Malaclypse Randolfo: A tiny group of people, from the mountains of Yemen, succeeded in defeating three empires centuries old. And this was achieved by imposing their religious beliefs? DO you not think that perhaps the religion proved attractive, allowing the Arab conquerors to build support? Or was this tiny tribe from Yemen able to impose its beliefs on much of Asia and North Africa? I think if you read accounts of the growth of the Arab world (Which was so decentralised it could bearely be considered an empire), you'll find it was the power of the religion among downtrodden people that so helped contributre to Islam's success. I believe we could easily say the same about Christianity. This does not refute my point regarding the link between fanaticism and culture rather than fanaticism and Islam. So not entirely conquered or defeated. And presumably, Muslims not entirely fanatic as Christians and Jews were welcome to worship in Palestine. If you are trying to suggest that Islam is by its nature fanatic, violent and intolerent, I'll need some evidence. If you're suggesting that Islam was imposed, I'd argue no more so than Christianity. I'm arguing that the major religions are in essence no different - they establish an ethical code through mystical texts that are open to interpretation depending upon the individual. Different interpretations gain popularity relative to the social and cultural circumstances. If you want to estimate some kind of body count, I think you'll find Christianity's hands are soaked in the blood of so-called 'infidels'.