Americans Are Latest Crusaders

The Omaha World-Herald ^ | December 12, 2003 | James P. Pinkerton

[quidnunc]

For 14 centuries, Christians and Muslims have waged a series of conquests and crusades. And while we know who started the fighting, we don't know who will end it. The one safe bet is that America's current crusade in the Middle East will not be the last.

It's worth pointing out, of course, that the Muslims "started it." In the seventh and eighth centuries, the Arabs, fired by their new Islamic faith, burst out of the Arabian Peninsula. They swept across the mostly Christian Middle East, eager to conquer and convert. Their general, Tariq ibn-Ziyad, crossed into Spain from North Africa in 711. It's from him that the Rock of Gibraltar gets its name: "Jabal Tariq" ("Mount of Tariq"). The Muslims overran Spain and then invaded France; they were defeated at Tours in 732.

Meanwhile, on another Muslim-Christian front, to the east, the Turks were on the attack. They crossed into Europe in the 14th century, holding Greece and the other Balkans for centuries.

But the Europeans had ambitions, too, both territorial and theological. In 1095, Peter the Hermit preached a Crusade — the word itself comes from the Latin for "cross" — for the liberation of Jerusalem. One can visit his statue outside Amiens Cathedral in France and see a determined-faced man waving a cross like a sword.

On the base of Peter's statue are the words, "Deus Lo Veult" — "God Wills It." As the 1914 edition of the Catholic Encyclopedia records, "The Crusades were expeditions undertaken, in fulfillment of a solemn vow, to deliver the Holy Places from Mohammedan tyranny."

And many expeditions were undertaken — eight in all, from 1096 to 1270. The Crusaders held Jerusalem for a century; the last Crusader fortress in the area fell in 1291.

So by the common reckoning, the Crusades covered a period of two centuries. And while the Crusaders were mostly animated by a blood-and-fire interpretation of Christianity, they also were interested in more mundane goals, such as land and treasure.

-snip-

[cyborg]

to deliver the Holy Places from Mohammedan tyranny

*** Well the islamic terrorists are bent on destroying the great biblical places like Rachel's tomb, Joseph's tomb, the city of Bethlehem. I'd say that's tyranny.

[Capitalist Eric]

And while we know who started the fighting, we don't know who will end it. The one safe bet is that America's current crusade in the Middle East will not be the last.

Actually, I disagree with both statements. We know who must ultimately end it- permanently.

When the liberals and their lies are swept away, only the implacable truth will remain:

Islam is a religion of DEATH.

We WILL destroy them, before they destroy us. And, I might add, by any means necessary, up to and including nuclear weapons.

That these murderous animals don't understand this, is irrelevant. Piss us off enough, and you will feel our wrath unleashed...

It's only a matter of time.

[longtermmemmory]

Is it really so bad to call the war on terror a crusade? What if it was a cult instead of islam, would that be easier?

[Beck_isright]

America? The nation where the word Christmas can not longer be spoken? I want some of what the author of this article is smoking.

[Looking for Diogenes]

"The Crusades were expeditions undertaken, in fulfillment of a solemn vow, to deliver the Holy Places from Mohammedan tyranny."

There aren't any non-Muslim Holy Places in Iraq or Afghanistan that I'm aware of. I don't see ow what we're doing is like the Crusades. We're not in the Mddle East because of our own religious convictions. We're there to root out religous fanatics who are attacking us. That is the opposite of what the Crusaders did. Pinkerton is arguing that we're really in the Iraq with a new crusade, the purpose of which is to spread democracy. I'm all for democracy, but that is not why our troops are there.

[Delphinium]

if it was a cult instead of islam,

Islam is a cult.

[tinacart]

"On the base of Peter's statue are the words, "Deus Lo Veult" — "God Wills It."

Interesting...

[Stopislamnow]

Yup. Still gets to me that some people are apologists for a cult rooted and founded in thievery, murder, repression, and 7th century barbarisms.

Says it all.

[dk/coro]

To all: I have studied this subject for some time now; and I might suggest that we tone down the decibels a bit and really delve into the depth of this scism in civilizations and cultures.

The defeat of the USSR, coupled with the Soviet Afgan debacle and our 1990-91 Gulf War defined a multi-polar woorld, adrift in cultural vice ideological mandates; additionally afforded the fundamentalists within the multitude of Islamic states a clear definition of "the Great Satan" -- to coin the Shi'ite Parzi phrase.

Sam Huntington, Bernard Lewis, Robert Kaplan, Dan Pipes, and others have written mastefully on this subject. IMHO, after a length analysis of the subject, it looks to me as though we are in for an incredibly protracted and complex national challenge. And, to make the issue more complicated, indeed, I invite you to take a close look at the attempted dis-engagement forces at work in Europe. The manipulations ongoing in Brussels pose a very serious threat to projection of a unified front to this civilational challenge by the fervent Islamists in execution of their jihad.

Thanks..and a Happy Weekend to all. DKP

[GeronL]

we'd rather nuke Mecca

[boycott]

History will probably be revised to show we were Crusaders in Afghanistan.

I believe the Crusaders were motivated more out of their own protection. Just my opinion.

[KneelBeforeZod]

I have nothing wrong with that assesment

[squidly]

Crusade, war, police action, military intervention, blah blah blah, they all mean the same thing.

[Stopislamnow]

Found this site tonight, there is some really good info about islam.

I dunno for who runs it, seems they are Christian, but it has info on the moon god, the pagan roots of islam, etc.

http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-start.htm

Still checking it out myself.

[LiteKeeper]

read later

[arasina]

An old, yet newer Crusader:

[GeronL]

Thanks

[Billthedrill]

You are absolutely right. The issue isn't the Holy Land in any sense, and we aren't attempting to re-establish a religion. In fact, we aren't doing anything more than setting up a secular government and (I hope) departing. The analogy is entirely inappropriate, suitable only for those whose aquaintance with the subject comes from a quick perusal of a Google search.

As far as invading Syria, we'll see if and when we cross that bridge. But if we do it won't be to re-establish a religion or start a colony, both of which described the efforts of the real Crusaders. We will be wiping out a nest of vipers. It's rather a different thing - it was, after all, Islam itself that wiped out the Assassins the first time. In Syria.

[liberty or death]

The crusades were carried out by one religion religion. The Catholics, raiding the holy lands and regaining trophy's of holy relics.(Golden cups and religous jewelry) Hardly the way Jesus told his followers to behave. The crusades were not carried out by Christians and the continued referance to it is an insult to our God who came down in the flesh to be whipped,beaten and nailed to a cross for the transgression of our sins.
This is the full payment for OUR sins. In Jesus name, Amen.