# Islamic hostility to the west works both ways. **URL:** \ **Category:** Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports\ **Created:** [July 8, 2017, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/islamic-hostility-to-the-west-works-both-ways/790793 "2017-07-08T21:36:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Balanced999](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/71c47a/32.png) [@Balanced999](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Balanced999)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2017, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/islamic-hostility-to-the-west-works-both-ways/790793/1 "2017-07-08T21:36:11Z")
If, I can add to Cecil’s answer to why the Islamic world is hostile, there is another factor. Much of Islamic ideation is to convert or conquer people and countries that are not Muslim. You forget the Muslim invasions all over the world to fulfill this premise.Esp the failure to take Europe in spite of over 500 years of occupation in Spain. This fueled fear in the west and added to the brutality of the Crusades. Some how this gets left out of the equation. The battle of Tours and the Battle for Vienna are significant reminders that the arrows of fear and mistrust go both ways. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2017, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/islamic-hostility-to-the-west-works-both-ways/790793/2 "2017-07-08T21:52:35Z")
The Crusades didn’t have anything to do with Muslims trying to conquer other nations in the name of religion. ---
**Author:** ![John\_W.Kennedy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_w.kennedy/32/1031_2.png) [@John\_W.Kennedy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_W.Kennedy)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2017, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/islamic-hostility-to-the-west-works-both-ways/790793/3 "2017-07-11T02:50:18Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > The Crusades didn’t have anything to do with Muslims trying to conquer other nations in the name of religion. Only because they already had. And the actual trigger of the First Crusade was various attacks on legitimate Xtian pilgrims. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2017, 4:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/islamic-hostility-to-the-west-works-both-ways/790793/4 "2017-07-11T04:38:13Z")
And the people who lived in those lands before the Muslims came were also invaders, as were the people they took it from, and the people before them. You run out of historical records before you run out of waves of invasion. ---
**Author:** ![Evan\_Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b487fb/32.png) [@Evan\_Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evan_Drake)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2017, 5:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/islamic-hostility-to-the-west-works-both-ways/790793/5 "2017-07-11T05:44:13Z")
Pope Urban’s speech kicking off the First Crusade **specified** it as a response to invasion: at that moment it had been the Seljuk’s spread, but apart from the fact Muslims had no more brotherly love than Christians and warred amongst themselves and there were a number of Muslim players in the game; they had only been around Jerusalem just over 400 years — bearing in mind Islam was just born then when it started grabbing everywhere — and had taken two thirds of Christendom, leaving only tiny Europe for later, the Fatamids actually lost the city for a few years previous, and then again to the Christians. Abrahamic religions are all very morose and heavy-handed… > [@Chronos](#): > > And the people who lived in those lands before the Muslims came were also invaders, as were the people they took it from, and the people before them. You run out of historical records before you run out of waves of invasion. Then by that logic it was high time someone kicked them out in turn. Left alone that would have been the Mongols. They generally succeeded. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2017, 12:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/islamic-hostility-to-the-west-works-both-ways/790793/6 "2017-07-11T12:22:44Z")
My point was that you can’t describe the Crusades as Muslim conquest. I’m not saying that there was no Muslim conquest, but the Crusades weren’t it. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2017, 12:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/islamic-hostility-to-the-west-works-both-ways/790793/7 "2017-07-11T12:47:51Z")
> [@John\_W.Kennedy](#): > > Only because they already had. And the actual trigger of the First Crusade was various attacks on legitimate Xtian pilgrims. Was that ever actually substantiated? The guys over at Extra History seem to heavily imply that [that was mostly made up](https://youtu.be/HIs5B2U7US0?t=50). ---
**Author:** ![Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/do_not_taunt/32/2968_2.png) [@Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Do_Not_Taunt)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2017, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/islamic-hostility-to-the-west-works-both-ways/790793/8 "2017-07-15T19:43:23Z")
Since no one else has done so, I’ll just observe that this seems to be in reference to this here article: [What did the West do to provoke Islamic hostility?](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/3347/what-did-the-west-do-to-provoke-islamic-hostility)