Comments by "AileDiablo" (@ailediablo79) on "Whatifalthist"
channel.
-
There is few micro stuff wrong here.
200 yrs ago the world population where not 90% or anything like that poor. In Mughal Empire Sultanate a big majority group of the population for each individual has their own weight in gold. Also there was a welfare system too. China and Gunpowder Empires where crazy rich. West Africa was rich too. Native American Empires where rich too. That is where majority of the world population lived. Up to 1750s Ottoman Empire Sultanate was on top in everything and China had largest and most powerful navy mankind had ever seen (in terms of size it is the largest overall in all of history). The thing that changed things is the steam engine idea. The population of Africa outside the north, west and north east is very tiny unlike today.
UK got veeeery extremely lucky with India colonization. If it wasn't for collapse of Mughal Empire Sultanate (it was there for 800ish yrs , it just reached it is end of life span and had 50% of their leaders bad) it would impossible even with WW1 technology for UK alone and very difficult and not worth it even if all of Europe planed together due to the population size + army and police size, land size, many different geographies , strong centralization, money and welth and resources they had. Mughal Empire lecturely had a bigger army with advance technology and equipment plus other stuff bigger than the entire population of the UK islands few times over. They could also if necessary make it even bigger. The military technology of the equipment wasn't that much behind on average the UK. The thing uk had was silty better gunpowder and muskets. The Indian and Ottoman canons and other siege equipment where much better than even Germany at the same time. They had tone of elephants which is a game changer in the way they used them for logistics, carring, as tanks and builders.
The one that give the final hit on Ottoman Empire in Mediterranean is Napoleon Bonaparte destroying Ottoman navy and mainland Egypt due to him being Napoleon.
In Ottoman Empire even before WW1 and especially befor 1908 people where living better lives than majority average population did in London.
Muslims and Women in general where nontaxable - untaxable. Monopolies and interest/usury where prohibited + bank power very limited + you get Zakat money when necessary. Very little poor people and they get hlep. You had there too free healthcare for anyone on Ottoman soul.
Ottoman Empire just got too tired from being fighting everyone around it: Russia, Europe and Iran for 400+ yrs around the clock. 3 fronts + competing with Spain and Portugal in Indian Ocean too. UK and Ottoman empire where very frindly up until around Napoleon Bonaparte times. Other thing Ottoman Empire trusted it is so called Ailes too much.
If it wasn't for 1908 and joing ww1 Ottoman Empire would have been as powerful if not more powerful than Japan + haveing non of Japan weaknesses/disadvantages in a very geopolitical strategic location + haveing most of the world oile and gas + having influence over Muslim world. Even with 1908 mistake and joing the losing side of WW1 if it wasn't for stupid and naive Arab revolut in 1916 Ottoman would have continued - it is impossible to invade with WW1 technology without internal support ie arab revolut. Although joing ww1, Aramain genocide and Arab + Turk nationalism would be impossible if it wasn't for 1908. Ottoman Empire was only 50 yrs late to industrial thing due it takes time to implement.
Mughal Empire is so big and powerful that it was more productive than industrial Europe, without being industrial. India what made UK.
Capitalism is not the blame to so called 3 world poverty and problems but colonialism and neo-colonialism of NATO and CIA. Also because of over dose of capitalist extremism and extreme exploitation and craziness what caused those things. Basically mis use of capitalism ,racism + stupid supremacy and greed what caused things. Neo-colonialism is real thing. France for example 85% of it is economy depends on exploitation of western Africa. It is all about CIA , cold war and colonialism.
Do u know that Ottoman Empire Sultanate could have would taking Spain and Portugal in just 10 yrs or so campaign in 16th or even 17th (especially during Solomon the magnificent period) century, but they didn't due 2 reasons: too expensive and money wise not going to make money + Morocco would have alot of Muslims die. Ottoman Empire could have took Venice intead of Vienna. Also they would took Vienna and half of Germany if it wasn't for Persia. Also all of that they didn't use their armies in Anatolia and Egypt which would have added at lest 400k soldiers to their 200k ish main professional army in Balkans. Mamluks had a very skilled professional force of 220k in Egypt of their own you may add (Which Napoleon Bonaparte destroyed).
26
-
Just 2 notes: 1) threekingdoms China or Qin is a big ones too
2) despite how much weaker Byzantium and Prussia got after their 9.9 yrs war and from other wars before it they still where at the time more powerful each than China or India oftge time. Also, they still superpowers. Plus despite whatever you say and everything logically speaking on paper it would still be absolutely impossible for the Muslim Arabs to defeat even 1 of them. But they fought both and generally except for first year at the sametime against a collection. For record only First Caliphate and USA that in history managed to fight 2 front wars at the same time. If you count Qin will they where really good and proven and experienced before it. Same with USA it had many advantages that where too much. But the Muslims where in magnificent significant severe in many disadvantages. Not only having no knowledge or experience of full scale wars but severally out numbered 3-5 times on average by each side with much similar population, less money and less resources. Most of their resources cane from constantly winning battles. Someone like Khalid wasn't trained in tactics nor had any books or people to teach himself. Just came out of the blue.
The Arabs had few advantages: the enemy can not attack them back at the desert and they have capability to keep attacking for ever campaign after the other. But it worked from first try. But that same advantage combined with distance from good areas and capital it is a disadvantage too. Which makes the war if longer just more bloody not more than that and longer. But eventually they would win but not first try or that much and even conquer all of Persia and do what the full Roman Empire could not do. Also do not forget Afghanistan and Zergose mountains in between Mesopotamia and Iran. They had too pour managment skills as well as no much food and money for first 3/4 of the Campaign length. Even manytimes run out of water. The army was consistently hungry for most of the time. There is no line of supplys. Also the distance and desert forces them to not be able to send the numbers they could otherwise too.
The their situation was crazy as.
Despite all odds stacked against them. They win strongly and done the impossible manytimes over. Also, remained in control for a long time and the ideology stayed to today. Unlike other conquest.
All this done by people whom almost nobodys.
Thus, the weaker state they where in Byzantium and Prussia doesn't matter and doesn't take credits from Arabs nor explains why they succeeded. Although, it is one of many other reasons.
Also Tang China is equal or a bit less powerful and rich than first 50 yrs or half of the 8th century Abasised of Baghdad.
China and middle east for all human history except for 18th century and onwards the most rich and powerful in the world. India can be the same but it is usually not one nation. It happened only 3 times their history for prefer time. It only really united was under Deile Sultanate and Mughal Empire Sultanate. Mughal for 400 yrs where the most powerful in the world and richest.
Both whom are turks/Mongoliaic muslim ishy (due to doing many bs that contradicts Islam as a Muslim, especially Mughals whom based on Timur which is f up for 50% of the time) ,but maintained most of the population being rich. So ruch that some people didn't become rich / lost their richness by the fact their things value dropped because there is too much of it, like gold.
Note: Ottoman Empire Sultanate got really weak because of Napoleon Bonaparte and their weak image came by the beginning of the 19th century 18 hundreds with Napoleon Bonaparte attack on Egypt. And stayed a superpower up to 1830s-1850s. Their decline began by 1750s mid 18th century (however, it wasn't more about decline really than western Europe getting more powerful due to America and industrial revolution steam engine idea)
Also Ottomans are fighting everyone around them from 3 sides + Portugal and Spain being annoying in Indian Ocean too. Russia, Europe and Persia/Saifivd (another superpower of the gunpowder empires) slown Ottoman Empire. Plus their triple system stoed working as they expanded and should used first Caliphate political system.
They had a chance of coming back with Abadalhamed II however they overthrown real Ottoman sultan in 1908. They also wasted their chance of not getting into WW1. Otherwise, they would be with us today and middle east would be powerful and peaceful and advance + no Israel.
23
-
11
-
There is few micro stuff wrong here.
200 yrs ago the world population where not 90% or anything like that poor. In Mughal Empire Sultanate a big majority group of the population for each individual has their own weight in gold. Also there was a welfare system too. China and Gunpowder Empires where crazy rich. West Africa was rich too. Native American Empires where rich too. That is where majority of the world population lived. Up to 1750s Ottoman Empire Sultanate was on top in everything and China had largest and most powerful navy mankind had ever seen (in terms of size it is the largest overall in all of history). The thing that changed things is the steam engine idea. The population of Africa outside the north, west and north east is very tiny unlike today.
UK got veeeery extremely lucky with India colonization. If it wasn't for collapse of Mughal Empire Sultanate (it was there for 800ish yrs , it just reached it is end of life span and had 50% of their leaders bad) it would impossible even with WW1 technology for UK alone and very difficult and not worth it even if all of Europe planed together due to the population size + army and police size, land size, many different geographies , strong centralization, money and welth and resources they had. Mughal Empire lecturely had a bigger army with advance technology and equipment plus other stuff bigger than the entire population of the UK islands few times over. They could also if necessary make it even bigger. The military technology of the equipment wasn't that much behind on average the UK. The thing uk had was silty better gunpowder and muskets. The Indian and Ottoman canons and other siege equipment where much better than even Germany at the same time. They had tone of elephants which is a game changer in the way they used them for logistics, carring, as tanks and builders.
The one that give the final hit on Ottoman Empire in Mediterranean is Napoleon Bonaparte destroying Ottoman navy and mainland Egypt due to him being Napoleon.
In Ottoman Empire even before WW1 and especially befor 1908 people where living better lives than majority average population did in London.
Muslims and Women in general where nontaxable - untaxable. Monopolies and interest/usury where prohibited + bank power very limited + you get Zakat money when necessary. Very little poor people and they get hlep. You had there too free healthcare for anyone on Ottoman soul.
Ottoman Empire just got too tired from being fighting everyone around it: Russia, Europe and Iran for 400+ yrs around the clock. 3 fronts + competing with Spain and Portugal in Indian Ocean too. UK and Ottoman empire where very frindly up until around Napoleon Bonaparte times. Other thing Ottoman Empire trusted it is so called Ailes too much.
If it wasn't for 1908 and joing ww1 Ottoman Empire would have been as powerful if not more powerful than Japan + haveing non of Japan weaknesses/disadvantages in a very geopolitical strategic location + haveing most of the world oile and gas + having influence over Muslim world. Even with 1908 mistake and joing the losing side of WW1 if it wasn't for stupid and naive Arab revolut in 1916 Ottoman would have continued - it is impossible to invade with WW1 technology without internal support ie arab revolut. Although joing ww1, Aramain genocide and Arab + Turk nationalism would be impossible if it wasn't for 1908. Ottoman Empire was only 50 yrs late to industrial thing due it takes time to implement.
Mughal Empire is so big and powerful that it was more productive than industrial Europe, without being industrial. India what made UK.
Capitalism is not the blame to so called 3 world poverty and problems but colonialism and neo-colonialism of NATO and CIA. Also because of over dose of capitalist extremism and extreme exploitation and craziness what caused those things. Basically mis use of capitalism ,racism + stupid supremacy and greed what caused things. Neo-colonialism is real thing. France for example 85% of it is economy depends on exploitation of western Africa. It is all about CIA , cold war and colonialism.
Do u know that Ottoman Empire Sultanate could have would taking Spain and Portugal in just 10 yrs or so campaign in 16th or even 17th (especially during Solomon the magnificent period) century, but they didn't due 2 reasons: too expensive and money wise not going to make money + Morocco would have alot of Muslims die. Ottoman Empire could have took Venice intead of Vienna. Also they would took Vienna and half of Germany if it wasn't for Persia. Also all of that they didn't use their armies in Anatolia and Egypt which would have added at lest 400k soldiers to their 200k ish main professional army in Balkans. Mamluks had a very skilled professional force of 220k in Egypt of their own you may add (Which Napoleon Bonaparte destroyed).
11
-
11
-
9
-
9
-
Just 2 notes: 1) threekingdoms China or Qin is a big ones too
2) despite how much weaker Byzantium and Prussia got after their 9.9 yrs war and from other wars before it they still where at the time more powerful each than China or India oftge time. Also, they still superpowers. Plus despite whatever you say and everything logically speaking on paper it would still be absolutely impossible for the Muslim Arabs to defeat even 1 of them. But they fought both and generally except for first year at the sametime against a collection. For record only First Caliphate and USA that in history managed to fight 2 front wars at the same time. If you count Qin will they where really good and proven and experienced before it. Same with USA it had many advantages that where too much. But the Muslims where in magnificent significant severe in many disadvantages. Not only having no knowledge or experience of full scale wars but severally out numbered 3-5 times on average by each side with much similar population, less money and less resources. Most of their resources cane from constantly winning battles. Someone like Khalid wasn't trained in tactics nor had any books or people to teach himself. Just came out of the blue.
The Arabs had few advantages: the enemy can not attack them back at the desert and they have capability to keep attacking for ever campaign after the other. But it worked from first try. But that same advantage combined with distance from good areas and capital it is a disadvantage too. Which makes the war if longer just more bloody not more than that and longer. But eventually they would win but not first try or that much and even conquer all of Persia and do what the full Roman Empire could not do. Also do not forget Afghanistan and Zergose mountains in between Mesopotamia and Iran. They had too pour managment skills as well as no much food and money for first 3/4 of the Campaign length. Even manytimes run out of water. The army was consistently hungry for most of the time. There is no line of supplys. Also the distance and desert forces them to not be able to send the numbers they could otherwise too.
The their situation was crazy as.
Despite all odds stacked against them. They win strongly and done the impossible manytimes over. Also, remained in control for a long time and the ideology stayed to today. Unlike other conquest.
All this done by people whom almost nobodys.
Thus, the weaker state they where in Byzantium and Prussia doesn't matter and doesn't take credits from Arabs nor explains why they succeeded. Although, it is one of many other reasons.
Also Tang China is equal or a bit less powerful and rich than first 50 yrs or half of the 8th century Abasised of Baghdad.
China and middle east for all human history except for 18th century and onwards the most rich and powerful in the world. India can be the same but it is usually not one nation. It happened only 3 times their history for prefer time. It only really united was under Deile Sultanate and Mughal Empire Sultanate. Mughal for 400 yrs where the most powerful in the world and richest.
Both whom are turks/Mongoliaic muslim ishy (due to doing many bs that contradicts Islam as a Muslim, especially Mughals whom based on Timur which is f up for 50% of the time) ,but maintained most of the population being rich. So ruch that some people didn't become rich / lost their richness by the fact their things value dropped because there is too much of it, like gold.
Note: Ottoman Empire Sultanate got really weak because of Napoleon Bonaparte and their weak image came by the beginning of the 19th century 18 hundreds with Napoleon Bonaparte attack on Egypt. And stayed a superpower up to 1830s-1850s. Their decline began by 1750s mid 18th century (however, it wasn't more about decline really than western Europe getting more powerful due to America and industrial revolution steam engine idea)
Also Ottomans are fighting everyone around them from 3 sides + Portugal and Spain being annoying in Indian Ocean too. Russia, Europe and Persia/Saifivd (another superpower of the gunpowder empires) slown Ottoman Empire. Plus their triple system stoed working as they expanded and should used first Caliphate political system.
They had a chance of coming back with Abadalhamed II however they overthrown real Ottoman sultan in 1908. They also wasted their chance of not getting into WW1. Otherwise, they would be with us today and middle east would be powerful and peaceful and advance + no Israel.
9
-
8
-
@WhatifAltHist There is few micro stuff wrong here.
200 yrs ago the world population where not 90% or anything like that poor. In Mughal Empire Sultanate a big majority group of the population for each individual has their own weight in gold. Also there was a welfare system too. China and Gunpowder Empires where crazy rich. West Africa was rich too. Native American Empires where rich too. That is where majority of the world population lived. Up to 1750s Ottoman Empire Sultanate was on top in everything and China had largest and most powerful navy mankind had ever seen (in terms of size it is the largest overall in all of history). The thing that changed things is the steam engine idea. The population of Africa outside the north, west and north east is very tiny unlike today.
UK got veeeery extremely lucky with India colonization. If it wasn't for collapse of Mughal Empire Sultanate (it was there for 800ish yrs , it just reached it is end of life span and had 50% of their leaders bad) it would impossible even with WW1 technology for UK alone and very difficult and not worth it even if all of Europe planed together due to the population size + army and police size, land size, many different geographies , strong centralization, money and welth and resources they had. Mughal Empire lecturely had a bigger army with advance technology and equipment plus other stuff bigger than the entire population of the UK islands few times over. They could also if necessary make it even bigger. The military technology of the equipment wasn't that much behind on average the UK. The thing uk had was silty better gunpowder and muskets. The Indian and Ottoman canons and other siege equipment where much better than even Germany at the same time. They had tone of elephants which is a game changer in the way they used them for logistics, carring, as tanks and builders.
The one that give the final hit on Ottoman Empire in Mediterranean is Napoleon Bonaparte destroying Ottoman navy and mainland Egypt due to him being Napoleon.
In Ottoman Empire even before WW1 and especially befor 1908 people where living better lives than majority average population did in London.
Muslims and Women in general where nontaxable - untaxable. Monopolies and interest/usury where prohibited + bank power very limited + you get Zakat money when necessary. Very little poor people and they get hlep. You had there too free healthcare for anyone on Ottoman soul.
Ottoman Empire just got too tired from being fighting everyone around it: Russia, Europe and Iran for 400+ yrs around the clock. 3 fronts + competing with Spain and Portugal in Indian Ocean too. UK and Ottoman empire where very frindly up until around Napoleon Bonaparte times. Other thing Ottoman Empire trusted it is so called Ailes too much.
If it wasn't for 1908 and joing ww1 Ottoman Empire would have been as powerful if not more powerful than Japan + haveing non of Japan weaknesses/disadvantages in a very geopolitical strategic location + haveing most of the world oile and gas + having influence over Muslim world. Even with 1908 mistake and joing the losing side of WW1 if it wasn't for stupid and naive Arab revolut in 1916 Ottoman would have continued - it is impossible to invade with WW1 technology without internal support ie arab revolut. Although joing ww1, Aramain genocide and Arab + Turk nationalism would be impossible if it wasn't for 1908. Ottoman Empire was only 50 yrs late to industrial thing due it takes time to implement.
Mughal Empire is so big and powerful that it was more productive than industrial Europe, without being industrial. India what made UK.
Capitalism is not the blame to so called 3 world poverty and problems but colonialism and neo-colonialism of NATO and CIA. Also because of over dose of capitalist extremism and extreme exploitation and craziness what caused those things. Basically mis use of capitalism ,racism + stupid supremacy and greed what caused things. Neo-colonialism is real thing. France for example 85% of it is economy depends on exploitation of western Africa. It is all about CIA , cold war and colonialism.
Do u know that Ottoman Empire Sultanate could have would taking Spain and Portugal in just 10 yrs or so campaign in 16th or even 17th (especially during Solomon the magnificent period) century, but they didn't due 2 reasons: too expensive and money wise not going to make money + Morocco would have alot of Muslims die. Ottoman Empire could have took Venice intead of Vienna. Also they would took Vienna and half of Germany if it wasn't for Persia. Also all of that they didn't use their armies in Anatolia and Egypt which would have added at lest 400k soldiers to their 200k ish main professional army in Balkans. Mamluks had a very skilled professional force of 220k in Egypt of their own you may add (Which Napoleon Bonaparte destroyed).
7
-
6
-
6
-
Just 2 notes: 1) threekingdoms China or Qin is a big ones too
2) despite how much weaker Byzantium and Prussia got after their 9.9 yrs war and from other wars before it they still where at the time more powerful each than China or India oftge time. Also, they still superpowers. Plus despite whatever you say and everything logically speaking on paper it would still be absolutely impossible for the Muslim Arabs to defeat even 1 of them. But they fought both and generally except for first year at the sametime against a collection. For record only First Caliphate and USA that in history managed to fight 2 front wars at the same time. If you count Qin will they where really good and proven and experienced before it. Same with USA it had many advantages that where too much. But the Muslims where in magnificent significant severe in many disadvantages. Not only having no knowledge or experience of full scale wars but severally out numbered 3-5 times on average by each side with much smaller population, less money and less resources. Most of their resources cane from constantly winning battles. Someone like Khalid wasn't trained in tactics nor had any books or people to teach himself. Just came out of the blue.
The Arabs had few advantages: the enemy can not attack them back at the desert and they have capability to keep attacking for ever campaign after the other. But it worked from first try. But that same advantage combined with distance from good areas and capital it is a disadvantage too. Which makes the war if longer just more bloody not more than that and longer. But eventually they would win but not first try or that much and even conquer all of Persia and do what the full Roman Empire could not do. Also do not forget Afghanistan and Zergose mountains in between Mesopotamia and Iran. They had too pour managment skills as well as no much food and money for first 3/4 of the Campaign length. Even manytimes run out of water. The army was consistently hungry for most of the time. There is no line of supplys. Also the distance and desert forces them to not be able to send the numbers they could otherwise too.
The their situation was crazy as.
Despite all odds stacked against them. They win strongly and done the impossible manytimes over. Also, remained in control for a long time and the ideology stayed to today. Unlike other conquest.
All this done by people whom almost nobodys.
Thus, the weaker state they where in Byzantium and Prussia doesn't matter and doesn't take credits from Arabs nor explains why they succeeded. Although, it is one of many other reasons.
Also Tang China is equal or a bit less powerful and rich than first 50 yrs or half of the 8th century Abasised of Baghdad.
China and middle east for all human history except for 18th century and onwards the most rich and powerful in the world. India can be the same but it is usually not one nation. It happened only 3 times their history for prefer time. It only really united was under Deile Sultanate and Mughal Empire Sultanate. Mughal for 400 yrs where the most powerful in the world and richest.
Both whom are turks/Mongoliaic muslim ishy (due to doing many bs that contradicts Islam as a Muslim, especially Mughals whom based on Timur which is f up for 50% of the time) ,but maintained most of the population being rich. So ruch that some people didn't become rich / lost their richness by the fact their things value dropped because there is too much of it, like gold.
Note: Ottoman Empire Sultanate got really weak because of Napoleon Bonaparte and their weak image came by the beginning of the 19th century 18 hundreds with Napoleon Bonaparte attack on Egypt. And stayed a superpower up to 1830s-1850s. Their decline began by 1750s mid 18th century (however, it wasn't more about decline really than western Europe getting more powerful due to America and industrial revolution steam engine idea)
Also Ottomans are fighting everyone around them from 3 sides + Portugal and Spain being annoying in Indian Ocean too. Russia, Europe and Persia/Saifivd (another superpower of the gunpowder empires) slown Ottoman Empire. Plus their triple system stoed working as they expanded and should used first Caliphate political system.
They had a chance of coming back with Abadalhamed II however they overthrown real Ottoman sultan in 1908. They also wasted their chance of not getting into WW1. Otherwise, they would be with us today and middle east would be powerful and peaceful and advance + no Israel.
6
-
5
-
There is few micro stuff wrong here.
200 yrs ago the world population where not 90% or anything like that poor. In Mughal Empire Sultanate a big majority group of the population for each individual has their own weight in gold. Also there was a welfare system too. China and Gunpowder Empires where crazy rich. West Africa was rich too. Native American Empires where rich too. That is where majority of the world population lived. Up to 1750s Ottoman Empire Sultanate was on top in everything and China had largest and most powerful navy mankind had ever seen (in terms of size it is the largest overall in all of history). The thing that changed things is the steam engine idea. The population of Africa outside the north, west and north east is very tiny unlike today.
UK got veeeery extremely lucky with India colonization. If it wasn't for collapse of Mughal Empire Sultanate (it was there for 800ish yrs , it just reached it is end of life span and had 50% of their leaders bad) it would impossible even with WW1 technology for UK alone and very difficult and not worth it even if all of Europe planed together due to the population size + army and police size, land size, many different geographies , strong centralization, money and welth and resources they had. Mughal Empire lecturely had a bigger army with advance technology and equipment plus other stuff bigger than the entire population of the UK islands few times over. They could also if necessary make it even bigger. The military technology of the equipment wasn't that much behind on average the UK. The thing uk had was silty better gunpowder and muskets. The Indian and Ottoman canons and other siege equipment where much better than even Germany at the same time. They had tone of elephants which is a game changer in the way they used them for logistics, carring, as tanks and builders.
The one that give the final hit on Ottoman Empire in Mediterranean is Napoleon Bonaparte destroying Ottoman navy and mainland Egypt due to him being Napoleon.
In Ottoman Empire even before WW1 and especially befor 1908 people where living better lives than majority average population did in London.
Muslims and Women in general where nontaxable - untaxable. Monopolies and interest/usury where prohibited + bank power very limited + you get Zakat money when necessary. Very little poor people and they get hlep. You had there too free healthcare for anyone on Ottoman soul.
Ottoman Empire just got too tired from being fighting everyone around it: Russia, Europe and Iran for 400+ yrs around the clock. 3 fronts + competing with Spain and Portugal in Indian Ocean too. UK and Ottoman empire where very frindly up until around Napoleon Bonaparte times. Other thing Ottoman Empire trusted it is so called Ailes too much.
If it wasn't for 1908 and joing ww1 Ottoman Empire would have been as powerful if not more powerful than Japan + haveing non of Japan weaknesses/disadvantages in a very geopolitical strategic location + haveing most of the world oile and gas + having influence over Muslim world. Even with 1908 mistake and joing the losing side of WW1 if it wasn't for stupid and naive Arab revolut in 1916 Ottoman would have continued - it is impossible to invade with WW1 technology without internal support ie arab revolut. Although joing ww1, Aramain genocide and Arab + Turk nationalism would be impossible if it wasn't for 1908. Ottoman Empire was only 50 yrs late to industrial thing due it takes time to implement.
Mughal Empire is so big and powerful that it was more productive than industrial Europe, without being industrial. India what made UK.
Capitalism is not the blame to so called 3 world poverty and problems but colonialism and neo-colonialism of NATO and CIA. Also because of over dose of capitalist extremism and extreme exploitation and craziness what caused those things. Basically mis use of capitalism ,racism + stupid supremacy and greed what caused things. Neo-colonialism is real thing. France for example 85% of it is economy depends on exploitation of western Africa. It is all about CIA , cold war and colonialism.
Do u know that Ottoman Empire Sultanate could have would taking Spain and Portugal in just 10 yrs or so campaign in 16th or even 17th (especially during Solomon the magnificent period) century, but they didn't due 2 reasons: too expensive and money wise not going to make money + Morocco would have alot of Muslims die. Ottoman Empire could have took Venice intead of Vienna. Also they would took Vienna and half of Germany if it wasn't for Persia. Also all of that they didn't use their armies in Anatolia and Egypt which would have added at lest 400k soldiers to their 200k ish main professional army in Balkans. Mamluks had a very skilled professional force of 220k in Egypt of their own you may add (Which Napoleon Bonaparte destroyed).
5
-
5
-
Why not to have a realistic insinuations?, As if we don't have institutions.
His video is not going to happen ,especially if a forth/third power comes to the picture, because nuks and very cable intelligence agencies and the deep economical connections.
Also , USA would not be able to blook China from Indonesia as it is more with China than USA security same as Turkey it is more with Russia but ultimately they would take advantage of that not simply listen from both China and USA. Plus China has Pakistan and Russia and NK illegal businesses. Also China can do toooo much terrorism like cyberwarfare and others. Interms of Cybersecurity and hacking China and Russia are much a head of NATO. Also their internet is completely under their control very hard to get throw, due to being a dictatorship.
Russia is not going to fight without useing nuks against NATO.
China could siege Taiwan and skirmish them useing intelligence agencies terrorists and other stuff.
Neither China could leave USA nor USA would leave China. 2008 wasn't as bad because of China and we still recovering from it.
CCP government could be changed but i don't think it would be a civil war or a revolution. Also it would not be fully democracy. It would be a new dynasty system that is mixed with a Republic like UK or Japan but with more kings an an empire whom hold more power than monarchs in Japan and UK however they don't interfere except ehen necessary only.
Next Putin like of Russia would be a Muslim.
Turkey and Pakistan-Afghanistan should take down Iran and divided in half useing too some Palestiniany nuks, before it gains nuclear weapons.
Turkey as it expands to middle east would be a superpower equal to China that could hold China, Japan, SK and India by their nikes. It would influence USA and EU alot too and be a middle man that makes the other both sides keep fighting eachothers.
Turkey also wants nuker energy and weapons. It could in the beginning rent some of Pakistan nuks.
The strong connection due to modern communication and transport as well the world trade makes what you talked about very unlikely.
Although, something would happen but it is less serious than that.
Also many people forget that Iraq in 1991, 1979 and especially during last couple years of the 70s was fully industrialized and in the top 10 economies with 4th strongest and largest army in the world with stronger intelligence agencies than Israel. Also their oil/gas is comparable to that of Saudia Arabia.
5
-
5
-
As a Muslim i can say those don't apply that much except in the west. I agree with first points and many points across. First point is very much ya ok. However the point about women in work force is ya but also no. As a Muslim and recording to Islam women working is very much fine and not a problem it just not encouraged. Islam also gives Women maximum possible safety and comfort, thus on avg only the most capable and promising really motivated exceptional woman would get to work and science. Also, you can work and become a housewife at sametime. In Islam it just woman must not work for necessity of survival ,but as an additional hobby. Survival money for women in Islam is granted by the state or relatives men by default also she is nontaxable un-taxable, regardless how rich she is (except for Zakat, which goes to unfortunate people to grow-up. 2.5% of unusable uncycling stored wealth). She can work but if she is married then being a good mom is first priority.
It is just that western housewive model suck not being a housewife when got married suck. Like alot of people at some points gets married no matter how you put it - being a wife and a mother.
If income doubles 2× or 3× , if houre rate doubles most women wouldn't work. Like if a man making 50k next year starts making 100k and other things stay the same relatively ok the same on avg ,then most wifes would not want to work at least not in a traditional way. Many women in western world forget about working when they marry a decent rich person.
Also, haveing little amout of kids is a problem. You need to have as many as possibly possible. At least 5. You can lecturely have them in few years.
Just work parttime, be a good mother, have many kids altogether.
Just like Arab world.
Most people are not rich even when they look rich, this proves why economy is f up because of greed of companies and some governments, because they really can't even afford a big family. Most people are rich because they had 1 or 2 kids only. The avg house hold in Iraq for example just on family level whom in top 60% of the population they have expensive cars and many large houses for rent and they make 1-10 m a year together (in Iraq although 40% of the population are really f up and all government related stuff are bad which includes services of the government such as heathcare because of corruption and mafias. But many people are realy rich and can still look rich despite haveing like 10 kids. That is way beyond the avg westerner. In Suaida Arabia and UAE is even better with very little poor people too). That is being rich. Being really actually rich today, means having 10M$. If not , you are not rich no matter how good your life is going. Because not having kids is just a cheat code to bypass by.
Also government and compines wanted women to work just so they tax more people not because women rights really. That is f up. In my opinion woman must be nontaxable. Also rich people actually rich the ones close to being a billionaire and the actually billionaires and multi-billionaires needs to be tought and listen and forced to pay more taxes and eliminate all tax code cheating. Tax wealth ,not income. People wth 70k or less income needs to be nontaxable too. So they can grow, especially the ones just started working for first 2 years and the ones makeing less than 20k.
Economy organization and orientation is the main problem. We need a better capitalist economical model system. Which Islamic economy system is an option. Islam is also by in basic core can be considered a version of capitalism. A nice feature the model is optimized but reorganize there is gaps thus in a side show works on those disadvantages spreatly outside of the economy even if it is counter to the capitalist economical system to fix them. Thus being perfect. An example of this is Zakat. Another good feature taxing wealth1.5%-2.5% not income.
Cultures are not equal. True. Some cultures can't be compared anyway. Some cultures are equally but vastly different good for different things. Some are equal. Some are not equal.
However, being not equal doesn't mean one is better than the other is nesseery, however most of the time it is, all the time.
Also, this doesn't mean west is superior or anything. This has many countless factors. Winning wars 90% of the time has nothing to do with culture and philosophy. You can lecturely win a war by random metroid hit your opponent capital or a pandemic or simply had one or 2 great tacticians in on your side. Also technology and advancement in general happens more often outside culture itself on the side as it has nothing to do with it.
Thus, the west are not better than Islam or China.
Your example of lock how those are doing in modern world doesn't make sense. Because vast majority are doing at the level they are today due to neo-colonialism, CIA and active foreign intervention and exploitation plus stuff lift behind from first wave colonialism and corruption/bad dictatorship that sold nations for mony acting as puppets. Simply because theere s forces that do anything for profit and lowering competition by simply not allowing combination by keeping the levels artificially the same. Most modern day problems of war and corruption in colonialised world is artificial by USA and UK.
Islam is beyond culture. Islam fights and adapt cultures to it. Islam is above culture. There is still things done around Muslim world that is cultureal but prohibited in Islam in verse locations, especially outside Arab world, turky and Iran. To add your gulit, shame and face argument is not complete. At lest in west including Islam especially in Islam you cannot have gulid without shame or vise versa, which together makes face. Those are one thing not spreat they work together and interconnected. It is more complicated than your words.
To add Darwinism is wrong. Adaptation happens but it doesn't make new creatures. Also, in Islam humans are not animals. Each Muslim human like a miny king. In Islam Humans are God's greats creation, where he made all the angles including main ones pow to the knee to one human/humanity. S×e is tapo because it must be private and logical. By logical means specific to a parenter you stay loyal to until a brake up agreement or end of life. Also, because s×e in Islam is only in this life for earth. Next life has no intercourse or the enter system wouldn't be there. It is viewed to be earthy low weakness of mankind in current form as part of the test.
By the way, Islam is not "making women stay in the home and be velled for their entire lives". As an agv educated about Islam Muslim that is simply bs. It is too very overwhelming over simplification that very much becomes fantasy. This is just flus stereotyping. (By the way a side point, velleing is just for outside in home very much even with shorts. Also it is not required with other women. Also , men have their own velleing. Men do not either do what ever they want. All the servents of God and his laws)
Islam is the middle ground equilibrium, not extreme. Islam is not Taliban. This is so extreme is contradict Islam. It is more nuanced than that.
Polygamy doesn't mean anyman can get as many as he wants. Islam that is limited and small amount of men gets the right too and when they do by any means it doesn't effect anything because it is limited. Limited by a criteria: weath, physical ability, men only, good character, woman needs to agree and psychological capacity. Also marriage is a like a contract in islam the woman can put on demands, such as: you can marry only me as long i am your wife and i am alive. If the man agreed then it is so.
West envy their ancestors because they suck. In Muslim world it is absolutely the opposite. Also Prophet Mohammad said the best generation in history is his generation and the next 3 generations and at end times generation, where his time and next generation are at the top. Muslim world across history always looks back and learn from prophet Mohammad and first only true Caliphate.
Islam accomplished way more than western European world did in modern times.
West where lucky with steam engine idea. Give that to China or Muslim world and they would accomplish even way more. There is nothing marcial or special about that, except that luck with that idea and extreme equal to Mongolia violence that systematic that continues to keep others down without mercy + racism and arrogant supremacy.
Being a teacher should be as profitable as a lawyer. At least 200k-250k a year.
Muslims are not educated to those things and we don't need them. Society doesn't really needs drugs.
When tobacco found to be harmful it got prohibited. It got lowered down alot. If they know that before they would have done the same.
Abasised got taken by turks due to being soft as they become Muslim. Also due to incompetence of the new rulers at Baghdad.
West is only successful with evil of exploitation. For example 85% of modern France economy comes from western Africa. In what caled second wave neo-colonialism or the third colonialism. Slavery changed form but didn't despair.
UK had the best colonial power but they still horrible and they made sure there is a problem before they left and they have some control. Basically making sure no competition.
No 10: is completely western Europe stuff and it is bs. Females are family one unite the sisters, wifes and mothers of men, envy is logically impossible.
Both men and women in the west are rubbish in dating.
5
-
Simply the people of authority and the system are not doing what it supposed to do fully and the people of the west have no motivation to live and they are personalised and private. Weaker families equal on average overall weaker people. Muslim world until 1750s from 7th century and the area even before that is very rich and powerful and happy and relaxed and have easy living. Modern Western civilization from 16th century and upwards is almost rubbish. It is not even civilization, it is like an anti-magic magic that is hard to call it magic even. It is not a civilization. The most important science for a civilization is humanitarian sciences and philosophy and psychology then comes math then other sciences. Science without mercy and wisdom is rubbish, is crazy and evil dangerous. The west don't have those in importance ,and their focus priorities are upside down. The resone people are not happy most important the main reason is it is not a civilization to begin with. It is for the top rich people and blood and exportion of over countries. Africa is most stole and damaged in modern day after WW2 in the neo-colonialism. The world is still under colonization but in a new way that is more efficient for UK,France and USA. West is f up. West only succeeded in colonialistion cause: it is not a full invasion, it is far of and they have good navy, they can't be attacked by the ones they are attacking, lucky to get to the new world and more lucky they died to the diseases native Americans, used the Muslim world sciences (used Muslim map to reach to the new world), lucky to find a new form of energy where it showed how to get that there is many forms of energy by one person making the steam engine, most if the rest of the world was relaxed in a vacation as everything is cool, Japan was just figuring out where it is on the world map, Ottoman Empire was fighting everything and everyone around it, Muslims where not completely united and in separate unites and ignored Europe, Ottoman Empire was slowed down by 60% by the Svided adding an additional front to the Ottoman. Ottoman Empire didn't take full advantage to it is advantages. Also Mughal Empire Sultanate reach it is life span and UK hot super lucky in India, rest of the world since the dawn of time is in sleep. That is why they succeeded. 70% of it is just luck.
5
-
As a Muslim i can say those don't apply that much except in the west. I agree with first points and many points across. First point is very much ya ok. However the point about women in work force is ya but also no. As a Muslim and recording to Islam women working is very much fine and not a problem it just not encouraged. Islam also gives Women maximum possible safety and comfort, thus on avg only the most capable and promising really motivated exceptional woman would get to work and science. Also, you can work and become a housewife at sametime. In Islam it just woman must not work for necessity of survival ,but as an additional hobby. Survival money for women in Islam is granted by the state or relatives men by default also she is nontaxable un-taxable, regardless how rich she is (except for Zakat, which goes to unfortunate people to grow-up. 2.5% of unusable uncycling stored wealth). She can work but if she is married then being a good mom is first priority.
It is just that western housewive model suck not being a housewife when got married suck. Like alot of people at some points gets married no matter how you put it - being a wife and a mother.
If income doubles 2× or 3× , if houre rate doubles most women wouldn't work. Like if a man making 50k next year starts making 100k and other things stay the same relatively ok the same on avg ,then most wifes would not want to work at least not in a traditional way. Many women in western world forget about working when they marry a decent rich person.
Also, haveing little amout of kids is a problem. You need to have as many as possibly possible. At least 5. You can lecturely have them in few years.
Just work parttime, be a good mother, have many kids altogether.
Just like Arab world.
Most people are not rich even when they look rich, this proves why economy is f up because of greed of companies and some governments, because they really can't even afford a big family. Most people are rich because they had 1 or 2 kids only. The avg house hold in Iraq for example just on family level whom in top 60% of the population they have expensive cars and many large houses for rent and they make 1-10 m a year together (in Iraq although 40% of the population are really f up and all government related stuff are bad which includes services of the government such as heathcare because of corruption and mafias. But many people are realy rich and can still look rich despite haveing like 10 kids. That is way beyond the avg westerner. In Suaida Arabia and UAE is even better with very little poor people too). That is being rich. Being really actually rich today, means having 10M$. If not , you are not rich no matter how good your life is going. Because not having kids is just a cheat code to bypass by.
Also government and compines wanted women to work just so they tax more people not because women rights really. That is f up. In my opinion woman must be nontaxable. Also rich people actually rich the ones close to being a billionaire and the actually billionaires and multi-billionaires needs to be tought and listen and forced to pay more taxes and eliminate all tax code cheating. Tax wealth ,not income. People wth 70k or less income needs to be nontaxable too. So they can grow, especially the ones just started working for first 2 years and the ones makeing less than 20k.
Economy organization and orientation is the main problem. We need a better capitalist economical model system. Which Islamic economy system is an option. Islam is also by in basic core can be considered a version of capitalism. A nice feature the model is optimized but reorganize there is gaps thus in a side show works on those disadvantages spreatly outside of the economy even if it is counter to the capitalist economical system to fix them. Thus being perfect. An example of this is Zakat. Another good feature taxing wealth1.5%-2.5% not income.
Cultures are not equal. True. Some cultures can't be compared anyway. Some cultures are equally but vastly different good for different things. Some are equal. Some are not equal.
However, being not equal doesn't mean one is better than the other is nesseery, however most of the time it is, all the time.
Also, this doesn't mean west is superior or anything. This has many countless factors. Winning wars 90% of the time has nothing to do with culture and philosophy. You can lecturely win a war by random metroid hit your opponent capital or a pandemic or simply had one or 2 great tacticians in on your side. Also technology and advancement in general happens more often outside culture itself on the side as it has nothing to do with it.
Thus, the west are not better than Islam or China.
Your example of lock how those are doing in modern world doesn't make sense. Because vast majority are doing at the level they are today due to neo-colonialism, CIA and active foreign intervention and exploitation plus stuff lift behind from first wave colonialism and corruption/bad dictatorship that sold nations for mony acting as puppets. Simply because theere s forces that do anything for profit and lowering competition by simply not allowing combination by keeping the levels artificially the same. Most modern day problems of war and corruption in colonialised world is artificial by USA and UK.
Islam is beyond culture. Islam fights and adapt cultures to it. Islam is above culture. There is still things done around Muslim world that is cultureal but prohibited in Islam in verse locations, especially outside Arab world, turky and Iran. To add your gulit, shame and face argument is not complete. At lest in west including Islam especially in Islam you cannot have gulid without shame or vise versa, which together makes face. Those are one thing not spreat they work together and interconnected. It is more complicated than your words.
To add Darwinism is wrong. Adaptation happens but it doesn't make new creatures. Also, in Islam humans are not animals. Each Muslim human like a miny king. In Islam Humans are God's greats creation, where he made all the angles including main ones pow to the knee to one human/humanity. S×e is tapo because it must be private and logical. By logical means specific to a parenter you stay loyal to until a brake up agreement or end of life. Also, because s×e in Islam is only in this life for earth. Next life has no intercourse or the enter system wouldn't be there. It is viewed to be earthy low weakness of mankind in current form as part of the test.
By the way, Islam is not "making women stay in the home and be velled for their entire lives". As an agv educated about Islam Muslim that is simply bs. It is too very overwhelming over simplification that very much becomes fantasy. This is just flus stereotyping. (By the way a side point, velleing is just for outside in home very much even with shorts. Also it is not required with other women. Also , men have their own velleing. Men do not either do what ever they want. All the servents of God and his laws)
Islam is the middle ground equilibrium, not extreme. Islam is not Taliban. This is so extreme is contradict Islam. It is more nuanced than that.
Polygamy doesn't mean anyman can get as many as he wants. Islam that is limited and small amount of men gets the right too and when they do by any means it doesn't effect anything because it is limited. Limited by a criteria: weath, physical ability, men only, good character, woman needs to agree and psychological capacity. Also marriage is a like a contract in islam the woman can put on demands, such as: you can marry only me as long i am your wife and i am alive. If the man agreed then it is so.
West envy their ancestors because they suck. In Muslim world it is absolutely the opposite. Also Prophet Mohammad said the best generation in history is his generation and the next 3 generations and at end times generation, where his time and next generation are at the top. Muslim world across history always looks back and learn from prophet Mohammad and first only true Caliphate.
Islam accomplished way more than western European world did in modern times.
West where lucky with steam engine idea. Give that to China or Muslim world and they would accomplish even way more. There is nothing marcial or special about that, except that luck with that idea and extreme equal to Mongolia violence that systematic that continues to keep others down without mercy + racism and arrogant supremacy.
Being a teacher should be as profitable as a lawyer. At least 200k-250k a year.
Muslims are not educated to those things and we don't need them. Society doesn't really needs drugs.
When tobacco found to be harmful it got prohibited. It got lowered down alot. If they know that before they would have done the same.
Abasised got taken by turks due to being soft as they become Muslim. Also due to incompetence of the new rulers at Baghdad.
West is only successful with evil of exploitation. For example 85% of modern France economy comes from western Africa. In what caled second wave neo-colonialism or the third colonialism. Slavery changed form but didn't despair.
UK had the best colonial power but they still horrible and they made sure there is a problem before they left and they have some control. Basically making sure no competition.
No 10: is completely western Europe stuff and it is bs. Females are family one unite the sisters, wifes and mothers of men, envy is logically impossible.
Both men and women in the west are rubbish in dating.
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
As a Muslim i can say those don't apply that much except in the west. I agree with first points and many points across. First point is very much ya ok. However the point about women in work force is ya but also no. As a Muslim and recording to Islam women working is very much fine and not a problem it just not encouraged. Islam also gives Women maximum possible safety and comfort, thus on avg only the most capable and promising really motivated exceptional woman would get to work and science. Also, you can work and become a housewife at sametime. In Islam it just woman must not work for necessity of survival ,but as an additional hobby. Survival money for women in Islam is granted by the state or relatives men by default also she is nontaxable un-taxable, regardless how rich she is (except for Zakat, which goes to unfortunate people to grow-up. 2.5% of unusable uncycling stored wealth). She can work but if she is married then being a good mom is first priority.
It is just that western housewive model suck not being a housewife when got married suck. Like alot of people at some points gets married no matter how you put it - being a wife and a mother.
If income doubles 2× or 3× , if houre rate doubles most women wouldn't work. Like if a man making 50k next year starts making 100k and other things stay the same relatively ok the same on avg ,then most wifes would not want to work at least not in a traditional way. Many women in western world forget about working when they marry a decent rich person.
Also, haveing little amout of kids is a problem. You need to have as many as possibly possible. At least 5. You can lecturely have them in few years.
Just work parttime, be a good mother, have many kids altogether.
Just like Arab world.
Most people are not rich even when they look rich, this proves why economy is f up because of greed of companies and some governments, because they really can't even afford a big family. Most people are rich because they had 1 or 2 kids only. The avg house hold in Iraq for example just on family level whom in top 60% of the population they have expensive cars and many large houses for rent and they make 1-10 m a year together (in Iraq although 40% of the population are really f up and all government related stuff are bad which includes services of the government such as heathcare because of corruption and mafias. But many people are realy rich and can still look rich despite haveing like 10 kids. That is way beyond the avg westerner. In Suaida Arabia and UAE is even better with very little poor people too). That is being rich. Being really actually rich today, means having 10M$. If not , you are not rich no matter how good your life is going. Because not having kids is just a cheat code to bypass by.
Also government and compines wanted women to work just so they tax more people not because women rights really. That is f up. In my opinion woman must be nontaxable. Also rich people actually rich the ones close to being a billionaire and the actually billionaires and multi-billionaires needs to be tought and listen and forced to pay more taxes and eliminate all tax code cheating. Tax wealth ,not income. People wth 70k or less income needs to be nontaxable too. So they can grow, especially the ones just started working for first 2 years and the ones makeing less than 20k.
Economy organization and orientation is the main problem. We need a better capitalist economical model system. Which Islamic economy system is an option. Islam is also by in basic core can be considered a version of capitalism. A nice feature the model is optimized but reorganize there is gaps thus in a side show works on those disadvantages spreatly outside of the economy even if it is counter to the capitalist economical system to fix them. Thus being perfect. An example of this is Zakat. Another good feature taxing wealth1.5%-2.5% not income.
Cultures are not equal. True. Some cultures can't be compared anyway. Some cultures are equally but vastly different good for different things. Some are equal. Some are not equal.
However, being not equal doesn't mean one is better than the other is nesseery, however most of the time it is, all the time.
Also, this doesn't mean west is superior or anything. This has many countless factors. Winning wars 90% of the time has nothing to do with culture and philosophy. You can lecturely win a war by random metroid hit your opponent capital or a pandemic or simply had one or 2 great tacticians in on your side. Also technology and advancement in general happens more often outside culture itself on the side as it has nothing to do with it.
Thus, the west are not better than Islam or China.
Your example of lock how those are doing in modern world doesn't make sense. Because vast majority are doing at the level they are today due to neo-colonialism, CIA and active foreign intervention and exploitation plus stuff lift behind from first wave colonialism and corruption/bad dictatorship that sold nations for mony acting as puppets. Simply because theere s forces that do anything for profit and lowering competition by simply not allowing combination by keeping the levels artificially the same. Most modern day problems of war and corruption in colonialised world is artificial by USA and UK.
Islam is beyond culture. Islam fights and adapt cultures to it. Islam is above culture. There is still things done around Muslim world that is cultureal but prohibited in Islam in verse locations, especially outside Arab world, turky and Iran. To add your gulit, shame and face argument is not complete. At lest in west including Islam especially in Islam you cannot have gulid without shame or vise versa, which together makes face. Those are one thing not spreat they work together and interconnected. It is more complicated than your words.
To add Darwinism is wrong. Adaptation happens but it doesn't make new creatures. Also, in Islam humans are not animals. Each Muslim human like a miny king. In Islam Humans are God's greats creation, where he made all the angles including main ones pow to the knee to one human/humanity. S×e is tapo because it must be private and logical. By logical means specific to a parenter you stay loyal to until a brake up agreement or end of life. Also, because s×e in Islam is only in this life for earth. Next life has no intercourse or the enter system wouldn't be there. It is viewed to be earthy low weakness of mankind in current form as part of the test.
By the way, Islam is not "making women stay in the home and be velled for their entire lives". As an agv educated about Islam Muslim that is simply bs. It is too very overwhelming over simplification that very much becomes fantasy. This is just flus stereotyping. (By the way a side point, velleing is just for outside in home very much even with shorts. Also it is not required with other women. Also , men have their own velleing. Men do not either do what ever they want. All the servents of God and his laws)
Islam is the middle ground equilibrium, not extreme. Islam is not Taliban. This is so extreme is contradict Islam. It is more nuanced than that.
Polygamy doesn't mean anyman can get as many as he wants. Islam that is limited and small amount of men gets the right too and when they do by any means it doesn't effect anything because it is limited. Limited by a criteria: weath, physical ability, men only, good character, woman needs to agree and psychological capacity. Also marriage is a like a contract in islam the woman can put on demands, such as: you can marry only me as long i am your wife and i am alive. If the man agreed then it is so.
West envy their ancestors because they suck. In Muslim world it is absolutely the opposite. Also Prophet Mohammad said the best generation in history is his generation and the next 3 generations and at end times generation, where his time and next generation are at the top. Muslim world across history always looks back and learn from prophet Mohammad and first only true Caliphate.
Islam accomplished way more than western European world did in modern times.
West where lucky with steam engine idea. Give that to China or Muslim world and they would accomplish even way more. There is nothing marcial or special about that, except that luck with that idea and extreme equal to Mongolia violence that systematic that continues to keep others down without mercy + racism and arrogant supremacy.
Being a teacher should be as profitable as a lawyer. At least 200k-250k a year.
Muslims are not educated to those things and we don't need them. Society doesn't really needs drugs.
When tobacco found to be harmful it got prohibited. It got lowered down alot. If they know that before they would have done the same.
Abasised got taken by turks due to being soft as they become Muslim. Also due to incompetence of the new rulers at Baghdad.
West is only successful with evil of exploitation. For example 85% of modern France economy comes from western Africa. In what caled second wave neo-colonialism or the third colonialism. Slavery changed form but didn't despair.
UK had the best colonial power but they still horrible and they made sure there is a problem before they left and they have some control. Basically making sure no competition.
No 10: is completely western Europe stuff and it is bs. Females are family one unite the sisters, wifes and mothers of men, envy is logically impossible.
Both men and women in the west are rubbish in dating.
3
-
3
-
3
-
As a Muslim i can say those don't apply that much except in the west. I agree with first points and many points across. First point is very much ya ok. However the point about women in work force is ya but also no. As a Muslim and recording to Islam women working is very much fine and not a problem it just not encouraged. Islam also gives Women maximum possible safety and comfort, thus on avg only the most capable and promising really motivated exceptional woman would get to work and science. Also, you can work and become a housewife at sametime. In Islam it just woman must not work for necessity of survival ,but as an additional hobby. Survival money for women in Islam is granted by the state or relatives men by default also she is nontaxable un-taxable, regardless how rich she is (except for Zakat, which goes to unfortunate people to grow-up. 2.5% of unusable uncycling stored wealth). She can work but if she is married then being a good mom is first priority.
It is just that western housewive model suck not being a housewife when got married suck. Like alot of people at some points gets married no matter how you put it - being a wife and a mother.
If income doubles 2× or 3× , if houre rate doubles most women wouldn't work. Like if a man making 50k next year starts making 100k and other things stay the same relatively ok the same on avg ,then most wifes would not want to work at least not in a traditional way. Many women in western world forget about working when they marry a decent rich person.
Also, haveing little amout of kids is a problem. You need to have as many as possibly possible. At least 5. You can lecturely have them in few years.
Just work parttime, be a good mother, have many kids altogether.
Just like Arab world.
Most people are not rich even when they look rich, this proves why economy is f up because of greed of companies and some governments, because they really can't even afford a big family. Most people are rich because they had 1 or 2 kids only. The avg house hold in Iraq for example just on family level whom in top 60% of the population they have expensive cars and many large houses for rent and they make 1-10 m a year together (in Iraq although 40% of the population are really f up and all government related stuff are bad which includes services of the government such as heathcare because of corruption and mafias. But many people are realy rich and can still look rich despite haveing like 10 kids. That is way beyond the avg westerner. In Suaida Arabia and UAE is even better with very little poor people too). That is being rich. Being really actually rich today, means having 10M$. If not , you are not rich no matter how good your life is going. Because not having kids is just a cheat code to bypass by.
Also government and compines wanted women to work just so they tax more people not because women rights really. That is f up. In my opinion woman must be nontaxable. Also rich people actually rich the ones close to being a billionaire and the actually billionaires and multi-billionaires needs to be tought and listen and forced to pay more taxes and eliminate all tax code cheating. Tax wealth ,not income. People wth 70k or less income needs to be nontaxable too. So they can grow, especially the ones just started working for first 2 years and the ones makeing less than 20k.
Economy organization and orientation is the main problem. We need a better capitalist economical model system. Which Islamic economy system is an option. Islam is also by in basic core can be considered a version of capitalism. A nice feature the model is optimized but reorganize there is gaps thus in a side show works on those disadvantages spreatly outside of the economy even if it is counter to the capitalist economical system to fix them. Thus being perfect. An example of this is Zakat. Another good feature taxing wealth1.5%-2.5% not income.
Cultures are not equal. True. Some cultures can't be compared anyway. Some cultures are equally but vastly different good for different things. Some are equal. Some are not equal.
However, being not equal doesn't mean one is better than the other is nesseery, however most of the time it is, all the time.
Also, this doesn't mean west is superior or anything. This has many countless factors. Winning wars 90% of the time has nothing to do with culture and philosophy. You can lecturely win a war by random metroid hit your opponent capital or a pandemic or simply had one or 2 great tacticians in on your side. Also technology and advancement in general happens more often outside culture itself on the side as it has nothing to do with it.
Thus, the west are not better than Islam or China.
Your example of lock how those are doing in modern world doesn't make sense. Because vast majority are doing at the level they are today due to neo-colonialism, CIA and active foreign intervention and exploitation plus stuff lift behind from first wave colonialism and corruption/bad dictatorship that sold nations for mony acting as puppets. Simply because theere s forces that do anything for profit and lowering competition by simply not allowing combination by keeping the levels artificially the same. Most modern day problems of war and corruption in colonialised world is artificial by USA and UK.
Islam is beyond culture. Islam fights and adapt cultures to it. Islam is above culture. There is still things done around Muslim world that is cultureal but prohibited in Islam in verse locations, especially outside Arab world, turky and Iran. To add your gulit, shame and face argument is not complete. At lest in west including Islam especially in Islam you cannot have gulid without shame or vise versa, which together makes face. Those are one thing not spreat they work together and interconnected. It is more complicated than your words.
To add Darwinism is wrong. Adaptation happens but it doesn't make new creatures. Also, in Islam humans are not animals. Each Muslim human like a miny king. In Islam Humans are God's greats creation, where he made all the angles including main ones pow to the knee to one human/humanity. S×e is tapo because it must be private and logical. By logical means specific to a parenter you stay loyal to until a brake up agreement or end of life. Also, because s×e in Islam is only in this life for earth. Next life has no intercourse or the enter system wouldn't be there. It is viewed to be earthy low weakness of mankind in current form as part of the test.
By the way, Islam is not "making women stay in the home and be velled for their entire lives". As an agv educated about Islam Muslim that is simply bs. It is too very overwhelming over simplification that very much becomes fantasy. This is just flus stereotyping. (By the way a side point, velleing is just for outside in home very much even with shorts. Also it is not required with other women. Also , men have their own velleing. Men do not either do what ever they want. All the servents of God and his laws)
Islam is the middle ground equilibrium, not extreme. Islam is not Taliban. This is so extreme is contradict Islam. It is more nuanced than that.
Polygamy doesn't mean anyman can get as many as he wants. Islam that is limited and small amount of men gets the right too and when they do by any means it doesn't effect anything because it is limited. Limited by a criteria: weath, physical ability, men only, good character, woman needs to agree and psychological capacity. Also marriage is a like a contract in islam the woman can put on demands, such as: you can marry only me as long i am your wife and i am alive. If the man agreed then it is so.
West envy their ancestors because they suck. In Muslim world it is absolutely the opposite. Also Prophet Mohammad said the best generation in history is his generation and the next 3 generations and at end times generation, where his time and next generation are at the top. Muslim world across history always looks back and learn from prophet Mohammad and first only true Caliphate.
Islam accomplished way more than western European world did in modern times.
West where lucky with steam engine idea. Give that to China or Muslim world and they would accomplish even way more. There is nothing marcial or special about that, except that luck with that idea and extreme equal to Mongolia violence that systematic that continues to keep others down without mercy + racism and arrogant supremacy.
Being a teacher should be as profitable as a lawyer. At least 200k-250k a year.
Muslims are not educated to those things and we don't need them. Society doesn't really needs drugs.
When tobacco found to be harmful it got prohibited. It got lowered down alot. If they know that before they would have done the same.
Abasised got taken by turks due to being soft as they become Muslim. Also due to incompetence of the new rulers at Baghdad.
West is only successful with evil of exploitation. For example 85% of modern France economy comes from western Africa. In what caled second wave neo-colonialism or the third colonialism. Slavery changed form but didn't despair.
UK had the best colonial power but they still horrible and they made sure there is a problem before they left and they have some control. Basically making sure no competition.
No 10: is completely western Europe stuff and it is bs. Females are family one unite the sisters, wifes and mothers of men, envy is logically impossible.
Both men and women in the west are rubbish in dating.
3
-
In Islam science and religion go hand to hand. The first world reviled from the Quran is "Read". Mohammed highly focused on lernering for his people. Also lernering is an act of warship with right intentions and that the gole to make the world a better place.
It is kind of the same in Christianity. The Catholic church organization wasn't that bad interms of education and science but they did hide stuff from general public + it wasn't for God to being with. We see that very clear in 4th Crusade to holyland.
There is few micro stuff wrongin the video.200 yrs ago the world population where not 90% or anything like that poor. In Mughal Empire Sultanate a big majority group of the population for each individual has their own weight in gold. Also there was a welfare system too. China and Gunpowder Empires where crazy rich. West Africa was rich too. Native American Empires where rich too. That is where majority of the world population lived. Up to 1750s Ottoman Empire Sultanate was on top in everything and China had largest and most powerful navy mankind had ever seen (in terms of size it is the largest overall in all of history). The thing that changed things is the steam engine idea. The population of Africa outside the north, west and north east is very tiny unlike today.
UK got veeeery extremely lucky with India colonization. If it wasn't for collapse of Mughal Empire Sultanate (it was there for 800ish yrs , it just reached it is end of life span and had 50% of their leaders bad) it would impossible even with WW1 technology for UK alone and very difficult and not worth it even if all of Europe planed together due to the population size + army and police size, land size, many different geographies , strong centralization, money and welth and resources they had. Mughal Empire lecturely had a bigger army with advance technology and equipment plus other stuff bigger than the entire population of the UK islands few times over. They could also if necessary make it even bigger. The military technology of the equipment wasn't that much behind on average the UK. The thing uk had was silty better gunpowder and muskets. The Indian and Ottoman canons and other siege equipment where much better than even Germany at the same time. They had tone of elephants which is a game changer in the way they used them for logistics, carring, as tanks and builders.
The one that give the final hit on Ottoman Empire in Mediterranean is Napoleon Bonaparte destroying Ottoman navy and mainland Egypt due to him being Napoleon.
In Ottoman Empire even before WW1 and especially befor 1908 people where living better lives than majority average population did in London.
Muslims and Women in general where nontaxable - untaxable. Monopolies and interest/usury where prohibited + bank power very limited + you get Zakat money when necessary. Very little poor people and they get hlep. You had there too free healthcare for anyone on Ottoman soul.
Ottoman Empire just got too tired from being fighting everyone around it: Russia, Europe and Iran for 400+ yrs around the clock. 3 fronts + competing with Spain and Portugal in Indian Ocean too. UK and Ottoman empire where very frindly up until around Napoleon Bonaparte times. Other thing Ottoman Empire trusted it is so called Ailes too much.
If it wasn't for 1908 and joing ww1 Ottoman Empire would have been as powerful if not more powerful than Japan + haveing non of Japan weaknesses/disadvantages in a very geopolitical strategic location + haveing most of the world oile and gas + having influence over Muslim world. Even with 1908 mistake and joing the losing side of WW1 if it wasn't for stupid and naive Arab revolut in 1916 Ottoman would have continued - it is impossible to invade with WW1 technology without internal support ie arab revolut. Although joing ww1, Aramain genocide and Arab + Turk nationalism would be impossible if it wasn't for 1908. Ottoman Empire was only 50 yrs late to industrial thing due it takes time to implement.
Mughal Empire is so big and powerful that it was more productive than industrial Europe, without being industrial. India what made UK.
Capitalism is not the blame to so called 3 world poverty and problems but colonialism and neo-colonialism of NATO and CIA. Also because of over dose of capitalist extremism and extreme exploitation and craziness what caused those things. Basically mis use of capitalism ,racism + stupid supremacy and greed what caused things. Neo-colonialism is real thing. France for example 85% of it is economy depends on exploitation of western Africa. It is all about CIA , cold war and colonialism.
Do u know that Ottoman Empire Sultanate could have would taking Spain and Portugal in just 10 yrs or so campaign in 16th or even 17th (especially during Solomon the magnificent period) century, but they didn't due 2 reasons: too expensive and money wise not going to make money + Morocco would have alot of Muslims die. Ottoman Empire could have took Venice intead of Vienna. Also they would took Vienna and half of Germany if it wasn't for Persia. Also all of that they didn't use their armies in Anatolia and Egypt which would have added at lest 400k soldiers to their 200k ish main professional army in Balkans. Mamluks had a very skilled professional force of 220k in Egypt of their own you may add (Which Napoleon Bonaparte destroyed).
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Joleyn-Joy kind of
There is few micro stuff wrong in this video. 200 yrs ago the world population where not 90% or anything like that poor. In Mughal Empire Sultanate a big majority group of the population for each individual has their own weight in gold. Also there was a welfare system too. China and Gunpowder Empires where crazy rich. West Africa was rich too. Native American Empires where rich too. That is where majority of the world population lived. Up to 1750s Ottoman Empire Sultanate was on top in everything and China had largest and most powerful navy mankind had ever seen (in terms of size it is the largest overall in all of history). The thing that changed things is the steam engine idea. The population of Africa outside the north, west and north east is very tiny unlike today.
UK got veeeery extremely lucky with India colonization. If it wasn't for collapse of Mughal Empire Sultanate (it was there for 800ish yrs , it just reached it is end of life span and had 50% of their leaders bad) it would impossible even with WW1 technology for UK alone and very difficult and not worth it even if all of Europe planed together due to the population size + army and police size, land size, many different geographies , strong centralization, money and welth and resources they had. Mughal Empire lecturely had a bigger army with advance technology and equipment plus other stuff bigger than the entire population of the UK islands few times over. They could also if necessary make it even bigger. The military technology of the equipment wasn't that much behind on average the UK. The thing uk had was silty better gunpowder and muskets. The Indian and Ottoman canons and other siege equipment where much better than even Germany at the same time. They had tone of elephants which is a game changer in the way they used them for logistics, carring, as tanks and builders.
The one that give the final hit on Ottoman Empire in Mediterranean is Napoleon Bonaparte destroying Ottoman navy and mainland Egypt due to him being Napoleon.
In Ottoman Empire even before WW1 and especially befor 1908 people where living better lives than majority average population did in London.
Muslims and Women in general where nontaxable - untaxable. Monopolies and interest/usury where prohibited + bank power very limited + you get Zakat money when necessary. Very little poor people and they get hlep. You had there too free healthcare for anyone on Ottoman soul.
Ottoman Empire just got too tired from being fighting everyone around it: Russia, Europe and Iran for 400+ yrs around the clock. 3 fronts + competing with Spain and Portugal in Indian Ocean too. UK and Ottoman empire where very frindly up until around Napoleon Bonaparte times. Other thing Ottoman Empire trusted it is so called Ailes too much.
If it wasn't for 1908 and joing ww1 Ottoman Empire would have been as powerful if not more powerful than Japan + haveing non of Japan weaknesses/disadvantages in a very geopolitical strategic location + haveing most of the world oile and gas + having influence over Muslim world. Even with 1908 mistake and joing the losing side of WW1 if it wasn't for stupid and naive Arab revolut in 1916 Ottoman would have continued - it is impossible to invade with WW1 technology without internal support ie arab revolut. Although joing ww1, Aramain genocide and Arab + Turk nationalism would be impossible if it wasn't for 1908. Ottoman Empire was only 50 yrs late to industrial thing due it takes time to implement.
Mughal Empire is so big and powerful that it was more productive than industrial Europe, without being industrial. India what made UK.
Capitalism is not the blame to so called 3 world poverty and problems but colonialism and neo-colonialism of NATO and CIA. Also because of over dose of capitalist extremism and extreme exploitation and craziness what caused those things. Basically mis use of capitalism ,racism + stupid supremacy and greed what caused things. Neo-colonialism is real thing. France for example 85% of it is economy depends on exploitation of western Africa. It is all about CIA , cold war and colonialism.
Do u know that Ottoman Empire Sultanate could have would taking Spain and Portugal in just 10 yrs or so campaign in 16th or even 17th (especially during Solomon the magnificent period) century, but they didn't due 2 reasons: too expensive and money wise not going to make money + Morocco would have alot of Muslims die. Ottoman Empire could have took Venice intead of Vienna. Also they would took Vienna and half of Germany if it wasn't for Persia. Also all of that they didn't use their armies in Anatolia and Egypt which would have added at lest 400k soldiers to their 200k ish main professional army in Balkans. Mamluks had a very skilled professional force of 220k in Egypt of their own you may add (Which Napoleon Bonaparte destroyed).
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Just 2 notes: 1) threekingdoms China or Qin is a big ones too
2) despite how much weaker Byzantium and Prussia got after their 9.9 yrs war and from other wars before it they still where at the time more powerful each than China or India oftge time. Also, they still superpowers. Plus despite whatever you say and everything logically speaking on paper it would still be absolutely impossible for the Muslim Arabs to defeat even 1 of them. But they fought both and generally except for first year at the sametime against a collection. For record only First Caliphate and USA that in history managed to fight 2 front wars at the same time. If you count Qin will they where really good and proven and experienced before it. Same with USA it had many advantages that where too much. But the Muslims where in magnificent significant severe in many disadvantages. Not only having no knowledge or experience of full scale wars but severally out numbered 3-5 times on average by each side with much similar population, less money and less resources. Most of their resources cane from constantly winning battles. Someone like Khalid wasn't trained in tactics nor had any books or people to teach himself. Just came out of the blue.
The Arabs had few advantages: the enemy can not attack them back at the desert and they have capability to keep attacking for ever campaign after the other. But it worked from first try. But that same advantage combined with distance from good areas and capital it is a disadvantage too. Which makes the war if longer just more bloody not more than that and longer. But eventually they would win but not first try or that much and even conquer all of Persia and do what the full Roman Empire could not do. Also do not forget Afghanistan and Zergose mountains in between Mesopotamia and Iran. They had too pour managment skills as well as no much food and money for first 3/4 of the Campaign length. Even manytimes run out of water. The army was consistently hungry for most of the time. There is no line of supplys. Also the distance and desert forces them to not be able to send the numbers they could otherwise too.
The their situation was crazy as.
Despite all odds stacked against them. They win strongly and done the impossible manytimes over. Also, remained in control for a long time and the ideology stayed to today. Unlike other conquest.
All this done by people whom almost nobodys.
Thus, the weaker state they where in Byzantium and Prussia doesn't matter and doesn't take credits from Arabs nor explains why they succeeded. Although, it is one of many other reasons.
Also Tang China is equal or a bit less powerful and rich than first 50 yrs or half of the 8th century Abasised of Baghdad.
China and middle east for all human history except for 18th century and onwards the most rich and powerful in the world. India can be the same but it is usually not one nation. It happened only 3 times their history for prefer time. It only really united was under Deile Sultanate and Mughal Empire Sultanate. Mughal for 400 yrs where the most powerful in the world and richest.
Both whom are turks/Mongoliaic muslim ishy (due to doing many bs that contradicts Islam as a Muslim, especially Mughals whom based on Timur which is f up for 50% of the time) ,but maintained most of the population being rich. So ruch that some people didn't become rich / lost their richness by the fact their things value dropped because there is too much of it, like gold.
Note: Ottoman Empire Sultanate got really weak because of Napoleon Bonaparte and their weak image came by the beginning of the 19th century 18 hundreds with Napoleon Bonaparte attack on Egypt. And stayed a superpower up to 1830s-1850s. Their decline began by 1750s mid 18th century (however, it wasn't more about decline really than western Europe getting more powerful due to America and industrial revolution steam engine idea)
Also Ottomans are fighting everyone around them from 3 sides + Portugal and Spain being annoying in Indian Ocean too. Russia, Europe and Persia/Saifivd (another superpower of the gunpowder empires) slown Ottoman Empire. Plus their triple system stoed working as they expanded and should used first Caliphate political system.
They had a chance of coming back with Abadalhamed II however they overthrown real Ottoman sultan in 1908. They also wasted their chance of not getting into WW1. Otherwise, they would be with us today and middle east would be powerful and peaceful and advance + no Israel.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Just 2 notes: 1) threekingdoms China or Qin is a big ones too
2) despite how much weaker Byzantium and Prussia got after their 9.9 yrs war and from other wars before it they still where at the time more powerful each than China or India oftge time. Also, they still superpowers. Plus despite whatever you say and everything logically speaking on paper it would still be absolutely impossible for the Muslim Arabs to defeat even 1 of them. But they fought both and generally except for first year at the sametime against a collection. For record only First Caliphate and USA that in history managed to fight 2 front wars at the same time. If you count Qin will they where really good and proven and experienced before it. Same with USA it had many advantages that where too much. But the Muslims where in magnificent significant severe in many disadvantages. Not only having no knowledge or experience of full scale wars but severally out numbered 3-5 times on average by each side with much similar population, less money and less resources. Most of their resources cane from constantly winning battles. Someone like Khalid wasn't trained in tactics nor had any books or people to teach himself. Just came out of the blue.
The Arabs had few advantages: the enemy can not attack them back at the desert and they have capability to keep attacking for ever campaign after the other. But it worked from first try. But that same advantage combined with distance from good areas and capital it is a disadvantage too. Which makes the war if longer just more bloody not more than that and longer. But eventually they would win but not first try or that much and even conquer all of Persia and do what the full Roman Empire could not do. Also do not forget Afghanistan and Zergose mountains in between Mesopotamia and Iran. They had too pour managment skills as well as no much food and money for first 3/4 of the Campaign length. Even manytimes run out of water. The army was consistently hungry for most of the time. There is no line of supplys. Also the distance and desert forces them to not be able to send the numbers they could otherwise too.
The their situation was crazy as.
Despite all odds stacked against them. They win strongly and done the impossible manytimes over. Also, remained in control for a long time and the ideology stayed to today. Unlike other conquest.
All this done by people whom almost nobodys.
Thus, the weaker state they where in Byzantium and Prussia doesn't matter and doesn't take credits from Arabs nor explains why they succeeded. Although, it is one of many other reasons.
Also Tang China is equal or a bit less powerful and rich than first 50 yrs or half of the 8th century Abasised of Baghdad.
China and middle east for all human history except for 18th century and onwards the most rich and powerful in the world. India can be the same but it is usually not one nation. It happened only 3 times their history for prefer time. It only really united was under Deile Sultanate and Mughal Empire Sultanate. Mughal for 400 yrs where the most powerful in the world and richest.
Both whom are turks/Mongoliaic muslim ishy (due to doing many bs that contradicts Islam as a Muslim, especially Mughals whom based on Timur which is f up for 50% of the time) ,but maintained most of the population being rich. So ruch that some people didn't become rich / lost their richness by the fact their things value dropped because there is too much of it, like gold.
Note: Ottoman Empire Sultanate got really weak because of Napoleon Bonaparte and their weak image came by the beginning of the 19th century 18 hundreds with Napoleon Bonaparte attack on Egypt. And stayed a superpower up to 1830s-1850s. Their decline began by 1750s mid 18th century (however, it wasn't more about decline really than western Europe getting more powerful due to America and industrial revolution steam engine idea)
Also Ottomans are fighting everyone around them from 3 sides + Portugal and Spain being annoying in Indian Ocean too. Russia, Europe and Persia/Saifivd (another superpower of the gunpowder empires) slown Ottoman Empire. Plus their triple system stoed working as they expanded and should used first Caliphate political system.
They had a chance of coming back with Abadalhamed II however they overthrown real Ottoman sultan in 1908. They also wasted their chance of not getting into WW1. Otherwise, they would be with us today and middle east would be powerful and peaceful and advance + no Israel.
3
-
All what you talked about doesn't really fit East-Asia and it has nothing to do with Muslim world.
Indonesia and Malaysia are under the shadow ailed as one and they are growing very powerfully, Afghanistan would be at lest 2× as rich as Saudia Arabia with more logical independent decisions it would be a very powerful and rich state , China buliding a neo-slick road and already control most of Asia, China and Muslim powers around India and 200M Muslims in India and the many different societies in India would collapse and control India, China doesn't want the world it wants Asia and influence into Africa and control over Indian Ocean and limit the west economy, Afghanistan and Pakistan are really one controled by the Pashto people ethnicity, China might get changed to overthrow the communist and establish a dynasty rule modeled after Ming Han Qin Tang and the three main philosophies of China as well become fully Republic imperialism like UK but the emperor has more influence on top the republic and be capitalistic as it was for most of history capital Hongkong but with a Chinese twist to it and Islam would start to get into East Asia, an aliens would be formed with fully united Korea Japan and China, East Asia and Muslim powers would form unity, Islam would keep expanding it is size and get to be more everywhere and more and more people convert.
"The richer the people the less childrens they will have" that is the opposite in Muslim world. The richer the more wifes and more childrens from each.
Capitalism the best economical system, ya of course most of history it is capitalist. But however, What type of capitalism?
Islam has it is own version of capitalism.
Capitalism is not new, it is just obvious. But USA applied it differently as it suites them with addition to Chinas Ming dynasty influence of economical perception and bit more from their brain.
A neo-Gunpowder Empires age is coming. A new age for Islam and Muslims.
You know that Islam has a nationalistic nature too as the nation of Mohammed and as one nation. This is found in prophet Muhammad words in first Caliphs words and in the Quran. The NOM... the age of capitalism is wavering, the age of Normalization of NOM (Nation of Mohammed) is coming.
I think Iran would be divided between Turkey and Afghanistan-Pakistan Taliban as well central Asia.
Turks are coming, back.
Capitalism would be a concept within a bigger one called Normalization based of the Islamic version perception of capitalism.
3
-
3
-
The answer is that they are all both and all politics are bs. They are all wrong. They are both bad. Democracy is fake. You choose yes but bith choices has been chosen for you before hand. The CIA for example what controls USA, in the real world. This is just talk. All politicians in the west are colonial, neo-colonialism, racist and are by a plan deliberately destroying Africa and rest of the Muslim world since 1850s to the day. They want Africa to say as it is. Africa got into a real colonialism after WW2 under the neo-colonialism and it is continuing to the day. The entire political system is corrupt, ugly and bs and so bad. There is also problems with democracy: significant disadvantages, such as ; alot of emotions is evolved, not always choosing the right thing, eassy to manipulate people for vots, not really all adults can vote as not everyone understands those things (when you are sick do you ask a doctor or your computer science friend?), no alot of information is present to us, people choose by shity resones, alot of selflessness, not really knowing whom we are voting or dealing with ect... democracy doesn't fully work for effective efficiency with a big population more than 20M in my opinion. The economical, political and social system needs to be changed or destruction comes. What is happening today is similar to the western Roman Empire.
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2