Veeky Forums BTFO

Veeky Forums BTFO

>sack of byzantium...
>FALSE
>then goes on to say it happened but it was ok

>try to justify 4th crusade rather than just say they weren’t Christians because they were excommunicated
>justify petty politics rather than becoming one universal monarchy led by the HREmperor as people ‘identifying by religion’
The pre Turkish Islamic empires were just stopped by overextension
>muh western dominance
History isn’t pre determined you need agents of action for things to actually happen
>massacring Saxons
But Charlemagne expanded in almost every direction so why not say that, he tried to take some of Iberia but lacked the siege engines and got BTFO by the basque so failed there. Seeing how Saxony would then stop raiding thhe provinces south of it should be seen as why it’s conversion was a force for good

I don't like how the OG infographic lumps in the first and third crusades with all the rest

>muslims control Iberia
>(((Pope))) doesn't care

>muslims control most of Anatolia
>(((Pope))) doesn't care

>muslims control Egypt, Baghdad, Libya, all formerly Christian lands
>(((Pope))) doesn't care

>muslims control (((Palestine)))
>OY VEY NOT THE HOLY LAND! ALL ABLE EUROPEAN MEN SHOULD ABANDON THEIR COUNTRIES AND DEFEND THE HOLY LAND FOR THE CHOSENITES!

>convert to christianity was peaceful
I SHED THE BLOOD OF THE SAXON MEN

Yeah because we all know that Europe was in a position to launch the crusades in the 7th and 8th century.

No, you’re just really bad at interpreting arguments.

>Converting Saxons was probably the single most import event and fundamental cornerstone of later European dominance. Taking back Iberia was relatively simple.

What in the absolute fuck? First of all why is it so fucking important? Secondly how was taking back Iberia simple? It took 800 fucking years?!

...

>muslims and christians were each basically giant factions fighting specifically against each other for 1,300 years

The 4th one is both false and not adressing the argument.

>giant factions
of Judaism

>The of Byzantium was neccesary to start the age of European dominance

Are you really implying the Ottomans were more european than Byzantium? Because I'm pretty sure they were the ones that benefited the most from the end of Byzantium.
You fucking moron

I think he was talking about when Byzantine scholars fled to Italy which caused the Italian Renaissance.

Most of this is pretty good although some of the arguments need some work.

>converting saxons was the single most important event and the cornerstone of the later European dominance
>taking back iberia was relatively simple
>>Byzantium is sacked
>FALSE.
>venice had more important things to do also it was ok because the fall of byzantium was necessary
>Muslims were the agressors in the crusades
>>do the raiding, murdering and pillaging yourself.
>FALSE.
>proceed to claim something completely unrelated to the statement amd somehow bring pagans into it

>gives no specific details and provides no sources at all, just general claims pulled from their ass with no supporting evidence

Im not defending the other side but really nigga

>Muh Homeland.
Most Crusadershits went to the holy land on private quests.

Or even settled there, as in the case of the Outremer.

Not to defend Europe, considering their homes were literally far away from fighting or the nearest Muslim state.

You made this, OP, don't fucking lie.
>history.com
>britannica
Jesus Fucking Christ.

Nah, I was just searching through google.
Do a reverse search.

we need to go deeper

>most Christians were converted peacefully
Yeah, like Polabian Slavs.

>Thietmar of Merseburg claims the captured Stoigniew, whom he calls Stoinneg, was decapitated by Otto. After the battle, according to Widukind, Stoinegin's head was raised on a pole and seven hundred captured Slavs were executed before sundown

>In 939, an Obodrite attack left a Saxon army routed and its margravial leader dead. Gero in revenge invited thirty Slav chieftains to a banquet whereat he killed all but one, who managed to escape by accident.[6] In response, the Stodorani revolted against German overlordship and chased the Germans across the Elbe, but Gero was able to reverse this before Otto's arrival in Magdeburg later in the year. He subsequently bribed Tugumir, a baptised Slav prince, to betray his countryman and make his people subject to Germany. Soon after, the Obodrites and the Wilzes made submission.[6]
Those peaceful and moral Christians.

/thread

>peacefully converted

Why does no one ever talk about the Northern Crusades

this.

>I think he was talking about when Byzantine scholars fled to Italy which caused the Italian Renaissance.
FALSE

That’s not an argument.

...

>might is right
I've never heard a pagan say that.

Regardless, pagans got their asses kicked by a superior enemy. Stop whining about it like a little bitch.

>I lied, but *regardless*
Cool story christcuck

>I've never heard

>I lied.

The fact that you have never heard about pagans being nazi larpers and pretty social-darwinian by themselves, doesn't negate the fact that yes, they believe that might makes right.

>only websites as sources
F-

>accuse someone of making might makes right argument
>makes a might makes right argument literally one post later
can't make this shit up, total fucking retard without any self-awareness

I never said that “might is right” was a bad argument. I was just pointing out that Neo-pagans are hypocritical about it.

Well it is a bad argument.

>claims there was no unified concept of being "European"
>also claims that certain events were necessary to create a European state

I don't get it...

Why is this anti white leftists shill samefagging?

>Justifying 4th crusade this hard because it was "way past its peak at the time" and "It was necessary"
Wew lad, even edgy venice doge don't larp this hard.
Sacking Constantinople in 1204 didn't acomplish anything worth while for western christians, they didn't return any scrolls or anything worth while back. Because most of it was destroyed, emperor and saint bodies feed to street dogs, christian relics melted for coins, Libraries burned etc. Letting muslim turk hordes flood eastern europe.
The only thing you can actually say was "necessary" was in 1453 when Ottoman conquered it, then all the smart orthodox figures sailed to Italy and contributed to the Renaissance.

This "counter" meme is probably most pathetic example of Deus Vult christian larpers justifying themselves.

This.
Doos Boolt faggots need to die.

>Most Christians were converted peacefully. It was in fact pagans who did of most the raiding al pillaging
what is Theodosius reforms? what is Theodosian Iconoclasm? what is Northern Crusade? what is Teutonic Order? what is constant war against Lithuania? what is invasion of Saxony?

>history-world
>brittanica
>phillipcoppens
>historywarsweapons
>history

It didn't happen, but should have.

56% Christcuck detected

>being anti-christian and anti-crusade is anti-white
you /pol/tards do realise christianity is part of "(((Abrahamic)))" religions?

So? Jesus litterally btfo'ed the Jews "Pharisees" and said that their laws doesnt make them good, therefor jesus must die for everyones sin and become the new divine individual where "good" is all about intentions.

Basically a jew could commit something evil, as long he follows the basic rules, while jesus says, if you intentions are evil and unjust you must reject yourself.

Example of sufi muslims, they cannot touch women because "Lust". While jesus says that no such rule exist, but if you look at the women with lust in your Eyes, you have commited a sin by your intentions.

There is a reason that jews reject Jesus. He Went against their interests. He also states "do not give what is holy to the dogs."

The broble is a good read †

>im not a /pol/ cuck.

(((Jesus)))

Jesus was a cuck who got strung up by a stand-in for the jews. His followers followed suit and wouldn't get to fuck their wives in case he wanted em more. Ham comes to mind.

>Trust ((me)), guilt Cultures are all lies.

Jesus was a Chad who keept his promises (if he now ever existed).

He Always dicked the Pharisees who Always nagged on him for breaking their traditions. He even goes to temples with a whip to beat the Pharisees who made coin Exchanges in the temples. He litterally beated the oy vey bankers.

Btw that sounds like mohammed when they asked him why he gets to have 9 wives.

You don't even need to bring out any historical knowledge to show the shityness of that image. It says that the crusaders didn't sack constantinople and then says that they did IN THE SAME FUCKING SENTENCE.
Only an indoctrinated doos vooltard could have written that.

>muslims control Iberia
False, half of Iberia was owned by Christians

>muslims control most of Anatolia
>(((Pope))) doesn't care
Lad half the First Crusade was spent retaking lands in Anatolia

>muslims control Egypt, Baghdad, Libya, all formerly Christian lands
Baghdad was never Christian, and nobody wants to die for Libya

>muslims control (((Palestine)))
>OY VEY NOT THE HOLY LAND! ALL ABLE EUROPEAN MEN SHOULD ABANDON THEIR COUNTRIES AND DEFEND THE HOLY LAND FOR THE CHOSENITES!
Hello leftypol
In case you missed it, the Crusaders killed every Jew in the Rhineland and Jerusalem.

>Judaistic heresy critisises original Judaism
>Judaism hates it's own heresy
>This makes Judaistic herey nothing to do with Judaism itself, therefore your anti-white if you criticize it

true

>Baghdad was never Christian
Absolute retard

>crusades were a jewish plot

Probably not even trolling

>not dying for Jewish interests makes you /leftypol/
How does that even make sense in your shill brain?

All Abrahamic religions are just glorified slave cults which are obsessed about submission to (((God))).

I never stated anything anti White about Christianity, im not the /pol/ cuck as i said.

All im saying is that its not supporting the "zionist" or jewish elite which some people states.

>LUL dumb they /pol/ must be cuz jesus a jew??!!

/pol/ are dumb because they are racialsocialists.

But the bible clearly says "do not give whats holy to the dogs (infidels) nor throw you Pearls to the swine so that they stomp on them and rip you apart."

Which must lots of cucks do today. Give whats holy to everyone until the truck of Peace thanks them.

Everyone had gods back then, it was a way to compensate with the unknown and lack of purpose in a harsh Life.

>lel only christians have gods. Lol why arent they like pagan civilized atheists?

Also christianity made people reject themselves in conflicts which lead to better cooperation. While Wikings for example would justify a violent solution of conflicts. Obvouisly people broke these ideals when they felt self-justified but still.

>built by the Muslim Caliph
>Christian
>It is in the Jewish interest to be slaughtered and banished from your own homeland

Wanna know how I know you're a leftypol falseflagger?

>Lad half the First Crusade was spent retaking lands in Anatolia
>retaking lands in Anatolia
The absolute state of "Deus Vult" retards.
Christian /pol/tards trully are delusional.

I love how the initial antimeme is actually so retarded that it states that the Mongols stopped Muslim expansion in the 13th century lmfalalalao

Both the initial meme and the anti crusader response meme are filled with innaccuraccccies.

Shit like this doesn't even surprise me anymore

You idiot, multiple popes encouraged foreign Christians to aid the Iberian kingdoms in the Reconquista and it was declared a rightful "Crusade." And really? "Pope doesn't care about Anatolia"? That was the original stated target of the 1st Crusade. How do you think the County of Edessa was formed? The Kingdom of Antioch?

Christcucks are anti-white. The whole bible takes place in asia and Africa, and all the characters aren't white.
Imagine praying to a Levant god, fuck.

bump

>encouraged foreign Christians to aid the Iberian kingdoms in the Reconquista and it was declared a rightful "Crusade."
what was after the First Crusade's success. Iberia wouldn't become an officially sanctioned crusading ground till the mid 12th century.

>That was the original stated target of the 1st Crusade.
It was Jerusalem. Aiding the Byzantines prompted the Crusades but implicit was seizing Jerusalem under Byzantine tutelage or no.

>How do you think the County of Edessa was formed?
Baldwin Boulogne taking independent initiative out of lust for lands and power. Not saying this is a good or bad thing but it was the least religiously inspired part of the crusade.

>The Kingdom of Antioch?
Certainly a very important strategic and symbolic city to seize for the Cross, but Antioch was agreed upon by negotiations between Franks and Byzantines in an attempt to define the scope and target of the Crusade. Papacy had little involvement in this decision. Franks clearly wanted to rule the city for themselves, namely the highly ambitious ones like Bohemond of Tarento and Raymond of Toulouse. Taranto especially was highly ambitious and power hungry and his appetite for Crusading ceased immediately after he staked claim over the city, soon abandoning ship altogether. Raymond also had little inclination for conquest of Jersusalem and only decided on the course after he failed to carve out his own territory in Arqa and Tripoli

>Using history.com as a resource

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Nice to see the thread still up and no one responded
Oh well

I think he’s talking about the Turks blocking off the east leading to the Americas being discovered and proper Africa

Not an argument.

>That was the original stated target of the 1st Crusade.
No. The first target of Crusades was Jerusalem and rest of the Holy Land.
The First Crusaders never cared about asia minor after not being able to plunder and sack Siege of Nicaea and went straight forward to Antioch, abandoning Byzantine to retake rest of anatolian aegean coast all by themselves.
>How do you think the County of Edessa was formed?
When Baldwin abandoned the crusade and was invited by armenian christian ruler of Edessa Thoros of Edessa, then he assassinated him and usurped the rulership. "Such a great crusade against other christians...", he eventually became King of Jerusalem...
>The Kingdom of Antioch?
When Bohemond abandoned crusade on stupid accusations of Alexius I "betrayal" and decided to settle in recently conquered Antioch, leaving rest of Crusaders marching to Jerusalem on their own...

You understanding of The First Crusade is very misleading and probably filled entirely by "Deus Vult" memes and retarded christian/catholic "patriotism".

Did a veniceboo write this?

Christianity is anti-white
Just go to any Church in a major city, it's 70% 3rd world

>got their asses kicked by superior enemy
>civilians and farmers just trying to live normal lives harassed by missionaries if not fully genocided by armed fighting forces to get them to convert
Sounds a little like ISIS now that I think about it

the picture is the only post i made in this thread beside f*ggot

>When Bohemond abandoned crusade on stupid accusations of Alexius I "betrayal" and decided to settle in recently conquered Antioch

Bohemond was right tho.

Why is it a bad source?

Because it's not a primary source nor ever references any.

It was due to misunderstanding by those who fled the siege of antioch like stephen of blois