No mongols

[alexmilman]

the author or maker of the video just said the mongol conquest made the the conservitate and things that made industralization imposible in chinise society and goverment more prevolent not that the mongols stoped it .

Which is exactly the same thing I'm talking about: (a) start blaming the Mongols for what happened after they had been expelled and then (b) extend scope of that blame to something that would not happen anyway.

as for the Khwaresm again the areas most of their conquest were not even 50 years old heck some were bearly 20 and then a new force cut them off.

if it were up to me i give the empire the same life span as the seljuks so about a century or century and a half

How exactly this contradicts to what I wrote?

Muhammedunderstimated the mongols

Yes. The same goes for the Keraits, Tatars, Merkits, rulers of Western Xia, Jin, Song, Kuchlug, the Russian Princes (twice) and Bela of Hungary. The list is probably much longer.

" let his army to be completely exterminated in a battle." which one? in the indus? yeah due to chinghis sending 10 000 to outmanuver him after he nearly breached the nearly the center of the Mongol army ( and he had placed his army in a good defensive position the mongols out numbered him and it was nearly a mongol defeat .

Sorry, but in the battles "almost" does not count. The point is that he, with a force that was numerically and qualitatively inferior to the opponent took a position which prevented any retreat and did one of the stupidest things possible in these circumstances: tried to break enemy by attacking his center thus weakening the flanks and allowing enemy to attack them and encircle him. Perfect Cannae. BTW, the Mongols at that time tended to keep a considerable reserve and initial attack with a following retreat was a standard method to tempt an opposing idiot to do something fundamentally stupid.

also he didnt start conflict with delhi the sultan it makes no sense he wanted refuge

Why would he need a refuge if he already subdued at least part of Punjab?

and the sultan according to both Juvayni and Minhaj, he wanted an allience wich the sultan denied and had the envoys killed ( ad din attack Qabacha but he was enemies with the sultan) and heck the sultan send forces to his enemy or in other sources marched an army against him.

Obviously, he wanted an alliance with the Sultan of Delhi and obviously the Sultan did not want an alliance with him: why would he want to stick his neck helping ad-Din against the Mongols? Not to mention that his activities at Sultan's backyard definitely should make the sultan suspicious: where was the guarantee that from Lahor he woudl not march on Delhi?

as for him in the west i mean the base of his empire or his father empire in transoxiana was cut off (so to speak the head of the snake was cut off) after the center of his empire was killed he wanted to form a neo empire as a new based and manged to pull it off for a while .
with him defeating a small mongol army going to the caucasus defeating the Eldiguzids

OK, we both agree that he was trying to create his own empire but I don't see why should it make everybody's darling and why would it justify genocidal activities in Georgia (mass murder of the people who did not want to convert to Islam).

and heck some times he didnt even use force like in the Battle of Bolnisi were he Georgians, Kipchaks, Alans, Vainakhs and Leks came with 40 000 to defeat him and he Kipchaks to desert the coaltion
as for Yassi Chemen you are rigth but it was not a seljuk only endavor rather and abuyid seljuk one were again ad din almost won despite his small army and sittuation (with the coaltion with 42 000) and the mongols arrived after the defeat and the rebellions after him (not saying that the mongols would have lost if he won at Yassi but its a possibilty)

You see, here we going again to the point I was making: he kept creating the enemies. The Seljuks were not a part of his father's "empire", he just tried to conquer them and Ayyubids sent help to the Sultanate of Rum because in 1227 he attacked them and captured the town of Akhlat. He just kept making enemies all around him, not to mention the rebellions within his state.

 

[Silver01]

Which is exactly the same thing I'm talking about: (a) start blaming the Mongols for what happened after they had been expelled and then (b) extend scope of that blame to something that would not happen anyway.




How exactly this contradicts to what I wrote?


Yes. The same goes for the Keraits, Tatars, Merkits, rulers of Western Xia, Jin, Song, Kuchlug, the Russian Princes (twice) and Bela of Hungary. The list is probably much longer.


Sorry, but in the battles "almost" does not count. The point is that he, with a force that was numerically and qualitatively inferior to the opponent took a position which prevented any retreat and did one of the stupidest things possible in these circumstances: tried to break enemy by attacking his center thus weakening the flanks and allowing enemy to attack them and encircle him. Perfect Cannae. BTW, the Mongols at that time tended to keep a considerable reserve and initial attack with a following retreat was a standard method to tempt an opposing idiot to do something fundamentally stupid.



Why would he need a refuge if he already subdued at least part of Punjab?




Obviously, he wanted an alliance with the Sultan of Delhi and obviously the Sultan did not want an alliance with him: why would he want to stick his neck helping ad-Din against the Mongols? Not to mention that his activities at Sultan's backyard definitely should make the sultan suspicious: where was the guarantee that from Lahor he woudl not march on Delhi?



OK, we both agree that he was trying to create his own empire but I don't see why should it make everybody's darling and why would it justify genocidal activities in Georgia (mass murder of the people who did not want to convert to Islam).



You see, here we going again to the point I was making: he kept creating the enemies. The Seljuks were not a part of his father's "empire", he just tried to conquer them and Ayyubids sent help to the Sultanate of Rum because in 1227 he attacked them and captured the town of Akhlat. He just kept making enemies all around him, not to mention the rebellions within his state.

1) you said that the author said that they would have an industrial revolution with out the mongolian invasions which is something he never said or big misunderstanding from your part
Now can debate how much merit the thing after the mongols happens the author said that the mongol made them more conservative than they already were ie like a sort of reaction to their rule .


2) nothing just stating.

3) i would agree in most cases but it shows a difference if ad dim was very incompent why did he almost win against a superior enemy ? That thar really prove he was incompent or that enemy was more competent.

Also the center did a feint retreat as you implied why didn't the wings attempt an encirclement like the mongols did in other battles .

As for Cannae The battle of the indus if anything
is more similar to battle of walaja than cannae , when khalid al walid send his cavarly from the field to lure the sassanids to attack and then these attacked from the back was this the case for the mongols?

Unlikely, unlike al walid who sent his cavarly away before the battle began , chingis sent him after his initial charge was pushed back why not after sure it could be to fool him but the the most likely(since the mongol casautlies were heavy and the mongols were not one to waste lives ) that he simply used it as a last resort to save the battle .

3) ask the historian who said that he wanted to go to sultan for refugee and for him to go to the palace which the sultan made an excuse for him not to .

4) makes sense but what was your response?

" he started a conflict with Sultan of Delhi" which he didn't as i mentioned two historians say the sultan did .
In what universe does a person rejecting your offer for alliance then helping your (and his ) enemy or marching his own army against you , make you the instigator ?

5) yeah he wanted to make his own empire as for the massacre don't know the sources don't say (not that I could find) maybe he was to into his religon maybe he wanted to send a massage to his brutality or that he would not tolerate infidels etc .

6) yeah I agree at first he wanted an alliance and after they rejected him he attacked for reasons unknown.
As for the rebellions he dealt with them fine actually with the expections after he lost against the seljuks .

 

[Skraea]

Butterflying away Genghis Khan does not necessarily mean that the Mongols won't invade Europe. European steppes are close by, considered to be of better quality and not that well fortified. The Huns swept through the European steppes around a thousand years earlier, and there were migration patterns from Asia to Europe much earlier during the Neolithic. More than likely, some ambitious Khan decides to invade Europe if for nothing else than the riches of Byzantium and Rus.

 

[Silver01]

Butterflying away Genghis Khan does not necessarily mean that the Mongols won't invade Europe. European steppes are close by, considered to be of better quality and not that well fortified. The Huns swept through the European steppes around a thousand years earlier, and there were migration patterns from Asia to Europe much earlier during the Neolithic. More than likely, some ambitious Khan decides to invade Europe if for nothing else than the riches of Byzantium and Rus.

Wat..the european steepe and the area were chingis lived are 5000 kilometers apart , the huns came from the volga region which is significantly closer ( yes I know of the xiongnu theory but thar was migration that lasted centuries not one empire expanding )