RHF wrote:
MII,

A few "Selective Quotes" do not make the 'truth'.



The Crusaders may have done MORE to help Islam advance than they did to
stop it. The Byzantyne Empire was the first bulwark against invasion.
Attacks from the north did a lot to weaken it against the forces in the
south.

Later on, it was the Ottoman Turks that did the greatest amount of
expansion. Political outlook and ethnic attitudes usually play a bigger
role in a Nation's actions than it's mainstream religion. The Turks
weren't expanding because of Islam. They were expanding because they
Imperialistic pricks. Much like some other countries you may be an
occupant of.

The fighting in the old Yugoslavia is most likely due to more to the
opinion that the Serbs have of themselves than any wish of the Moslems
to expand. Anyone who names their chidren Ratko (Warrior) is suspect.

At the outbreak of the hostilities, the Serbs had all the guns. The
'West' stopped the Moslems from arming themselves via embargoes and thus
became as easy to shoot as fish in a barrel. Serbs have been a
difficulty for centuries. The Archduke's assasination was just another
action by them.

Please check slides 2 and 30
http://www.humanities.ualberta.ca/hi...an8/sld001.htm


From one of your own sources:

If anything is open to interpretation there is bound to be disagreement.
I stand by my own outlook that the crusaders were basically *******s who
were there for the plunder. I don't think we are going to change each
other's outlooks, so please excuse me if I beg off from more examination
of the topic..If we don't we'll soon be fighting over what the
definition of 'is' is..


mike