Do you think the romans and the sassanids would've banded together if they knew the dangers of islam...

Do you think the romans and the sassanids would've banded together if they knew the dangers of islam? Imagine them together marching into mecca and burning the whole place down.
oh btw im not a doos vult fag just asking opinions.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>dangers of islam?

The dangers of creating the basis to science? You wouldn't have electricity if it wasn't for Islam. Humble yourself kaffir.

Hell no

>if they knew the dangers of islam
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age
How dangerous that was.

they tried but by then it was too late

Even when the plague was going around fucking up both the byzantine and sassanid forces, both sides were still technically at war with each other but kept defensive positions and mentalities. Even if they knew about an incoming islam revolution, the most they'd do is negotiate a temporary ceasefire and separately attempt to wipe mecca and madinah off the map. Even then, they might accidentally encounter each other, start a skirmish by some folly, and initiate a new wave of hostilities between the two empires.

There was nothing to burn down in mecca in the 7th century AD.

still a better ending than what we had
perhaps the fighting alongside each other would've melted their hearts :3

I was just being symbolic

what was that led to the muslims living in absolute shit again? Western interference?

I don't have a pic to describe this level of bait

They might have gone as far as making a defensive alliance if they could see the future, but joining together to run after camels in the desert? lolno

>dangers of islam

sry ahmed but your religion is cancer

Depends on who ruled the empires, imo. Heraclius probably would have agreed with something like that, but I doubt people like Khosrow II would.

>Islamic golden age
What a meme. Every ideology has it's own golden age, that doesn't mean it's better than any other

they tried to but got btfoed anyways since they couldn't coordinate.

Is that sword of allah guy the best general ever? Seriously

I thought it was a trading hub dating back farther than that

That and the Ottomans fucking the entire region all to hell

Yeah, Mohammed banished him because he was very agressive and angry to non-believers but recruited him again because he was a tactical genius

...

Not mentioned in any ancient sources as such. Mecca's importance is almost certainly retro-actively applied from the time after it became Islam's holiest site.

Why are mudslimes so retarded? Islam was obviously dangerous for the byzantines and the sassanids since it caused both of their empires to collapse.

this is Veeky Forums
people here are lefty as fuck so this doesn't suprise me at all lol

The Arabs and a century long period of demographic and political chaos caused their collapse in the Middle East. Islam was what helped consolidate their gains as more permanent and resistant to political assimilation.

The arabs were not united and therefore not a military threat before islam

what "dangers" are you alluding to? Do you understand how ridiculous your question is?

Heh let us, the two strongest empires in the region, put aside all our century long disputes and rivalry so we can beat some ragtag robe wearing raiders from the bumfuck that is arabia

>mfw ever kaffirs knows that Islam empower humans to a degree only it can accomplish
Why don't you convert Donny?

>Imagine them together marching into mecca and burning the whole place down.

Imagine this then. Rome tried to conquer the Hejaz but couldn't even make it to Mecca before the terrain of the Arabian Peninsula forced them to pull back.

Besides, what dangers are you even talking about? Were the Romans and Sassanids not anymore dangerous? They fought incessantly, to the point where the Sassanids were in near collapse/anarchy.

...

I have the opinion that Mohammed was Old Testament level of cunt, but his followers ended up being a lot more cuntish than him. Like Jesus but less of a cunt-o-meter difference.

>larping as a Muslim on the Internet
Just why? What's the point? (you)s?

>second siege of 'nople

kek

thank the lord for the invincible theodosian walls

Listening to History of Byzantium, I actually feel kind of sorry for Saif al-Dawla.

Whoa, hey, look at that! Constan- excuse me, Istanbul is Turkish!

Fascinating isn't it? Fucking try hard.

>only it can accomplish
Nobody said that but thats the way it turned out
>Why don't you convert Donny?
Better question is why should i?

Greek fire, too.
Then the Bulgars showed up and proceeded to kick some ass.

This whole thread is talking about the Arab wars, dumbass.

Your slice of life anime is bad and you should feel bad.

Are you stupid? I asked whether they would side with eachother if they somehow knew how powerful islam is going to be.
Why are you such a pretentious nigger?

>The arabs were not united and therefore not a military threat before [Muhammad]
>The mongols were not united and therefore not a military threat before Genghis
Same difference.

You'll notice it's not called Islam al-kubra too, you fucking baboon. Or are you just pretending to be retarded and ignoring the thread topic?

>there were no harmful things that were caused by islam against the byzantine and the sassanids.
fucking kill yourself you historical retard

They did band together about 15 years before. Steppe dudes with outrageous demands and Mauritius's inability to pay them (the demand was more than the empire's GDP at the time, estimated) led to an insurgency when the barbs executed a ton of legions. He was deposed and the Parthians got pissed and attacked because their Emperor had been buddies with Mauritius. The war lasted like 5 years and ended in both being horrifically weakened, right in time for Islam to burst out of the desert like cum, covering everything from the Caspian to Morocco in a hot sticky new brand of monotheistic government.

>Rome putting serious effort into subduing a third-rate trade hub with literally nothing around and no natural resources to exploit while they already hold the bountiful trade and agricultural hubs of Egypt and Mesopotamia

I mean, sure they would have gotten some foederati/ethnic desert garrisons which might have helped against the Persians but what did they really have to gain otherwise? More african/Indian goods which were coming in through Egypt anyway?

Not a worthwhile conquest. Even Islamic states didn't even bother with controlling mecca unless it was insanely easy for them to acquire. There is no point to controlling a desert which, without oil, would be the most worthless real estate on earth.

really sad
I just imagine that a combined parthian cataphract and roman auxillary would've wiped that cum right up.

JUST

This triggers the t*rk

>Saif al-Dawla
who is he and why?

The only thing that was needed for Rome to beat back the Arabs was for Heraclius to have competent generals. His strategy for Yarmouk would have won the battle, but his generals distrusted and fought amongst each other. The lack of coordination allowed Khalid to concentrate his forces and locally outnumber separated divisions and ultimately inflict more casualties, which was also Heraclius's strategy which his generals failed to carry out due to infighting and being overly defensive. The Romans also never used their cavalry, they were kept them in reserve until the battle was already lost. The Arab cavalry used this to their advantage and dominated the field and the hammered the infantry unopposed at various locations in the battle.

Heraclius himself was a general as skilled as Trajan, Scipio, or even Caesar. At the time the Arabs attacked he was already 60, ill, and close to death. Had he been younger, the Arab conquests might have turned out much differently.

If somehow they united their forces would be manzikert but x10 worse