how many times in islamic history has their small army overcome a much larger army.?

Question

military buffs only.no silly remarks.

Answer 1

Only when Muslims were on right path and their motives were not personel gains of their dictators/leaders but only to support the cause of truth in the name of God against injustices and human sufferings. If you read history particularly Islamic history the Muslim victories, even with small armies were long lasting but when ever they occupied the territories with injustices the victories were not lasting. I am convinced that even in the present time a small group of finatic muslims think that they have waged war against west and ultimate they will be winners are sadly mistaken. Islam on the first hand does not support this type of war where inocent people are being killed and secondly there no model Islamic society which can attract others to Islam. Muslims won the wars when they were offering better human rights than non Islamic societies. Whereas the oppposite is true at the moment. Muslim countries are offering the worst kind of human rights. Muslims are the most illiterate and ignorant community at this time being led by the dictators in most countries who are working only to extent their dictatorship.

So days are gone when Muslim societies were better than non muslim societies. And wars can not be won only by numerical superiority.

Answer 2

I've a rather good knowledge of history and I can't point out any. It was always with large armies they won (and often lost against small armies like Poitiers, many times in the crusades, Malta, different times against the East-roman empire, the Mongols, England, France, Israel, ...).
Sorry but maybe some else can give an example of the opposite.

By the way for the person that said that the Ottoman empire was the superpower for 6 centuries : think again. It started after the taking of Constantinople and ended shortly after Suleiman the Great (died 1655). After this the expansion was ended and more and more land was retaken by different European countries. Later on Turkey was mentioned as "the old man". It was a power to be recognised but not any more THE superpower.

Answer 3

Millions of times. those who say none WHAt do they know about Islamic history

Just look at the muslim's Ottoman Empire alone, they ruled over the world

they had the most advanced sciences and armies

they were the only Super Power for more than SIX CENTURIES
Who else did that--noooooo one

I wish they were here today, the world wouldn't have been the same.

They been around so long because they didn't abuse thier powers like the current super powers
that's why those new super power won't stay for a long time

I assure u that the Ottoman Empire will return -- and much better

Answer 4

Perhaps you don't know this, but Muslims numbers reach over 1.2 billion in this world, so the chances of having them be considered the smaller is slim to none.

For those who believe that the extremist element in Islam is small, the numbers are staggering. There are 1.2 billion Muslims in this world. Lets take a very liberal view that only a very small percentage of Muslims are exterme, while the rest of the Muslim world is very peaceful. So if only 10% of Muslims have extreme point of views, and may be a threat, and must be dealt with, meaning dealing with 120 million Muslims! How about 1%? Then you must deal with 12 million Muslims. How about 1/10 of a percent? Then you must deal with 1.2 million Muslims. The numbers are staggering! How do you propose dealing with even the "very low" figures of 1.2 million Muslim extremists?

I am sick and tired of hearing that Islam is a "peaceful" religion. Thank Allah Islam is such a "peaceful" religion. Can you imagine if it weren't??!

While not all Muslims are terrorists or support terrorism, the vast majority of terrorists and their supporters are Muslim. Islam is a very oppressive, violent religion, not only on its own people, but certainly on non-Muslims. The good Muslims ought to stand up and condemn Islamic extremists and Islamic terrorism, unequivocally, without any "and," "if," or "but."

Unfortunately for the modern world, the Muslims have been conditioned by their dictatorial regimes to have one thought, the same as the regime. There is no spectrum of opinions in the Muslim world, there is no freedom of expression, freedom of thought, freedom to live life freely (exception is in Turkey).

It's time for Muslims to take accountability for their religion and culture. Stop spinning, and address the fact that the Muslim culture is one of the most oppressive and violent cultures, against its own people, and certainly against other cultures.

It would be to the World to rid of Islamofascism and its backers: Hezbollah, Hamas, the Syrian and Iranian regime. It must be done to finally have a chance for peace in the world.

Answer 5

You really need to phrase that question better. Are you counting only those armies belonging to Caliphates, or modern states as well? Are you counting only those battles fought against foreigners (such as Acre, Constantinople, Taranto) or between Muslims as well?

Off the top of my head, only one battle barely qualifies: Ain Jalut, Mamluks vs Mongols, 13th century C.E. - and even then, the armies were fairly evenly matched. Central Asian and Middle Eastern armies throughout history tend to be defined by massed numbers, made possible by a fairly good technology base and superior agriculture. Between pre-Adrianople Rome and the end of the Renaissance, it was much too costly for most European states to even begin to field armies of comparable size.

The notion of Muslim armies as continual underdogs is false. Troops such as Mamluks and Jannisaries were first-rate during their prime. And having numerical superiority was always the preference and always paid off when led well. Read on Hattin on how things went well, and Wadi Al Khazandar for when they did not.

Answer 6

I am not sure but it was more than two. Ironically the component of Muhammeds army that played a crucial role in attaining the victory at one of Islams early needed victories was composed of Jews

Answer 7

You talk about all of Islam as if it were a single nation or had a single army. That hasn't been true any time in the last thousand years.

Answer 8

Hebrew is a language, Jews are a race. Jews are universal for speaking Hebrew and because that Jews talk Hebrew so Jews too are called Hebrews. in the Hebrew Scriptures, the call Hebrew isn't utilized to the language, the call there being utilized basically to persons or to the folk of Israel as an entire. in the Christian Greek Scriptures, even with the undeniable fact that, the call Hebrew is typically utilized to the language spoken through the Jews

Answer 9

lol i just realized it said Islamic amazing i skipped over that 4 times as i read the question, To be fair i don't think they ever won i think the are tied with France on the war history by them selves so lets see France by themselves are 1-12 the one is just to be nice so i would say Islam is 1-8 a war to them is different then what we know it as

Answer 10

Well, look at Iraq-- though the direct "army" is wiped out, the reinforcements, ie: insurgents, seem to be holding up mighty well.

I wouldn't totally dismiss their capabilities. Both sides have lost many.

Wouldn't you agree? Iran, Lebanon, Syria... are they not deemed a threat?

--Rob