Thank God for the Crusades

[spmetla]

ok my mistake. I would disagree that the crusaders were ignorant, instead i would call them [generally of course] compassionate and brave. I am unaware of a preacher calling for death and violence, perhaps you could provide some sources. My op provides some of the common sermons used to ignite the crusade.

I don't have any quotes for any Cardinals, Bishops, Pope etc... that says it but you know as well as I do that there were undoubtedly no shortage of low level clergymen that did just that. Preaching about the wicked hateful turks, mohammedens, saracens and how those inhumane servants of the devil deserve to die. You don't actually need me to find a source stating that explicity for you to believe it, right? I'm sure there were no shortage of the "God hates ****" types around at the time on both sides of the crusades.
Yes, there were more flowery speakers as well but those were aimed toward the more educated as well as toward people that could then donate to a military order instead of needing to put forward service.

The leaders of the crusaders weren't ignorant but as in all movements the rank and file were. Even for the educated West it remains true in our comparatively very well educated militaries.

i was speaking in general terms not every single instance, i dont disagree with the above. I would point out the crusaders took back Jerusalem without any blood shed either [5th crusade i think/ German crusade?]

Technically speaking that wasn't actually a crusade (and it was the sixth not the fifth which was in Egypt). The Western Emperor, Fredrick II was excommunicated so even the military orders (Templars, Hospitallers, Teutonic Order) were not allowed to accompany his 'crusade' but merely shadow it and if chance allowed some action to participate. The Emperor didn't win Jerusalem back but negotiated for it (he got it but under very poor terms), visited it, and then left a disorganized and infighting 'Outremer' behind to continue their self destructive decline.
He was a very practical and not religious man who did his crusade more for domestic reasons. He knew many languages, was more culturally aware due to his Sicilian ties and did not have a blind hatred toward the enemy. The Pope couldn't stand him because he controlled the HRE as well as Southern Italy and Sicily meaning there was no one to really play against him as they had in the past to keep Italy divided and the Papacy strong.

Once again all those efforts could have been put into something more tangible and permanent. During this time period the remenats of Eastern Rome were still attempting to cobble together their empire around Nicaea and efforts would have been better spent if they weren't stuck fighting the latin successors in Constantinople, Bulgaria, and so on. Again I'll point out that during this fragmented and weak period in Greece and Asia Minor the Seljuks still weren't able to even threaten an invasion of Europe and would soon be crushed by the mongols which would then lead to the rise of the Ottomans who would then consolidate power and eventually invade Europe.
Instead of useful help in a theater where victory of a sort could have been possible instead attention was focused on the 'holy land' with half hearted efforts that doomed that enterprise to failure anyhow.