Bush called the War on Terror a crusade.
1 Like
I mean, Jesus died over a thousand years ago but people still care about that.
naw fam statute of limitations for miracles is like 500 yrs, who cares abt jesus anymore? just some fanboys who hang on
I think it was meant in the context that people today still hold strong feelings regarding the geopolitics of the Crusades. Whereas the historical context surrounding the 1st century and the Crucifixion are secondary to the spiritual message.
Then why do they say CRUSADES if theyâre talking about The War on Terror? 
Thatâs not what they mean and you know it.
Jesus did do a lot more than just that.
I dare you to repeat that comment with the central figure of any other religion, but I know your bigotry and cowardice wonât allow it.
Youâre not wrong. How quickly the WoW forums turn into r/atheism smh
1 Like
If weâre gonna start talking about the crusades in history, I will go out on a limb here and say they werenât quite as horrible as some people now view them as. Sure, they were an ill-advised and disastrous attempt to recolonize the Middle East. However, they were done in response to aggression from the Ottoman Empire to keep them from being able to claim land in western Europe any further. It was a pretty ordinary war driven far more by politics than religion, with religion being the set-dressing more than anything.
Not to say the crusaders were good. Far from it, they were a (ahem)show that resulted in tons of unnecessary deaths on both sides. They just werenât quite as cartoonishly evil as modern revisionism would have you believe.
1 Like
There was also the persecution of Christians in the Holy Land by Muslims at the time and bad blood between Christians and Muslims over the prior Byzantine - Seljuk war, which the Islamic Seljuk Empire started unprovoked.
But thank you for a fairer assessment; was getting tired of explaining âThe Crusades were retaliation for the Byzantine-Seljuk war and persecution in the Holy Land. Muslims pushed, Christians pushed back.â
Trivia; accounts of locals during the end of the First Crusade reported the bloodbath victory and kinda damned them with faint praise by saying that, unlike other armies of the time, at least the Crusaders didnât r-word anyone.
Paladins of modern fantasy are largely derived from positive accounts and ideas of the Crusaders, particularly the Knights Templar (lots of interesting history there once you weed out the conspiracy theories and fearmongering about them). Despite what certain know-it-all-know-nothing ideologues and modern fiction would have you believe, the Crusaders werenât all bloodthirsty or zealots. And ones like Turalyon embody that particularly.
According to some, but the point being age doesnât preclude interest or care about something.
More than some.
Not just age. Itâs also other things like attacking people still alive for the actions of those long dead; the âcollective guiltâ nonsense. If we applied the same standard to Islam over the Armenian Genocide or 9/11 or atheism over Soviet Russia or the Cristero War (theyâre all still in living memory)âŚ
Reminds me of one thing I like about WoWâs story lately. Historical grievances are acknowledged, but theyâre not the be-all-and-end-all.
canât have a conversation about the light without a healthy dose of christian victim mentality to really round out the conversation and ensure itâs productive.
No more than a conversation about the Light without atheist victim mentality, projection, trolling and hypocrisy.
No, some is an unspecified amount. So some is accurate.
That doesnât really relate to the comment you responded to.
People still do blame Islam for that, lol.
Part of the reason for it.
Difference in teachings. Plus some people who played a part in 9/11 are still alive (wasnât just Bin Laden and the hijackers).
None of this changes the fact that characters like Turalyon are based on accounts of some of the good Crusaders (yes, they existed, Ridley Scottâs movie was historically 
). Hopefully Blizzard wonât ruin his character. I donât fully trust the writers yet, but TWW has given me a glimmer of hope.
wait, to be clear⌠is it a matter of contention whether thereâs still animosity over 9/11??
Kingdom of Heaven where the like three main characters are good crusaders?
Suppose anything can be contended. Doesnât feel like long ago some politician tried to ban Muslims from the United States.
I would agree, except all the other Crusaders - especially historical ones - get demonized while the figures on the other side - historical or otherwise - get whitewashed.
Wasnât it just foreign-born Muslims, not all Muslims? Stupid as that position was, thereâs a difference between what he said and what you say he said.
There is a religion the mediaâs trying to demonize and pathologize, and itâs not Islam (though Judaism gets a raw deal too whenever the latest Israel-Palestine war crops up).
All the others? You mean two characters that get defeated and are depicted as antagonists?
I didnât say all Muslims. But point being obviously Islam still gets flack for 9/11 since it was specifically cited in said ban.
Iâd point out there were good Muslims and Christianâs during the crusades. But you know, people wonât ever be ready for that conversation
1 Like
/10_chairs
Standout examples of what I said are the filmâs negative treatment of the Catholic Patriarch of Jerusalem, Guy de Lusignan and the Knights Templar.
Everybody gets flack for something, some more than others.
When my fellow Christians and I get flack for something that happened over 600 years before any of us were born, itâs not easy to sympathize with getting flack for something that happened a mere 23 years ago.
I agree with this comment.
1 Like