Nuking the Entirety of Arabia in 610


#1

I dream of going back in time and nuking the entirety of Arabia in 610. Without the rise of islam, how would the world as a whole and the mediterranean develop?

Religion in pre-Islamic Arabia was a mix of polytheism, Christianity, Judaism, and Iranian religions.

Arab polytheism, the dominant belief system, was based on the belief in deities and other supernatural beings such as djinn. Gods and goddesses were worshipped at local shrines, such as the Kaaba in Mecca. The Kaaba was dedicated to Hubal and also contained the images of the three chief goddesses Al-lāt, Al-‘Uzzá and Manāt.


#2

The wars between the Sassanid and Byzantine Empires brought both Empires to near collapse.
Resulting in the Sassanid Empire being overrun by the Muslims, and the Byzantine Empire too found themselves unable to defend their borders.


#3

Were Sassanids not Greek culturally?


#4

They were actually Persians.


#5

Islam not existing would probably result in ancient Greek texts not being translated to Arabic, in turn not coming to Western Europe.


#6

But many of the things destroyed by the worst of the Islamist’s and Christians would still be with us. No WARS (Crusades).


#7

He is not arguing a hypothetical for Islam not existing, he is made the post about “Nuking all of Arabia” in order to stop Islam from spreading.

A real alternative history would have to be centered around the Byzantine and Sassanid empires.

Either they do not have such a devastating conflict that nearly collapses both of the Empires. Or, one of the Empires needs to have a relative easy victory. This would make the Muslims from Arabia unable to contest them. Hence they’d remain in their isolated shithole.

I vote Byzantines winning.


#8

Byzantines would possibly become more successful than they were irl, I agree.


#9

Or, what could also happen. According to my knowledge, when the Arabians first attacked the Sassanid Empire, their commanders had a duel in front of their men. So the highest rank versus the highest ranked and then two commanders below them versus each other.

If the Sassanids had killed the Arabian leader, whom appears to have been a capable general, then they might not have won further conquests.

In either event, if the Byzantines did not lose then the Turks would have remained in Central Asia, or at least not be able to settle in Turkey. So we would not have to deal with a modern day version of Turkey anymore.

Then you have to wonder about the Mongols, but they were willing to make friends at first, before they nuked the hell out of Central Asia because the ruler killed the Mongolian envoys.

So maybe the Mongolians still gobble up Persia and make friends with the Romans.


#10

How would the rest of northern Africa develop though? I have zero knowledge of pre-Islamic Africa.


#11

Much of Africa was still under Roman control at that time, so they would have developed under Rome and would likely remain Christian.

Well, Egypt would still be Coptic in terms of their religion, but Africa would definitely be Christian.

The Visigothic Kingdom might not have collapsed either.


#12

That’s an intereating interpretation. You seem to be supporting the argument I often hear POC and Islamophiles make that had it not been for Islam, Western Europeans would “still be living in caves” etc.
You do realise the Muslims encountered civilisation among their conquests, rather than brought it, don’t you? Ancient Greek writings and other teachings from the classical period were already available all across Europe prior to Islam’s taking up the flame of civilisation. Most educated people in Europe would’ve spoken both Greek and Latin.
Far from preserving the knowledge of the ancients, the Muslims were actually responsible for destroying much of it (as they are still doing to this day). Moreover, they destroyed classical civilisation itself and were themselves responsible for plunging western civilisation into the dark ages (oftwn erroneously blamed on Germanic ‘barbarians’). The renaissance was triggered by the rediscovery of the tattered fragments that remained from the classical period, none of which required the ‘discoverers’ to speak Arabic.
All this ‘Golden Age of Islam’ nonsense is nothing more than propaganda designed by sellouts and appeasers to obfuscate the truth about history and the West’s relationship with political Islam so that we might more readily accept the current, ongoing invasion and occupation. Islam are not now and never were the torch bearers of civilisation and the champions of enlightenment and justice. If their is any doubt about that claim, try this simple thought experiment: the Moorish kingdom of El Andalus on the Iberian peninsula is often cited as the most politically and technologically advanced region of the Caliphate and the pinnacle of Islamic achievement in the Golden Age. Ask yourself this: is it more likely, as Islamophiles claim, that the brutish armies of Islam who poured out of the Arabian peninsula some 300 years or so prior to invading the old Roman province of Hispania brought this learning with them, or that they inherited it from that pre-existing culture? Is it not unlikely to be a coincidence that this area - this old, established part of the Roman empire - just happened to be the site upon which the greatest, shining example of Islamic civilisation flourished?
Islam have contributed NOTHING of any worth to humanity that would not have existed in a more complete form without them. Even their fabled architecture was inherited from the Persians and other conquered middle-eastern people.


#13

Interesting question. The results would probably change so much it’s hard to even imagine. The Arab slave trading being gone would have huge ramifications on its own.