Our dear Deb and Arabian imperialism

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Jun 23, 2010 at 06:15

Now our dear Deb is justifying the absurd -the Muslims did not invade any land whatsoever. They were threatened by the Byzantine and Persian empires from both sides. They just fought the war for survival against these empires and they won , thanks to Allah.

1. Remember our little kuffar rule where is your evidence from historical sources that the Muhajiruun aka Moagaritio (Greek) or Mhgraye (Syriac) later to be known as Arabs (Arabaye or tayyaye in Syriac) and much later as Muslims (the first extant literary source that has the word muslimeen can be dated to 760CE) invaded the civilized Middle East in-order to defeat not just the Greeks but also the Persians?

Let me help you: There is no evidence, none what so ever. The Greeks never had an interest in Arabia and the Persians had no interest in al-Hijaz it was too far and too poor

Oh the bogus Meccan trade? It never existed and do you know why? Why did it just disappear after the Arab invasion in 633CE? and why no one in the Middle East recognized those invading barbarians as the followers of Muhammad as in: "oh those are the Arabs the followers of Muhammad al-tajir (trader) who had chats with Bahira". And if there was really Meccan trade then Mecca would have continued to be a great mecantile center and would have contiued to be the capital of the empire and just imagine the Brits invading India and making Delhi their capital instead of London! but you know what? There was no Mecca and this is why Mu3awiyya selected Damascus as his capital

2. OK so let me see: with both the Persians and the Greeks were defeated long time ago you think that the Arabs and wannabe Arabs in all the countries that were invaded by the Arabs starting in 632CE (oh darn it I must be a Zionist! Oh well) should head back to al-Hijaz? What a great idea but who would want to live in Miserable Mecca when one can live in the civilized Middle East?

3. And let me papaphrase what you wrote: The Crusaders did not invade any land. They were threatened and the holy land was threatened by the Arabs from all directions they fought the war for survival against these barbarians the Arabs but they lost because of the fact that the Arabs wanted to defend their caravan routes that were being raided by the crusaders. Muslims and Arabs that were the vicitms of the crusaders? Your masters the Arabs did not even care but it was all about the loot I guess. Did Allah help them? Allah was taking a nap

You see we do not accept your Islamic ...

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".