Thread 17969344

Why were the French able to pacify the North Africans (Algeria, Tunisia, Morocco) so quickly and easily in the 1800s when they struggled and failed to pacify the Levantine Arabs so badly during the crusades hundreds of years before?

>>17969344 (OP)
>so quickly and easily
It wasn’t, it took decades and a third of Algeria’s population being killed

>>17969363
Why didn’t they kill the other 2/3rds while they were at it?

>>17969344 (OP)
Arabs have been enslaved Europeans for centuries. The French reversed this trend for a bit but they are now again being enslaved and conquered by Arabs.

The same cannot be said of Levantines who were easily defeated by the French and Brits and have been colonies of foreign powers ever since, first French and Anglos, Americans, Russians and now Jews.

>>17969344 (OP)
made for BCC

>>17969380
Well it wasn’t due to lack of trying

>>17969344 (OP)
>quickly and easily in the 1800s
Because of Science
>when they struggled and failed to pacify the Levantine Arabs so badly during the crusades hundreds of years before
Because of god

>>17969344 (OP)
The conflicts in the 1800s were fought by a modern, cohesive nation state with a professional, funded and well-organized army. The crusades were fought by hundreds of different groups of warriors and their retinues, with organization levels ranging from "pretty alright" to "it's a miracle that they even made it to the holy land to begin with."

>>17969428
This
But also logistics were much easier during the time, the tech advantage of the europeans was much greater (or rather, actually existent), the population advance was greater.

>>17969382
The entire Arab world, other than Yemen, is firmly in the western sphere of influence at this point.

>>17969380
They needed the Africans for they're attempted genocide post WW1.

>>17969387
Big Calais Cock?