Correct, Geforce in the sense that there was no Church Army per se. As you rightly say, the Church could – and did – hire mercenaries to overthrow “heretical” leaders who refused to toe the “party” line. And they’re still around to this day in the form of the Swiss Guards who, in addition to their ceremonial duties, are a small but “serious” armed security force.
Since these forces were under the exclusive command of the Pope or his delegated authority it is reasonable to refer to them as an army, although I do accept your point that there was no standing army as such. I don’t suppose it made all that much difference to whoever was on the receiving end, though!
In 1527 the German/Spanish Emperor Charles V used his troops to occupy and destroy Rome (sacco di Roma) and I think that meant the end of the Pope’s military adventures. However, the pope could still influence the kings like during the spanish inquisition.
And it did matter. Even long after the middle ages, a blessing from the pope could mean a military victory or defeat. Luckily for us the pope backed the spanish back in 1585 otherwise my name would be Dutchie or Arthur and I would be walking around in Portugal dressed in that afwul colour :p
So far this thread about useless historical facts
try to rewrite history again Garry? I thought you don’t like Western Europeans as much as Americans…why so biased this time? We didn’t started the whole problem in the Balkans, a couple of so called “righteous” nations of Europe begged and begged us to get involved and finish off what they were doing so poorly. :rolleyes:
Now for once I agree. The US has nothing to do with it, we (Germany, France, EU) asked Clinton to send troops and other stuff, against the will of the Senate! If I can remember Clinton even had to convince the Democrats. The US envolvement was a pure economic deal. The EU even got a bill I think.
But Western-Europe didn’t start the problems in the Balkan either. However, I do believe every country or organisation as the EU/NATO should take responsabilities towards the whole world community. Therefor I think it is our duty to send peacekeepers, and without sending a bill afterwarts, but at least there should be some cooperation.
Well, I did say it in my answer: there’s simply no mandate. Look, I feel sorry for the people in the Balkans, but these problems are not new, in fact, are already 500 years old (if not older). If UN-forces didn’t interfere, that’s truely a sad thing, but it is not going to change the fact that these nations should stop fighting. NATO and the UN may assist in making a peace-proces, support it, send troops to monitor, however, if the ethnic hatred continues, there’s little we can do about this. This has nothing to do with Europe’s military capabilities being crap compared to the US. Look at Iraq, even with the US’s best intentions, they can’t persuade the people to give in their arms.
BTW, did anyone see the series “Warriors” on BBC?
You won’t find the catholic church – for one – apologising for anything it was responsible for several centurys ago – it is bad enough trying to get it to own up to its paedophile priests of recent memory…
Flood.™
Well, if there’s a paedophile living in Britain I don’t see Tony Blair excusing do I? So why should the pope. These are individual cases, there might be a lot of them, but still, individual cases.
Ohh one last thing Grey Area, the pope didn’t actually have it’s own army. They were assigned to him by the German Emperor. However, at the time of the crusades, the Emperor was a weak and unimportant person compared to the pope. But there was no such thing as an organised army, mercenaries, and a whole lot of drunks, criminals … etc … I don’t think such thing as a national army existed before Louis XIV.
100% correct. But it would even be a mistake to blame everything on the church. As you said, anyone with enough ambition joined the crusades, even children. Apart from that, “the crusades” is not a war like WWII was. There were 8 large of them, with more than 200 years between. It was a time of mass-hysteria, where European rules battled against the Islam, but in the meanwhile kept fighting against eachother. So, very confusing if we have to remember each victim.
But even if “the gov’t” excused for these events, who can be helped? When the Belgian gov’t excused itself for the massacre in Ruanda (when we pulled back our troops) or the Dutch for Srebrenica, only some years ago, I keep asking the same question: “what does it matter?” Just politics, to shake hands, and we can get back to business?
well im not sure about church organisations, but most western governments tend to hold the view that all that is in the past and has long been forgotten about. if there was a formal apology, i’ve never heard anything about it, maybe someone would care to fill me in if i have missed something.
Probably because most states have only been created 18/19th century, hundreds of years after the last crusade. By that time, states didn’t even exist, so why (and how) should “the gov’t” excuse. There’s a difference between the crusades and the nazi’s. Both were horrific, but for the latter the (then) German gov’t can be held responsable. But how on earth can France (or any other european country), which is since 2 centuries a secular state, be blaimed for these things. Maybe the EU could appologise, but even that would be historical bul**** since Lithuania (East-Prussia) has suffered as much from the Teutonian Knights as the ME.
The pope already excused for the crusades a couple of times during the 20th century.
Sauron, what’s happening with you lately?
A UN-mission is always limited. Look, UN-troops can only monitor the region, they can not MAKE peace. And that’s the point of sending UN-troops, they can’t do a thing, otherwise nobody would allow them into the country. Very sarcastic indeed, UN-troops can only record the massacres that are happening. A UN-mission is of no use when the different parties don’t want to cooperate. But after a peace-proces, UN police forces can indeed, controll trafic (which is probably a very important issue).
The NATO-mission (K/SFOR) is totally different, but NATO and the EU can’t stay in the region forever. Most of the troops left the region already months ago (there are only 5000+ of them now). When there’s an uprisel of violence, NATO can scramble some troops (like French, British and Belgians some months ago), but after a while, they have to pull them back, because there’s no mandate.
Grey Area and Aries
Oh come on! David Duke! Most here were children when that idiot was taken seriously by anyone other than maybe his mother. You will have to do better than that.
As far as a the Nazi’s are concerned, were did the vast majority of Germans stand on the issue of extermination of the Jews not to mention others? They listened to Hitler and his madmen and what did they do about it? Nothing! They sat back and said nothing and have been making excuses for the last 60 yrs. So if you want to draw parallels between what happened then and the raving Islamic morons who preach hatred everyday in the M-E, then fine, but where do the majority of folks in the Islamic world stand? If they don’t support these idiots and the official bull-roar that is available for all to see from the M-E governments and the mullahs who spew out their weely hate, then let them speak. Let them show a little courage.
Calling others racist is to easy.
Sauron
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Ohh yes, I bet you would also be couragious. Honestly, if your country has been bombed to pieces twice the past decade, do you really think these people in Iraq are so shocked about one American being decapitated. I was, for sure, but you have to see things in perspective. For the average Iraqi, after the horror of the last decades (sadam AND allies), this is not even worth mentioning.
On the german-nazi thing. Ever heard of the Milgram-experiment? Here’s a scientific explenation for what you describe as just sitting back. Never heard of the economic depression of the 30’s, the treaty of Versailles?
Also funny you’re talking about Islamic hatred, but, Islam and Christianity are very similar religions. It would be funny if GWB said “may Allah continue to bless America”.
I have to vote, so yes, voted for the conservatives, but no VB. But a centre-left-right gov’t 🙁 a rainbow-gov’t they call it over here.
Elections in Flanders: Vlaams Blok has become the largest party which means all traditional parties (conservatives, socialists, liberals) have to form a gov’t to survive. Not a very bright future apparently.
Belgian hercs are already on the runway and can scramble within 15 minutes 🙂
Hand 87-5
I agree with you 100% on PAPER Communism sounds like a great idea, but it is impossible to impliment in the real world!! that is precisley the problem…Capiltalism has its faults for sure, but the bottom line is, most people will work hard to provide for themselves and their families..there is a degree of greed in that, because they won’t work as hard for someone elses family…But if every person in a nation is working as hard and efficiently as possible to provide the best possible life for their families, then the nation as a whole will benefit as well…In the US there is a popular saying,
“A Rising Tide lifts all Boats”
Accepting this concept and understanding it is at the crux of all the debates between Liberals and conservatives..and to a lesser degree between US democracy and European democracy.
TTP
There’s no difference between US and European democracy. What is important is the social system, but conservative parties should also be able to agree on the fact that social measures are necessairy.
And more irritating than pop-ups. Maybe we should add a max posts of 10 a day?
Agree with Plawolf though. Personally I think Snapper and Flood are good guys, but they are dominating the forum lately. I can’t blame them ofcourse, it’s a free and democratic forum, but it can be a little annoying.
I’m not going to vote, and I am one of the few people on this forum who may end up in jail for this 😀