Are we Witnessing the Beginning of a Crusade???

Are we are witnessing and experiencing the Crusade and we are looking into the barrel of a Great Big Gun???

To avoid embarrassment, the western historians have named the Crusades like First Crusade, Second Crusade etc but the fact of the matter is that Crusades were continuously inflicted upon the MOSLEMS of Middle East since the past 250 years straight, so writes the famous religious expert and former Nun Karen Armstrong and famous Crusade Scholar Mr. Steven Runciman.

Kings and Leaders of small sheikhdoms in the Gulf and the Kings of the House of Al-Saud likes, which were installed and that are being "black-mailed" by the "White Kings" (for reasons unknown to us), its their time to leave. The moment common Moslems realize that the actual truth behind their "sold-out" leaders, they will get their entrails removed and strangled them with it. These “dead-souls” will then be replaced by Pious, Decent, Respectable, Honest, Sincere, God-fearing men, who would give priority to serving God and people instead of the "White Kings". We must realize the importance and power of OIL which can twist any arm, which can derail any economy of the world and which could easily bring any superpower to its knees, THEY must capture the OIL FIELDS and regain control of their destiny.

So dear people, I am just letting you know that the acquisition of major Arabian Oil installations are being given a top global priority by the western nations, as this is their lifeline. Sorry, I live in a western nation, I agree with this country, and I love its laws, its people and its goodies but do not agree with the Political doctrine and Military Machinations disguised as "Globalization".

Sometimes I wonder why people are not looking at this situation as I see it (which is very obvious and happening like a daylight) There is no Rocket Science involved in it??? Its best for us to remove the "Lids" to get some fresh air or else "we will hang next to each other".

Disclaimer: Anybody who thinks that this above statement of mine has something to do with Jihad or promotion of Jihad is missing a link in the brains. This is just a simple and honest study of events as i see it.

When Pope Benedict orders all true Christians to retake Jerusalem once again, let me know, otherwise there is no Crusade.

As for the West needing all this oil...as Woodrow so often points out, the whole idea is absurd due to the cost of such an endeavor. It simply isn't lucrative for oil companies to focus on the middle east or Arab states. Canada and Venezuela will remain the primary oil producers for North and South America.

I think as soon as we see another violent war of aggressive by Muslims on Europe, we will see another Crusade.

Keltoi said:

When Pope Benedict orders all true Christians to retake Jerusalem once again, let me know, otherwise there is no Crusade.

As for the West needing all this oil...as Woodrow so often points out, the whole idea is absurd due to the cost of such an endeavor. It simply isn't lucrative for oil companies to focus on the middle east or Arab states. Canada and Venezuela will remain the primary oil producers for North and South America.

Click to expand...

i think central asian oil reserves are pretty important and of great interest to US, china and russia. when i say u.s. i mean american corporations who want to control it. (not for use in US).
as for crusades, i certainly hope not, because i would be a target too, as much as a muslim!

snakelegs said:

i think central asian oil reserves are pretty important and of great interest to US, china and russia. when i say u.s. i mean american corporations who want to control it. (not for use in US).
as for crusades, i certainly hope not, because i would be a target too, as much as a muslim!

Click to expand...

That is what I'm talking about. The central asian oil reserves are important, but much more important to Russia and China than the U.S. American oil companies see no profit in central asian oil, it is simply too expensive to refine and transport as opposed to much cheaper sources like Canada, Mexico, and Venezuela.

As for a "Crusade", Muslims attribute every military force gathered by the "West" as a "Crusade". Realistically there is no chance of the Catholic Church endorsing a military campaign in the near future. Obviously things can change, but I don't see it happening anytime in the near future or the distant future.

well, i think the muslims got the idea from bush, who used the word "crusade".
about central asian oil, i think the u.s. oil corps want to control it and sell it to russia and china. oil is power.

Call it a crusade or a war on terrorism or whatever you want, it is a war between Heaven and Hell, good and evil, truth and falsehood, Islam and Christianity.

Talha777 said:

Call it a crusade or a war on terrorism or whatever you want, it is a war between Heaven and Hell, good and evil, truth and falsehood, Islam and Christianity.

Click to expand...

The terrorists the U.S. is fighting are killing Muslims too. The conflict isn't religiously based, most Muslims aren't targets and the western nations involved are secular countries. The Iraq venture wasn't part of a crusade, it was a ham handed attempt to help Muslims in Iraq by bringing democracy and taking down Sadaam. I mean, look at how we're fighting the war, we put our troops at risk to avoid civilian casualties.

do you believe we went to iraq for noble reasons? do you think the u.s. cared about the iraqi people?
it was bush who used the word "crusade" before we invaded afghanistan. so it is little wonder that many muslims see it as such.

snakelegs said:

do you believe we went to iraq for noble reasons? do you think the u.s. cared about the iraqi people?
it was bush who used the word "crusade" before we invaded afghanistan. so it is little wonder that many muslims see it as such.

Click to expand...

Yes, our reasons were entirely noble. If we didn't care about the Iraqi people, we would be building a dictatorship, not a democracy. Bush shouldn't have said "crusade" but he didn't mean it as a revival of the wars against the Muslims. He meant it in the sense of a rightous struggle-against terrorists, not Muslims in general.

Yes, our reasons were entirely noble.

Click to expand...

Whatever the reasons for America's invasions, they are anything but noble. If it was to stop saddam hussein from acquiring nuclear weapons, well than america can leave because saddam is dead and there is no chance of iraq getting nukes, not before iran at least (so america should prepare to invade iran now right?). On the other hand, if america invaded to fight al-qaida and root out terrorism, the experts of the world, non-Muslims included, agree that the war on iraq has increased "terrorism" and hatred for America. And finally, if America invaded to bring democracy or save the kurds and shias from repression, why didn't they also invade North Korea? why didnt they invade china or a multitude of other countries which in a worse state than Iraq? because America would stand no chance? so how are they being noble when they start a war they think they can win, but avoid fighting wars they will lose? that is not nobility, that is shameless opportunism.

I didn't say our nobility was inteligent. But our intentions were good. According to the theory that led us to invade, Iraq would become a democracy and the people of dictatorships (such as Iran) would rise up and overthrow their leaders. And it wasn't supposed to be just Iraq. We were supposed to be done with Iraq in less than a year, and then we would move onto the next country. What this teaches us isn't that the U.S. is evil, but that idealism isn't a sound basis for foreign policy.

August said:

Yes, our reasons were entirely noble. If we didn't care about the Iraqi people, we would be building a dictatorship, not a democracy. Bush shouldn't have said "crusade" but he didn't mean it as a revival of the wars against the Muslims. He meant it in the sense of a rightous struggle-against terrorists, not Muslims in general.

Click to expand...

there was no link between iraq and 9/11. (the excuse for everything).
the iraqis are much worse off now than they were before we delivered anarchy and bush has put our country at much greater risk than it was before. the numbers of people in the world who hate us has increased monumentally.
but if you want to believe that the US cares about the iraqi people, go right ahead....

Greetings and peace be with you August,

I didn't say our nobility was inteligent. But our intentions were good.

Click to expand...

I find this truly worrying and disturbing, as long as the intentions are good a country can invade another. So the only thing that seems to separate Bush invading Iraq and Hitler invading Poland are the intentions behind the action.

And it wasn't supposed to be just Iraq. We were supposed to be done with Iraq in less than a year, and then we would move onto the next country.

Click to expand...

Hitler thought along those lines too.

In the spirit of praying for peace on Earth

Eric

Keltoi said:

When Pope Benedict orders all true Christians to retake Jerusalem once again, let me know, otherwise there is no Crusade.

Click to expand...

To re-take Jerusalem from the Jews?

Talha777 said:

Call it a crusade or a war on terrorism or whatever you want, it is a war between Heaven and Hell, good and evil, truth and falsehood, Islam and Christianity.

Click to expand...

Yes i agree with you. Osama ben Laden is obviously on the right side.

north_malaysian said:

To re-take Jerusalem from the Jews?

Click to expand...

I was being sarcastic. My point is that many Muslims seem to be a little confused as to what the goal of the historical Crusades were. It was not a military campaign based on killing Muslims, it was based on "reclaiming" the Holy Land. The Turks and the other Arab kingdoms were the enemies of that goal. I'm not suggesting the Crusades were a good thing or based on sound religious doctrine. No doubt they were a brutal and merciless affair, but the motivation wasn't some blind hatred of Muslims, as Karen Armstrong attempts to claim repeatedly.

Eric H said:

Greetings and peace be with you August,



I find this truly worrying and disturbing, as long as the intentions are good a country can invade another. So the only thing that seems to separate Bush invading Iraq and Hitler invading Poland are the intentions behind the action.



Hitler thought along those lines too.

In the spirit of praying for peace on Earth

Eric

Click to expand...

Hitler was concerned with adding territory to the German Reich, but your point is well taken. Sometimes the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Keltoi said:

Sometimes the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Click to expand...

Exactly. Our intentions aren't the problem, the wisdom of the strategy is.

Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan and soon to follow Iran, Syria, Turkey