DuQuense said:
You have to remember that It was the Treasure of Persia that allowed the Byzanitines to rebuild North Africa. Without this the Byzanitines would have been on a thousand year downslope.
I'd dispute that. It was several centuries before the Empire decided to meet the Moorish threat in North Africa (but, at least the Moors were Orthodox Christians, unlike the Arian Vandals). Though, I'm sure that, without the control of the trade routes, Byzantium wouldn't have been as wealthy and would've found it harder to finance the Moorish Campaigns.
Besides, I'll grant that the campaigns did eliminate a potential threat to the Empire, but, except for their last king (Philip, wasn't it?), the Moorish kings were usually pro-byzantine. I still say that the better choice would've been to support a coup. Though, I will grant that, with a pro-Byzantine Moorish kingdom centered around North Africa as opposed to the anti-Byzantine Moorish kingdom centered in Hispania, the New World wouldn't have been discovered as early. After all, it was the Byzantine's restriction on trade to the Moors (and, of course, Gothica) that prompted them to send out the expeditions.