Arabs are terrible at war

>arabs are terrible at war

>Italians are terrible at war

It's almost like people are talking about modern warfare and not whatever happened 1400 years ago

>Whites are terrible at war

>>Whites are terrible at war
Who are you quoting?

Wow that's a lot of sand

>tfw Ethiopia was this close to never being colonized but some Italian memelord literally gassed them into submission to satisfy his desire to LARP as a Roman
What a fucking bummer.

*modern Arabs
I mean practically the entire Arabic world got beat by a bunch of ragtag dusty jews.

I hate sand

arabs can't into modern warfare, because responsibility for failure is always passed along down the chain of command as far as it can go. incompetence remains at the top, quite frankly, because allah wills it.

the concept of "Italians" did not exist until after the Roman Empire collapsed in 1453. similarly, I don't think there was a shared "Arab" identity held by the ancient caliphates

>Mike Tyson & Floyd Mayweather beat each other to a pulp
>Numale comes by and shoves them down
>Numale is champion of the world

>Roman Empire

what did he mean by this?

>"-"

This is a difficult point to defend considering that they managed to keep most of it together for a good 200 years. Eventually Tyson and Mayweather would get back up and knock the numale on his ass. In this case though Tyson never stopped having to catch his breath and Mayweather never got back up, period.

What? Italic peoples have been a concept nearly as long as Greeks,

Italic=/=Italian anymore than Germanic=German.

t,

you =/= your white dad

Oh they kept it for 200 years? You do realize the romans held a much more populated stretch of territory for much longer right? I'm pretty sure the classical persians did too and so did the chinese.

And? Your point was that they got in a lucky shot, but that point stops being valid when neither party manages to make anything remotely close to a comeback. If the Byzantines were really the superior tough guys then why did they only manage to get Antioch, Cyprus, and Crete back while the Calihate was literally tearing itself apart? In the end it was the Turks who ended up dealing the most damage to both the Arabs and the Byzantines.

Because they had more problems to deal with then just the mudslimes. There's no real achievement involved in stomping a state that is in a constant state of war or preparation for war with it's neighbors by default.

>There's no real achievement involved in stomping a state that is in a constant state of war or preparation for war with it's neighbors by default.
Then it shouldn't have been hard for the Byzantines to do it.

lol no. The Byzantines went from having to deal with the Arabs to having to deal with the Turks with little time to recover in between invasions. Oh and they also occasionally had to deal with attacks from the west or north too! The Arabs for all intents and purposes only really had the Turks as a serious threat to them. Which they fared terrible against.

>The Byzantines went from having to deal with the Arabs to having to deal with the Turks with little time to recover in between invasions.
The Abbasid Caliphate started falling apart around 950. The Seljuk Turks didn't gain a border with the Byzantines until around a century later. They had opportunities user. Stop making excuses.

>>they had opportunites.
lol no they didn't.

>>started falling apart in around 950
And rome started falling apart during the third century, but the germanic tribes didn't manage to overrun them until a couple hundred years later. The arabs got in a lucky shot that crippled the Byzantine empire for long enough that by the time they were capable of taking back lost land the turks were rampaging around.

Literally just Vikings with sand and horses
>Buildup of an unsustainably large population of young males (climatic shift for Vikings, institution of Islam for Arabs)
>Large young male population sets out to rape, pillage, and conquer.
It's not hard user

>And rome started falling apart during the third century, but the germanic tribes didn't manage to overrun them until a couple hundred years later
Why are you comparing the Byzantines to Germanic tribes people? I thought the Byzantines were the superior polity in this scenario (not the other way around) and that the deed in question was supposed to be simple.

Because in terms of military and economic power they were not superior enough to take on all their neighbors at the same time. The Byzantines could have easily crushed the arabs if it were not for the turks, they could have easily crushed the turks if not for the arabs. This isn't new, classical rome could have easily conquered and kept persia if they didn't have to worry about the western barbarians for example.

>Italy under romans it's literally called Roman Italia
>T-THEY WERE ITALICS NOT ITALIANS!
Nordcuck delusions, everyone

>whites

When is this meme classification going away?
Americans and europeans aren't the same.

Monotheism is pretty easy to sell, though.

>Yeah our God forgives everything and you don't have to sacrifice anything, how's that sound?
>Pretty good, I'll join up
>Okay but now that you're here, if you leave you go to help forever

Most of it still is. You might wanna check out a map

North Africa was conquered by islamized berbers tho

>Japan
>ROK
>Not in the "Partial European control or influence" color

Self-reply,
And yes, americans are europeans

That all happened under Mohamed's BLUE eyes and BLONDE hair and his kriegsbund of ARYAN NORDIC generals
SHITSKINS are kike-worshipping soyboys and you'RE a fucking cuck

>liberia
>never colonized by europe

bit dishonest desu, it was colonized by the USA which was culturally, racially, and institutionally European

WE

Board post quality rapidly deteriorating

this should be a banner

>implying

Also
>Battle of Yarmouk

okay but did the Vikings establish a multicontinental contiguous land empire

>casualties and losses
E N T I R E A R M Y

Yeah I wish more people would understand this, Americans are actually Atlantians. When Europeans were coming to the new world by the thousands, they were kidnapped by the Atlantians and replaced by their own race. That's why they look so incredible different to nearly all European countries.

I think of it as more of an occupation than an outright colonization. After all the Italians were only there for like 5-6, almost as long as Poland was under the Germans.

>I don't think there was a shared "Arab" identity held by the ancient caliphates

>Iran and Afghanistan
>Not green from Alexander
>Anatolia
>Not green from the thousands of years it was owned and populated by Whites

This desu

italians are not romans