The Arab-Byzantine wars

Feels oddly familiar.

Your shithole country has been conquered by both the Germans and the Russians several times over, your people are subhuman garbage and are only allowed to exist because you're useful tools of ZOG.

Cuck yourself some more poland.
Enjoy the filter.

The Greeks will vehemently deny it, but the rise of Islam was mostly the Byzantine empire's fault

Rome was in such a shitty tactical position that they moved the capital several times in late antiquity, precisely because Rome itself was regarded as incredibly difficult to defend, whereas Constantinople was one of the best defended cities in the world.

If you only have read about the 400 yeara non-stop wars between Byzantium and Persia, you would know exactly why and how the Arabs managed to do what they did.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine–Sasanian_wars

The last one was particularly a massacre to both sides, and this war represents the end of Classical Antiquity, the demise of the Aryan world (until the rise of Europe later) and a return to Semitism in the Middle East and North Africa.

How?

If you're the same BR that claimed he was white then you have actually started to make me believe you.

There are VPN shills here for a long time now.
Not me, I rarely post here on Zig Forums
There are many whites in Brazil, mostly in the Southern regions, where most are Italians (Northern Italians, not the Southern ones the USA got) and Germans. But racemixing has gone rogue here for centuries and anyone with a pre-20th immigration background is mixed, no matter how light featured such person is.
The official figures for Brazil's white population is about ~45%, but it's much closer to ~20% or less. There are many fake whites.

Other than reproducing like roaches, not really. Byzantium wasn't anywhere near as pozzed as the post-(((renaissance))) West.

Try harder, mehmet.

If she showed strength difference we would look even more pathetic I'm afraid. See Battle of Yarmouk

Do you have some kind of Stockholm Syndrome with Germany? You were their bitch in WW2 and still are.

>says a chump who fought for the (((allies)))

In WWII Hitler had no choice to invade because Italians fucked up and the British were intentionally sending troops to Greece to get his attention. They did nothing wrong.
Commie politicians being given orders by Israel to intentionally fuck our economy doesn't count as "us".

Trusting Catholics. Popery not even once.

Better than serving amerimutts.

Once again the anti-white spergkike ruining the thread.

The Byzantine empire failed due to:
- increasingly bad and inept leadership
- constant strife among christians (((allies)))
- the failure of the fourth crusade, which ends up costing the byzantines a lot of finance & manpower.

To be honest, most of it can be attributed to christian in the west who simply refuse to help the orthodox (what help was minimal and mostly volunteers).
And then later on with the Crimean war where western european again side with the fucking turks against orthodox russians.

Constantinople/Istanbul remains forever a sign of how cucked european are in the threat of foreign aggression.

...

So saying fact is being anti-white now?

Why can't you say WHITE correctly, yid? Are you scared of that?

You will never be white, spergook

I'm not white, I'm a vietnamese.

To

It's an actual mystery how Egypt fell, especially Alexandria. The city had tall ramparts, supplies, a fortress networks and as a major port it could be resupplied infinitely as the byzantine had full control of the sea, the muslims had jack and shit as mean to breach it.
Yet it fell without fighting as the governor just apparently decided to yield the city to the muslims (which quickly executed him and everyone else important) in what could only have been either the worst tactical decision in the history of mankind, a miracle (Muslim official account) or some sort of inside job.

Definitely sound like inside job.

I need to look into this.

And you are nogun too. Reported.

Holy fuck it is true.

This remains me of the capitulation of Jerusalem in the 1st Crusade, in a similar manner.

At this point, I'm not surprised anymore with the treacherous (((officials))).

gschweiggä di oida

(((geographical proximity)))

Oh no doubt we sucked the shit out of America's asshole, but if you tried to make me come up with a better foreign policy or defense strategy I would be hard-pressed.

Funny talking about the truth gets you called anti-european.

Tell me, yid, how am I anti-european?

Oh wait, reported and filtered.

How about self-reliance and making Austrialia into a regional naval power that can help out Japan and SEA in a pinch?

How about recognizing the obvious attempt of chinkification going right now with the chinks migrating en masse and building off land.

There is much to do in Australia.

Thanks to a series of incompetent and/or corrupt Patriarchs, Egypt and Syria both had a huge population of increasingly-angry heretics during Mohammed's day. Mohammed saw this and deliberately designed Islam to appeal to said heretics, allowing the Caliphate to convert its way across much of Egypt and giving them a substantial army of mostly Egyptian converts for when they finally encountered serious resistance. Alexandria seems to have been conquered by discretely converting a few inside men and getting them to persuade the governor into surrendering (probably through promises that they'd settle for a bit of ransom and booty like civilized people, or that they'd spare him if he promised to convert).

To be honest the best defense strategy would be to partner with us and go full naval dominance of the south pacific. I would actually like to see kiwi and aussie sailors sinking migrant boats on live TV.

We have the same problem here and to be honest the problem is so fucking easy to solve but it will never happen since it would sink the housing market which is currently in a massive bubble because of all the Chinese buying land. How you solve the problem is by taking a page out of the economic theories of Henry George and switching all tax to land value tax, and charging foreign land owners extra.

wew

I'm not mad, it's just the truth m8.

Attached: 9d431f7046528907e8182c89c65e1ba197178bdee81a3ce7377068aaf87d0d56.png (600x900, 522.9K)

...

Nigger, I'm behind a fucking VPN.

It's fucking disgusting.

Fuck off fake krauts. The pole is prolly a turk, but no one wants fucking D&C here.

Attached: ^^.gif (320x240, 1.33M)

Reported and filtered for off-topic.

Fuck off yid.

Stay triggered cuckboy.

Attached: 06f6bbfc7502ed97473b63aed02760a3aa193433624b3b3d9de7e8b550c289d2.png (314x346, 45.79K)

...

In the thread, alone there are plenty of fake krauts i.e. kikes under German VPN.

They think the german VPN somehow hides their kikery.

See

When your mother gave birth to you, you cock-sucking faggot. Stop making these shitty threads.

Attached: op and his feisty dolphin.gif (259x176, 1.19M)

Attached: 4a6.png (994x738, 695.44K)

Haven't watched JoJo once but still got that reference.

Yeah, how about you fuck off, cretin.

t. kike

Attached: Screenshot_20190123-083626_Chrome.jpg (1080x2220, 576.17K)

So I meant the OTHER fake kraut that literally admitted he's in VPN.

Your IP resetted again, cretin.

Ignorier den einfach.

Watch it, it is manly and they are all my body goals

Attached: D74433F2-6759-4142-8B54-2B80F093BB24.png (1000x640, 614.86K)

Everything. The Byzies were always the sacrificial lions when warfare changed.
The Arab armies were like nothing either the Byzies or the Sassanids had ever seen. Large, extremely organized and mobile armies led by extremely competent generals and dominated by cavalry, consistently dabbed on the even larger, but far more clunkier infantry dominated Sassanid and Byzantine armies in the pitched battles that they always got tricked on falling into.
Yes, both empires were exhausted attacking each other like dogs, but they still had the resources to fight.
Another, often overlooked, factor is the fact that the semitic populations in Mesopotamia, the Levant and Egypt had gotten tired of the constant Roman-Sassanid shitflinging and corruption and were eager to change sides on a whim.

Attached: Ράντι Πιρούνι.PNG (625x632, 657.13K)

Turkophile traitor detected.

You either learn from your own mistakes, or waddle in the shitpile caused by them for centuries.
This is the issue with this shithole, no one ever wants to learn from them. You can only call people who accept this reality buzzwords. Shitdog.

Keep crying, Ahmud.

Dude, he's right. Byzantium failed to adapt when the durkas arrived and caused an out-of-context problem. Such problems are the cause of death of many or most empires and nations, sad to say, mostly because they fail to see they cannot deal with the situation the way they did every other issue.

Oh you mean exactly like the parthians which lost their capital to the Romans three times over?

Get off your greek proxy, abdul.

The greeks honestly did pretty good against the arabs. It was the mongols and subsequently the turks that got them; and that's mainly do to having a bad ruler who couldn't pay for the crusades he was ordering.

At best, it was a bunch of clients opportunistically moving into a power vacuum, at worst it's historical fiction created hundreds of years after the fact.

ARABIA WORLD 1 POWER 2022 TURAN!!!!!!

Attached: Turkposters.png (800x600, 65.73K)

We fucked the Arabs in the ass in the end

Cavalry is neat, but means shit in actual medieval combat if your overall strategies and tactics are terrible. See the Battle of Agincourt.
Europeans commonly employed armies dominated by Infantry to beat the shit out of Arabs and Muslims and in the end of that the entire Muslim world became nothing but parts of European Colonies.
The actual problem of Muslim armies in medieval times was that they were basically moving chimpouts, the vanguard of their armies was always several bands of slave hunters and looters. To beat them they basically had to find a way of dealing with scorched earth policy.

Arabian cavalries were nothing special, 10K strong crusader knights regular beat them, in their own fucking game.

The problem, as always, is in-fighting and disorganizational.

The arabs squabbled among themselves until they united Saladin, there was no such figure for the crusaders and byzantines.

Richard the Lionheart COULD have been if he didn't play politics and ends up fighting other europeans in the Holy land.

...

???

Have you listened to the history of Byzantium podcast, OP? I recommend that you do if you're interested in this time-period.

Basically the size of the Byzantine empire at the end of the war against the sassanids occludes what shitty position they actually were in. A few key points that people commonly misunderstand explain why the arabs could snatch so much area in just a half century:

Many people look at historical maps like the one in the OP and assume that the countries or empires that they're looking at are homogenous and unitary states when they were in effect loose federations of different peoples with different economic, cultural, and geographic dispositions. One of the key reasons Constantine pushed christianity as hard as he did was that it was basically the only unifying force he saw that the entire empire could have in common.

Many people see the dissolution of the Western empire in terms of a foreign conquest by migrating barbarian tribes, which the state, as well as the people, struggled against up until the very end. In reality many regions welcomed the invaders because the increasingly centralised Roman state kept levying higher and higher taxes while at the same time failing to uphold their obligations toward the periphery of the empire. Not only were they failing to defend the borders in a military sense, they were also neglecting local administration; being a local town leader was basically a dead-end career by the 5th century. In effect, the social contract was broken and the invaders offered better deals.

The same thing happened in the East, especially after the fall of the West. The economic burden of the empire increasingly fell on the cities of the levant and Egypt. Greece and Anatolia were basically flyover states at this point, and while Constantinople was the largest city in the Western hemisphere, most of its population was dependent on the grain and wine dole coming in from Alexandria.

This bred discontent in the populations actually forced to pay the brunt of imperial taxes, it didn't help that they were also the most heavily populated areas outside Constantinople as well and therefore had to supply most of the recruits for the army and navy.

Come the last Sassanian war, the East Roman social contract was broken. The levant and parts of Egypt came under sassanian rule for a whole generation. Heraclius (the emperor at the time) was obliged to have the church melt down their precious metal decorations in order to fund one last army which just barely managed to kick out the sassanids after twenty years of continous campaigning.

A consequence of this is that an entire generation had grown up in the levant used to a different government than the roman state, and didn't really take kindly to when the romans came Rolling back in and started to demand the same taxes as they had received half a century earlier.

>Arabs not assimilating conquered populations
This played an immense role when the Arabs came ten years later. After the Yarmouk, most towns in the levant basically opened their gates to them. The opinion at the time varied from "they're just desert raiders and the roman army will soon be here and kick them out again" to "fuck the romans".

The arab state (if it can even be called that) was much more decentralized than the roman counterpart, and they barely interfered in the day to day business of conquered areas. They even kept to themselves and housed their soldiers and imported populations in newly created garrison towns outside the main settlements, so the conquered peoples didn't even see their conquerors.

In the beginning the arabs didn't even force conversions or apply jizya, they. instead allowed most people to keep being christians. There are moderns scholars who argue that Islam at this point wasn't even formed as a coherent religion, and rather just a branch of Judeo-Christianity.

This initial reluctance to interfere greatly increased local acceptance of the new regime and allowed the arab armies to focus on keeping the rape train going rather than put down brewing revolts.

The common idea of the Romans at war is the disciplined legion advancing with shields locked and methodically stabbing at everything in front of them until the battle was done. By the end of the 5th century (and especially after Attilla) this strategy and focus on infantry as the main battle line had mostly disappeared. Instead the army was focused around a core of veteran horsemen with the line being held by levied militia, with barbarian auxiliaries making up the difference in times of need. The romans didn't have the population to support the attritional warfare of high antiquity nor the money to support standing armies. As such, the loss of a single army was a much harder blow to the state than it had once been (they lost three legions in the Teutoburg forest without even flinching but suffered a total collapse after a single army was lost at the yarmouk). This operational weakness was evident even before the wars against the arabs began, as enemies the romans had earlier kicked around without much trouble suddenly became very dangerous, see the Sassanids and the Lombards.

Finally, adding to this general weakness of the armies was the inherited trouble of Italy that the emperors of the 7th century had to deal with. Justinian had reconquered large parts of the peninsula in the 6th century for the only reason that it looked cool on the map. But just as when they later came rolling back in the levant, most of the "liberated" population weren't too keen on being back under the heavily taxed roman yoke. Add to this that they never really cleared Italy out of ostrogoths and Lombards and as such were forced into a low-intensity conflict that raged constantly. The weakened army was therefore forced to garrison territories of dubious economic value over in Italy, while the few people left in the East were getting completely stomped by first the Sassanids, and then by the Arabs.

Just as the size of the empire is misleading about its economic and military prowess, it is also misleading about its population. As mentioned, most of Greece and Anatolia was flyover country at this time, and most of the population either lived in Constantinople or the cities of the levant. The Balkans were basically dead territory after the migration period with packs of feral slavs raping and killing Everything in sight.

The general population made a slight recovery after the fall of the Western empire, but most of this was erased either by Justinians wars, or by the justinian plague which beset the empire continously during the middle of the 6th century. Constantinople lost almost half of its population, and one can assume that the number was about the same in the other great cities of the empire. This weakened population then had to contend with the continous wars that both Justinian and his successors were forced into, mainly against the people of Italy and the Sassanids.

At the end of the last great war the empire was exhausted militarily, economically and demographically. There was no faith in the state, there was no money to pay for the state, and there were no soldiers to defend the state. This is why the arabs had such an easy time taking half the empire.

Wrote this on my shitty old Surface 2 so apologizing for any weird spellings or sentences. But hope it answers your question, OP.

Thanks for this, with this kind of situation, it's amazing that Constantinople stood until 1453.

The fact it's lost is still a shame nonetheless.

You probably meant the Eastern Rome. Oh well, went full circle like the Western one did, then switched religion to boot.

Thank you very much for your very detailed and accurate response. Great Swedish education.

I'll provide tl;dr just in case
As I recall, early Muslims were very light on taxes, especially for converts, so double profit.

hello history-forgery jewpig

Byzantium was a joke, nothing but shitskins LARPing as romans

This channel does a nice job going into the details and politics involved with the time period, telling you WHY things (likely) happened the way they did.

The 4th crusade went full retard

This Varangians knows his shit. Both described weakness, that he forgot to mention are strongly correlated, still reflect on Modern Greece' military and demographics. For example, today the countryside is full of slavic toponyms, villages of albanophone ancestry and "Vlach" practically translates to "redneck". Only islands kept pure Greek population (with the exception of Cyprus, Crete, Euboea and a lesser extent Rhodes, primarily due to their size, due to continental Balkanians' lack of maritime culture and the islands' innermost being in close proximity to the sea and the urban centers formed around ports. I'll have to point out though that Greeks were largely urbanized long before Byzantium and well into the pre-Classical City-States' era during which the countryside was full of pre-Hellenic autochthones and pre-Doric Peloponnesian powerhouses (Mycenae, Achaia, Messene, Arcadia) had become largely irrelevant due to their decentralization leaving only Sparta, Corinth and Argos on the historical scene. Also note Macedonia's and Hepirus' relative irrelevance all the way up to the later classical era due to their decentralized non-urban demographics. Throughout its history the Greek mainland was a huge gap between cities, bays and intresspassable mountaintops.

That was actually the case all the way up to late Ottoman Empire times, even if it was more sporadic. That's how Murka got cucked into denying their God with the Treaty of Tripoli.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_slave_trade

HAPAS ARE SUPERIOR TO WHITES