No. The initial Arab "conquests" were the result of a "unified" group of "opportunists" filling the power vacuum left by the result of a 26 year long war between the two "superpowers" of the age the Romano-Byzantines and the Sassanian Persians, that left both empires devastated. The Arabs fought no more than one or two decisive battles against the Byzantines, destroying their field armies and the cities and towns of Egypt and the Levant (Palestine and Syria) surrendered to them. There was no mass slaughter of civillians, no forced conversion, no expulsions, except of those Byzantine nobles who refused to convert; they were allowed to leave the area unharmed. No churches were destroyed or desecrated and the natives were allowed to administer themselves as they had before. The only differences were that they had to pay taxes to their conquerers. The tax could be avoided altogether if they converted to Islam and the Muslims even tried to stop mass conversions as they reduced their tax base. It took centuries for the region to convert to Islam, that's historical fact, not Islamophobic propaganda.
There's another book availble on the subject by the historian Tom Holland,
In The Shadow Of The Sword - Tom Holland that postulates the idea that the overwhelming bulk of Arabs in the 7th century that took part in the conquests were not even Muslims. Islam becoming a "state" religion much later. This book caused a bit of a controversy in 2012 when a TV programme about it was shown on UK's Channel 4.
TV historian Tom Holland triggers storm after calling Islam a made-up religion Daily Mail Online
What are you blaberring now? From the time Mohammad appeared on the scene, Islam spread through invasions and conquests. In India alone Islamic savages massacred over 90 million Hindus until they conquered it. And every nation Islam conquered, they forced the Arab religion, culture, and language down the people's throats at the point of the sword. Those who "converted willingly" knew what the consequences would be if they didn't.
Again, try reading some objective history, not Islamophobic propaganda. The only large scale massacres in India prior to the 1948 Partition, were perpertated by Timur-i-Lenk who was a Turko-Mongol warlord in the 14th century who used Islam more as a political tool to legitimise his rule, whereas his own religious beliefs remain a mystery. He's held responsible for depopulated vast areas of Asia and the Levant.
Islam spread as much through missionaries as did any other religion. The only people who claim 90million hindus were massacred by Muslims are those like Andrew Bostrom, who is not even a historian but an agenda driven Islamophobe, along with others like Daniel Pipes. Such accounts also tend to omit the Hindu massacres of Muslims.
If anyone is interested, here's a simplified but more objective account:
Muslim conquests on the Indian subcontinent - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Hold on the Mongol Empire was virtually over by 1280 and the Mongols were never Muslims,and their territory never extended into the Levant or India for that matter......are you sure that you don't mean the Mughals who invaded India 1540 well after the collapse of the Mongols and Ghengis Khan and his sons ??????? they were Turkic/Persian peoples with some Mongol but should not be confused with the Mongols under the Great Khan...who were never Muslim steve
If you've never heard of Timur-i-Lenk, he's better known as Tamerlane and his forces were a blend of Turkic and Mongol soldiers, here's a brief account of his campaigns in India and the levant:
Timur - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
He was a seriously unpleasant individual who may or may not have been a Muslim. When the Mongol empire split, the Ilkhanids eventually conveted to Islam
Ilkhanate - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia but other parts retained their Shamanistic practices.
Unpleasant? Ha ha ha. Yes he WAS a GOOD Muslim, just judging by the body count he left behind. He used Islam as justification for his campaigns of mass murder.
Born into the
Barlas confederation in
Transoxiana during the 1320s or 1330s, Timur gained control of the
Western Chagatai Khanate by 1370. From that base, he led military campaigns across
Western,
South and
Central Asia and emerged as the most powerful ruler in the
Muslim worldafter defeating the
Mamluks of Egypt and Syria, the emerging
Ottoman Empire and the declining
Delhi Sultanate. From these conquests he founded the Timurid Empire, although it fragmented shortly after his death.
Timur is considered the last of the great
nomadic conquerors of the
Eurasian Steppe, and his empire set the stage for the rise of the more structured and lasting
Gunpowder Empires in the 1500s and 1600s.
[3][4]:1
Timur envisioned the restoration of the
Mongol Empire of
Genghis Khan. "In his formal correspondence Temur continued throughout his life as the restorer of Chinggisid rights. He even justified his Iranian, Mamluk and Ottoman campaigns as a re-imposition of legitimate Mongol control over lands taken by usurpers[.]"
As a means of legitimating his conquests, Timur relied on Islamic symbols and language, referring to himself as the "Sword of Islam" and patronizing educational and religious institutions. He converted nearly all the Borjigin leaders to Islam during his lifetime. "Temur, a non-Chinggisid, tried to build a double legitimacy based on his role as both guardian and restorer of the Mongol Empire."
[6] Timur also decisively defeated the Christian
Knights Hospitaller at
Smyrna, styling himself a
ghazi.:91 By the end of his reign, Timur had gained complete control over all the remnants of the
Chagatai Khanate,
Ilkhanate, and
Golden Horde and even attempted to restore the
Yuan dynasty.[
citation needed]
Timur's armies were inclusively multi-ethnic and were feared throughout Asia, Africa, and Europe, sizable parts of which were laid waste by his campaigns. Scholars estimate that his military campaigns caused the deaths of 17 million people, amounting to about 5% of the world population.
After the death of
Abu Sa'id, ruler of the
Ilkhanid Dynasty, in 1335, there was a power vacuum in Persia. In 1383, Timur started the military conquest of Persia. He captured
Herat, Khorasan and all eastern Persia by 1385; he captured almost all of Persia by 1387. Of note during the Persian campaign was the capture of
Isfahan. After the city revolted against Timur's taxes by killing the tax collectors and some of Timur's soldiers,
Timur ordered the massacre of the city's citizens; the death toll is reckoned at between 100,000 and 200,000. An eye-witness counted more than 28 towers constructed of about 1,500 heads each. This has been described as a "systematic use of terror against towns...an integral element of Tamerlane's strategic element" which he viewed as preventing bloodshed by discouraging resistance.
****YUP, sounds pretty much like standard Islamic behavior throughout history.