Jiggerj, I'd say you might have a point if I saw some sort of a glorious united Jihad of muslims united under the same banner, though throughout history, muslims fought eachother more than they did non-muslims.
And fits of conquest that have been successfully done against non-muslims in the past are limited to a number of dynasties in muslim history.
These are the Rashidun Caliphate, who have successfully managed to spread their influence to Egypt and the Levant, the Umayyads, who have ventured as far as central asia and Spain, the Seljuks who have crushed the Byzantines and opened the gates of Anatolia to the Turkish hordes, the Ghaznavids who have pillaged India, the Ottomans, who have ventured as far as Vienna with their armies, and the Mughals who conquered India for good.
Some or multiple of these have always been in competition with eachother, lacking unity. If they had unity, they would have been able to do much more, perhaps, but as you see, there are ethnolinguistical differences amongst muslims.
And to be honest, in regards to what you've written above, none of these glorious dynasties committed wholesome genocide against their conquered non-muslim subjects, not even in India, where the Hindus were considered to be "mushrik" or pagans, instead being subject to the same jizyah as the the christians and jews were. I think you're being too...dramatic about the issue.
Worry about the arabs? Bah, the fools who cannot defeat a small jew state in Palestine? Worry about Iran? Good with the pen, but weak with the sword. But my good man, worry yourself about us Turks should we ever unite.
But you worry yourself about a number of muslim negroes in Africa and some rag-head tajiks in Afghanistan.
I'd say you're a fool, you really look to the wrong people for an enemy.
And fits of conquest that have been successfully done against non-muslims in the past are limited to a number of dynasties in muslim history.
These are the Rashidun Caliphate, who have successfully managed to spread their influence to Egypt and the Levant, the Umayyads, who have ventured as far as central asia and Spain, the Seljuks who have crushed the Byzantines and opened the gates of Anatolia to the Turkish hordes, the Ghaznavids who have pillaged India, the Ottomans, who have ventured as far as Vienna with their armies, and the Mughals who conquered India for good.
Some or multiple of these have always been in competition with eachother, lacking unity. If they had unity, they would have been able to do much more, perhaps, but as you see, there are ethnolinguistical differences amongst muslims.
And to be honest, in regards to what you've written above, none of these glorious dynasties committed wholesome genocide against their conquered non-muslim subjects, not even in India, where the Hindus were considered to be "mushrik" or pagans, instead being subject to the same jizyah as the the christians and jews were. I think you're being too...dramatic about the issue.
Worry about the arabs? Bah, the fools who cannot defeat a small jew state in Palestine? Worry about Iran? Good with the pen, but weak with the sword. But my good man, worry yourself about us Turks should we ever unite.
But you worry yourself about a number of muslim negroes in Africa and some rag-head tajiks in Afghanistan.
I'd say you're a fool, you really look to the wrong people for an enemy.
![[Image: trkdevletbayraklar.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=i128.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fp161%2Fazmhyr%2Ftrkdevletbayraklar.jpg)
Üze Tengri basmasar, asra Yir telinmeser, Türük bodun ilingin törüngin kim artatı udaçı erti?
