Every Crusader who died was given full remission of his sins...that's a good deal!
Are any of them canonized? To whom goes greater glory: crusaders who died in battle, or canonized martyrs, held up by the Church as examples of holiness to be honored by all Christians until the end of time?
St King Louis IX
but I agree with you rbjmartin, Christianity and Catholicism in particular is a pacifist religion with the exception of wars of a defensive nature *edit* like the Spanish Civil War or Lebanese Civil War etc etc (I'm no moral theologian but I would have no problem, though the isolationist in me cringes, launching an offensive campaign to protect people and stop genocide, like in Rwanda or even in Vietnam to stop the reds) I can't just launch a massive invasion of Indonesia and kill everyone in the name of Christ who refuses to be baptized, that would be horrible- its disgusting even thinking about it!
Also I would find war appropriate to fight the Taliban and Al Queda in Afghanistan (and Pakistan though that I suspect would be a total mess of a war) because those people attacked us first and are a threat, but going over there and nuking Mecca, no matter how appealing to some it is, would be wrong and make us no better than the Muslims.
anyways have always been under the impression, after reading the documents involved, that what the crusaders got was basically a perpetual indulgence - not a ticket to heaven like junk history makes it out these days. Rather different from Muslims - they believe they go to heaven for killing people.
edit::
curiously I would consider the two wars that formed the country I now have allegiance too: the American Revolutionary War and the American Civil War to be unjust and aggressive, this first overthrowing your lawful King (protestant or not dosent matter, he passed The Quebec Act to the ire of many especially the American patriots) the Civil War being an aggressive war on the part of the Union.
Also to make clear I have no double standard, in the revolution only 1/3 of the population actively supported revolution against the King, unlike the South where it was pretty much everyone wanted to break away, also the Southern states were "sovereign" entities, not royal colonies.