Defense Issues

Military and general security

    Advertisements
  • Follow Defense Issues on WordPress.com
  • Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 253 other followers

  • October 2019
    M T W T F S S
    « Sep    
     123456
    78910111213
    14151617181920
    21222324252627
    28293031  
  • Categories

  • Advertisements

Archive for the ‘history’ Category

1400 years of islamic aggression

Posted by picard578 on July 6, 2019

While modern Marxist Western thought tends to dismiss all non-material motivations for development and war, religion included, looking at the sources it becomes impossible to separate Islam from Arab expansion. Sayyid Qutb, a Muslim polemicist, stated that the mission of Islam is to correct injustices in the world – injustice being whatever is not islamic in nature. Religion is not the only motive for Muslim expansion, but it is the primary one. It is impossible that such conquest could have happened under Christianity, or any other religion. But holy war is a Muslim’s duty, and conversion must happen – by peace or by force. Much like modern-day Marxism/Progressivism, Islam is a “universalizing” ideology, attempting to operate on a global scale, and eventually encompass the whole of humanity – the entre world is divided into Dar al-Islam (House of Islam) and Dar al-Harb (House of War) – if you are not Muslim or under Muslim rule, Islam is automatically at war against you. No permanent peace is possible with non-Muslims, unless latter submit to Muslim rule. Non-muslims are given the options to convert, flee, pay a punishing tax, or die; no peaceful coexistence is possible. Qur’an instructs that the entire world is to be converted. Islam relies heavily – and is built upon – taqqiya, or the duty of deceiving unbelievers for the sake of faith. Lying to believers is despicable; lying to unbelievers is virtuous. It is that way that a “religion of peace” is responsible for majority of terror attacks in the world. While Shi’a communities have – mostly – used it to protect themselves from persecution at the hands of their Sunni rivals, Sunni Muslims had deployed taqqiya as an active deceit, for purpose of aggresion against unbelievers. Today it is also used by Muslims living in countries where Christian infidels are a majority. War is deceit, as many had acknowledged. Difference is that Islam defines Muslims as being always at war against non-Muslims; therefore, Muslims perpetually lie. In Islam, Muslims can only agree to a maximum 10-year truce with infidels; sole function of any truce is to buy time for Muslims to regroup before renewing the offensive. And any oath or treaty can be abriged or nullified if it is advantageous to Islam. In Islam, there is no time of war and time of peace; there is only time of open war and time of war through deceit.

Islamic aggression begins with Muhammad himself. Muhammad fled to Medina after Meccans got fed up with his aggression and usage of his followers to beat up political opponents. At Medina, Muhammad murdered poets who opposed him. Once in power, he attacked Mecca – without any provocation. Between 622. and 630., Muhammad organized 64 raids against Meccan caravans; of these, he personally led 27. Muhammad himself sent a letter to Khaibar Jews, saying that they will be safe if they embrace Islam. Meccans got fed up with Muhammad’s raids, and attacked him in Medina. This led to Battle of Badr in 624.; Meccans were defeated and killed to a man, Muhammad having ordered no prisoners taken. In 625., Quraish – frustrated by continuing Muslim attacks on caravans – reorganized their forces and attacked Medina once again. This time lust for plunder led to defeat of Muhammadian forces, causing Muhammad to institute a death penalty for breaking discipline. The following year Quaraish built an alliance of different Arab tribes to fight the Muslim gangsters in Medina. Muhammad dug a trench around the city at the advice of Salman, who had come to Muhammad to seek help in his revenge on Persians who had banished him. This forced Quaraish to place a siege, which Muhammad used to contact separate members of the alliance and promise them peace if they embraced Islam – but without telling them that withdrawing from Islam meant death. Many accepted, as Quaraish did not make accepting Islam a punishable offence like Muhammad did leaving Islam. Thus, under the pretext of embracing Islam, members of the confederacy withdrew one by one. Once Quraish lifted the siege, Muhammad ordered murder of poets in the city that had mocked him. (A Muslim’s loyalty is only to his co-religionists; this makes islamic democracy an oxymoron, as democracy relies on nationalism and nation-state, whether civic or ethnic).

After victory at the Battle of the Trench, Muhammad turned his attention to the Roman and Persian Empires, whose wealth he desired. He sent out an invitation to the emperors in which he asked them to find refuge in Islam. “Embrace Islam and you will be safe” – an invitation, a threat and an ultimatum rolled into one. Both emperors refused the blackmail, not realizing the kind of threat Islam represented. After the ultimatum was rejected, and the Governor of Syria attacked one of emissaries for insulting Emperor Heraclius, Muhammad declared that it was the duty of Muslims to attack the Roman Empire. In 629 AD, Muslims attacked the Roman Empire, spurred also into action by the fact that Quraish had started to make overtures to the Persians and Romans. An army 3.000 strong marched out under leadership of Muhammad’s personal slave Zaid. Romans massacred the invasion force at Battle of Mu’tah; Zaid was killed, as was Jaffar. The remainder fled. But Romans, despite the victory and overtures by the Quraish, failed to destroy Muhammad and his followers. Hundreds of millions would die because of that mistake.

After losing that battle, Muhammad attacked the Quraish’ Jewish allies, specifically Banu Quraizah tribe. All Quraizah males were killed, while women and children were sold into slavery. In 628 AD Muhammad and thousand followers marched to Mecca by an indirect route, thus avoiding detection. Once there, Quraish and Muslims negotiated a peace treaty. The terms of the treaty included a clause: if any Muslim from the Quraish clan renounced Islam and returned to Mecca, Muhammad would not hold any grudge against him and would not ask for his return. If anyone from the Quraish embraced Islam and went to Medina, Muhammad would immediately return him to the Quraish at Mecca. This allowed Muslim spies to infiltrate Mecca without any problems, while no Quraish spies would infiltrate Medina. Once a large number of Muslims had infiltrated Mecca, in AD 630. Muhammad abrogated the treaty and attacked Mecca. Before that, he made a large number of alliances, prompting the Quraish to do the same in self-defense. After Meccan-allied tribe of Banu Bakr was attacked by Muslim Banu Khuza’ah, it launched a retaliatory strike, which was enough for Muhammad to declare war. He now had enough strength and besieged the city, forcing Meccan leader Abu Sufyan to convert to Islam by holding his daughter captive as part of his harem. After that, Meccans – as blood relatives of Muhammad – achieved preferred status within Islam. This forced conversion created Sunnis, as Meccans unconditionally surrendered. From this event comes name Islam as well (“Al Silm”, surrender). Muhammad demolished all idols in Mecca, and proclaimed that Allah has no form so that Muslims could not be demoralized by enemy destroying image of Allah.

After conquest of Mecca, Muhammad set his sight on the town of Taif, which had earlier rejected Islam. The defenders were outmaneuvered and defeated at the pass of Hunain, after Muslim champion cheated in a duel by striking the camel (rules allowed only the rider, not the camel, to be struck). Demoralized, army of Taif retreated to the fort. Muslims meanwhile destroyed oases around Taif and forcibly converted allies of Taif to Islam, forcing Taif to sue for peace and convert to Islam as well.

Between 630. and Muhammad’s death in 632., Muslims – driven by religion with ingrained lust for booty and slaves – had conquered the bulk of western Arabia and southern Palestine in a series of holy wars. Conquest was put on hold from 632. to 634. as many tribes rebelled, seeing an opportunity after Muhammad’s death, but resumed once rebellion was crushed in 634. Now, this was not the first holy war in history. Khusrou’s invasion of Roman Empire which just preceded islamic expansion was a holy war, and Heraclius’ response had significant elements of holy war as well, and could indeed be called such. In fact, ancient Israelite invasion of Canaan was likely the earliest recorded holy war in history, assuming religious justification was not merely added post factum. Thus, Muslims did not invent the concept of the holy war. They did, however, make it a standard rather than an exception. In Islam, anything done in fight against non-Muslims (or Muslim heretics) is holy. After Muhammad’s death, new Caliph – Abu Bakr – continued Muhammad’s “holy work” and launched Islam into 1400 years of imperialism, colonialism and genocide. A stretch of land invaded by Muslims at one point or another stretches from Western Europe (Spain, France) to Phillipines, from Poland and Ukraine to Nigeria and from central Asia to New Guinea. Out of 28 battles fought by Muhammad, 27 were offensive-aggressive.

The conquest of Arab pennisula was followed by the invasion of Eastern Roman Empire and Persia. Muslims had changed the rules of war: theirs was probably the first religiously-driven conquest in history (previous religious wars ended in status quo being restored). Those conquered by Islam could only avoid slavery by becoming Muslims. In 634. AD, Muslims launched an unprovoked attack on Persia. They started harrassing civilians and attacking border towns. In response, Persians sent a reconnaissance force. Arabs withdrew to desert, giving their camels an advantage over Persian horse cavalry. The reconnaissance force was defeated and withdrew to join up with Persian army at Kasker. Muslims followed him, surprising and defeating the Persian force at Kaskar. Persians consequently withdrew beyond Euphrates. At the Battle of the Bridge, Persians used elephants to defeat Muslim army, but did not pursue Muslims into their own territory, nor slaughter them like Muslims did their enemies, as Persians – like Romans – subscribed to unwritten rules of civilized warfare. Neither exterminated each others’ armies, tormented nor forcibly converted the civilian population.

Roman Empire was attacked at the same time. According to islamic historians, Monophysites and Jews initially welcomed Muslims. But this was not true. Because it was so quick, conquest of Palestine and Egypt is often described as “bloodless” and “peaceful”. While indeed quick – and often helped by local Monophysites who were persecuted by the Orthodox elite in Constantinople – it was far from bloodless. Damascus was conquered in 635. After several defeats – including the Battle of Ajnadyn – Romans attempted to stop the Muslim advance at Battle of Yarmouk in 636. However, Roman multiethnic and multiconfessional force lacked cohesiveness, while Islamic army was fully Arab and Muslim and thus had substantial edge in cohesion and morale. Despite 2:1 numerical disadvantage, Muslims won after three days of battle. After Battle of Yarmouk, Muslims conquered rest of Palestine and started a five-month siege of Jerusalem, which was captured in 638. After Jerusalem was captured there was no slaughter of inhabitants, but non-Muslims were made to pay tribute to colonialist Muslims. City itself was sacked for three days, and over 300 churches and monasteries destroyed. Further wars provided the Muslim Empire with a stream of slaves. The conquest of Christian North Africa went easily enough until Berbers were encountered, bringing the conquests to stop between Tripoli and Carthage for quarter a century. After their resistence was broken, Muslims enacted massacres of Berber populations, ethnically cleansing the coast. While few coastal Berber enclaves remained, most of the populace – then and today – was Arab, and Berbers were pushed into the Sahara desert. Persian Empire was also defeated in 636., in Battle of al-Quadisiyyah. Following this battle, Muslims conquered Iran, with conquest lasting until 650. Jerusalem was conquered in 638.

Jerusalem itself prospered for the next 100 years under Umayyad rulers. However, under Abbasids it began to decline, starting at 725. Causes of decline were numerous – breaking away of provinces, growth of extremist Muslim sects – but the most important was new decision that Muslims had to convert Christians, Jews and other pagans to Islam (note: Muhammad changed his talk about “people of the Book” after they refused to accept his teachings, denouncing them as pagans and heretics; anything good and tolerant he wrote about them is from before that time). Abbasids drained wealth from Jerusalem to Baghdad for the benefit of the caliphs, and just like any colonial possession in such a situation, Jerusalem declined economically. The language of the government became Arabic, and forcible conversion to Islam became the Muslim policy. Christian and Jewish populace of Jerusalem suffered significantly afterwards. Early in eighth century, 60 Christian pilgrims were crucified. In 772, caliph al-Mansur ordered the hands of Christians and Jews in Jerusalem be stamped with a distinctive symbol. People who converted from Islam to Christianity were beheaded, as was the case with Christian monk in 789; at the same time, Betlehem monastery of Saint Theodosius was plundered and many monks massacred. By the ninth century, persecution was so widespread and intensive that many Christians began fleeing to Roman Empire. In 923., a large number of churches was destroyed, and in 937. Palm Sunday rampage, Muslims destroyed Church of Calvary and the Church of Resurrection. Muslims destroyed the countryside of Israel in 970-983 and 1024-1077; Christian churches were wholesale destroyed on several occasions, and in 1020s the Caliph of Cairo completely destroyed Jerusalem. Muslim laws were enforced, mosques built on top of Christian churches and church height was limited. Pilgrims from Europe were attacked and robbed, as were Christian processions. Part of the reason may have been that new Muslims rulers felt more secure after so long stretch of islamic rule, but vast distances of the Empire also led to establishment of independent rulers and instability of Caliphates.

Major problem in Jerusalem was that Christians and their churches were significantly wealthier than the Muslims, since with Charlemagne in early 800s Europe adapted “foreign aid” programme for the churches located at holy places – particularly Jerusalem where Christian churches outshone Muslim rivals. Many were run by religious orders from Rome or Constantinople. Sometimes churches were victims of internal Muslim warfare, especially when Christian and Muslim rulers were in an alliance.

Conquest continued beyond Palestine after 638. Between 638. and 650., Iran was conquered; in same timeframe happened the conquest of Egypt (639-642), Syria and Palestine (638-641) and North Africa (643-707). In 644 Caliph Umar is assassinated, and replaced by Uthman. Uthman, between 644 and 650, conquered Cyprus, Tripoli, Iran, Afghanistan and Sind. In 656. Uthman was assassinated, and succeeded by Ali ibn Abi Talib. Muhammad’s wife Aisha attempted to avenge Uthman’s assassination, rebelling against Ali for not doing so, but was defeated. Ali himself was murdered in 661., and Muawiyyah I. established Umayyad dynasty. Constantinople was beseiged in 673., lasting to 678. In 680., Muhammad’s grandson Hussein and his supporters were massacred in Karbala, Iraq. In 705., Umayyad rule is restored by Abd al-Malik.

Islam was also spreading in the East, and it did not stop at conquering Persia. Muhammed bin Qasim conquered Sindh and Indus valley in 712. Sindh became the easternmost state of the Umayyad Caliphate. In the West, Spain was conquered by Muslims in 711-713, imposing the Kingdom of Andalus. Their advance is only halted by Franks at the Battle of Poitiers in 732. Umayyad Emirate of Cordoba was set up in Spain in 756. In the East Mediterranean, Romans halted their advance in 678. and 717. sieges of Constantinople, and the entire Roman Empire was quickly turned into a militarized garrison state to resist islamic expansion. Constantinople would remain the focal point of Muslim offensives in the West until its fall in 1453. After the defeat in the 717. siege, Caliph Omar projected his wrath on the Christians under his authority, forcing many to convert to Islam and killing those who refused. In 863., victory at Lalakaon marked the end of large-scale raids of Roman territory. But Muslim world was still strenghtened by its wider-ranging access to slave labour in Africa and Asia, while Roman Empire stood essentially alone. Crete became the centre of Mediterranean slave trade, an “honour” which it retained until Roman Emperor Nicephorus II Phocas retook the island in 956.

(…)

It was Muslim conquest that brought about the Dark Ages. Up until the 7th century and Islamic invasions, the Roman culture of Antiquity continued to prosper in Spain and France (actually Visigoth and Frankish kingdoms). While Anglo-Saxon barbarians largely erased Roman culture in the Great Britain – only vestiges of it were preserved in Ireland – and Italy regressed into a dark age due to ransacking by Justinian’s armies, Visigoths and Franks both continued a supremely advanced civilizations, their culture being a direct continuation of Roman culture. Visigothic Kingdom maintained aquaducts and bathing houses (latter oftentimes incorrectly attributed to Muslim invaders). They also constructed new buildings, often influenced by the architecture and art of surviving Eastern Roman Empire. Kingdom also produced significant intellectuals such as Isidore of Seville, Eugenius I of Toledo and Theodulf of Orleans. Visigothic nobles were taught writing, reading, medicine, law and philosophy. In France, Merovingian dynasty continued late Roman system of administration. It was Islam’s blockade of Mediterranean that impoverished the cities, led to loss of knowledge and education, and caused many cities to be abandoned and rest significantly reduced. Muslim blockade of trade as well as continual raids and piracy – as commanded by Islam against infidels – had served to transform entire Mediterranean – from Spain and France to remains Roman Empire – into a rural, largely illiterate society. Muslim conquest led to almost complete disappearance of Christian communities in Middle East and Northern Africa. Islam commands a continual war against nonbelievers, and in that spirit Muslims mounted constant raids against southern shores of Europe, taking plunder and slaves. Many ports on the northern shores of Mediterranean became desolute, large areas of coast becoming completely uninhabited. Those who did remain adopted a culture in which paranoid suspicion of outside world, violence and vendetta were endemic.

Despite popular misconception, Roman Empire itself did not fare any better than Western Europe. Its long tradition allowed it to maintain basics of an organized state, without slipping into feudalism, but even those were shadows of what the Empire had been before the invasion. The entire Roman Empire had been turned into a garrison state. Loss of supply of papyrus from Egypt had devastated Roman learned class, and between the loss of administration and constant attacks, many cities were abandoned. Same poverty that ruled in the West was also in evidence in Rome. Bronze coinage – the proof positive of developed commerce – disappeared in seventh century, and did not reappear in quantity until late tenth century. In Rome as in West after Muslim attacks, one finds barter economy, and largely illiterate populace. As As al-Mundhir described it, “Rich cities are few in their kingdom and country, despite its situation, size, and the antiquity of their rule. This is because most of it consists of mountains, castles, fortresses, cave dwellings and villages dug out of the rock or buried under the earth.”.

But that culture was also terminated in Egypt and Syria due to new faith’s utter contempt for it. Caliphal government in Egypt immediately established a commission whose purpose was to seek out and plunder pharaohnic age tombs. A century after Muslim conquest, nobody knew who had built the Great Pyramid. Immediately prior to Muslim invasion, libraries and academies of Egypt, Syria and Babylonia were packed with works of classical authors. Yet these works and most of their knowledge disappear immediately after Muslim conquests. Islam had destroyed the Classical civilization.

(…)

In Spain, Muslims were initially tolerant of Christianity. This changed as their rule solidified. In 9th century Cordoba, a group of Christians initiated a nonviolent campaign as a response to outrageous human rights violations by Muslims. They were all slaughtered. St. Eulogious was likewise killed by Muslims for defending the martyrs. However, despite wide-scale conversion efforts via violence and jizya, only very poor were swayed – by an effective argument of children being sold into sexual slavery if the tax wasn’t paid, a tax they couldn’t afford. Nonviolent resistance by Spanish was met by Muslim reprisals, such as mentioned pogrom. In 853 a nonviolent resistance in Cordoba was supplemented by violent uprising in Toledo. Emir initially threatened to massacre all Christian men and sell Christian women into prostitution. He eventually backed down from the threat, but he still purged all Christians from the government, destroyed churches, monasteries and schools, and launched a massive campaign of forced conversions.

The intention of taking the jizya is not to approve the disbelief of non-Moslems in Islam, but rather to spare their lives and to give them some time; in hope that during it; they might stop to reflect on the virtues of Islam and its compelling arguments and consequently converting from disbelief to belief. That’s why it’s important to pay the jizya with humiliation and servility, because naturally, any sensible person cannot stand humiliation and servility. So if the disbeliever is given some time watching the pride of Islam and hearing evidences of its authenticity, then apparently this might carry him to convert to Islam and that’s the main rationale behind the enactment of the jizya. (Tafsir al-Kabir. Koran 9:29)

Later during 10th century, Christians were being executed in Andalusia for refusing to convert to Islam. In 1013., Jews were expelled from Cordova by the Umayyad Caliphate.

(…)

In 807., Caliph Harun al-Rashid ordered the destruction of non-Muslim prayer houses and the Church of Mary Magdalene in Jerusalem. In 809., Sardinia was conquered by Aghlabids. In 813., Christians in Palestine were attacked, and many fled the country. In 831., Muslim jihadis captured Palermo in Italy. In 850., Caliph al-Matawakkil orders the destruction of non-Muslim houses of prayer. Between 837. and 901., Aghlabids conquer Sicily and raid Corsica, Italy and France.

In 855., Christians of Syria revolted. This revolt was followed in 869. by revolt of black slaves in Iraq, which was crushed in 883.

In 903., the Arabs sacked the second-largest city of Roman Empire, Thessalonica, enslaving 30 000 Christians. In 909., Fatimid Caliphate rises in Tunisia, and conquers Sicily and Sardinia. Roman Empire experiences military revival in 928.-969., retaking old territories such as Cyprus and Tarsus. Even so, in 931. Muslim raiding parties reached as deep as Ankuriya (Ankara) and took thousands of Christians captive. Ribats, quasi-monastic establishments – part monasteries, part fortresses – flourished as basis from which Ghazis joined the raids against Christian “polytheists”. Muslims burn down the Church of the Resurrection (The Church of the Holy Sceptre) in Jerusalem in 937., and more churches are attacked. In 966., Quarakhanid Turks convert to Islam.

An entire corpus of Muslim writers preached committment to jihad so as to stop Christian counterattacks. Ibn Nubata used rhetoric not dissimilar to that of Pope Urban, over a century later: “Do you think that He will forsake you whilst you are assisting Him, or do you imagine that He will desert you whilst you are steadfast in His path? Certainly not! . . . So put on — may God have mercy on you — for the Jihad the coat of mail of the faithful and equip yourselves with the armor of those who trust [in God].”

In 966., anti-Christian riots happen in Jerusalem. In 969. Fatimids conquer Egypt, while in 970. Seljuks enter Islamic territories from the East. By 972., Fatamids had conquered North Africa. In 973., Israel and southern Syria are again conquered by Fatimids. In 1003., al-Hakim begins his persecutions of Christians, destroying the Church of st. Mark in Fustat, Egypt. In 1009., Church of Resurrection is again destroyed by al-Hakim, and he in 1012. declares oppressive decrees against Jews and Christians, including destruction of all churches and temples. Umayyad Calphate collapses in 1031., and reconstruction of the Church of Resurrection is completed in 1048.

(…)

Between 1001. and 1026., islamic prince Mahmud of Ghazni launched a series of 17 campaigns into Northern India. By 1020s, his empire included Indus Valley, Afghanistan and Persia, echoing Muhammed bin Quasim who created an islamic empire in roughly the same area in 710s.

(…)

The Crusades, so reviled by the Left, were late and anemic effort at defense against islamic aggression. They were an imitation of jihad, spurred by fear and necessity of a losing war. Neither were they without immediate provocation, launched only once Muhammedians had settled in their newly conquered lands. First call for a Crusade was made in 846 AD, when an Arab expedition to Sicily sailed up the Tiber and sacked Rome. By 11th century, islamic jihad had succeeded in conquering more than half of what used to be Christian land – Christian communities in North Africa, Middle East and Western Asia had been subjugated by that time. The expansion was finally stopped after the Battle of Politiers and failed attempts at conquering Constantinople. But this did not mean the end of the threat. In the West, Abd-el Rahman III and Al-Mansur advanced through northern Spain in the latter years of the tenth century, and raids into southern France continued well into eleventh century. Leon, Barcelona and Santiago de Compostela were burned by Al-Mansur. It was these actions which initiated Reconquista, a Christian response to renewed threat of Islam in the West. Mediterranean was again a battlefield as Christians fought to hold back the renewed offensive by Islam. In the East, the Roman Empire was still at disadvantage against jihadis. While there was a revival of the Empire under Macedonian dynasty, it did not survive Basil II’s death. Seljuk raids into Anatolia began in 1020s, devastating Armenia. In the twenty years immediately preceeding the First Crusade, the Empire had lost nearly whole of Anatolia – an area larger than France, and on doorstep of Europe. In 1050. Seljuk leader Togrul Beg killed at least 130.000 Christians in a Holy War. In 1055., Seljuk Prince Tughrul entered Baghdad; in the same year, Seljuks confiscated the property of the Church of Resurrection. In 1064. an old Armenian capital of Ani was destroyed by Alp Arslan, who had unified Seljuks in 1063. and quickly gained charming nickname of “a drinker of blood” through his cruelty. Over 30 000 people were enslaved, and the equal number massacred, so that – in words of Armenian historian Matthew of Edessa – it was impossible to find a street not covered by corpses. Upon hearing the news, Caliph of Baghdad issued a rescript praising and blessing Alp Arslan. From 1065. onwards Edessa was assaulted yearly, in 1066. Seljuks occupied the pass of Amanus Mountains, and in spring of 1067. Cappadocian metropolis of Caesarea was sacked. That winter Roman armies were defeated at Melitene and Sebastea, which sealed Seljuk control of Armenia. Raids penetrated to Neoceasarea and Amorioum in 1068., Iconium in 1069. and Chonae near Aegean coast in 1070.

By 1070., Seljuks were in control of all of Armenia and were threatening the conquest of Anatolia, which had been stripped of its thematic forces following the ascension of incompetent Constantine VIII to the throne. Emperor Romanos Diogenes attempted to liberate Armenia, but was defeated at Manzikert in 1071. and taken prisoner. Alp Arslan was killed a year later, and his son Malek Shah completed the conquest of Asia Minor, up to the western shores – aided by Roman civil war in which various pretenders tried to take the throne. Continual raids allowed Seljuks to expel, enslave or impoverish region’s Christian inhabitants. A fortress of Nicaea, just across Constantinople, was taken by the Seljuks in 1075. In mere 20 years, Roman Empire – the preeminent Christian state of the era – had lost an area larger than France. Anatolia, one of earliest hotbeds of Christianity, fell under Muslim rule – once thriving region having been reduced to a wasteland and pastureland for still-nomadic Turks. After these defeats, Romans appealed to Pope for help.

It is this renewal of islamic expansion that brought about the Crusades. As noted, after loss of Anatolia – the traditional recruiting ground of the Empire – Emperor Alexius Comnenus made a call for help. While Romans had hoped for mercenaries to help them liberate Anatolia, Pope saw an opportunity to unite Christians and stop them from fighting each other instead of a far more dangerous enemy. As such, he made a call for uniting Christians in defense against Muslim aggression. This was successful in part, and the spirit of the Crusades enabled Europe to survive by uniting it in crucial battles of Lepanto and Vienna. Crusades themselves were also partly successful. It should also be noted that, with few one-off exceptions (Constantine, Heraclius), Christianity did not have a concept of holy war as a doctrine until first contacts with Islam.

All and all, it makes as much sense claiming that Crusades were aggressors as it does to claim Allied soldiers who went to France in 1944. were, or that Allied war effort as such was evil because Dresden, Tokyo and other cities with no military targets in them were destroyed in obvious campaign of terror bombing (i.e. war crime). Compared to Jihad, or to wars started by atheists in 18th century and later, Crusades were measured, moral, rational and reasonable answer to Islamic invasion and colonization. Crusades were indeed not clean. Crusader conquest of Jerusalem was a barbaric thing – but while the West and Westerners have apologized for Crusades (and many are taking pilgrimages even today as symbol of penance), no such apology ever came from Muslim side for jihad, nor for Muslim imperialism, geographically largest in the world’s history. By the time Crusades had started in AD 1099, Muslim armies had conquered, slaughtered, enslaved, raped and tortured their way through nearly two-thirds of the Christian world. Christians were forced to pay the exertionist tax, forced to convert to the peaceful genocidal religion, summarily executed for no other fault than being Christian. In 11th century, Christians living in the Fatamid Caliphate were subject to persecution during the reign of al-Hakim, who ordered them to wear identifying black turbans and a large cross in public, as well as ordering the destruction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. When Seljuks conquered Middle East, one of their goals was greater persecution of Christians. Pilgrims were subject to harrassment and violence – in 1065., a group of 12.000 German pilgrims led by Bishop Gunther of Bamberg in 1065. was massacred by the Seljuks on Good Friday. Pilgrims were attacked first by emir of Tripoli but were saved by a storm, and were attacked on Good Friday by Bedouins.

Toledo was liberated by Christians in 1085., but in 1086. Almoravids sent help to Kingdom of Andalus. By 1091., Muslims had occupied all of Andalus except for Saragossa and Balearic Islands, sending refugees fleeing all over France. In 1094., the ambassadors of the Roman Emperor Alexius I Comnenus appeared before the Pope Urban II. at the Council of Piacenza to request help against Muslim Seljuk Turks. While the Emperor had hoped merely for mercenaries, Pope had seen an opportunity to unite Western Europe for a useful purpose, and declared a Crusade to liberate Christ’s grave in 1095.

(…)

Crusades had little impact on Muslim anti-Christian sentiments. Muslims themselves remained as ignorant of the Christian world after the Crusades as they were before them. They knew next to nothing of Europe’s geography and culture; it held no interest to Muslims beyond being a frontier area against which they waged war. Both Muslim attacks and Christian counterattacks degenerated into extremely dirty wars. They also helped establish popular anti-Semitism as well as slave trade within Western Christianity.

Muslim aggression continued during and after the Crusades. (…)

(…)

Spanish Inquisition was not a reflection of Christian barbarism, but rather a desperate measure of a Christian society forced to defend itself against hundreds of thousands of Muslims who had claimed to have converted to Christianity, but were practicing taqiyya and living as moles trying to subvert the Christian nation back to Islam.

(…)

On May 29, 1453. Muslims conquered Constantinople, a city that had by that time thrived for over a thousand yeary (330. – 1453.), and a then-center of two thousand years old Roman civilization. Many civilians were massacred, raped or taken into captivity, and city itself pillaged. Around 30 000 civilians were enslaved or forcibly deported, out of pre-siege population of no more than 50 000. People who had taken shelter within Hagia Sophia – those unable to assist in defence of the city – were divided among captors, and those not enslaved were slaughtered. Sultan Mahmud, wanting to preserve his future capital, was forced to order a stop to the pillage on the first day, contrary to contemporary laws of war which allowed three days for pillage of a captured city.

With fall of the Constantinople, four out of five centres of Christianity – Constantinople, Alexandria, Jerusalem and Antiochia – were conquered, leaving only Rome free.

(…)

Conquest of Constantinople and Middle Asia led to Europeans seeking other routes to China. Made more aggressive and expansive by its struggle with Islam, Christian Europe colonized the Western Hemisphere and sidestepped Dar al-Islam as middleman in trade with Asia. But this also led to Reformation and the rise of secularization. But Columbus’ trip – which had jumped off European colonization – was not only about seeking trade routes to China. Military alliance against Islam was also sought. And extreme cruelty that Spaniards displayed in the New World were merely habits gained through long association with Islam. This includes the parasitic habits and nature of the Arabs and nomad Africans, which caused Spaniards to merely plunder gold from the New World, instead of – as English and French did – establishing trade colonies. Spanish habits in the New World – putting villages to fire and sword, razing crops, devastating whole districts to bring the enemy to terms, enslaving people – were nothing more than what they themselves had been subjected to at the hands of Muslims.

(…)

Wherever it establishes itself, Islam destroys or defaces monuments that represented the previous, destroyed culture and replaces them with its own – Afghanistan used to be Buddhist, Anatolia Christian, Pakistan Hindu, but there are no intact monuments remaining from these cultures. The same thing happened in Egypt. The Great Pyramid of Giza used to be covered by a smooth, beautifully polished layer of white stone. This limestone was similar to marble but superior in hardness and durability. The 144.000 casting stones were so brilliant they could be seen from the mountains of Israel, hundreds of miles away. But when an earthquake in 13th century loosened some of the casting stones, Arabs saw their opportunity. Limestone layer was removed and stone used for mosques and palaces.

(…)

In conquered areas, non-Muslims were segregated and discriminated against. Islamic law was introduced as senior law and Arabic language as official language, and local language frequently disappeared. Society was divided into two basic classes – islamic conquerors who did not pay taxes, and conquered natives who had to pay heavy tax. There are many examples of discriminatory legal practices: in various cases, Christians and Jews were forbidden from bearing arms, riding horses, building new houses and proselytizing. They had to bow to their Muslim masters when paying taxes and to live under Koranic law. Eventually, even non-Arab Muslim inhabitants became a second class – still above non-Muslims, but below Arab masters, in a classic colonialist practice. Over time, various practices led to disappearance of once-thriving Christian communities in North Africa, Middle East and Western Asia. Muslims also captured and/or imported a mass of black slaves, centuries before the European transatlantic slave trade; but these were all castrated, which is why there are no or very few black people in Arab countries today. Intermittent tolerance of other “peoples of the Book” was tolerance of the victors. It always disappeared as soon as the tide turned against Islam. The pressures of jihad led to forced conversions, pogroms and other brutalities.

(…)

The expenses of defending Europe forced the Church to raise money in various ways. This included selling the indulgences, which naturally was exploited by the less ethical members of the clergy. Various popes opposed it on ideological basis, and attempts were made to rein it in (such as in 1392. by Pope Boniface IX), but practicality precluded cessation of practice and it was only Martin Luther – a monk without understanding of greater picture – that decisively opposed it by publishing 95 Theses. This caused a religious schism in the West, and led to the Thirty Years War, one of the most lethal wars in European history. This will not be the last intra-Christian war that the expansion of Islam will ultimately cause.

(…)

Muslims had beseiged Vienna in 1529. and 1683. In 1627., Iceland was raided by Muslim corsairs, seizing four hundred captives and selling them in slave markets of Algeirs.

(…)

Russian invasion of Crimea under Catherine the Great was a response to centuries of slave raids by the Crimean Khanate, the “white harvest” so common on borders of islamic states wherein Muslims would capture and enslave Christians, especially children. Blond women and boys fetched a premium at the slave markets in the Ottoman Empire. Raids were no less cruel than later Western slaver raids in Africa, but are completely unknown to average college SWJ.

(…)

Creation of United States Marine Corps was a response to islamic aggression. Now, USMC are not the first such organization in the US history – that would be the Continental Marines of the US War for Independence. But Continental Marines were disbanded following the end of the war. United States Marine Corps were established 20 years later to counter islamic piracy. The Barbary Coast pirates were following in Muhammad’s footsteps, raiding oceangoing ships, taking slaves, capturing people for ransom and demanding “protection money” from any kafirs that didn’t want to be raided.

Many European countries, as well as United States initially, did the easy thing and paid the protection money. This, however, meant that piracy flourished, as money was used to fund operations against anyone who wasn’t paying. During Jefferson’s time as ambassador to France, he met with an ambassador from Tripoli and asked why Tripoli was doing this; the answer he was given was that it was written in Koran, and that it was Muslim’s “right and duty to make war upon them [non-Muslims] wherever they could be found, and to enslave as many as they could take as prisoners”. Jefferson read the Koran, formed the United States Navy, created the Marine Corps, and sent them to the shores of Tripoli. This was the beginning of the end of the Barbary Coast pirates.

(…)

In 1830., Greece regained independence from the Ottomans.

(…)

Even in 20th century, islamic imperialism has continued unabated. Ottoman Empire expelled approximately 1.500.000 Greeks from its land and replaced them with Turks. While a logical and reasonable thing to do – Greeks also expelled Turks from Greece, and in the long run it prevented internal conflicts and possible civil war – today it would be called “ethnic cleansing”. What cannot be excused in any possible way is Turkish massacre of 2.000.000 Armenian Christians – which was religiously, not ethnically motivated act. Turkey also occupied and ethnically cleansed northern Cyprus, an act of aggression which cannot be justified by any means. Muslim Northern Sudan enslaved Christian and pagan southern Sudan. Muslim Indonesia likewise occupied non-islamic western New Guinea, East Timor and Celebes, and immediately conducted a campaign of destroying any non-islamic religions. Muslim Iraq has fought wars with surrounding Muslim states for the lack of Christian enemies at hand; Muslim Albania is busy trying to enlarge borders at Macedonia’s expense while Muslim North Nigeria is busy being an aggressor against Christian south. Yet no Muslim country ever sent troops anywhere to protect Christians from persecution, while Christian nations did protect Muslims from persecution (e.g. Bosnia).

(…)

From 1902. to 1913., United States fought against Islamic “Moro Warriors” in the Phillippines. These warriors were extremely hard to stop due to a combination of rope armour, drugs and religious insanity. In one instance, a Moro warrior fought on after receiving 14 bullet wounds in five minutes – one of which was to the brain. As a result of these wars, US military introduced high-calibre M1911 pistol.

(…)

In Nigeria today, Muslim terror is not limited to classical terror groups such as Boko Haram. While it looks like a problem between herdsmen and farmers, most of herdsmen are Muslims from the north who are taking over the land, coming to settle in the south in order to populate area with Muslims. Herdsmen are being financed from the outside, and have access to sophisticated weaponry. In Thailand, Muslims have embarked on a campaign of violent religious cleansing and genocide against Buddhists despite making up only 4% of the populace. This is not a new phenomenon: modern-day “Arab world”, with sole exception of Arabia itself, was never Arab until Muslims came. But Muslims exterminated native populace. European Union has admitted that islamic terrorism had cost the economy hundreds of billions of Euros. In fact, increased cost of terrorism is directly linked with Muslim immigration. Europol has warned that “Migration flows are relevant to the terrorist threat, with irregular migrant flows having been ‘exploited in order to dispatch terrorist operatives clandestinely to Europe.'”.

(…)

Pathos of contemporary Islam is fuelled not by Western imperialism – which was fuelled first by need for defense against Islam, and today by Marxist globalism – but rather by memory of how Islam’s final victory over Christianity for so long remained a real possibility. Further, most of today’s islamic terrorism is home-grown: rather than being more integrated, second-generation Muslim immigrants are far less integrated into their countries than first-generation immigrants.

In Muslim countries, Western analysts have predicted that the Arab Spring will lead to democratization and moderation. Democratization, in a sense, may have happened – but moderation did not. Instead, what happened was the spread of traditional (so-called “extremist”) Islam, leading to unprecendented jihadist mobilization.

In Western societies, Muslim aggression is a function of percentage of population. While this does vary from society to society, below 2% Muslims are well-behaved members of the society. Between 2 and 3 per cent, prosyletization behins among criminals and similar groups. From 5% on, Muslims begin forcing host society to adapt to their demands – such as so-called “halal” food. When they reach 10%, lawlessness and outright terrorism are used as a means of pressure against the host society. Anything that offends Islam results in uprising and threats. After reaching 20% of population, Muslims engage in hair-trigger rioting, Jihadi militia formations, murders and church and synagogue burnings. These are not hard rules, however – France has little less than 10% Muslims, yet it is already experiencing symptoms listed as appearing with 20% of populace. Reason is that behaviour is also determined by the nature of host society. Western European societies and people in them have been conditioned into spineless cowards by decades of liberalism and progressivism. In a free and tolerant society, Muslims will not feel fear, and will start misbehaving much sooner. On the other hand, in a strongly anti-Muslim, self-conscious nation such as China, percentage will have to be much greater before they start misbehaving.

Muslims are regularly ones to initiate hostilities, and when their victims resist, Muslims and their progressive apologists immediately shift the blame to them (as they do with Crusades). Al Jazeera blamed Buddhists for defending themselves from Muslim aggression. And because West refuses to see the danger, Muslim immigrants flooding the West will easily demographically and culturally overwhelm host societies, achieving peacefully what they failed to achieve by sword centuries ago. Muslim “enclaves” or “ghettoes” in Western societies are not a consequence of Western intolerance – they are ribat, frontier posts where war is waged against infidels, one way or another.

Aggression itself is not merely ideological, but biological-psychological as well. Somewhere around 70% of Pakistanis, 25 – 30% of Turks, and 50% of Arabs are inbred. Consequences of inbreeding are lower levels of IQ and higher levels of aggression. At least 55% of Pakistani population in UK is married to a first cousin. As a result, a British Pakistani family is at least 13 times more likely than the general population to have children with recessive genetic disorders. While UK Pakistanis account for 3,4% of all births in Britain, they account for 30% of all British children with disorders that are a result of inbreeding. Overall, around half of Muslims in the world are inbred; so if world becomes Muslim, it will also become mentally retarded, as well as locked in permanent rage. Western airplane instructors have found that Saudis have very limited night vision, as well as dim memories, and have to be constantly reminded the things they had been told days before. Inbreeding has done irreversible damage to Muslim gene pool in terms of sanity, intelligence and health. Inbred babies are 400% more likely to have IQ lower than 70 – which is mental retardation limit (this effect is well known in European royal families, such as Hapsburgs and British royal family, which had been inbreeding for centuries). In Denmark, non-Western immigrants are more than 300 percent more likely to fail the intelligence test required for entrance into the Danish army. Arab world as a whole translates only 330 books per year, 20% of what Greece alone does. In 1200 years of Islam, only 100 000 books had been translated into Arabic – less than Spain translates in a year. Seven out of 10 Turks have never read a book. Only four Muslims had ever won a proper Nobel Prize – additional five had won Nobel Peace Prize. In Denmark, between 51% and 70% of children with special needs have immigrant background, and 64% of schoolchildren with Arabic parents are still illiterate after 10 years in the Danish school system. More than 40% of patients in Denmark’s biggest ward for clinically insane criminals have an immigrant background.

Vuk dlaku mijenja, ali ćud nikada.

RANDOM READING

http://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1805&context=ccr

https://clashdaily.com/2014/11/crusades-direct-response-islams-bloodlust/

http://classicalchristianity.com/2011/05/30/five-interesting-historical-facts-about-islam/

http://www.ncregister.com/blog/astagnaro/the-crusades-were-a-reasonable-response-to-unchecked-islamic-aggression
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2009/11/how-muslim-piracy-changed-world.html

APPENDICES

http://markhumphrys.com/islam.killings.html

http://www.oswego.edu/~delancey/314_DIR/WhyWeHateYou.pdf

A list of major Muslim invasions:
https://factreal.wordpress.com/2010/02/12/muslim-crusades-started-four-centuries-before-the-western-crusades/

630

Muhammad conquers Mecca from his base in Medina.

632

Muhammad dies in Medina. Islam controls the Hijaz.

636

Muslims conquest of Syria, and the surrounding lands, all Christian – including Palestine and Iraq.

637

Muslim Crusaders conquer Iraq (some date it in 635 or 636).

638

Muslim Crusaders conquer and annex Jerusalem, taking it from the Byzantines.

638 – 650

Muslim Crusaders conquer Iran, except along Caspian Sea.

639 – 642

Muslim Crusaders conquer Egypt.

641

Muslim Crusaders control Syria and Palestine.

643 – 707

Muslim Crusaders conquer North Africa.

644 – 650

Muslim Crusaders conquer Cyprus, Tripoli in North Africa, and establish Islamic rule in Iran, Afghanistan, and Sind.

673 – 678

Arabs besiege Constantinople, capital of Byzantine Empire.

691

Dome of the Rock is completed in Jerusalem, only six decades after Muhammad’s death.

710 – 713

Muslim Crusaders conquer the lower Indus Valley.

711 – 713

Muslim Crusaders conquer Spain and impose the kingdom of Andalus. The Muslim conquest moves into Europe.

718

Conquest of Spain complete.

732

Muslim invasion of France is stopped at the Battle of Poitiers / Battle of Tours. The Franks, under their leader Charles Martel (the grandfather of Charlemagne), defeat the Muslims and turn them back out of France.

762

Foundation of Baghdad.

785

Foundation of the Great Mosque of Cordova.

789

Rise of Idrisid amirs (Muslim Crusaders) in Morocco; Christoforos, a Muslim who converted to Christianity, is executed.

800

Autonomous Aghlabid dynasty (Muslim Crusaders) in Tunisia

807

Caliph Harun al—Rashid orders the destruction of non-Muslim prayer houses & of the church of Mary Magdalene in Jerusalem.

809

Aghlabids (Muslim Crusaders) conquer Sardinia, Italy.

813

Christians in Palestine are attacked; many flee the country.

831

Muslim Crusaders capture Palermo, Italy; raids in Southern Italy.

837 – 901

Aghlabids (Muslim Crusaders) conquer Sicily, raid Corsica, Italy, France.

869 – 883

Revolt of black slaves in Iraq.

909

Rise of the Fatimid Caliphate in Tunisia; these Muslim Crusaders occupy Sicily, Sardinia.

928 – 969

Byzantine military revival, they retake old territories, such as Cyprus (964) and Tarsus (969).

937

The Church of the Resurrection (aka Church of Holy Sepulcher) is burned down by Muslims; more churches in Jerusalem are attacked.

960

Conversion of Qarakhanid Turks to Islam.

969

Fatimids (Muslim Crusaders) conquer Egypt and found Cairo.

973

Israel and southern Syria are again conquered by the Fatimids.

1003

First persecutions by al—Hakim; the Church of St. Mark in Fustat, Egypt, is destroyed.

1009

Destruction of the Church of the Resurrection by al—Hakim (see 937).

1012

Beginning of al—Hakim’s oppressive decrees against Jews and Christians.

1050

Creation of Almoravid (Muslim Crusaders) movement in Mauretania; Almoravids (aka Murabitun) are coalition of western Saharan Berbers; followers of Islam, focusing on the Quran, the hadith, and Maliki law.

1071

Battle of Manzikert, Seljuk Turks (Muslim Crusaders) defeat Byzantines and occupy much of Anatolia.

1071

Turks (Muslim Crusaders) invade Palestine.

1073

Conquest of Jerusalem by Turks (Muslim Crusaders).

1075

Seljuks (Muslim Crusaders) capture Nicea (Iznik) and make it their capital in Anatolia.

1076

Almoravids (Muslim Crusaders) (see 1050) conquer western Ghana.

1086

Almoravids (Muslim Crusaders) (see 1050) send help to Andalus, Battle of Zallaca.

1090 – 1091

Almoravids (Muslim Crusaders) occupy all of Andalus except Saragossa and Balearic Islands.

https://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/crusades_timeline.htm

630 Two years before Muhammad’s death of a fever, he launches the Tabuk Crusades, in which he led 30,000 jihadists against the Byzantine Christians. He had heard a report that a huge army had amassed to attack Arabia, but the report turned out to be a false rumor. The Byzantine army never materialized. He turned around and went home, but not before extracting “agreements” from northern tribes. They could enjoy the “privilege” of living under Islamic “protection” (read: not be attacked by Islam), if they paid a tax.

This tax sets the stage for Muhammad’s and the later Caliphs’ policies. If the attacked city or region did not want to convert to Islam, then they paid a jizya tax. If they converted, then they paid a zakat tax. Either way, money flowed back to the Islamic treasury in Arabia or to the local Muslim governor.

632-634 Under the Caliphate of Abu Bakr the Muslim Crusaders reconquer and sometimes conquer for the first time the polytheists of Arabia. These Arab polytheists had to convert to Islam or die. They did not have the choice of remaining in their faith and paying a tax. Islam does not allow for religious freedom.

633 The Muslim Crusaders, led by Khalid al-Walid, a superior but bloodthirsty military commander, whom Muhammad nicknamed the Sword of Allah for his ferocity in battle (Tabari, 8:158 / 1616-17), conquer the city of Ullays along the Euphrates River (in today’s Iraq). Khalid captures and beheads so many that a nearby canal, into which the blood flowed, was called Blood Canal (Tabari 11:24 / 2034-35).

634 At the Battle of Yarmuk in Syria the Muslim Crusaders defeat the Byzantines. Today Osama bin Laden draws inspiration from the defeat, and especially from an anecdote about Khalid al-Walid. In Khalid’s day an unnamed Muslim remarks: “The Romans are so numerous and the Muslims so few.” To this Khalid retorts: “How few are the Romans, and how many the Muslims! Armies become numerous only with victory and few only with defeat, not by the number of men. By God, I would love it . . . if the enemy were twice as many” (Tabari, 11:94 / 2095). Osama bin Laden quotes Khalid and says that his fighters love death more than we in the West love life. This philosophy of death probably comes from a verse like Sura 2:96. Muhammad assesses the Jews: “[Prophet], you are sure to find them [the Jews] clinging to life more eagerly than any other people, even polytheists” (MAS Abdel Haleem, The Qur’an, Oxford UP, 2004; first insertion in brackets is Haleem’s; the second mine).

634-644 The Caliphate of Umar ibn al-Khattab, who is regarded as particularly brutal.

635 Muslim Crusaders besiege and conquer of Damascus.

636 Muslim Crusaders defeat Byzantines decisively at Battle of Yarmuk.

637 Muslim Crusaders conquer Iraq at the Battle of al-Qadisiyyah (some date it in 635 or 636).

638 Muslim Crusaders conquer and annex Jerusalem, taking it from the Byzantines.

638-650 Muslim Crusaders conquer Iran, except along Caspian Sea.

639-642 Muslim Crusaders conquer Egypt.

641 Muslim Crusaders control Syria and Palestine.

643-707 Muslim Crusaders conquer North Africa.

644 Caliph Umar is assassinated by a Persian prisoner of war; Uthman ibn Affan is elected third Caliph, who is regarded by many Muslims as gentler than Umar.

644-650 Muslim Crusaders conquer Cyprus, Tripoli in North Africa, and establish Islamic rule in Iran, Afghanistan, and Sind.

656 Caliph Uthman is assassinated by disgruntled Muslim soldiers; Ali ibn Abi Talib, son-in-law and cousin to Muhammad, who married the prophet’s daughter Fatima through his first wife Khadija, is set up as Caliph.

656 Battle of the Camel, in which Aisha, Muhammad’s wife, leads a rebellion against Ali for not avenging Uthman’s assassination. Ali’s partisans win.

657 Battle of Siffin between Ali and Muslim governor of Jerusalem, arbitration goes against Ali

661 Murder of Ali by an extremist; Ali’s supporters acclaim his son Hasan as next Caliph, but he comes to an agreement with Muawiyyah I and retires to Medina.

661-680 the Caliphate of Muawiyyah I. He founds Umayyid dynasty and moves capital from Medina to Damascus

673-678 Arabs besiege Constantinople, capital of Byzantine Empire

680 Massacre of Hussein (Muhammad’s grandson), his family, and his supporters in Karbala, Iraq.

691 Dome of the Rock is completed in Jerusalem, only six decades after Muhammad’s death.

705 Abd al-Malik restores Umayyad rule.

710-713 Muslim Crusaders conquer the lower Indus Valley.

711-713 Muslim Crusaders conquer Spain and impose the kingdom of Andalus. This article recounts how Muslims today still grieve over their expulsion 700 years later. They seem to believe that the land belonged to them in the first place.

719 Cordova, Spain, becomes seat of Arab governorship.

732 The Muslim Crusaders are stopped at the Battle of Poitiers; that is, Franks (France) halt Arab advance.

749 The Abbasids conquer Kufah and overthrow Umayyids.

756 Foundation of Umayyid emirate in Cordova, Spain, setting up an independent kingdom from Abbasids.

762 Foundation of Baghdad

785 Foundation of the Great Mosque of Cordova

789 Rise of Idrisid emirs (Muslim Crusaders) in Morocco; foundation of Fez; Christoforos, a Muslim who converted to Christianity, is executed.

800 Autonomous Aghlabid dynasty (Muslim Crusaders) in Tunisia.

807 Caliph Harun al-Rashid orders the destruction of non-Muslim prayer houses and of the Church of Mary Magdalene in Jerusalem.

809 Aghlabids (Muslim Crusaders) conquer Sardinia, Italy.

813 Christians in Palestine are attacked; many flee the country.

831 Muslim Crusaders capture of Palermo, Italy; raids in Southern Italy.

850 Caliph al-Matawakkil orders the destruction of non-Muslim houses of prayer.

855 Revolt of the Christians of Hims (Syria)

837-901 Aghlabids (Muslim Crusaders) conquer Sicily, raid Corsica, Italy, France.

869-883 Revolt of black slaves in Iraq

909 Rise of the Fatimid Caliphate in Tunisia; these Muslim Crusaders occupy Sicily, Sardinia.

928-969 Byzantine military revival, they retake old territories, such as Cyprus (964) and Tarsus (969).

937 The Ikhshid, a particularly harsh Muslim ruler, writes to Emperor Romanus, boasting of his control over the holy places.

937 The Church of the Resurrection (known as Church of Holy Sepulcher in Latin West) is burned down by Muslims; more churches in Jerusalem are attacked .

960 Conversion of Qarakhanid Turks to Islam

966 Anti-Christian riots in Jerusalem

969 Fatimids (Muslim Crusaders) conquer Egypt and found Cairo.

c. 970 Seljuks enter conquered Islamic territories from the East.

973 Israel and southern Syria are again conquered by the Fatimids.

1003 First persecutions by al-Hakim; the Church of St. Mark in Fustat, Egypt, is destroyed.

1009 Destruction of the Church of the Resurrection by al-Hakim (see 937)

1012 Beginning of al-Hakim’s oppressive decrees against Jews and Christians

1015 Earthquake in Palestine; the dome of the Dome of the Rock collapses.

1031 Collapse of Umayyid Caliphate and establishment of 15 minor independent dynasties throughout Muslim Andalus

1048 Reconstruction of the Church of the Resurrection completed

1050 Creation of Almoravid (Muslim Crusaders) movement in Mauretania; Almoravids (also known as Murabitun) are coalition of western Saharan Berbers; followers of Islam, focusing on the Quran, the hadith, and Maliki law.

1055 Seljuk Prince Tughrul enters Baghdad, consolidation of the Seljuk Sultanate.

1055 Confiscation of property of Church of the Resurrection

1071 Battle of Manzikert, Seljuk Turks (Muslim Crusaders) defeat Byzantines and occupy much of Anatolia.

1071 Turks (Muslim Crusaders) invade Palestine.

1073 Conquest of Jerusalem by Turks (Muslim Crusaders)

1075 Seljuks (Muslim Crusaders) capture Nicea (Iznik) and make it their capital in Anatolia.

1076 Almoravids (Muslim Crusaders) (see 1050) conquer western Ghana.

1085 Toledo is taken back by Christian armies.

1086 Almoravids (Muslim Crusaders) (see 1050) send help to Andalus, Battle of Zallaca.

1090-1091 Almoravids (Muslim Crusaders) occupy all of Andalus except Saragossa and Balearic Islands.

1094 Byzantine Emperor Alexius Comnenus I asks western Christendom for help against Seljuk invasions of his territory; Seljuks are Muslim Turkish family of eastern origins; see 970.

1095 Pope Urban II preaches first Crusade; they capture Jerusalem in 1099

Advertisements

Posted in history | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

Implications of diversity – diversity and security

Posted by picard578 on April 4, 2019

1554364282541

Human society is built on commonality. Greek ἔθνος (ethnos) comes from ἔθω (éthōI am accustomed, wont (to something)), but its meaning is “group of people: tribefamily“. Latin natio means “related to place of birth”, and originates from nascor (to be born); it can mean “nation”, “people”, “race”, “class”. It can be seen that civic nationalism is thus an aberration; original, actual meaning of nationalism is exclusively ethnic one.

Consequences of dominance of civic nationalism can be seen above. While diversity of peoples, cultures, races etc. is extremely useful – it is one of main drivers of progress – it can also be damaging. The question is one of borders. Common culture, mentality and characteristics allow people to live together without having to walk on eggshells all the time. It allows society to direct its energies outwards, towards a common goal.

Conversely, a society that is internally heterogenous will divide itself into multiple subsocieties. It will spend its energies on internal friction instead of directing them externally. And if friction is significant enough – if society is diverse enough – then society will eventually destroy itself. This friction can take various forms, depending on nature and intensity: from people ignoring each other, to different groups forming their own exclusive communities, to members of particular group being pushed out of certain areas, to open conflict and even civil war. All except the last are in evidence in the Western Europe.

The only solution to this was one employed by the Roman Empire. Now, unlike what BBC would like to portray, the Empire was not racially diverse, being almost exclusively Caucasian, as can be seen from Septimius Severus’ reaction to seeing a black soldier at Hadrian’s wall:

“After inspecting the wall near the rampart in Britain… just as he [Severus] was wondering what omen would present itself, an Ethiopian from a military unit, who was famous among buffoons and always a notable joker, met him with a garland of cypress. And when Severus in a rage ordered that the man be removed from his sight, troubled as he was by the man’s ominous colour and the ominous nature of the garland, [the Ethiopian] by way of jest cried, it is said, “You have been all things, you have conquered all things, now, O conqueror, be a god.” “

(Post murum apud vallum visum in Brittannia… volvens animo quid ominis sibi occurreret, Aethiops quidam e numero militari, clarae inter scurras famae et celebratorum semper iocorum, cum corona e cupressu facta eidem occurrit. quem cum ille iratus removeri ab oculis praecepisset, et coloris eius tactus omine et coronae, dixisse ille dicitur ioci causa: Totum fuisti, totum vicisti, iam deus esto victor.)

(Historia Augusta, ‘Septimius Severus’, 22.4-5)

However, the Empire was culturally and ethnically diverse. The manner in which it dealt with the issue was twofold. First, it made certain to reduce cultural diversity to minimum. Latin was the official language, and peoples of the Empire were made to gradually accept certain tenets of Roman culture, such as religion. Second, along with common culture came the Roman identity – akin to what would today be called civic nationalism, but also much more than that. To be Roman was not to be a barbarian, and this sense of national and cultural superiority helped define and hold together the Roman Empire until the fall of Constantinople in 1453. Third, diversity was strictly on the level of the Empire – individual communities were not diverse, and were given wide autonomy in return for loyalty.

Medieval Roman Empire – also called Byzantine Empire – proved even more resillient than Roman Empire of antiquity, in part because it added Christian faith to already existing common ground of Roman identity and Greek culture. It was also less diverse, especially after losing its African and Levant territories in the aftermath of the Battle of Yarmouk. More recent example are United States, which are based on common culture and belief in God. This is why Americans are often so religious – fervent nationalism and pronounced religiousness are used to compensate for the lack of common ethnic basis.

All of the above has significant military-security implications. Strength of the military is based largely on strength of the society. Strong society produces strong military, weak society produces weak one. Multicultural society is inherently fragile, and is thus easily subverted from within. Further, there had been cases in history where countries had been conquered without firing a shot, merely through mass immigration. This was the case in large areas of Roman Empire after the battle of Yarmouk, and later after the battle of Manzikert. In both cases, battles served as a trigger; but Battle of Manzikert in particular was not, on its own, necessarily catastrophic. What proved catastrophic was the dissolution of the thematic system during the previous century, but especially after the death of Basil II in 1025. Unlike the situation from 7th to 10th centuries, in late 11th century thematic system was in disarray, and people were unable to defend their lands without the presence of full-time professional army which had just been destroyed at Manzikert. As a result, within ten years after Manzikert, Seljuks had conquered – through war and immigration – 78 000 square kilometers of Roman territory.

Posted in history, politics | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Surprise and deception in war (Carl von Clausewitz expanded)

Posted by picard578 on September 17, 2018

This is an expansion of Chapters 9 (Surprise) and 10 (Deception) of Clausewitz’s Book 3 of “On War”.


3.9. Surprise

Surprise is a key factor in war, for without it there is little possibility of achieving superiority at the key point. Other than being a tool for superiority, it is also useful by itself due to its psychological impact. Successful surprise causes confusion and breakdown of the opponent’s command and psychological structures. Surprise itself can be tactical, operational, strategic, political or even grand strategic, but regardless of the level it is based on two key factors: speed and secrecy. Both require great energy and serious character. While in theory surprise makes it easy to achieve decisive successes, in practice there are always factors such as friction and chance which may reduce its impact. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in doctrine, history | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

On Friction In War – Carl von Clausewitz Expanded

Posted by picard578 on September 9, 2018

Here I took observations of Carl von Clausewitz on friction (just reading through his book “On War”), and expanded on them.


War is simple, but the simplest thing is hardest. Various acters and factors in war produce other acters and factors, and also with their interaction produce friction. There are many things that cannot be predicted; things that should not happen but do; things that should have happened but did not. While each circumstance by itself may be too small to even consider, together they add up. Each level of authority adds another layer of friction, and confusion and dangers of war only increase probability of it happening. Most effects of friction cannot be predicted; effects of weather, disease, confusion, mechanical failures; they all cause friction of some kind. Organization itself causes friction: differing doctrines and culture can cause friction when operating with allies. Because of these various types of friction, any undertaking in war is like moving in a fog or a deep mud. Further, each war is full of individual characteristics and events which change its nature; one of primary qualities of a general is recognizing that friction. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in doctrine, history | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments »

Byzantine military doctrine in modern practice

Posted by picard578 on August 17, 2018

While I originally wrote this for sci-fi setting I am working on, general principles are usable in modern world as well.


OVERVIEW

Laigin culture sees war as a necessary evil – but as the saying goes, “if you have to do something, you have no excuse for not doing it to the best of your ability”, and the Empire is constantly at war, surrounded by enemies. Typically there are two or three wars going on at the same time, even if most of those are minor, and difference between war and peace is merely a matter of planet’s location within the Empire. This has caused tensions between parallel condemnation of war in theory and rather militaristic ideology and structure in practice, which is resolved by the doctrine of “just war”. At its basic, this doctrine dictates that wars of conquest are unjust, while wars of defense or reconquest of lost territories are just wars and thus require no further justification. Warfare permeates all aspects of society, from culture to education, with civil defense being a mandatory class subject even from the primary school. War is waged for defense or to recover the lost territories – territories not willingly given away are always considered to belong to the Empire “by right”, regardless of the actual situation on the terrain, or how much time had passed since the loss. Defence of the state is the ultimate goal, on all levels and in all aspects of the policy. Therefore, there is no concept of “holy war” – defensive war is automatically just by virtue of defending the state and its people. But while no sin is incurred by participating in a just war, war is not religious but rather civic obligation, and cannot be used for absolution of sins. War is only waged for purpose of defending the state or its interests abroad, such as its allies. If goals can be achieved without fighting a war, they are achieved so and casualties are minimized where possible; but military is always kept prepared for war. Overall approach can be summed up as “do everything possible to raise, equip and train the best possible army and navy, and then do everything possible to use them as little as possible”. Prepare for war to avoid war.

The main aim in war is to win without having to fight a decisive battle, especially since the Empire is at best at equal footing with its enemies, and more often disadvantaged in terms of numbers and resources. Decisive battle is avoided because even in victory it may cause an unacceptable loss of resources, and in loss it is typically catastrophic. Victory is achieved through combination of delaying tactics and exploitation of enemy weaknesses, landscape and diplomacy. Generally, aim is not to destroy the enemy, but to reach a state of equilibrium – for a destroyed opponent leaves a power vacuum which will be filled by another power, or by lawless elements, whereas a weakened opponent can be negotiated with. Today’s enemy may be tomorrow’s ally, and large number of weaker enemies is better than smaller number of powerful enemies, as they can be played off against each other. Enemies are transient; only the Empire lasts forever. Hence, warfare is typically defensive, especially since enemies tend to be diverse and numerous. Hit and run raids are preferred approach, but pitched battles can and will be fought as well if no other recourse is practical. Scouting is crucial, and is typically done by light ships. Initiative is pursued, leading to typically agressive posture. Enemies will be mislead with false information, and allies sought that can attack the enemy from a different direction. Most useful allies are those closest to the enemy, as they know how to fight the enemy best. Internal conflicts may be decided by duel by champion, typically a sword fight, in order to avoid the possibility of devastating civil wars. COIN is avoided, and proxies liberally used.

Deception is likewise used, and is separated into concealment/camouflage, imitation/mimicry, simulation, disinformation and feints. The goal is to mislead the enemy with regards to Laigin political / grand-strategic, strategic, operational and tactical objectives and approaches. Surprise is the basis of military approach on all levels.

This approach is especially advantageous because each enemy is systematically studied, and local forces are trained to respond to enemy’s specific approach to war. Knowledge about enemies – their history, culture, politics etc. – is also incorporated into strategy manuals which provide political and military leaders with guidance on dealing with enemies and neighbours in general. Constant practice, interpretation and corrections ensure that manuals are always up-to-date. Military readiness is maintained, not only to fight the war once started but also to prevent the war from being fought at all.

Morale is recognized as being one of most important factors in success, and special emphasis is placed on intangible factors – morale itself, unit cohesiveness, tradition, interaction and links between active military and general populace. Officer competence is likewise recognised as a key, and incompetent officers are demoted or transferred to whatever position they are actually capable of serving at. Diplomacy and warfare go hand in hand, with diplomacy being used to achieve war goals and vice versa. Subversion is likewise understood to be the cheapest path to victory.

OFFENSE

In offensive operations, goal is to cause maximum damage to enemy’s economy and material infrastructure – destruction of fortifications, orbital and urban installations, and severing of trade routes. This is typically employed in goal of persuading the enemy to accept a course of action most favourable for the Empire.

Heavy elements of the fleet are concentrated against key points. These points are selected to reduce enemy’s ability and will to fight. The objective is not to destroy the enemy, but as already noted, to make him more amenable to working with – instead of against – the Empire. As such, typical targets are orbital and system defense installations, while planets themselves are rarely if ever attacked.

At the same time, fast elements of the fleet – “cruiser” ships such as battlecruisers and light cruisers – are used to scout ahead of the main battle force, interdict enemy merchant and cargo traffic, and take out less-defended crucial points such as observation posts, and command centers where possible. Due to being more mobile, these elements can be more easily concentrated and deployed against any single threat. At times, half the cruiser fleet may be concentrated against a single target while still not compromising the security of the Empire thanks to existence of heavy elements. Light elements are regularly employed in hit-and-run raids as well as in attacks against important targets (focal points). In both cases, heavy fleet might be used to draw enemy attention elsewhere.

Allies will also be called upon, especially if they are in position to catch the enemy in the rear. Nomadic allies are particularly important as they are fast, mobile and also good source of information about enemy movements. When campaigning farther from Laigin territory, local allies will be contacted to provide information on the area and geopolitical situation, as well as help with scouting and intelligence gathering.

Offensive approach is also used for defensive purposes, launching pre-emptive attacks into enemy territory, and also by launching counter-invasions of the enemy territory. Offensive operations for the recovery of lost territory are also seen as inherently defensive.

When in enemy territory, and typically in friendly territory as well, fleet is organized in divisions. Frigate groups are deployed in groups along the perimeter of the fleet, acting as scouts and advanced warning screen. Main body is in the center of frigate dispositions. Some frigates are detached for independent scouting duty, using their greater speed and small sensory signature to range far ahead of the main force.

On ground, fire support missions can be called in by platoon leaders and up. Oftentimes, a platoon “on point” will be assigned a private pair of close air support aircraft. Specialized infantry units are equipped with jump packs, allowing them to scout ahead of tanks, while tanks provide direct fire support. Same approach is used by regular infantry in cities. When attacking defended positions, heavy artillery support will be called in, typically in the form of a creeping barrage. First step however is heavy scouting to identify enemy defensive positions, strongpoints and weak spots.

Units prefer to have a three-to-one local advantage in attack. In infantry, this means attacking element, fire support element and flanking element. In navy, there may be two flanking elements (side and top/bottom). Attacks, both ground and space, are carried out in waves. First wave will reach designated limit line, stop and reorganize; second wave will pass the first wave and keep advancing until it reaches its own limit line, at which point first wave, now fresh and reorganized, will launch its own attack. Laigin specialty are night attacks, which are slightly more difficult to organize but can be frighteningly effective, particularly against underequipped or technologically backwards enemies. These are typically done just before the dawn.

Infiltration tactics are heavily utilized in all situations. During fleet advance, detached frigate groups are deployed behind the enemy lines on a seek-and-destroy campaign against enemy logistical and civilian cargo ships, disrupting enemy’s logistics and economy. With time, such attacks can cause the enemy to redeploy more and more ships to guard convoys, weakening his front lines. Assaults against space stations and even planets are preceded by deployment of special forces to shut down or disrupt enemy defences from inside. On ground, special forces are deployed behind the enemy lines, identifying and possibly eliminating crucial targets. Assaults against static defensive lines are preceded by short but massive artillery bombardment against enemy defences and support structures (C4ISR, logistics, communication lines). Armoured units advance under cover of artillery fire, breaching the weakest points of enemy defences and then spreading out in the enemy rear area to cut off any support and reinforcements while infantry eliminates enemy front-line units. Breakthrough (in space or on ground) is reinforced by reserve forces with the aim of destroying enemy reserves, communications and supply depots.

Initial attack is made by several independent formations, with each operation designed to divert the enemy attention and prevent him from figuring out the real objective. Each formation has its own set of objectives, to be completed at formation’s discretion according to local conditions. Main objective of the attack is assigned to whichever unit is in best position to fulfill it. Alternatively, false attacks may be launched at points removed from the objective to draw out enemy reinforcements. Oftentimes, the goal of the attack – be it armoured or fleet attack – is simply to penetrate as deep behind the enemy lines as possible and cause as much damage to support structures as possible. If objective of the attack is particularly important and defended, several formations will combine before launching the attack.

When attacking enemy systems, frigate groups will attempt to destroy hyperspace sensors and comm buoys of several systems, along a broad area, to mask approach of the main force. This prevents the enemy from determining exact target of the attack until the moment of the attack. If possible, extraplanetary sensors in systems themselves will be neutralized as well. Approach to target world is preferably made from the opposite side of planet’s star to mask fleet’s signature. In several cases commanders even utilized hyperspace storms to mask fleet’s hyperspace signature, losing some ships in exchange for complete surprise. Fleet itself may approach the system formed in several battlegroups and from multiple directions, preventing the enemy from easily estimating the size of the force, and combine into one force just before combat contact. Some warships may even be equipped with false hull to disguise them as support ships.

Ground attacks use similar principles. Large forces will be simulated with dummy guns, tanks etc. while actual force may be dozens or hundreds of miles away, hidden by multispectral camouflage netting. Radio traffic will be likewise simulated. Troops are moved in secret, dug in and camouflaged.

DEFENSE

Defense is seen as a primary duty of the military. Normal day-to-day operations of the Navy consist mostly of counter-attacks and raiding into enemy territories for purposes of destabilizing enemy posture and gathering information, as well as intercepting enemy raids against outposts and unfortified worlds (i.e. worlds without planetary shields). For border security Navy is aided by a number of secret listening and sensory posts outside of Empire’s borders. These scan hyperspace for any signatures and listen in communications, sending regular reports back to the Empire. Listening posts are reinforced by light scout ships. Any indication of an attack – unusual activity on border, massing of ships, listening post falling silent – prompts the Royal Navy to send a scouting force of frigates to check what has happened. At the same time, a cruiser force – consisting of battlecruisers, light cruisers and frigates – is assembled near the border to check the enemy incursion before the enemy crosses the border. Heavy force of battleships, heavy cruisers and destroyers is meanwhile assembled in the rear area, acting as a strategic reserve.

Once enemy force and likely route had been ascertained from reports provided by observation posts and scouting forces, battlecruiser force shadows it until battleship force gets into position to intercept. Once battleship force gets into position, battlecruiser force closes in and brings the enemy force out of hyperspace, keeping it in place until battleship force can perform the interception. If enemy force is slow enough, only light scouting units are used to shadow it until battleship and battlecruiser forces can perform simultaneous interception. Ideally, interception happens before the enemy crosses the border. If enemy fleet is small enough, and battleship force will not make it in time, battlecruiser force makes the interception on its own.

If enemy fleet is too powerful to be destroyed without heavy casualties, or interception could not be made in time, request for assistance from deeper sectors will be made. In such a case, enemy will be allowed to lay siege to border worlds in order to buy time for the fleets to gather, and will be continually shadowed by the battlecruiser force. If enemy force is a regular force from an established state – as opposed to e.g. nomadic group – cruiser portion of the fleet will launch counter-raids, possibly forcing the enemy to return in order to defend their own territory. Once fleets had gathered, an all-out assault may be made against the enemy fleet, and possibly enemy territory as well. If enemy fleet is still too powerful, attack will be made directly against enemy territory. If needed, fleets may be called in from all over the Empire, and if some fleets may not make it in time, they will be detailed to attack enemy territory instead. Since Laigin ships tend to be somewhat faster than enemy counterparts, any division of enemy force opens it up to possibility of defeat in detail. Attacks against planets typically require ground forces except in rare cases where no planetary shields are present. These forces require supplies, meaning that no direct fleet engagement is required except in rare cases when enemy brings truly overwhelming force to bear. Supplies are brought in by cargo ships, which are vulnerable to interception by light fleet forces. Enemy army supplies are similarly attacked, and any groundside supplies either moved to defended depots or destroyed outright. Once worn down, ground forces and if possible in-system starship presence is destroyed in a series of ambushes.

Fortified planets – by definition equipped with planetary shields – are used to slow down enemy fleet, and as bases to resupply and repair starships. This makes them too valuable and too dangerous to ignore. An industrial world can, if left untouched, shift balance of power by producing starships ready to deploy into enemy’s rear. This plays against nomadic and mobility-based forces, forcing them to besiege well-defended strongholds. Enemy mobility can also be reduced by placing interceptor forces at hyperspace lanes/highways, forcing the enemy to either fight through them or else accept the penalty of reduced movement speed. Since Laigin Empire is in area with comparatively high star density, hyperspace highways are narrow and far between, significantly limiting Asquilahs’ offensive options. Aside for fortified planets, the Empire maintains a number of secret naval bases and outposts – generally in close orbits around highly active stars which help mask them from enemy sensors. These are used for resupply, maintenance and all other fleet’s logistical needs so as to ensure continued operation against superior enemy forces, effecting a “fleet in being”.

Mobile forces discussed above are concentrated at strategically important locations, particularly near hyperspace streams/lanes – specifically near “crossroads” – and are deployed against major incursions. Pirate raids and similar minor threats are handled by local planetary forces. Importance of hyperspace lanes means that they are heavily protected by listening posts, observation posts and military outposts – which ironically results in invaders often avoiding hyperspace lanes, making them harder to locate but also much slower.

This defence is reinforced by the existence of a string of dependencies, vassal states and suzerainties. These client states act as a buffer zone, intercepting smaller invasions and providing warning of larger attacks. In turn, Laigin Empire provides them with military support and other forms of aid as required, as well as establishing trade relationships. On areas of border where client states are present, same system of defense is used as outlined in previous paragraphs, but with respect to client’s border as opposed to imperial territorial border – albeit fleets are still stationed within the Empire itself. Exact specifics are however dependant on agreements and may be subject to change. Where such buffer states are not present, attempts are made to establish diplomatic relations to whatever entities are present and possibly establish them as allies – be it states, corporations or even smuggling organizations. If alliances cannot be established, various factions are played against each other.

Enemies are varied – pirates, slavers, nomadic tribes, tribal federations and formalized countries. Of those, tribal federations are particularly dangerous, especially when ideologically or religiously motivated, but most of them break apart quickly under strain of internal politics or due to military failures. Even so, they are capable of causing massive damage if allowed to roam unchecked. Tribes are dealth with by signing mutual defense treaties and giving subsidies, while any tribal invasions are punished by punitive expeditions where possible. Enemy commanders may be bribed. Anyone negotiating with enemies or assisting them is dealt with swiftly and decisively, as much as possible.

While pirates are a danger, privateers as well as other mercenaries may be contracted by planetary or provincial governors to bolster defences in times of need. This is also done by the central military as outlaws often know tricks and hyperspace shortcuts that professional military may be unaware of.

On ground as well, first line of defense are patrols and listening/observation posts. Any likely landing sites and choke points are covered by artillery and machine guns. Various obstacles are employed, from minefields to barbed wire and stakes. About a third of the force is kept as a mobile reserve to reinforce the defensive line and counter any breakthroughs. For any ground unit, digging defensive works is the first thing to be done after a stop call has been made. For brief stops, only shallow pits and trenches are dug out; the longer the stay, the more elaborate its defences. On hilly terrain, larger units will make two defensive lines, one on front slope and another on reverse slope.

MILITARY INTELLIGENCE

In both aspects of warfare, intelligence gathering is crucial. Intelligence gathering is divided into strategic and tactical. Strategic intelligence includes the information on enemy culture, mentality, doctrine, political structure, economic structure, etc. It is used to inform long-term decision-making. Tactical intelligence includes information on current force structure, disposition etc., and is crucial for winning battles. Diplomatic contacts, from other states to nomadic peoples, are a crucial source of information. Other sources of information are sensory and listening posts, scouting ships and unmanned probes, as well as various contacts and unofficial channels (mercenaries, privateers, pirates, criminal underground…). Spies, patrols, reconnaissance and probing attacks are all used for intelligence gathering purposes.

When making strategic decisions, Laigin Empire has inbuilt 10th man rule: if nine people all look at the same information and arrive at the same conclusion, it is a duty of 10th man to disagree. The 10th man has to find, compile and present all evidence, as well as possible arguments, that prove the remaining nine wrong, no matter how improbable or impossible his arguments seem. He must never stop until all possible avenues have been checked. Preparations are then made for worst case scenario. This way, group-think and conformity – so common in social animals – are avoided. In more complex situations, whole groups may be given the “tenth man” role. All Military Intelligence organizations have Control Units whose entire purpose is precisely that: producing range of explanations and assessments for events which avoid relying on a single concept. They actively criticize products coming from analysis and production divisions and write opinion papers contrary to these departments’ assessments. These memos go directly to Director of Military Intelligence and all other major decision makers. They also write and distribute papers examining the possibility of a sudden and negative change in security environment (including political, economic etc. spheres).

DIPLOMACY AND GENERAL INTELLIGENCE

As noted before, diplomacy is absolutely crucial. Diplomatic contacts are maintained with all states – friends, neutrals and enemies – whenever possible. Regular contact is considered a basis for successful negotiations, and diplomatic contact is maintained even during the war – when guns speak, diplomats must shout. This also pertains to nomadic peoples. Problem with nomads is that, due to geographical distance and lack of communications infrastructure, regular contact is hard to impossible. Further, they tend to be decentralized, meaning that negotiations with one group do not affect relations with any other group. This is not true only if a powerful leader manages to unite various groups, but aside from presenting a major threat, such alliances are short-lived.

The Bureau of Foreign Relations studies the weaknesses, strengths and personalities of all neighbouring states, cultures, peoples and leaders. It also keeps tabs on centres of power and influential individuals and families, including possible ways of influencing them. Consequently, tools and approaches such as psychological analysis are highly important. As with military intelligence, these are used to inform long-term decision-making.

Normally, diplomacy is used to maintain balance of power. Much like other empires, Laigin Empire may incite attacks on a neighbour if said neighbour starts growing too powerful. Other than Asquilah Empire, most empires do not wage wars of conquest, but rather for control over trade routes, for influence and to maintain balance of power. This makes wars frequent but limited in scope, as the goal of the war never is outright destruction of the enemy, but rather “merely” achieving favourable position and maintaining balance of power. Two empires that had waged a war decades, years or even just days before, may help each other against a more powerful third party. The “resource” fought over in such wars is oftentimes nothing physical – not even trade routes – but rather political and diplomatic influence in an area.

Against new or powerful enemies, diplomacy and negotiations will be used to gather intelligence, buy time to optimize strategies, and to break down enemy’s own operational tempo with frequent truces and negotiations. Diplomacy is also used to recruit allies – including former enemies – against the new threat. Subversion is the cheapest path to victory, and nomads in particular are open to being recruited.

There is a special Office of the Barbarians which deals solely with gathering military intelligence and disseminating it to officers in the field. The Office gathers intelligence from Military Intelligence agencies as well as diplomatic corps, analyzes it and then sends results to appropriate agencies or military commanders. Unlike MI agencies, the Office is subordinated directly to the government executive.

Military itself is often used to help in civic role, with public works and similar, both at home and abroad.

SOURCES AND INSPIRATION

Rome at War AD 293-696

Byzantium at War AD 600-1453

Heraclius and the Evolution of Byzantine Strategy

The Strategy of Heraclius

Posted in doctrine, history, sci-fi conceptual | Tagged: , , , , , | 7 Comments »

How Islam led to world wars

Posted by picard578 on July 2, 2018

Islam has, maybe not directly caused, but definitely set into motion events which ultimately led to the World Wars. In short, Islamic expansion cut off trade routes to the East and forced Europe to (eventually) turn to Atlantic. This led to discovery of the New World, which was then settled, giving rise to great colonial empires (and also heavy-duty slavery, started by islamic merchants selling slaves to Europeans – not that it was anything new at the time, slavery existed even in Merovingian Empire). Colonialism and colonial competition (not directly nationalism, as is often said) then caused global conflicts: Seven Years War, Napoleonic Wars, World War I and World War II. Specifically, Seven Years War led to Napoleonic Wars. Napoleonic Wars eventually helped cause national unification of Germany, which became industrial power, leading it to conflict with West over the colonies, which led to World War I. World War I was never properly wrapped up, and so caused World War II.

Islam has appeared in 7-th century, after a man by name of Muhammad decided he is not rich enough and decided to dupe a bunch of people with God to pillage for him. He was supremely successful, and Islam spread rapidly. Within decades, whole of Middle East and North Africa were conquered. Eventually, in 15th century, Ottoman Emirate captured Constantinople. Islam also invaded Central Asia, cutting off the overland route to the East. Afterwards, islamic armies continued their advance westward until finally being stopped at the gates of Vienna in 1683., specifically on September 11, 1683. Old overland route for trade with East now went through islamic territory. But in 1492., Spanish finally liberated the pennisula from islamic occupation, and Cristopher Columbus went sailling West to find the new passage East. This led to discovery of Americas.

Europe itself (in geopolitical terms) is product of Islam. Up until the expansion of Islam, there was no “European” civilization, but Mediterranean one, primarily centered around Eastern Mediterranean and tightly connected to the Fertile Crescent and through it to India and China. Greek civilization is a product of Egyptian one, Greek philosophers and artists had been to Egypt (as is obvious when comparing art: kuros, and other early Greek art, shows clear Egyptian influences). There was in fact an entire civilizational system along the Silk Road: Rome/Greece – Persia – India – China – Korea – Japan.

Islam destroyed all of it. It conquered Arabia, Near East (Middle East for Americans), Northern Africa, Persia and parts of India. It conquered as far as Soviet -stans. This last act in particular severed the Silk Road, and forced Europe to look West. First came expansion northwards: into British islands, Germany, Scandinavia and Russia (Byzantines), turning former Mediterranean civilization into European one, and giving birth to modern Europe. Then, after the route through Central Asia was severed, came the western expansion: Americas, and later Australia, Africa and Asia. Balance of power and trade shifted from Mediterranean to Atlantic, and this led to global expansion and first wave of globalization. It is not incorrect to say that European colonialism is a product of Islam.

This colonialism in turn led to a series of wars. First came the Seven Years War. This war was what made Britain into great power, but it was initiated by a conflict over colonies between Britain and France. Conflict started in 1754. when British attacked French positions in North America, and – much like World War II – it quickly spread to encompass most of Europe and much of the world into what became the first world war. The war ended in expansion of British Empire and destabilization of France, which ultimately led to the French Revolution and the next global conflict – Napoleonic Wars.

Napoleonic Wars are a continuation of French Revolution, itself caused by the Seven Years War. French Revolution did not last long, and as revolutions are prone to doing, it soon turned into a dictatorship by Napoleon Bonaparte. French expansion, even though it started from wars of self-defense, destabilized the continent and threatened other powers. This destruction of balance of power precluded peaceful settlement, and ensured that wars started in the Revolution would continue, both in Europe and in French colonies. After 10 years of Napoleonic Wars, Napoleon was defeated, borders redrawn, and both Europe and the world were free from major conflicts for next hundred years.

First and Second World Wars follow a nearly identical pattern. First World War was started by a conflict over colonies – rising Germany wanted resources and slaves to exploit, and established Britain and France did not want to give up their own resources and slaves. This led to formation of various alliances, which after some shuffling settled into well-known Triple Entente and Central Powers. The entire continent was a powder bag, and was easily set off by a single spark provided by Serb imperialist activists. The war led to dissolution of German, Austrian, Ottoman and Russian Empires, but solved little – colonies and colonial powers remained, and heavy-handed peace terms forced on Germany bred resentment.

World War II was little more than delayed epilogue of World War I. Germany, humiliated by the peace treaty – very different from light handling France received post-Napoleon – vied for a revenge. This in turn destabilized and illegitimized the Wiemar Republic, and everything was worsened by the Great Depression. Nazism was little but expression of uncertainty and insecurity caused by this, even if expressed in extreme terms (and even then, it was much less extreme back in 1930s than it seems today). In Asia, Japan itself embarked onto colonialist route, placing it at collision course with established colonial powers. Overall, Nazism, militarism etc. that are typically listed as causes of World War II were largely incidental – true cause of war was, again, colonialism.

Overall, Islam caused European colonialism, and European colonialism caused world wars. Normally stated causes of world wars such as nationalism are at best minor, if not irrelevant. Likewise, it is doubtful that United Nations, EU and other such institutions prevented World War III. It is unclear whether World War III had even been prevented in the first place – between 1814. and 1914. there were 100 years, whereas World War II happened “only” 73 years ago. However, if it had been prevented, it was not due to European Union. What prevented next European conflict was decolonization and transfer of balance of power from Europe to North America and, now, Pacific-Indian ring. Post-World War II Europe and its powers are simply not important enough to warrant a continent-wide conflict, and even if such a conflict had happened, they would not have had the power or influence to drag the rest of the world into war with them. If there is next world war – a prospect more likely than many think, thanks to globalized economy – it will begin in the Pacific.

Posted in history | Tagged: , , , , , , | 9 Comments »

The Fall of an Empire – The Lesson of Byzantium

Posted by picard578 on May 11, 2018

Video is quite relevant to modern Europe; best watch it yourselves.

Posted in history | Tagged: , , | 4 Comments »

Impact of Islam on history

Posted by picard578 on May 4, 2018

http://classicalchristianity.com/2011/05/30/five-interesting-historical-facts-about-islam/

WHILE READING about things totally unrelated to the counterjihad movement, I have occasionally come across some interesting historical facts about Islam. I was surprised to discover that Islam had a hand in many important historical events I already knew about without ever knowing Islam had anything to do with them. Here are a few of the most interesting:

1. The creation of the U.S. Marine Corps was initiated in response to Islamic warriors. The Barbary Coast pirates were following in Mohammad’s footsteps, raiding caravans (in this case, oceangoing ships), taking slaves, capturing people to hold for ransom, and demanding “protection money” from any kafirs who didn’t want to be raided. This had been going on for centuries along the North African Mediterranean coastline.

Any ships that wanted to do business in the Mediterranean were at risk. Many European countries did the easy thing and paid the protection money to the Muslims to avoid being raided, which, of course, helped fund their operations against anyone who wasn’t paying. The U.S. did not have enough military resources to protect its ships, so it paid the protection money too. This bothered Thomas Jefferson. Before he was president, when he was an ambassador to France, Jefferson had a chance to meet with an ambassador from Tripoli, and he asked why Tripoli did this. The Muslim explained it was written in the Koran.

So Thomas Jefferson did something every leader of the free world should do: He bought himself a Koran and read it. Then when he became president, he knew what he needed to do: He formed the United States Navy, created the Marine Corps, and sent them to the shores of Tripoli, where they soundly defeated the Muslim warriors.

This was the first foreign war fought by the United States. America’s victory was the beginning of the end of the “Barbary Coast Pirates.” The military aggressiveness of Islamic countries remained contained and weakened for over a century.

2. The New World was discovered because of Islam. Christopher Columbus was looking for a new trade route to the East. But why was he looking for a trade route?

During the Second Jihad, Islam invaded Central Asia and defeated Constantinople in 1453, cutting off the overland route for Europeans. Islamic armies continued their jihad northward, and conquered much of what is now Eastern Europe, until they were finally stopped at the gates of Vienna in 1683. Read more: The Second Major Wave of Jihad: the Turks, 1071-1683.

Europe had been trading with the Far East for centuries, and their old overland route now went through territory that was hostile and dangerous to anybody but Muslims. The economy of Europe was threatened.

So, in 1492, the year Islam was finally defeated in Spain, ending Islam’s 780-year occupation, Columbus set off to find a passage to the Far East by boldly sailing West into the unknown. Desperate times call for desperate measures.

3. The .45 caliber 1911 semiautomatic pistol was created to stop Islamic warriors. From 1902 until 1913, the United States fought a war with the “Moro Warriors” in the Philippines. These Islamic warriors were named “Moros” by the Spanish. Their unstoppability was legendary. “In one instance,” writes Robert Boatman, “a Moro warrior received 14 bullet wounds in five minutes, three of which penetrated his brain, and yet he fought on.”

At the time the army was using .38 caliber guns, which were unable to stop the Moros, so in 1906, they began testing different guns to find something better. In 1911, they chose the .45 caliber semiautomatic pistol. It had enough stopping power to kill even a Moro warrior with one shot.

4. The Great Pyramid of Giza looks unfinished because of Muslims. The pyramid was once covered by a smooth, beautifully polished layer of white stone. This outer layer was removed by Muslims, who used the white stone for mosques and palaces, leaving the ancient pyramids with their somewhat unfinished appearance.

The physicist, John Zajac, wrote: “This protective covering was made up of…hard, white limestone, similar to marble but superior in hardness and in durability against the elements…The casing stones, 144,000 in all, were so brilliant that they could literally be seen from the mountains of Israel hundreds of miles away…The people of the area had viewed the pyramid and its polished stones with awe for centuries. But when a 13th century earthquake loosened some of these casing stones, the Arabs recognized a great quarry of precut stones that could be used to finish off palaces and mosques. For instance, the casing stones were used to rebuild the new city of El Kaherah plus Cairo mosques and palaces, including the Mosque of Sultan Hasan.”

Historically, this is Islamic standard operating procedure. Wherever Islam established itself throughout the world, it destroyed or defaced monuments that represented the previous (conquered) culture and replaced it with Islamic structures and mosques. Afghanistan used to be Buddhist. Turkey used to be Christian. Pakistan used to be Hindu. The former cultures and any symbols of them were annihilated and replaced by Islam.

5. The Crusades were a limp, late, defensive response to four hundred years of Islamic war against what was then largely Christian lands (the Middle East, Northern Africa, and Europe). Four of the five main centers of Christianity, including the Byzantium and Constantiople, were eventually conquered by the Islamic warriors’ relentless conquests, and the countries were forcibly converted into Islamic states. But before the Crusades, Byzantium was still fighting to defend itself, and repeatedly appealed to Rome for help.

The different nations of Europe were largely competitors with each other. They were not a united force — far from it — but the Pope thought he could unify Europeans if he made it a matter of “defending Christians,” so that’s how he made his appeal. It helped unite Europeans against a common threat, and it may have saved Europe from the forcible Islamization suffered by the nations of the Middle East, part of India, and North Africa. Read more: What About the Crusades?

Here’s another interesting historical tidbit about Islam’s influence: The defense of Europe during the Crusades was devastatingly expensive, and the Church of Rome tried many ways to raise funds. Some of these fundraising efforts were deeply offensive to Martin Luther, so he intitiated the Protestant Reformation.

Islam has had a profound impact on important historical events throughout its history, and it is still being felt today.

Posted in history | Tagged: | 12 Comments »

Non-German Ethnic Groups in the Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS During the Second World War

Posted by picard578 on May 4, 2018

Waffen SS was the most multicultural military unit of World War II.

invictuspopuli

rommel-88.jpgAbove photograph: Field Marshal Erwin Rommel inspects a column of Indian volunteers. This shot was probably taken during 1944 somewhere along the coast of France, as many Indian volunteers manned defences along the Third Reich’s Atlantic Wall.

under construction - 450 px.jpg

Introduction

When most people think of the German Army during the Second World War, many probably imagine ranks of blonde-haired, blue-eyed German soldiers as depicted on recruitment posters at the time. However, in reality during the Second World War, the truth was quite different.

“One unique feature of the Waffen-SS was that it was a volunteer army, in which from 1942 European soldiers from many lands and peoples could be found: Albanians, Bosnians, Britons, Bulgarians, Cossacks, Croats, Danes, Dutch, Estonians, Finns, Flemings, French, Georgians, Greeks, Hungarians, Italians, Latvians, Lithuanians, Norwegians, Romanians, Russians, Serbs, Slovakians, Swedes, Swiss, Ukrainians, Walloons; as well Armenians, Byelorussians, Hindus, Kirghizes, Tartars Turkmen and Uzbeks served under their own flags…

View original post 2,689 more words

Posted in history, reblogs | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Workable battlecruiser concept

Posted by picard578 on February 10, 2018

Battlecruiser did not have a good showing in World War I. Main reason – other than ammunition handling – is that their big guns were too powerful to pass up in the line of battle, yet their armour was too thin to withstand such a battle while their speed was largely negated. They were also as costly as contemporary dreadnoughts, and used dreadnought slips and berths, meaning that any battlecruiser construction came instead, and not on top of, dreadnought battleship construction. Combination of thin armour and improper ammunition handling proved catastrophic. Irony is that ammunition handling was partly caused by thin-armour, big-gun design: battlecruiser had to hit its opponent before it got hit itself, and at long range. But this required placing a lot of rounds downrange, and quickly, which created training emphasis on rate of fire. This emphasis in turn caused unsafe ammunition handling, which then caused catastrophic losses. So question is, how battlecruisers could have been more idiot-proof, either in a sense that they are not so powerful they get used in battleship role (as in battle off Jutland), or that they can survive major battle if so committed, while still keeping intact battlecruiser’s basic characteristic: greater speed than battleship, enabling it to catch cruisers or outflank battleship forces.

There are several possibilities.

First possibility is reducing armament calibre while maintaining battleship’s armour protection. This would result in ships better protected than cruisers that are still faster and longer-ranged than battleships. Main armament could be either cruiser-calibre or in-between cruiser and dreadnought calibre – possibly reusing old 12-in guns from predreadnoughts.

Second possibility is maintaining armament calibre but reducing number of guns. Instead of three or four turrets mounting six to eight guns, battlecruiser would have two frontal turrets mounting four to six guns. This would technically reduce battlecruiser’s firepower, but would maintain range and penetration advantage against cruisers. At the same time, lesser armoured area covered as well as weaponry and munition carried would allow for more fuel as well as larger and more powerful power plant.

Third possibility is reconfiguring armour. Protecting only turrets, magazines and machinery spaces would allow maximum thickness of armour there, while leaving nonessentials unprotected. In particular, bow and stern armoured belt would be removed, as would be conning tower armour. This would result in something more akin to a fast battleship of “all-or-nothing” design, and not an actual battlecruiser, and would go against design philosophy of the time which required protection against various calibres.

Those options could also all be combined. Instead of eight 13,5 in guns of an Orion-class superdreadnought, a battlecruiser could have four to six 10 in to 12 in guns in two frontal turrets. As a result, only area from “A” turret to machinery spaces would need to be protected by armour, while rest would be left completely unarmoured. At the same time, smaller guns would allow a ship somewhat smaller than contemporary dreadnoughts, or else allow for greater volume of engines and fuel.

Lastly, battlecruiser could maintain battleship’s armour and armament, but with elongated hull form and more powerful propulsion unit. This would result in what is basically a fast battleship. That, however, may not have been feasible at the time. Such a ship would also be larger, heavier and more expensive than a contemporary dreadnought, and may require new slipyards and docks to be built.

Now for feasibility.

First option would place those ships, at best, at equal footing against British-style battlecruisers: one would have battlecruisers with cruiser guns and dreadnought protection going up against battlecruisers with dreadnought guns and cruiser protection. Best-case scenario would be stalemate at best.

Second possibility would reduce rangefinding and hitting capability due to pattern dispersal issues. Even battleships had around 2% hit rate with main guns. None of the main battlecruiser-building navies utilized triple turrets on a regular basis either. And with typical incremental armouring scheme, it would not actually reduce amount of armour.

Raft armouring scheme, while best option, was largely a product of experience of Jutland. As a result, nobody had the hindsight to utilize it before.

Overall, options 1, 3 and 4 are feasible but not likely. First option would wipe out range advantage against cruisers, impacting battlecruisers’ main role. Option four is very expensive, even if it is best for Jutland-type scenario. Third option is ideal, albeit it would increase vulnerability to high explosive and small-calibre shells.

Posted in history, proposals | Tagged: , , | 18 Comments »

 
%d bloggers like this: