Quote:
Originally Posted by bradclark1
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Avon Lady
The Crusades were not about proselytization. And while America has always been a Christian dominated nation, it's promotion of values are and were for the most part Universal and not theological in nature. At least this is what I understood from this book review and what I've always understood about American history.
|
And in todays radical islam the crusades means to force them to change religion.
We have a military force in the middle east.
To me Oren's take on the middle east in that article is that Bush sent us to
change the middle east to our way of thinking. In that context that would be like the middle east coming to the U.S. to force a conversion over to islam. Our reactin would be obvious.
At least thats my take on this anyway.
|
No. You've missed the point. America thinks that the ideas of freedom and democracy are universal in nature and do not contradict Islam in essence. America is not attempting to sway Islamic countries to become Christian. America is in vain trying to convince Islamic countries that they can be freedom loving without contradicting their religion. The American government is extremly naive and dangerously so.
Your definition of the Crusades is historically accurate and reflects what I said about the goal of the crusades not to be the proselytization of non-Christians but rather a clergy-sanctioned military reconquest of lands previously under Christian sway and rule, which were overrun by Islamists.