The 4 Freedoms Library

It takes a nation to protect the nation

by History of Jihad 19 Aug, 2008

How the Jihad nearly overran Austria in 1683, threatening the Islamization of Europe. But in 1683 the Day was carried by Jan Sobeiski the Christian Braveheart from Poland who saved Austria and Europe from Islam.


Poland the Bulwark of Christendom “Propugnaculum Christianitatis”

During the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries the Christian inhabitants of southeast Europe lived in perpetual fear of Muslim invasions. The Mongol-Tartar raiding parties laid waste to the countryside, abducting captives for slaves and ransom; while Ottoman Turkish occupation meant at the least - pillage, sacrilege and extortion.

While for the Mongols-Tartars the sole purpose of waging war was material gain, before they had succumbed to Islam, the aim changed to imposition of Islam after the Mongol Khans after Hulagu Khan embraced Islam. The Turks who has embraced Islam in the 10th century, expressly invaded the Byzantine Empire and later Europe with the aim of converting the Europeans to Islam at the pain of death.

______________________________

__________________________________

The Muslim invasion routes were through either the Danube Valley to the walls of Vienna, or through the Moldavian plain and southern Poland. Much of the Turkish effort was directed against Poland, whose heroic resistance earned her the name "Propugnaculum Christianitatis" the bulwark of Christianity.


The Jihadis besiege Vienna but Polish Heroism saves the day

The Turks after overrunning Serbia, Croatia, Romania, Bulgaria and Hungary, now lunged at the heart of Central Europe by repeatedly attacking Cracow and Vienna. They focused on Vienna as that was the major city, the capture of which would open their advance into Poland and Germany. Sensing the danger, in the winter of 1682-3, Poland, Prussia (Germany) and Austria came to an agreement providing for joint action against a Turkish invasion and promising relief in case of a direct attack on Vienna or Cracow.

______________________________

Jan Sobieski leading the Hussars at the Battle of Vienna.

__________________________________

The threat of Turkish attack could not have been more real. A Turkish army of over 140,000 men started marching north in March of 1683, and arrived at the walls of Vienna on July 14, 1683.

As about March 1683, the Turks were preparing for an attack on the Hapsburg capital, Vienna, and were gathering their forces together rather rapidly. By June, they had invaded Austria, and King Leopold and his court moved to Passau. On July 14, the Turks reached Vienna.

They laid siege to the great city. One of the disadvantages that the Turks had was that they did not have sufficient heavy artillery. The defenders fought bravely but their food supply and their ammunition were running low. The Turks had made some breaches in the walls but their effort was hindered by the barricades erected by the people of Vienna.

______________________________

__________________________________

Earlier that year on March 31, 1683, King John III had signed the Treaty of Warsaw with the Holy Roman Emperor Leopold. In this treaty, they had agreed to come to one another’s aid if the Turks attacked either Krakow or Vienna. Following his agreement in the treaty and the appeal of the pope, Sobieski marched to Vienna with an army of about 30,000 men. Sobieski said that his purpose for going to Vienna was "to proceed to the Holy War, and with God's help to give back the old freedom to besieged Vienna, and thereby help wavering Christendom."

______________________________

Polish light cavalry

Kara Mustapha Pasha lead an Ottoman force of 140,000 against Vienna, defended by 11,000. The Viennese gave up their suburbs, withdrew inside the fortified town and prepared for a siege; Emperor Leopold had moved to the western regions of his Habsburg domains. While the siege (July 14th - Sept. 12th) made progress and the area surrounding Vienna was subjected to raids, relief armies had gathered in various regions of the Empire and in Poland (which had been a French ally and thus a Habsburg enemy, but was drawn into the Habsburg camp by papal diplomacy).

Vienna was a strong fortress, but by the end of August 1683, the city was in mortal danger of collapsing to the Turkish attack. Food and ammunition were inadequate, and on September 1, the Turks exploded a mine under the walls and captured one part of the city. Outside the walls however the outlook was brighter. The defeat of a Turkish corps at Bisamberg allowed for the concentration of the allied armies northwest of Vienna. Most importantly 30,000 Poles under their warrior-king Jan Sobieski, the savior of Vienna and Europe, had arrived.

______________________________

A winged Hussar at Vienna

__________________________________

Sobieski, who already had a considerable reputation against the Turks, assumed command. His plan was to force battle on the plain west of the city and annihilate the Turkish army, thus breaking the siege. The Turkish commander Kara Mustapha continued to focus much of his effort at capturing the city, therefore at the start of the battle only part of his army was prepared to meet the relief force led by Sobieski. At four a.m. on the 12th of September 1683, the Austrians on the left wing moved forward and commenced battle, the Germans in the left center soon joined them.

As the Turks were preparing to counterattack, the Polish infantry emerged on the right wing clearing the foothills dominating the plain. By four p.m. the cavalry had moved up and prepared to charge. At five P.M., Sobieski ordered the charge. One German-Austrian and three Polish cavalry groups, 20,000 men charged down hill, echelon after echelon, lead by Sobieski, straight for the center of the Turkish camp. As the cavalry burst into the Turkish lines, the garrison in the city attacked the Turkish rear.

The demoralized Turks and their Tartar and Malaysian allies soon broke and ran, and the battle turned into a rout. At half past five Sobieski entered the Grand Viziers tent and the siege of Vienna was broken.

The merciless slaughter of the Jihadis by the Husaria, (Polish armored cavalry) after the victory at Vienna broke the back of the Ottoman Jihad and saved Vienna

In this battle the Polish King Jan Sobieski completely routed the Jihadis with his Husaria, (the Polish armored cavalry), which alongwith the cooperation of the Austrian and German armies, played an important role in the victory.

Sobieski with his Husaria charged toward Kara Mustafa's headquarters and mercilessly slaughtered all the Turks that he had at his mercy. Seeing this, Mustafa's army fled in panic. Even so, the Turkish army suffered heavy losses. This victory freed Europe from the Ottoman Turks and their invasions and secured Christianity as the main religion in all of Europe.

______________________________

Jan Sobieski the savior of Vienna and of Europe in 1683.

__________________________________

The Turks lost about 15,000 men who constituted the cream of their cavalry on the field, while the Western allies lost less then 4000 – martyred and wounded. Vienna had been delivered in the nick of time, since earlier that same day the Turks had exploded mines that had given them access to the city.

The Turks never recovered from the battle, while the Ottoman Empire survived for another two hundred plus years, from here on out it was merely a holding action. For Poland, this was her last great moment on centerstage when she saved Europe from Islam.

After the Battle Jan Sobieski entered Vienna in glory. The King and his Polish army had won considerable fame after their victory. Jan III Sobieski was not only looked upon as the savior of Vienna, but as a savior of the whole Europe from the Ottoman Turks

The defeat of the Jihadi Ottomans at Vienna in 1683, marked the turning of the tide of the second Muslim invasion of Europe (The first being turned back by Charles Martel at Poitiers in 732). The Republic of Venice declared war on the Ottoman Empire in 1685; a Venetian force conquered Morea and Attica, along with Athens. The Imperial Austrian army also remained on the offensive and gained ground; Buda was taken, after a siege, in 1686.

______________________________

__________________________________

In 1687 the Ottomans suffered another defeat at Mount Harsan near Mohacs, Belgrade was temporarily taken (1688), but retaken by Ottoman forces in 1690; in 1691 Transylvania was secured by the Imperial Austrian Army. Then the Imperial forces were placed under the command of Prince Eugene of Savoy; in 1697 he lead his forces to victory in the Battle of Zenta; in 1699, the Peace of Karlowitz (named Sremski Karlovci in Serbian, and Karloca in Hungarian) concluded the war.


Legacy of the war against the Ottoman Jihadis

The Ottoman Empire ceded Hungary, including Transylvania, to the house of Habsburg, Podolia to Poland and the Morea (Peloponnese) as well as border territory in Dalmatia to Venice. The war laid open the weakness of the Ottoman Empire; during the 17th century it would have to defend her vast Empire in numerous wars to the gradual advance of the Western powers.

In the 18th century, Russia, Britain and France not only sealed once and for all the threat of Islam to Europe, but took the war against Islam right into the heart of Islamdom with the conquest of Syria, Transjordan, Iraq and also extended their influence into Arabia (the last with the ingenuity of Lawrence of Arabia).

______________________________

The Ottomans besiege Vienna in 1683.

__________________________________

The victory at Vienna also gave the final death blow to the Ottoman Empire transforming it from an existential threat to Western Civilization into being "The Sick man of the Bosphorus" who survived till 1920 only due to the rivalry between the European powers mainly Russia, Britain and France.


Complete rejection of the Enemy’s Outlook was an essential ingredient in warfare

The reason why the Franks, the Spanish and the Austrians (as also the Byzantines before them) could repel the Muslim invaders at different times in history was that they had a complete disdain for the Muslim enemy’s outlook. They looked upon the Muslims as barbarians (which they in fact were). And with this disdain for the enemy they went to battle. The battle was half won, since it was already won in the mind. They never had the appeasement of the enemy in their minds as had Chamberlain for Hitler or as have Jacques Chirac,, Gerhard Schroeder have for the Islamofascist Jihadis today and to an extent even Tony Blair and George Bush (when he declares Islam to be religion of peace).

______________________________

______________________________

The Franks the Spanish and Austrians went to battle with a firm conviction that the enemy has to be not just defeated but utterly destroyed. This gave them victory over the Muslim invaders. We need to reinvent this outlook today, if our civilized way of life had to survive.

A Forward Military policy necessary in battling Islam

For the Franks at Tours, or for the Crusaders or for the Poles and Austrians at Vienna, with the battle already won in the mind due to a total contempt for the Muslim enemy. Because of this, the Franks, Spanish and Austrians, could follow a forward policy while battling Islam. The Muslim enemy was given no quarter, and after the initial Muslim attack, the Europeans of those days did not wait for the Muslims to fall upon them. On the contrary, they followed a forward policy of attacking the Muslims when they least expected and when they were at a disadvantage. This was an crucial reason for their success against the Muslims.

An Ideological battle with those committed to theology inspired warfare is futile, what is needed is their military defeat and decimation

The Franks, Spanish and Austrians (as also the Byzantines) could stand against the Muslims with conviction, as they realized that it was futile to try to negotiate with the Muslims. The only language that the Muslims understood was (and understand today is) that of blood and death.

In the annals of the Muslim attacks on Christendom over one thousand four hundred years, there is no mention of any Christian King surrendering himself to a Muslim conqueror and embracing Islam as a price of his freedom. There were Christian traitors of course, who for the sake of petty gain, went over to the Muslims, (Count Julian of Visigothic Spain is one example). But they were exceptions, that proved the rule to be otherwise.

______________________________

__________________________________

In the millennium and a half long war with Islam, all Christian kings as also the Christian armies and the lay population preferred fight or flight, rather than surrender and the ignominy of conversion to Islam. It was only those who were unfortunate enough to fall to the hand of the conquering Muslims who had to submit to Islam at the point of the sword and became Muslims at the pain of death.

Taking the war to the Muslim enemy’s civilian population was the trump card to a lasting European victory

Christianity was never spread at the point of the sword, and conversions to Christianity were never effected at the pain of death. But when the Muslim invaders were rolled back after a few centuries of occupation, the Christian re-conquistadors both in Spain and in the Balkans, followed a pragmatic policy of taking the war to the civilian Muslim population (many of whom were originally Christian) to either embrace Christianity, or leave the Christian lands, or to be put to the sword.

This ruthless European policy, ensured that there remained no hostile population in the liberated Christian lands, who would betray the Christian army or in peacetimes sabotage the nation by acting as a Muslim fifth column in Christendom. Today the situation is reversed with the large and ever growing Muslim populations in Europe and the USA. Today’s rulers have forgotten the enlightened policy of our forebears of the days of the Reconquista and the Crusades.

An enemy is an enemy, regardless of whether he is in the armed forces of the enemy’s military or is loyal to the enemy by reason of being a co-religionist. Thus an enemy civilian is also an enemy. This is the harsh reality, that we Americans and Europeans need to face. If we refuse to face it, there would be many more Theo Van Goughs in the near future in Europe, Australia, USA and the rest of the Western world.

______________________________

__________________________________

The fifth column that the Muslims populations in the West represent a heaven sent sanctuaries for the terrorists to whom the ordinary Muslims are loyal. We need be under no delusion that the Muslims in the West are loyal to the country in which they live. No way. They are loyal to Islam and hence to Islamic terrorism.

The Muslim in the West are vipers whom the Western countries have chosen to nurture on their bosom, a mistake that the enlightened Christian kings of the yore did never make. The argument today is that the world has changed, we no longer live in medieval times. Yes sir you are right. But it is the Western world that has changed. The Muslims still live in medieval times and nurture a blood feud with the West.

______________________________

__________________________________

If the blood-thirsty Muslim outlook is not seen-through for what it really is, and recognized as THE mortal danger it presents and countered with means that are far more ruthless than the ruthlessness and cruelty that the Muslims embody, there is a very dangerous future ahead for Western civilization. We hope today’s Western leaders open their eyes to reality, before it is too late in our battle against the Islamic Jihad. Islam presents a far more pervasive danger than Nazism, Fascism, or Communism ever did to our way of life based on Democracy and the Market Economy.

Tags: (1500-1683), Austrians, Jihad, Zaustria, Zimperialism, against

Seitenaufrufe: 521

Monitor this Page

You don't have to be a member of 4F to follow any room or topic! Just fill in on any page you like.

Privacy & Unsubscribe respected

Muslim Terrorism Count

Thousands of Deadly Islamic Terror Attacks Since 9/11

Mission Overview

Most Western societies are based on Secular Democracy, which itself is based on the concept that the open marketplace of ideas leads to the optimum government. Whilst that model has been very successful, it has defects. The 4 Freedoms address 4 of the principal vulnerabilities, and gives corrections to them. 

At the moment, one of the main actors exploiting these defects, is Islam, so this site pays particular attention to that threat.

Islam, operating at the micro and macro levels, is unstoppable by individuals, hence: "It takes a nation to protect the nation". There is not enough time to fight all its attacks, nor to read them nor even to record them. So the members of 4F try to curate a representative subset of these events.

We need to capture this information before it is removed.  The site already contains sufficient information to cover most issues, but our members add further updates when possible.

We hope that free nations will wake up to stop the threat, and force the separation of (Islamic) Church and State. This will also allow moderate Muslims to escape from their totalitarian political system.

The 4 Freedoms

These 4 freedoms are designed to close 4 vulnerabilities in Secular Democracy, by making them SP or Self-Protecting (see Hobbes's first law of nature). But Democracy also requires - in addition to the standard divisions of Executive, Legislature & Judiciary - a fourth body, Protector of the Open Society (POS), to monitor all its vulnerabilities (see also Popper). 
1. SP Freedom of Speech
Any speech is allowed - except that advocating the end of these freedoms
2. SP Freedom of Election
Any party is allowed - except one advocating the end of these freedoms
3. SP Freedom from Voter Importation
Immigration is allowed - except where that changes the political demography (this is electoral fraud)
4. SP Freedom from Debt
The Central Bank is allowed to create debt - except where that debt burden can pass across a generation (25 years).

An additional Freedom from Religion is deducible if the law is applied equally to everyone:

  • Religious and cultural activities are exempt from legal oversight except where they intrude into the public sphere (Res Publica)"

© 2018   Created by Netcon.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service