You mean American evangelicals? Yeah I mean that’s true, but I interpreted OPs comment in a way that they think the conflict between Israel and everyone else would simply be about Jews vs Muslims and I think that’s a very catchy Reddit type of comment but it’s very far from reality.
There was a somewhat peaceful coexistence of all kinds of religions before the collapse of the Ottoman Empire (let’s not get into the genocides the Ottoman Empire committed here). There have been pan-Arab nationalist movements in the 19th century to separate from the Ottoman Empire that the British undermined, see e.g. their meddling in Egypt. There have been local Arab nationalist movements that have been undermined, most prominently the Palestinian one.
Jews were in general safer in the Middle East than in Europe (I hope I don’t have to explain this). Especially in Palestine there have always been Muslims, Christians, and Jews. In Lebanon there were and still are many Christians. In Syria there are many ethnic and religious minorities. In Iraq there has been a coexistence between Shia and Sunni people. Iran wasn’t a very religious country.
The suppression of nationalist movements during the Ottoman period, the arbitrary borders that the British and French drew after they left their colonies, the installment of monarchies loyal to their interests and the creation of Israel all fueled conflicts. After the creation of the apartheid settler colony Israel, the Americans led regime changes in
Syria (1949, 1956-1957)
Egypt (1952)
Iran (1952-1953)
Iraq (1959, 1963)
all with the goal to prevent disloyal governments from forming, or even worse regimes that would take away their rights to extracting resources for free. These regime changes usually led to the establishment of brutal military dictatorships and to resistance groups forming. This is when the religious nut jobs finally entered the stage. They were either fighting the Americans (Iran) or armed by the Americans (Saudi Arabia, Taliban anyone?). And since the post WW2 period sectarian violence emerged because who would have guessed that destabilizing an entire region just to keep its influence down would fuel conflicts between people.
Maybe now you see why it’s such a typical snappy Reddit comment to blame it on religion but it’s in fact a pretty stupid take.
Btw for sources, regarding arab nationalism there’s „10 myths about Israel“ by Ilan Pappe and regarding regime changes there’s an extensive Wikipedia article on all American led regime changes.
I mean this person has absolutely no idea what they’re talking about if they think journalists publish in The Lancet just because it’s called a journal so I think any discussion is absolutely pointless.
How about taking about the elephant in the room that is British + French colonialism plus the establishment of a genocidal apartheid settler colony along with US driven regime changes through funding terrorist groups or just outright invasions?
It’s so damn lazy to blame all of this on religion.
You do not seem to understand how peer review let alone scientific research works and what kind of rigor is required to get your research published in an A* journal and I’ll leave it at that.
Boohoo let’s form an SA and do some pogroms then! Clearly some poor fuckers in a hotel are the reason for the misery, not the €28 billion net worth of the British royals or the owning class in general that fills it pockets through years of Tory rule and shifting the Overton window so far to the right that anyone who speaks of helping the poor is considered to be the reincarnation of Karl Marx himself.
I would like to find nicer words but at this point working class right wingers to me seem like they have brain damage. You can’t be doing mental gymnastics to this extend and have a healthy functioning brain at the same time.
I agree with this and I don’t think this bot adds any value given that it’s so damn biased itself. I would love to consume more left wing mass media, but from a Western European perspective sadly something like that barely exists. I also wouldn’t call The Guardian Centre-left like MBFC but rather centrist, as they are imo balancing the sides for as much as anyone can, but they are not my idea of a leftwing media outlet.
Ah yeah I had no idea you’re that kind of person. Well let me phrase it this way: I don’t care what you claim exists or doesn’t exist. As long as the USA don’t apply their standards to everyone which includes the genocidal apartheid settler colonialist project and its terrorist leaders I couldn’t care less who they call terrorist or who they sanction. They can do it but they have no moral authority to claim that it is in the name of humanitarian values.
I suggest starting with the Wikipedia Article on Axel Springer to understand what’s wrong with them. If you already know and you don’t care that explains a lot, but judging from the votes and the comments, most other people also don’t find your article interesting. That together with your style of communication are really not contributing a lot here. Posting ≠ contributing.
I agree but I rather worry that they’ll take over here as well because more people read this and are like „wtf I’m out“. That’s what happened with me on Reddit too. I was still lurking before the blackout but it was often already kinda bad.
However now if I look at Reddit it’s no different than Facebook or instagram because I assume many mods left, and I mean those who actually cared about their community vs being in power. I think it’s bad if these „opinions“ are here, even though they get downvoted to oblivion. They will just poison the discourse.
And don’t get me wrong, plurality of opinion is very important. But Nazi bots do not play by the rules, they do not contribute to said plurality, they want to destroy it and take over any space where people exchange opinions.
This is about the West Bank not Gaza, but given that there’s virtually no Hamas in West Bank this imo makes the terrorism charges even stronger.
That being said I think you have a point that there are some frameworks to follow. My problem is that the US only considers their enemies terrorists and doesn’t care about their own / their allies‘ war crimes, hence their hostility towards the ICC.
Likud consisted of terror organizations before becoming a political party. Doesn‘t stop Western politicians from simping for them. Again, I’m not a fan of Hamas but when they took over Gaza they became the government. Yet, we labeled them terrorists and still consider them as such.
You could then say „yeah but no Palestinian state exists“ and I would say that again, the USA do not recognize Palestine as opposed to most countries on this planet. That and the siege on Gaza since 2007 make it pretty much impossible to act as a state even though Palestinians want to do that since the British mandate period, hell since it was ruled by the Ottomans.
I hope you get what I mean, the rules are only the rules for some.
I mean you being condescending isn’t exactly contributing to the culture here and maybe it’s contributing more to not post low quality content than posting just for the sake of it.
You mean American evangelicals? Yeah I mean that’s true, but I interpreted OPs comment in a way that they think the conflict between Israel and everyone else would simply be about Jews vs Muslims and I think that’s a very catchy Reddit type of comment but it’s very far from reality.
There was a somewhat peaceful coexistence of all kinds of religions before the collapse of the Ottoman Empire (let’s not get into the genocides the Ottoman Empire committed here). There have been pan-Arab nationalist movements in the 19th century to separate from the Ottoman Empire that the British undermined, see e.g. their meddling in Egypt. There have been local Arab nationalist movements that have been undermined, most prominently the Palestinian one.
Jews were in general safer in the Middle East than in Europe (I hope I don’t have to explain this). Especially in Palestine there have always been Muslims, Christians, and Jews. In Lebanon there were and still are many Christians. In Syria there are many ethnic and religious minorities. In Iraq there has been a coexistence between Shia and Sunni people. Iran wasn’t a very religious country.
The suppression of nationalist movements during the Ottoman period, the arbitrary borders that the British and French drew after they left their colonies, the installment of monarchies loyal to their interests and the creation of Israel all fueled conflicts. After the creation of the apartheid settler colony Israel, the Americans led regime changes in
all with the goal to prevent disloyal governments from forming, or even worse regimes that would take away their rights to extracting resources for free. These regime changes usually led to the establishment of brutal military dictatorships and to resistance groups forming. This is when the religious nut jobs finally entered the stage. They were either fighting the Americans (Iran) or armed by the Americans (Saudi Arabia, Taliban anyone?). And since the post WW2 period sectarian violence emerged because who would have guessed that destabilizing an entire region just to keep its influence down would fuel conflicts between people.
Maybe now you see why it’s such a typical snappy Reddit comment to blame it on religion but it’s in fact a pretty stupid take.
Btw for sources, regarding arab nationalism there’s „10 myths about Israel“ by Ilan Pappe and regarding regime changes there’s an extensive Wikipedia article on all American led regime changes.