#49759 Islamic Conquest

[vorpal blade]

It was interesting to read the Islamic version of history.

[Cognoscente]

I've done plenty of reading from a wide variety of historical sources, and habiba's version was pretty fair. What, specifically, do you take issue with?

By the way, Saladin is pretty awesome in Civilization 4:

[vorpal blade]

Some of my children were really into Civilization. I've played the board game version, but that was more than ten years ago. I don't think I've played the computer version. I've played very few computer games.

I don't doubt that Saladin is awesome in the computer game.

[Darth Fedora]

Yeah, I thought it was a pretty good answer. I guess if I had any objection to it, it would be that although the People of the Book were technically designated as protected and not forced to convert, Jews and Christians were still definitely second-class citizens in the Islamic Empire. They couldn't preach their religion, build new chapels, join the army, or get any share of the treasury. And they had to pay extra taxes.
But yeah, the conquests of early Islam and the Crusades are not really a fair comparison at all.

[Giovanni Schwartz]

For what it's worth, Saladin is now the background on my BlackBerry.

[vorpal blade]

They say that history is written by the victors. The Muslims won the Islamic Conquest, and they ultimately won the Crusades. In the last one hundred years we have seen history reinterpreted to suit modern Arabic nationalistic ambitions.

I've been reading about the conquests and I've come to the conclusion that the Islamic conquest was bloodier than the Crusades. Both used religion as a sort of moral cover for killing and stealing. There were many contributing factors to cause the wars, but basically the Crusades were attempting to regain Christian control of the Holy Lands. The Islamic conquests were primarily about getting wealth by forcibly taking property from their neighbors.

Prior to the start of the Islamic Conquests the Persians had taken away from the Christian Byzantines parts of present day Egypt, Israel, Lebanon, Jordon, Syria, and some surrounding areas. They accomplished this in just a few years. Over the next dozen years or so the Byzantines took it all back, but it left Persia and the Byzantines militarily weak. The Arabs, newly united with a common faith, saw this as an opportunity to expand their small scale raids to take as much as they could. With tough and disciplined soldiers, a knowledge of the terrain, swift horses, and some brilliant generals they were wildly successful.

It would be a mistake to think that these conquests were quick and easy. The Persians and Byzantines fought for their lives and their families in many pitched and desperate battles. More than a million men were killed in the Islamic conquests, and that doesn't count the millions who died in subsequent slave revolts and early deaths in slavery. Much loot and slaves were taken from the conquered cities.

The normal procedure was for the Arab commander to demand that the inhabitants of a city yield to Islam, or surrender with a peace treaty and pay an annual tribute, or fight. Those that chose to fight were mercilessly slaughtered, including most of the civilians. Some of the civilians were taken away as captives or slaves. Female slaves were used for sex purposes as well as for the most menial chores. Musa took 300,000 captives in Africa, 30,000 “virgins” in Spain, and sold them into slavery. Qutayba capture 100,000 in Sogdiana. It was a form of terrorism to encourage cities to choose surrender.

It was important for the Arabs to honor terms of surrender. If word got out that the city had surrendered and the people were slaughtered then no city would surrender, and the war of conquest would be slow and exhausting. Sometimes Arab generals found a way around these practical rules. In 634 AD Khalid ibn Walid attacked Damascus. Khalid was taking the city by force, when Thomas, the Christian leader, sued for peace from Khalid's second in command, who apparently was unaware that Khalid had broken into the city. The peace treaty said the people would not be harmed or enslaved, the temples would not be harmed, and no booty was to be taken. They would have to pay tribute. When Khalid found out he was enraged, because he wanted to kill and take booty.

It is interesting how the generals reasoned among themselves, “Let there be peace, because if the Romans in Syria heard that the Muslims had given a guarantee of safety and then slaughtered those whose safety had been guaranteed, no other city would ever surrender to the Muslims, and that would make the task of conquering Syria immeasurably more difficult. Khalid was not happy but agreed.”

However, Khalid found a way around the peace treaty. He told Thomas, and all those who wouldn't be ruled by the Muslims, that they had three days to make their escape with their wives and children and possessions, and then the peace treaty was over. Thousands fled the city but were unable to outrun the Arab light calvary which caught up and slaughtered them near Antioch, in a battle called the Battle of Marj-ud-Deebaj (“Battle of Meadow of Brocade").

At least Thomas was given a chance to defend himself. Captives were at the mercy of their captors. As an example, in 717 the Caliph Suleiman got bored on a pilgrimage to Mecca, and invited “his courtiers to try their swords on 400 Greeks recently captured in war; the invitation was accepted and the 400 men were beheaded in merry sport as the Caliph looked on.”

Sometimes a city that surrenders is an inconvenience, and that is not to be tolerated. For example, in 1187 Saladin wished to draw out the Crusaders from their fortresses so that he could more easily attack them. To do this Saladin attacked Tiberias. The city tried to surrender, but Saladin wouldn't let them. The town was massacred or taken prisoners with the exception of the Citadel which continued to hold out. The Crusaders rushed out from Acre to relieve Tiberias and were totally destroyed in the open in the Battle of Hattin. Brilliant strategy, but merciless.

It is impossible to control an army that takes a city by storm. The same is true of Muslim as well as Christian armies. The Crusaders were perhaps more divided into separate factions and more undisciplined. The Crusaders also massacred in cities they took by force. It was the way things were done back then, but it doesn't excuse them. My point is that the behavior of Islamic armies and Crusader armies were a lot a like. The wars were bloody and cruel.

For References see:

The Story of Civilization: Part IV, “The Age of Faith,” by Will Durant.

Some Wikipedia references:

Arab Byzantine wars http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine-Arab_Wars

Early conflicts
Mutah – 629 AD. Deaths 4,000
Tabouk – 630 AD. Deaths 0
Dathin – 634 AD. Deaths?
Firaz – January 634 AD. Deaths 50,000 (Muslim sources)

Arab conquest of Roman Syria
Qarteen – June 634 AD. Deaths ? City plundered.
Bosra – June-July 634 AD. Deaths 8,000. City surrenders and pays tribute.
Ajnadayn – July 30, 634 AD. Deaths 50,000 (Muslim sources).
Marj-al-Rahit – July 634 AD. Deaths few. Large town pillaged and captives taken.
Fahl – January 635 AD. Deaths 10,000 (Yahya al-Baladhuri). City of Pella, Jordan surrenders with peace treaty.
Damascus – 21 August to 19 September 634AD. Deaths thousands. City surrenders with peace treaty.
Maraj-al-Debaj – September 634 AD. Deaths thousands. Survivors of Damascus massacred, booty taken, and large number of male and female captives taken.
Emesa – December 635-March 636 AD. Deaths more than 5,000. City surrenders with treaty.
Yarmouk – 15-20 August 636 AD. Deaths 70,000 – 120,000 (Original sources). 50,000 modern estimates.
Jerusalem – November 636 to April 636 AD. Deaths few. Treaty signed.
Hazir – June 637 AD. Deaths 3,000 to 4,000. City surrenders.
Aleppo - July to October 637 AD. City surrenders
Caesarea – 638 AD. 20,000 Jews and 30,000 Samaritans disappear from history when city is conquered.

Arab conquest of Roman Egypt
Heliopolis – July 640 AD. Deaths more than 20,000.
Alexandria - 641 AD. Siege of 14 months.
Nikiou - 646 AD. Deaths thousands?
Umayyad conquest of North Africa
Sufetula – 647-648 AD. Deaths thousands
Carthage - 665 - 698 AD. Army of 30,000 defeated. Many battles. City burnt to ground. Rest of Africa taken from Byzantines by 698 AD. Arab General Musa takes 300,000 captives and sold them into slavery.

Arab invasions of Anatolia and Constantinople
Iron Bridge – October 637 AD. Deaths more than 10,000. Antioch signs peace treaty.
Kahramanmaraş – 638 AD. Deaths ? People of Marash spared with treaty. Arabs soldiers take away enough spoil to make each rich for life.
Phoenix – 655 AD. Deaths heavy on both sides. Sea battle off Phoenice.
1st Constantinople – 674-678 AD. Deaths 150,000 Arabs. Unknown Byzantine deaths.
2nd Constantinople – 717-718 AD. Deaths 130,000 to 170,000 Arabs. Unknown Byzantine deaths.
Akroinon - 739 AD. Decisive Arab defeat.

Arab campaigns in Southern Italy
Sicily – 652 AD. 669 AD Syracuse was sacked. 700 AD Christian population of Pantelleria is annihilated. 812 AD Island of Lampedusa wiped out. 827 AD battle near Mazara. 831 AD Palermo falls. 842 AD Messina falls. 845 Mordica falls with 10,000 Byzantine deaths. 859 AD Butera, Gagliano, Cefalu, and Castrogiovanni taken. All Christian survivors executed and women and children sold into slavery. 878 AD Syracuse finally falls. 888AD Calabria defeated. 900 AD Trapani, Palermo (again). 901 AD Reggio Calabria. 902 AD Taormina massacred by Arabs.
Mainland – 847 AD Bari taken. 800-900 AD raids on Naples, Amalfi, Gaeta, Salerno. Duchy of Benevento. 881 AD. Gaetans killed or captured. 915 AD Battle of Garigliano. Muslims captured and executed.

Sassanid Persian Empire
Islamic Conquest of Persia –
Chains – April 633 AD. Deaths thousands. Near Kasima, Kuwait.
River – April 633 AD. Deaths 6,000-7,000. Iraq Much booty.
Walaja – May 633 AD. Deaths at least 22,000.
Ullais – May 633 AD. Deaths 70,000 (primary sources), 30,000 – 35,000 (modern sources). Captive Persians and Christian Arabs were disarmed, driven to River Khaseef, and all were beheaded.
Hira – May 633 AD. Deaths few. City sues for peace.
Al-Anbar – 633 AD. Deaths few.
Ein-ul-tamr – 633 AD. Deaths “high,” or “great number.”
Daumat-ul-Jandal – August 633 AD. Deaths more than 10,000. Captive men beheaded, women and children taken captive.
Muzayyah – November 633 AD. Deaths 10,000.
Saniyy – November 633 AD. Deaths more than 5,000. Women and children taken captive.
Zumail – November 633 AD. Deaths more than 5,000.
Firaz – January 634 AD. Deaths 50,000 (original sources). Combined Persian, Byzantine, Christian Arab.
Bridge – October 634 AD. Deaths 6,000 Arabs, 600 Persians
al-Qādisiyyah – 636 AD. Deaths 50,000 (http://persianempire.info/sassanid15.htm#YazdgerdIII )
Ctesiphon – January – March 637 AD. Deaths unknown. City surrenders. Massive booty taken.
Jalūlā – 637 AD. Deaths 100,000. http://persianempire.info/sassanid15.htm#YazdgerdIII
Nahāvand – 642 AD. Deaths 40,000 – 100,000. Known as “Victory of victories.”

Afghanistan – 870 AD. Many battles. Conquered most of country.

Indus – 644 AD -654 AD. Baluchistan province of Pakistan conquered.
711 AD. Expeditions to parts of Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and ancient Sindh.
11th century. Seventeen expeditions into India. By 1027 Mahmud and captured most of Northern India. Lasted until 1187. "An estimate of the number of people killed, based on the Muslim chronicles and demographic calculations, was done by K.S. Lal in his book Growth of Muslim Population in Medieval India, who claimed that between 1000 CE and 1500 CE, the population of Hindus decreased by 80 million."

Visigothic Kingdom (Hispania)
Guadalete – 711 or 712 AD. Deaths unknown. Destroys Visigoth aristocracy.
Toulouse – April – June 721 AD. Arab army destroyed.
Covadonga – Summer 722 AD. Deaths several hundred. Arab defeat.
Battle of the River Garonne – 732 AD. Great slaughter of Franks.
Tours – October 10, 732 AD. Deaths more than 10,000. Decisive Arab defeat.
500 years of conflict. Cities such as Leon, capital of Leon, massacred by al-Mansur. Many enslaved.

Khazar – Arab Wars Turkic Khazar Empire (Caucasus)
1st Balanjar – 652 AD. Arab army annihilated.
2nd Balanjar – 722 or 723 AD. Much of Balanjar (capital of Khazaria) population massacred.
Marj Ardabil – 730 AD. Khazars win.
Mosul – 731 AD. Arabs defeat an army of 100,000.
3rd Balanjar – 732 AD. Arabs win.
Atil – 737 AD. Arabs defeat 40,000 Khazars at Atil, new capital of Khazaria.


First Crusade
Nicaea – May-June 1097 AD. Deaths unknown, but heavy. City spared by surrender.
Dorylaeum – July 1097 AD. Deaths about 7,000.
Edessa -
Antioch – October 1097 – June 1098 AD. Deaths unknown. City taken, massacre garrison and some citizens by Crusaders
Ma'arrat al-Numan – Nov-Dec 1098 AD. Garrison surrenders but 20,000 civilians massacred by Crusaders.
Jerusalem – June-Jul 1099 AD. Deaths, at least 40,000 military and civilian. Many survive.
Ascalon – Augus 1099 AD. Deaths 10,000-12,000.
Melitene – 1100 AD. Most of crusaders from Antioch killed.

Crusade of 1101
Harran – May 1104 AD. Deaths heavy Christian.
Artah – 1105 AD. Deaths unknown.
3rd Ramla – 1105 AD. Deaths unknown. Egyptian loss.
Tripoli – 1102-1109 AD. Most inhabitants enslaved by Christians.
Shaizar – 1110 AD. Deaths light.
Al-Sannabra – 1113 AD. Deaths unknown.
Sarmin – September 1115 AD. Deaths probably 2,000
Ager Sanguinis – June 1119 AD. Deaths 3,500 Crusaders.
Hab – August 1119 AD. Deaths unknown.
Azaz – June 1125 AD. Deaths more than 3,000.
Marj es-Suffar – January 1126 AD. Heavy losses.

Second Crusade
fall of Edessa – Nov-Dec 1144 AD. Deaths thousands of citizens massacred by Muslims.
Dorylaeum – October 25, 1147 AD. Deaths 18,000 Crusaders; Turks unknown.
Laodicea – January 1148 AD. Deaths unknown. Crusaders routed.
Damascus – July 1148 AD. Deaths unknown. Crusader defeat.
Wendish Crusade - 11 47 AD. Against Polabian Slavs. Deaths unknown.
Siege of Lisbon – July-Oct 1147 AD. Deaths unknown. City surrenders and population allowed to leave. Reconquest of Portugal begun.

Third Crusade
Massacre at Antioch – circa 1189 AD. Muslims massacre
Tiberias – July 2, 1187 AD. Saladin refuses to let city surrender. Massacres town.
Battle of Hattin - July 4, 1187 AD. Deaths 17,000 Crusaders, unknown Muslim. Templars and Hospitallers executed for not converting.
Siege of Jerusalem - Sept-Oct 1187 AD. City surrenders. Thousands, unable to pay the huge ransoms were taken into slavery.
Iconium – May 1190 AD. Deaths unknown. Captured by Emperor Frederick Barbarossa.
Messina Italy – Oct 1190 AD. Deaths unknown. Christians attacking Christians.
Cyprus – May 1191. Deaths unknown. Christians fighting Christians.
Siege of Acre – August 1189-July 1191 AD. Deaths thousands. City surrenders. 2,700 of Muslim garrison executed for failure to meet surrender terms. Saladin executes all his Christian prisoners.
Battle of Arsuf - Sept 1191 AD. Deaths thousands. Indecisive loss for Saladin.
Battle of Jaffa – July 1192 AD. Deaths unknown. Saladin loses control of his troops.

Fourth Crusade
Zara – 1202 AD. Christian city taken to pay debt to Venetians.
Constantinople – April 1204. Deaths thousands. Christian against Christian. Looting, rape, pillage, massacres. Condemned by Pope.

Albigensian Crusade 1209-1229 AD. Deaths 200,000-1,000,000. Christians killing Christians in Southern France.

Children's Crusade 1212 AD. Probably part myth. Likely children sold into slavery in North Africa.

Fifth Crusade
Bethsaida -1217 AD. Deaths unknown. Jerusalem abandoned. Muslims defeat.
siege of Damietta – 1218-1219 AD. Deaths unknown. Much sickness. Crusaders occupy port.
Cairo – 1221 AD. Deaths many. Crusaders defeated in march to Cairo.

Sixth Crusade
Jerusalem and others – 1229 AD. Deaths few. Without papal approval. Peace treaty negotiated gives Crusaders control..

Seventh Crusade
Damietta – June 1249 AD. Little resistance.
Battle of Al Mansurah – Feb 1250 AD. Deaths thousands. Crusader defeat.
Battle of Fariskur – April 1250 AD. Deaths 15,000. Crusader defeat.


Eighth Crusade
Antioch – 1268 AD. Muslims attach and kill most inhabitants of city.
Siege of Tunis – 1270 AD. Deaths unknown. Sickness kills most. Treaty.

Ninth Crusade
Tripoli, Cyprus, Acre, Qaqun. 1271-1272 AD. Deaths heavy for Crusaders. Treaty signed which Arabs don’t honor.

Acre – 1291 AD. Deaths 60,000 Christian civilians massacred. Last Crusader stronghold.

Looks like my links didn't work.

[vorpal blade]

You may have heard of Saladin the Magnificent, who was a well-known and respected Muslim leader during the Crusades (he recaptured Jerusalem, which story is magnificently butchered in Kingdom of Heaven). He was known for his nobility and lenience, although his most brutal act occurred during the Crusades when he personally executed Raynald de Chatillon and ordered the executions of around a hundred Templars who were responsible for attacking Muslim caravans and torturing and murdering them (side note).

Raynald de Chatillon (Reginald of Chatillon) was a controversial character. He definitely was hated by Saladin and probably by most of the other Muslims. I’ve read many different accounts of the beheading of Raynald on July 4, 1187. The histories are very particular and often give the exact words Saladin is supposed to have said on the occasion. The accounts contradict each other.

It seems likely that Raynald did attack Muslim caravans. Raynald had come to the Middle East in the Second Crusade (1147-1149) and stayed, unlike most of the crusaders. He was captured in 1160 on a raiding expedition and spent 17 years in a Muslim prison until an enormous ransom was paid for him. He considered himself the lord of his own domains, and not under any peace agreement of the other Crusaders. He continued to make war on his enemies, raiding caravans.

I doubt that it was the raiding of the caravans that made Saladin hate Raynald. If we go back ten years to the Battle of Montgisard we find that Raynald was the effective commander of the Christian army, since King Baldwin IV was too ill. The Crusaders numbered about 375 knights, including a number of Templars, and a few thousand infantrymen. They faced a Muslim army of about 30,000. The Christians managed to take Saladin by surprise and with the Templars leading the way inflicted a devastating and humiliating defeat on Saladin’s army. Only about a tenth of Saladin’s army survived, and Saladin barely escaped alive on a racing camel. When Saladin got back to Egypt he spread the word that the Christians had lost the battle.

The other great “sin” of Raynald was that he publicly ridiculed Mohammed. Raynald hated Islam. And Raynald dared to lead an expedition against the holiest places to Muslims, Mecca and Medina, after war broke out between Saladin and the Latin Kingdom in 1182. Raynald’s expedition failed, and all were beheaded except Raynald and a handful of men who managed to escape. Later Saladin lay siege to Raynald’s fortress at Kerak, but the frustrated Saladin had to withdraw the siege when Count Raymond III of Tripoli came to the rescue.

I doubt that the Templars had anything to do with the raiding of caravans. The reason they were beheaded on July 6, 1187, after the Battle of Hattin probably had a lot more to do with the fact that they were so important in Saladin’s horrendous loss in the Battle of Montgisard. One account states that Saladin “with uncharacteristic coldbloodedness” ordered the execution of the hundred or so Templar and Hospitaller knights among the prisoners, because their religious “devotion and rigorous training” made them the “most feared” of the Christian soldiers. Ibn a Quauanisi mentions another reason for their execution being "because of the evident hatred they had for Islam."

[vorpal blade]

The dregs of the Byzantine Empire appealed to the Pope for help in preventing the Islamic Empire from acquiring any more land and the decision was made to okay a holy war.

The dregs of the Byzantine Empire...? That seems pretty biased. Actually, it was Alexius Comnenus I, emperor of the Byzantine Empire.

Here is what Will Durant says about Alexius:

When Alexius Comnenus I, nephew of Isaac Comnenus, came to the the throne (1081), the Byzantine Empire seemed near its fall. The Turks had taken Jerusalem (1076), and were advancing through Asia Minor; the Patzinak and Cuman tribes were approaching Constantinople from the north; the Normans were attacking the Byzantine outposts in the Adriatic; the government and the army were crippled with treason, incompetence, corruption, and cowardice. Alexius met the situation with subtlety and courage. He sent agents to foment revolution in Norman Italy; gave Venice commercial privileges in return for the aid of its navy against the Normans; confiscated Church treasures to rebuild his army; took the field in person, and won victories by strategy rather than by blood. Amid these foreign cares he found time to reorganize the government and its defenses, and gave the tottering Empire another century of life. In 1095, in a far-reaching stroke of diplomacy, he appealed to the West to come to the aid of the Christian East; at the Council of Piacenza he offered a reunion of the Greek with the Latin Church in return for unity of Europe against Islam.

Sounds like a worthwhile sort of guy to have as your leader. The dregs?

[Nanti-SARRMM]

Wasn't the first crusade started because Turks/Arabs started taxing people who came to Jerusalem, to which people started spreading rumors and complaining and the Pope decided it would be good opportunity to get wealth and land and the like and thus make it religious and started the whole shebang?

[vorpal blade]

Wasn't the first crusade started because Turks/Arabs started taxing people who came to Jerusalem, to which people started spreading rumors and complaining and the Pope decided it would be good opportunity to get wealth and land and the like and thus make it religious and started the whole shebang?

There were a lot of contributing factors to the cause of the First Crusade. The most immediate reason was the appeal of Alexius I for aid in repelling the advancing Turks, who were Muslims. There was a threat that Europe would soon be overrun with an expanding Muslim empire. Alexius also pointed out that the Turks had recently conquered Jerusalem. The idea soon caught on that Christianity needed saving; and liberating Jerusalem would help do that.

I’ve read that there were many stories of Christian pilgrims who were robbed or killed on their way to Jerusalem. There were instances of Christian churches, such as the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, which were destroyed by the Muslims in 1009. At times the Christians were severely persecuted. I haven’t read of any complaints about starting to tax people. I have read that for a time the Muslims forbade Christians from entering Jerusalem, until the Muslims realized that a significant portion of Jerusalem’s income was from the pilgrim traffic.

I don’t believe the Pope was interested in getting wealth and land. There are some who say that he wanted to stop fighting among Christians, and if he could get them united against a common enemy there would be more peace in Europe. Some say the Pope wanted more military and political power, and the Crusades gave the Pope soldiers somewhat under his control. But land and wealth for the Pope? I don't think so. No doubt some Crusaders saw this as an opportunity to not only do their Christian duty, but get some land and wealth for themselves.

Most of the Crusaders returned to their native lands after Jerusalem was liberated.

[vorpal blade]

The Crusades were a very different situation. It wasn't the building of an empire, it was a holy war condoned by a religious leader who did not hold powers of state. Initially they were also an excuse to give a large and very bored population of armed soldiers something to do.

I’ve read this argument in many places, but it doesn’t hold water. Europe was divided into many kingdoms and each kingdom was almost constantly fighting with its neighbors. All the fighting men were needed at home to defend each kingdom’s borders. In fact, it was frequently necessary to hire mercenaries from other countries temporarily not fighting a war in order to defend a kingdom.

No European king, count, or duke was going to say, “I wonder what I should do with my large and bored army? Perhaps I should send them to the Middle East.” It was very expensive to send an army so far away, and the troops were needed at home. Richard the Lion-Hearted made sure his enemy, King Phillip of France went with him on the Third Crusade so that he wouldn’t have to worry so much about the safety of his kingdom while he was away with the army. Frequently there was good cause to worry. Phillip returned early and began attacking the Normans, which is one reason Richard had to hurry home.

It probably is true that the pope was hoping that a crusade would bring an end to the constant warfare in Europe by giving the Christians a common enemy to fight.

In this regard the pope was not so different from the Muslim Caliph. When Mohammed died in 632 his followers broke into various splinter factions. The Arab tribes were not united and began to fight with one another. Abu Bakr became the first Caliph. To reunite the Arabs he sent out his trusted general Khalid ibn al-Walid. Khalid succeeded in short order to defeat the rebels and apostates. At this point Abu Bakr was looking at “a large and very bored population of armed soldiers” who needed something to do. So he sent them out to expand the empire. He gave them a common enemy. It became necessary to continually expand.

[vorpal blade]

I've done plenty of reading from a wide variety of historical sources, and habiba's version was pretty fair. What, specifically, do you take issue with?

By the way, Saladin is pretty awesome in Civilization 4:

I can't seem to get the picture thing to work. Well here is a link to a painting of Saladin, the Magnificent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BNF,_ ... io_399.jpg

And another of the consequences of war.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ruslavery.jpg

[vorpal blade]

I received this today from a friend. Enjoy.

Are you a Democrat, a Republican or a Texan?






Here is a little test that will help you decide.
The answer can be found by posing the following question:
You're walking down a deserted street with your wife
and two small children.
Suddenly, an Islamic Terrorist with a huge knife
comes around the corner , locks eyes with you,
screams obscenities, praises Allah, raises the
knife, and charges at you.
You are carrying a Colt 1911 cal. 45 semiautomatic pistol, and you are an expert shot.
You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family.
What
do you do?
...................................................
THINK CAREFULLY AND THEN SCROLL DOWN:
Democrat's Answer :
Well, that's not enough information to answer the question!
Does the man look poor or oppressed?
Have I ever done anything to him that would inspire him to attack?
Could we run away?
What does my wife think?
What about the kids?
Could I possibly swing the gun like a club and knock the knife out of his hand?
What does the law say about this situation?
Does the Colt have appropriate safety built into it?
Why am I carrying a loaded gun anyway, and what kind of message does this send to society and to my children?
Is it possible he'd be happy with just killing me? Does he definitely want to kill me, or would he be content just to wound me?
If I were to grab his knees and hold on, could my
family get away while he was stabbing me?
Should I call 9-1-1?
Why is this street so deserted?
We need to raise taxes, have paint and weed day and make this happier, healthier street that would discourage such behavior.
This is all so confusing! I need to debate this with some friends for few days and try to come to a consensus.
...................................................
Republican's Answer:
BANG!
...................................................
Texan's Answer:
BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG!
BANG! Click..... (Sounds of reloading)
BANG! BANG! BA NG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG!
BANG! Click
Daughter: 'Nice grouping, Daddy! Were those the
Winchester Silver Tips or Hollow Points?'
Son: 'Can I shoot the next one!'



Wife: 'You're not taking that to the Taxidermist!