• IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
      2912·
      4 days ago

      An actual historian can chime in if I’m wrong, but I’m pretty sure the middle east has had some sort of internal or external conflict going on for all of history. So the answer to your question is likely “still war”.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldEnglish
        536·
        4 days ago

        I’m pretty sure the middle east has had some sort of internal or external conflict going on for all of history

        Prior to the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, the Middle East enjoyed centuries of peace and prosperity. From the 13th to 20th centuries, you were far safer in Damascus or Baghdad or Tehran than Paris or Berlin or Rome. Europe was in a continuous state of civil conflict during this period.

        The Middle Eastern states were a popular refuge for European civilians fleeing the 30-Years-War, the Napoleonic Wars, the various wars of consolidation and independence following the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and the World Wars. Countries from Morocco to Iran were all common destinations thanks to their unaligned status and divorce from the conflicts in Europe. More common even than the Americas. In fact, a big early appeal of the Palestinian Mandate was that it allowed Christians, Muslims, and Jews alike to escape the pogroms north of the Mediterranean.

        In the early years, at the start of the Cold War, a number of the former European colonies broke away from their now-destitute colonial masters. This lead to brief civil struggles, largely centered around the capitals where all those European WW1/2 refugees had piled in. But by and large, the democratization of the Middle East was far more peaceful than the democraticization of Europe.

        It wasn’t until the 1950s, when spy games between the US and the USSR began to topple unaligned governments, that war in the Middle East became commonplace. But what we’re seeing today is a novelty of the 20th/21st century. You’re ignoring centuries of peaceful coexistence and fixating on a few ancient (Crusades) and a few very recent (Soviet/Post-Soviet) violent flare ups.

        • IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
          198·
          4 days ago

          So I checked Wikipedia, and the list of conflicts in the middle east in the years between 1300 to 1800 is far from empty. I know it’s easier to blame everything on the US, but you are ignoring dozens of different conflicts that occurred during that span of years.

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1210·
            4 days ago

            So I checked Wikipedia

            Show me a conflict within the borders of the Ottoman Empire that killed more people than the Napoleonic Wars.

            I know it’s easier to blame everything on the US

            Trying to explain to the judge that blaming Jeffrey Dahmer for all those bodies in the fridge is the easy answer and the jury needs to approach things more critically.

            I mean, if it makes you feel any better, the blame falls off the US once you spin the clock back before McKinley. The societal collapse during the 17th and 18th centuries are largely a consequence of imperial policies of England, France, and Spain.

          • BrainInABox@lemmy.mlEnglish
            58·
            3 days ago

            So I checked Wikipedia

            “You may have made extensive, well reasoned argument, but I have consulted the Holy Scripture (Wikipedia) and it says you’re wrong.”

      • BrainInABox@lemmy.mlEnglish
        74·
        3 days ago

        I can’t believe this racist bullshit is getting upvoted. Europe has far more of a history of being perpetually at war than the middle east.

    • MetalMachine@feddit.nlEnglish
      11·
      3 days ago

      Except almost all the problems in the middle east today can be traced to the Sykes pico agreement and imperialism by secular powers

    • BrainInABox@lemmy.mlEnglish
      171·
      3 days ago

      Most of the war in the middle east for the past century was created by secular imperialists, motivated by material greed and racism.

    • IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world
      510·
      3 days ago

      interesting, when a nation forms in the middle east without western influence, you get a mutual aid feminist state, which the media does it’s best to ignore, because the narrative that it is ethical to bomb arabs must be preserved.

      Rojave

          • Agosagror@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
            1·
            3 days ago

            Thats a long story, and true to any organization involved in syrian civil war, it’s a story that could be taught to me perfectly and I still wouldnt understand half of it.

            Simply whilst the US etc would prefer the SDF and by extenstion the YJP etc, Turkey would rather not have a kurdistani group in the area, for so many reasons. As such the turks have taken “buffer” zones in the area, and since Turkey is quite an important ally to nato etc, and important in containing Russia expansionism, the States has been quite passive about letting turkey invade.

            Im sure someone can add more detail, but my knowlegde of the precise mechanics of the SDF US Turkey relationship is lack luster.

  • lefaucet@slrpnk.net
    12·
    4 days ago

    Pretty sure it’s the rich and powerful who expect to become more rich and more powerful when there is war in the Middle East that bring about war in the Middle East.

    • IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world
      4·
      3 days ago

      Politicians,

      If we spend a trillion of taxpayers money to kill brown civilians, it will funnel billions into the pockets of the worst scum on earth, and they will funnel that tax money that could have been used on healthcare, housing, education… straight into my pockets.

      Politicians literally burning taxpayers and human lives in order to get a billionth of that cash.

      imagine robbing a bank, by setting it on fire with people inside, only to walk away with 3$ and call it a success.

    • niktemadur@lemmy.world
      9·
      3 days ago

      “An empire will rise”
      “An empire will fall”
      “War will break out in the Middle East”
      “The Boston Red Sox will win a World Series”

      OMG, was this man a wizard or what?!!

    • Darukhnarn@feddit.orgDeutsch
      84·
      3 days ago

      People have been slaughtering each other for well over 5000 years in the Middle East.

      • IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world
        62·
        3 days ago

        under that logic people have been slaughtering each other all over the world.

        the largest reason of war in the middle east are neocolonialism (western blocks controlling their puppet states for oil) and actually old timey settler colonialism (Zionism).

        saying “people have been slaughtering each other for…” is such a non answer.

        why did Nazis invade France? because they been fighting in Europe for thousands of years

        why was JFK shot? because people have been killing eachother for thousands of years

        you see how meaningless, non answer it is?

        I bloody hate though terminating clichés.

        • Darukhnarn@feddit.orgDeutsch
          21·
          3 days ago

          The root cause to violence in the Middle East isn’t Zionism and it certainly isn’t today as well. It plays a role, certainly, but it’s not the main cause.

          Comparing Zionism in its early forms to colonialism is wild. The lands originally settled by Zionist people were legally purchased. It became much more convoluted, when the British mandate informally supported two different claims to statehood on the same country, in order to gain support from various groups of the region. What we see today, can be described as „the British fucking around and leaving others to fight over their mess“. But even that is a simplistic answer. The reasons for the current situation are multiple and stretch over vast time horizons. Simply attributing the cause to Zionism is antisemitic. That being said, I oppose the current israeli government and its allies ideas. But the reasons for war, oppression and violence are never simple. Life isn’t black and white.

          • IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world
            12·
            3 days ago

            it isn’t colonialism because early colonial settlers bought lands from British colonials, then literally did an ethnic cleansing and took the rest, then it had heen gradually expanding and doubling down in apartheid, ethnic cleansing, and genocide.

            apartheid needs to die before there can be any peace.

            I’m Israeli, left in 2010 because i saw with my own eyes how horrible apartheid is. I wish to return one day, but a non apartheid Palestine.

            and saying that Zionism is one of the greatest evils in modern history isn’t anti-Semitic.

            because tying Jews to a genocide that so far is estimated to have slaughtered over 10% of the gaza population is insultingly anti-semitic.

        • Darukhnarn@feddit.orgDeutsch
          2·
          3 days ago

          Literally the only time with lasting peace, no vigilante groups, raids and so on was when the Romans tore down the temple and salted the earth around 73AD. Oppressed minorities or persecution were pretty much standard.