us and so we will raid them to sell them into slavery for guaranteed money
>We are doing Allah and Mohammed (PBUH) a service by punishing the infidels

you're trying way too hard

No, that is your fever dream. Read a fucking book. Like the one I recommended, Slavery in the Arab World by Murray Gordon.
Make a new thread once you have familiarized yourself with the facts.

>reality is a fever dream because it doesn't fit your narrative which is "Some people were not Christian, therefore it was not an attack on Christianity"
You can use the same logic to say the Holocaust was not an attack on Jews because some of those killed weren't Jews.

Communists. Nothing even compares.

>my opinion is reality because i get triggered when confronted with facts
Read a fucking book.

>muh nazi example out of nowhere haha i win
The Holocaust was objectively not an attack on Jews.
It was an attack on the "undesirables", which included gypsies, slavs, mentally retarded, homosexuals, but were mostly jews.

How was barbary piracy an attack on christians, if they also attacked muslims?
How was barbary piracy a holy war, if it was strictly driven by profit?
How was barbary piracy some muslim attack on christianity, if their own leaders tried to stop them, because they were criminals?
How was the USA traveling the ocean to go set fire to ports in Tunis in any way Jihad?
How is Razzia strictly a holy war thing, when its a french word meaning "to raid", and was used by the french to refer to all pirate attacks, muslim or not, only adapted by arabs later?

Now either make an argument, backed by facts, or go hang yourself.

>The Holocaust was objectively not an attack on Jews
Jesus I don't even think an argument needs to be made here because you went off the deep end in the first sentence.

>Stirner
>Nietzsche ripoff
Stirner came first.

This is the fourth line, not the first, and it is a well agreed on fact.
It was an attack on all elements that threatened the proposed racial purity, so the rhine bastards (german children of french colonial troops from WWI), the mentally ill, the jews, the slavs, homosexuals, and so on.
It didn't single out jews in particular, they were just the most numerous group attacked, and they had the most power over media to popularize their plight.

Again, read a fucking book. Do the bare minimum required research.

>trying to divert the argument cause you got btfo
sad!

>It didn't single out jews in particular
>Tells others to do the bare minimum of research while ignoring Wannsee which comes up in the bare minimum of research

>the holocaust was strictly anti-jewish and ignored all the other undesirables, because of this one part of it that i will cherry pick
>all the non jews who died during the holocause were just incidental collateral damage lol i cant read please end my life

I accept your surrender again, you've clearly conceded this as well.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger_Plan

>once again ignoring context in favor personal narrative

[Relevance?]

read here. it's open to interpretation

The context? The context is you moving the goalpost to Holocaust, because you lost the Barbary Wars.
The Holocaust was a German racial purity eugenics program that targeted slavs, mixed bloods, colonians, gypsies, mentally ill, homosexuals and jews.
One of the targeted groups, the jews, is being singled out by you in an attempt to beat me over the head with it.

The very basic research into the Holocaust will reveal the many other groups of undesirables. In fact in its earliest incarnation the "racial hygiene" program was concerned more with the declining birthrate of the German state and the increasing number of mentally ill and disabled people in state-run institutions (and their costs to the state). Literally just google it. They had propaganda to euthanize your grandpa long before they had propaganda to kill your landlord.

Oh, I get it now, he thinks the Holocaust is just the Jewish genocide, and nothing else.
Well, lucky him, that is also easily fixed by the already prescribed medicine of reading a fucking book.

The Holocaust was the German National Socialist government's effort to purge Europe of Jews, Romani people, Poles, Serbs, Ukrainians, Russians, mixed race, black people, homosexuals, trans people, political dissidents, the mentally retarded, and the insane, in an attempt to promote a racial purity and hygiene eugenics model based on Mendelian genetics as they were understood at the time.
Bulgarians were accepted as "Turkomen", and Croatians were accepted as "Goth Germanics".

moron

This was accurate about a year ago, when Veeky Forums was more obscure and actually had active mods

>when Veeky Forums was more obscure

You mean before r/thedonald colonized /pol/ and spread here eventually.

DONT LOOK HERE JUST SPOUTING BULLSHIT