blacksmit049

But Khalid's forces are always outnumbered by the enemy. In Walaja and Yarmuk, his forces are outnumbered but his tactical genius always wins him. It is the same for the Sultan, though he is not a genius in the battlefield, he is a great politician and a chivalric warrior. And though Khalid's enemies are exhausted, you can't say they are armed much better than the early Arabs.

Baderism

There's an official records for families in the middle-east that they're descended from Al Hasan Ibn Ali himself.

Labienus

The quality of the forces he faced was questionable, as the Roman forces at Yarmouk were mostly constituted of raw recruits if I am not mistaken. Also, he never faced a general of his ability.

Like I said before, if Heraclius had not fallen ill and could therefore take arms personally against Khalid in a pitched battle, I don't think that the Roman provinces would have fallen as quickly, if they would have fallen at all.

Khalid never met his match. Salah ad-Din did (Richard I) and lost. Therefore it is difficult to compare those two.

Ibn Aby Ahmed

Baderism, yes there are many descendants of Al Hasan Ibn Ali all over the Middle East, but I am talking in particularly about those who settled in Cairo like "الست زكية" as the Egyptians call her today, what happened to them in the reign of Salah Al Din, besides many of his followers accompanied his family I wonder, what was their fate too.

Tulun, you yourself said that you don't want to start a drama so why don't we just stick to that, and yes some Ismailis still survive in Yemen in very small numbers barely noticeable, from an empire to a small ethnic group which is barely noticed by the community, good job Salah Al Din, yes Jame3 Al Azhar is one of the most prestigious Islamic Universities in the Middle East but did Jawhar or any other Fatmid Caliphate intended it to be that way?
He sold most of it, these are not any books, these books carried a whole culture if they survived today it may have changed our interpretation of the past, these books could have changed a LOT today.

Many claim to be descendants but are they? We distinguish a descendant of the Prophet (PBUHAHH) or any of house hold by their title that is given to them from their father who got that title from his father that got it from his father etc etc, this title traces itself up to Al Imam Mosa Ibn Jaffar Al Kadim he was the first one to give the titles to his sons, Sayed Ahmed and Sayed Mohammed, their sons carried this title "Sayed" and it stills survive today, this is how we distinguish a descendant of the Prophet and/or his house hold, but of what I have heard, is that you distinguish a descendant by the appearance of a vein on the forehead if angered, to me that sounds very silly, because I have a Malaysian friend who has that, he ensured me that he is native to Malaysia etc, so the thing is they claim to be, but no one is ever sure, I am only convinced of that method I described earlier.

Tulun

Well we are in the 21th century so i would be most convinced if the Ashraf and the Sadah prove their ancestry with DNA test Like in the Judaism there is the 'Cohanim' who claims descent from Harun brother of Prophet Moses and dna tests proved most of them indeed descend from a common ancestor, a similar research would be interesting here also. Y chromosome pass from father to son so it couldnt distinguish who is descendant of Fatima or from other wife of Ali, but it can still prove if somebody still descendant of Ali ibn Abi Talib (or we can go back further as many families claim descent from other children of Abdul Muttalib).

Baderism

Ibn Aby Ahmed, no body can confirm his origin 100%, It's sad that the history of the middle-east isn't clear, It's distorted.

the biggest issue of the middle east that a lot of people who immigrate to this region claims that they are natives, and use famous families names. so we can't confirm anything now.

the second biggest issue that the politicians in the region changes the facts of history for their own goods, and for politics reasons.

Ibn Aby Ahmed

Baderism, I agree with what you proposed about politicians really nasty people, rulers of the Mideast have always and still are twisting facts to satisfy their needs.

But it is my very first time that I hear that immigrants change their last names in the Mideast, I myself live in an immigrant infested country they resemble more than 50% of our population, never did I hear of one changing his family name.

I agree that the history of the Middle East have been tampered with many a times which resulted in many misconceptions and to question some facts which are proposed by "the other side".

Tulun, I think that test would be splendid, but I don't think that anybody (in the Mideast) would like to properly fund this type of test, but for now we could just stick to the titles and family names for now :P.

blacksmit049

I agree that those two are incomparable in terms of enemies. But Khalid face a more tougher challenge, with Arabs train only for skirmishes. The battle of Walaja in my opinion, was an excellent tactical genius maneuver. He uses the terrain for his troops not to retreat against large enemy lines, and again uses it to hide his cavalry. In which a commander must learn his troops capability and the enemies as well, terrain advantage, and most importantly how to execute a good maneuver for a surprise attack which he does well in many battles. And in my opinion, Khalid is far better than Salah ad-Din in tactics, but politically speaking Khalid is a non-egoistic man! And I salute him for that. Although I don't put down Saladin in the bottom.

Abu ali

They are same to me,

one of them, was attempting to murder a caliph of Islam, the second threw a huge library in the Nile (books that if they was still here, they would've changed the world.)

for some reason Saladin, hated the followers of imam ali, and murdered them all.

ThePhilosopher

Khalid was of course the better tactician and strategist. I mean, he was removed from office because the Caliph at the time told him that people would start thinking their victories are because of you and not Allah. (Even though it was because of him lol)

People here seem to downplay Saladin, he was an excellent general and strategist but he was more of a political character rather than a military general which makes it difficult to compare the two.