The Mongol Destruction of Baghdad

[dexter]

The most devastating Mongol attack in history. After demolishing the Order of Assassins, Hulagu Khan leads an enormous Mongol army against the great city of Baghdad. The Abbasid caliph has angered the Mongols, and his people will suffer for it. Few will survive the wrath of the Khan.

 

[aziqbal]

Had Saladin came a little later he would have handed the Mongols their defeat

his armies were light and fast, they used diversion and hit and run tactics very well

however the Mamluks did what no one else could do, they defeated the Mongol Heavy Calvary in close combat

 

[PakFactor]

Had Saladin came a little later he would have handed the Mongols their defeat

his armies were light and fast, they used diversion and hit and run tactics very well

however the Mamluks did what no one else could do, they defeated the Mongol Heavy Calvary in close combat

The Mongols also started to have divisions within themselves that slowly weakened them. If the Mongols in their original form existed, Saladin would not have been victorious; if you study the crusades, even his scribe wrote that Saladin regrets many of the decisions he's made that cost too many lives and wasted resources. For example, he wasted too much time on siege tactics and not cutting off the supply routes of the crusaders; allowing them to regroup the Battle of Jaffa with King Richard is just one example of how not to war. This almost reminds me of the Ukraine-Russian Conflict and Russia repeating the mistakes of Saladin, costing them the war.

 

[aziqbal]

The Mongols also started to have divisions within themselves that slowly weakened them. If the Mongols in their original form existed, Saladin would not have been victorious; if you study the crusades, even his scribe wrote that Saladin regrets many of the decisions he's made that cost too many lives and wasted resources. For example, he wasted too much time on siege tactics and not cutting off the supply routes of the crusaders; allowing them to regroup the Battle of Jaffa with King Richard is just one example of how not to war. This almost reminds me of the Ukraine-Russian Conflict and Russia repeating the mistakes of Saladin, costing them the war.

Saladin took on 6 Kings from Europe simultaneously and over 1 million came with Fredrick from Germany alone

less than 1/10 returned home and Jerusalem remained in Muslim hands for next 700 years until Arabs sold it out

Saladin was a true master tactician and Mongols would have stood ZERO chance against him

 

[villageidiot]

Saladin took on 6 Kings from Europe simultaneously and over 1 million came with Fredrick from Germany alone

less than 1/10 returned home and Jerusalem remained in Muslim hands for next 700 years until Arabs sold it out

Saladin was a true master tactician and Mongols would have stood ZERO chance against him

bro, the mongols got their first ever defeat at the hands of mamluks at Ain Jalut, when they were evenly matched in manpower. This was at a time when there were internal fissures and hulagu was away for the kurultai.

At the time of genghis khan, there simply was not match for these mofos's tactics. While Saladin utilized quicker and lighter armies versus the bulky and slow crusader armies, would have been too slow against mongols. He was a great strategist but too slow for even Richard at Jaffa. Mongols were simply a league of their own at their peak. They weren't the single largest contiguous land empire for no reason.

Another example of a more direct comparison, is Saladin tried and failed to subdue, and eventually had to sue for peace with the Assassins but the mongols straight up obliterated them, where everyone else had failed be it seljuks, crusaders or indeed Saladin.

 

[aziqbal]

bro, the mongols got their first ever defeat at the hands of mamluks at Ain Jalut, when they were evenly matched in manpower. This was at a time when there were internal fissures and hulagu was away for the kurultai.

At the time of genghis khan, there simply was not match for these mofos's tactics. While Saladin utilized quicker and lighter armies versus the bulky and slow crusader armies, would have been too slow against mongols. He was a great strategist but too slow for even Richard at Jaffa. Mongols were simply a league of their own at their peak. They weren't the single largest contiguous land empire for no reason.

Another example of a more direct comparison, is Saladin tried and failed to subdue, and eventually had to sue for peace with the Assassins but the mongols straight up obliterated them, where everyone else had failed be it seljuks, crusaders or indeed Saladin.

many people have little understanding of Saladin as a person and his personality and why certain things happened

Saladin dealt with his enemies in accordance with who they were

He gave Richard the Lion Heart a horse when he was about to be killed and offered to marry his son to his daughter in exchange for coastal cities as Dowry

However he beheaded Reginald De Chatillon in a instant when he insulated our beloved Prophet Muhammed SAW

He never killed the King next to him saying Kings do not kill Kings

Saladin was a merciful leader who did not kill more than who he needed to however at the Battle of Hittin he wiped out the crusaders

600,000 crusaders, historians mention when you looked at them alive you could never image they would ever die

after Saladin was done you could never image anyone of them was ever lived

Mongols strong point was their heavy Calvary and extremely strong head on charges, this is a mirror image of the Crusaders Christians

Saladins armies would wipe the floor with Mongols, he never won by strength or numbers, but mastery in military tactics using geography to his advantage and his arches were the best in the World

 

[Foinikas]

Saladin took on 6 Kings from Europe simultaneously and over 1 million came with Fredrick from Germany alone

less than 1/10 returned home and Jerusalem remained in Muslim hands for next 700 years until Arabs sold it out

Saladin was a true master tactician and Mongols would have stood ZERO chance against him

Over one million is an exaggeration.

It was about time someone defeated the Mongols though...and I'm talking about the Mamluks and their forces.

600,000 crusaders

Bhai,where do you find these numbers?! This is way too much.

 

[chinasun]

Hulagu Khan uses the jade seal in Chinese.Nominally, it is a dependent country of the Yuan Dynasty.

 

[PakFactor]

Saladin took on 6 Kings from Europe simultaneously and over 1 million came with Fredrick from Germany alone

less than 1/10 returned home and Jerusalem remained in Muslim hands for next 700 years until Arabs sold it out

Saladin was a true master tactician and Mongols would have stood ZERO chance against him

many people have little understanding of Saladin as a person and his personality and why certain things happened

Saladin dealt with his enemies in accordance with who they were

He gave Richard the Lion Heart a horse when he was about to be killed and offered to marry his son to his daughter in exchange for coastal cities as Dowry

However he beheaded Reginald De Chatillon in a instant when he insulated our beloved Prophet Muhammed SAW

He never killed the King next to him saying Kings do not kill Kings

Saladin was a merciful leader who did not kill more than who he needed to however at the Battle of Hittin he wiped out the crusaders

600,000 crusaders, historians mention when you looked at them alive you could never image they would ever die

after Saladin was done you could never image anyone of them was ever lived

Mongols strong point was their heavy Calvary and extremely strong head on charges, this is a mirror image of the Crusaders Christians

Saladins armies would wipe the floor with Mongols, he never won by strength or numbers, but mastery in military tactics using geography to his advantage and his arches were the best in the World

You have not presented any substantial evidence or proof to back up your claims except for hearsay. Saladin was not a good strategist or tactician. It would be best if you correctly studied the crusades besides YouTube videos.

I don't claim to be an expert, but I've spent enough time studying military history to have a good enough opinion to stand on.

In the 1st Crusade, Jerusalem was captured by the Crusaders, establishing the Christian Levant. During the 2nd Crusade, Saladin comes along and retakes Jerusalem. The 3rd Crusade resulted in the Ramla Agreement to keep the status quo in the region for some time -- Saladin kept Jerusalem; however, the Crusaders held the main parts - Coastal Cities -. They also captured the City of Acre, which gives a direct landing platform (beachhead) into the area, among other territories that give inland access to Muslim lands. Richard leaves the region to consolidate power back home.

This is where the fun part starts and why I say Saladin and many Muslim Military leaders are failures. So much resource was spent in recapturing and defending Jerusalem, which is strategically useless and makes it difficult to defend and easily susceptible to being cut off from outside supplies. This allowed Richard to cut off supplies from Egypt and Syria to Saladin forces, who were forced to retreat into the walls of Jerusalem, allowing the Crusades to establish firm control in surrounding territory. Rather than focusing their military strategy on retaking the coastal cities Antioch, Tyre, Acre, and Jaffa to cut off Crusader forces, they settled for Jerusalem while leaving the Keys in the hands of the Crusaders.

The latter had enough time in a few years to regroup and resupply themselves with weapons and men into the region. Coming back to Saladin, rather than building a Navy as the head of united Egypt & Syria, he just sat around doing nothing, to put it plainly, while Christian forces were re-arming and using Cyprus to amass their army for the 4th Crusade. Read Page 12 on-wards: (https://deremilitari.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/gillingham2.pdf)

Saladin and other military leaders' failure to secure the home front leads to further losses of life, money, and blood in the 5th, 6th, and 7th Crusades. You have to look no further than Germany, WWII Normandy; once the beachhead was established, Allied Forces dropped supplies and consolidated and started making advances; not going to go into deep history on this, but you get my point.

Saladin took Jaffa (from the land route, but remember he failed to build a navy during the Ramla Agreement Period, which could've helped him); Richard regrouped and, by sea, launched a naval raid, and was successful in retaking it, look at the map and see how vital this is -- he had Christian soldiers captured. Still, the fool fails to kill them off. Instead, Richard frees them, his army adds more men, and Saladin is forced to surrender.

In the 2nd and 3rd Crusades, we lose more territory to them to hold one useless city, but not a single port city.

Below is what Saladin Chronicler said after the 3rd Crusade, and he couldn't think through what to do next and what to plan next to fix his error:

I fear to make peace, not knowing what may become of me. Our enemy will grow strong now that they have retained these lands. They will come forth to recover the rest of their lands, and you will see every one of them ensconced on his hilltop,' meaning in his castle, 'having announced, "I shall stay put," and the Muslims will be ruined.'

These were his words, and they came about as he said.

@villageidiot
@Foinikas

 

[aziqbal]

You have not presented any substantial evidence or proof to bac

ather than focusing their military strategy on retaking the coastal cities Antioch, Tyre, Acre, and Jaffa to cut off Crusader forces, they settled for Jerusalem while leaving the Keys in the hands of the Crusaders.


@villageidiot

stopped reading after this rubbish you are clueless

 

[lastofthepatriots]

Whatever the case, Bhartis should be kissing our feet for never allowing the mongols into their swamps.

 

[ThunderCat]

This is why i argued we need a military history forum with several subdivisions:
1) Pre-historic warfare
2) Ancient warfare
3) Medieval warfare
4) Post-meadival warfare
5) Pre-modern warfare
6) Modern warfare
7) Future warfare

 

[K_Bin_W]

Whatever the case, Bhartis should be kissing our feet for never allowing the mongols into their swamps.

Something they are never taught in their schools, if it was not for circumcised warriors each and every Gandphat Lal would have been khanned. --

 

[aziqbal]

This is why you are the resident stupid of PDF because you fail to comprehend anything. With people like you, no wonder our country's a basket of shit. You failed at reading cause you had nothing to counter.

@LeGenD How this clown ever held the title of Think Tank before it was taken away?

@Foinikas, now you know why we have a clueless and useless Pak Army.

losers like you should stick to sucking up to China and brown nosing white masters

when brown loser like you start making up tails about glorious China we know we are laughing basket of the world

 

[INS_Vikrant]

Whatever the case, Bhartis should be kissing our feet for never allowing the mongols into their swamps.

Taimur and Babur would like to disagree