Perhaps one of the most interesting and mysterious areas of the world. Why is it, that most historical events that are of incredible importance to the west took place there? And why is it, that this once so flourishing land has now become diseased with war and conflicts?
>inb4 ITS ISLAM DUH /pol/ TOLD ME
>>504902
>Why is it, that most historical events that are of incredible importance to the west took place there?
Don't know what that means
>Perhaps one of the most interesting and mysterious areas of the world.
Not really. Thankfully, European archaeologist uncovered a shit ton of "lost" history
>And why is it, that this once so flourishing land has now become diseased with war and conflicts?
Lots of reasons, and yes, Islam is one of them
Any questions?
>>504902
>Why is it, that most historical events that are of incredible importance to the west took place there?
I know it's a meme, but it really is a "crossroads of culture" hence its importance (and flashpoint status).
>And why is it, that this once so flourishing land has now become diseased with war and conflicts?
Shit got real nasty after the breakup of the Ottoman Empire and basically everyone involved is to blame in some measure
I'm not going to say it's the Jews buuut... it's totally Israel's foreign policy to destabilize the entire region at all costs, with support from many other states.
>>504937
>it's totally Israel's foreign policy to destabilize the entire region at all costs
Hardly. They want stable states surrounding them. Israel's attitude is better the devil you know.
They're very happy with a stable Jordan and Egypt and have been quietly pro-Assad for literally years now
>>504902
>Why is it, that most historical events that are of incredible importance to the west took place there?
Birthplace of civilization and Abrahamic religion.
>diseased with war and conflict
1. Sykes-Picot
2. House of Saud and their historical pact with radical Salafist scholar Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab
3. The creation of the state of israel and it's assured legal, economic, and military protection by the West (same goes for House of Saud)
4. The forced dismantling and destabilization of Arab Nationalist states and parties
>>504945
>have been quietly pro-Assad for literally years now
https://news.vice.com/video/the-war-next-door-full-length
>>504960
>Vice
Here's your (You)
If this is about the IDF treating wounded rebels, which I imagine it is, that doesn't mean shit about geopolitics, it's about professionalism and humanity
>>504971
>that doesn't mean shit about geopolitics, it's about professionalism and humanity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golan_Heights#Territorial_claims
http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21677597-geologists-israel-think-they-have-found-oilin-very-tricky-territory-black-gold
>>504982
Care to make a point or argument that isn't links to meme "documentaries" and online articles?
>>504902
>mysterious
nigga what, the Middle East's history is better documented than Europe on account of their developing writing and advanced architecture earlier.
It's "important to the west" because modern western culture is a direct descendant/fusion of northern/western European native culture and Roman culture, and the Romans took from the Greeks, and the Greeks took from the Middle Easterners. So the inherent similarities in broad cultural ideas should be obvious.
>>504937
Make that Israel, America, Saudis, Iran, Russia, Turkey and sometimes even the old colonial powers who compromise the stability and growth of the region for their sake.
>Democrazy America wants the strongmen gone (secular nationalists) through rebels and interventions, especially if the strongmen are non-aligned which usually happens to be the case
>Russia won't let go of its allies and generally supports Iran against America, as well as the strongmen
>Iran wants its natural sphere of influence and withdrawal of America, supports various groups in this quest
>Turkey seeks its natural sphere of influence, but doesn't really do anything but follow America-NATO as far as I know
>Saudis want to spread their filth and have endless capital to support it
>Israel goes to extremes to secure its existence in kikey conniving ways
>Kurdish nationalism
>Muslims of all kinds are hostile Israel
It's a clusterfuck, but not a "durr tribal ethnic muh ayyslam" clusterfuck, but a geopolitical one with lots of strings being pulled at once and any sort of accomplishment seems to disappear by the end of the week. It's not even about "muh Sykes-Picot", that just marked the beginning of meddling.
>>505001
Wasn't there like, ruins of a city found somewhere in turkey that are almost 15.000 years old? Just think, if the middle east is the birthplace of modern civilization, what else can we find? Perhaps even older cities? Pretty mysterious and overwhelming desu
>>505025
Gobekli Tepe. 12000 years old.
>>505035
Yes this one, thanks anon.
You can conclude that there are maybe even older cities or ruins. Pre-Persian and Pre-Babylon middle east is really interesting, anyone got some history on that?
>>505039
>You can conclude that there are maybe even older cities or ruins
It's just mind-bogglingly old. Makes Ancient Rome basically the equivalent of last week
>>504992
My point is the israeli government has a hard on for the Golan Heights not only just to piss of Assad, but also because there is oil in the region. The Syrian government is also allied with Hezbollah and Iran. The israeli government will do anything in their power to fuck over Assad.
>>504902
Well it was very important in some periods of western history, but even 'the west' subject to scrutiny.
The classical west including Greece and Macedonia were constantly involved in Anatolia and the middle east, but the modern western world became much less interested in the middle east after the end of the crusades, and it was really the ottoman empire's invasions of Europe that kept it in the west's attention.
>Why is it a shithole now
Well the Brits and the French condemmned Germany to economic devastation after WW1, and saw a good bit of the world with oil and a dire need of civilising, so they came over, conquered a few countries and turned everything into dependencies.
Then Germany got it's revenge and bombed the shit out of Britain and France, and they couldn't keep the empire together.
Then the USSR and the USA took over in the middle east, but this is the 20th cetury, so we have to use 20th century imperialism.
tl dr: Everyone destabilised all the regimes, deposed gaddafi in the name of peace, and created an unstable region full of rich oilfields and brutal regimes. Go figure
tl dr: Muslims
>>505047
>The israeli government will do anything in their power to fuck over Assad.
everything except actively encourage his departure, apparently
>>505039
Çatalhöyük and Eridu
Islam definitely is a major factory. However, let's skip the philosophical discussion and substitute it for the political one.
Christians during the Reformation of the 1500s and then later in the 1800s, argued what the "the body of Christ" meant. Specifically, one point that the Protestants made, is that Christ only said "build a church" and not "build a kingdom". Another phrase spoken at the time was, "Christ is coming back with a kingdom, but for now he just said to build a church."
Islam is the opposite of this. Muslims are supposed to build a kingdom, called a caliphate. The first one was established first by Muhammad (I think, I'm not the best with Islamic history). The Christians did try this one. It was called the Holy Roman Empire, where the Pope had to crown the Empire. However, im sure you guys know that the HRE had tons of problems, so we wont talk about that
France, England, Spain etc are all Christians, they are also culturally different. In a similar vein, Syrians, Iranians, etc are Muslim, they are also culturally different. BUT...Muslims have a caliphate, or giant empire, which bound all Muslims, even if they are culturally different
A pattern you see in Islamic history is giant caliphates forming, and then collapsing. Then a vacuum occurring, then another caliphate, etc etc. The most recent is the Ottomans of course.
Today, when we say Ottomans, the first country that pops into our minds is Turkey, who are the defacto inheritors of the Ottoman Empire. Wait, weren't they a caliphate of all Muslims? Well, now you see what happens when empires fall...poof, anything other than the capital areas get forgotten
And that is what has happened throughout most of Islamic history. Caliphates rise and fall, and the rest of the Muslims who were the conquered ones are stuck in a rut
>>504957
>Sykes-Picot
Blaming that agreement specifically is the biggest meme in the middle east.
>>505055
> Muslims are supposed to build a kingdom, called a caliphate. The first one was established first by Muhammad (I think, I'm not the best with Islamic history).
"Caliph" literally means "successor," as in successor to Muhammad. Since Muhammad was obviously not a successor to himself, he was not a Caliph, and the Islamic community up to his death was not a "caliphate."
>>505052
For now, because they realized they played a bad card by hampering the Syrian government's efforts to fight the Wahhabis (see airstrikes).
This is simply a temporary occurrence of realpolitik. Assad provides a threat to israel, so it's best to distract him with a Wahhabi invasion. However, the Wahhabis have been gaining too much momentum and could pose a threat to israel in the future.
With all that being said, the IDF still readily cares for Wahhabi militants (Netanyahu even spoke to one in a hospital).
>>505055
The Ottoman empire wasn't a caliphate, it was, like the name suggests, an empire, with all members of the abrahamic religions under its rule. Hell, they called the head of the empire Sultan and not caliph.
>>505059
It's less the agreement itself than the whole system of governance (colonial mismanagement and artificial nation-states basically doomed to failure) that came with it
>>505055
>Muslims have a caliphate, or giant empire, which bound all Muslims, even if they are culturally different
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ba%27athism
>>505079
>The Ottoman empire wasn't a caliphate
It was between 1517-1923
>>505089
Care to explain?
>>505079
>>505071
Eh its all semantics, but they did call thems Caliphs
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caliphate#Ottoman_Caliphate_.281517.E2.80.931924.29
My point still stands...
>>505088
Cool story bro, but this will never happen. Sure, it's possible. I mean, the Franks conquered the Occtians, Bretons, and Normans, who now identify as French. However, the pan-Islamic world is too large to form a single government unity. Maybe an EU type of thing, but never a real government entity
This is why the NWO or one world wide government will never work...because a Chinese man or a German man do not want to be told what to do by an Australian man or a Brazilian lady.
>>505097
As in, between 1517, when the last Mamluk caliph transferred the title of caliph to the Ottoman sultan, and 1923, when the caliphate was abolished, the Ottoman sultan was always the caliph of Islam.
>>505099
>the pan-Islamic world is too large to form a single government unity
Ba'athism is pan-Arabic specifically. I assume it was meant to demonstrate that Muslims don't need to be united under a caliphate/absolute monarchy.
>>504912
>And why is it, that this once so flourishing land has now become diseased with war and conflicts?
Lots of reasons, and yes, Islam is one of them
The middle east was flourishing under islam after hundred of years of stagnation....
>>505101
Ah I see, my mistake anon
>>504902
Islam itself is not really the problem, as the Ottoman Empire was stable(ish) for centuries despite being an Islamic empire. The problem is that, ever since the destruction of the Ottomans, it has been plagued by artificial borders combined with democracy, which has been proven to be incompatible with larger Islamic countries. As a rule, democracy works better the more you limit the vote. It is not going to work in places where various peoples, religious sects, and cultures are thrown together in these artificial borders.
It's sort of like an accidental and gargantuan version of what Stalin did with the countries on the periphery of the USSR. He relocated ethnic groups to force them to be in proximity with other ethnic groups. He did this so that, upon the collapse of the USSR, there would be enough instability for Russia to get itself together and be able to assert its influence over them. (see: Chechnya, Nagorno-Karabakh)
>Why is it, that most historical events that are of incredible importance to the west took place there?
Because it was an integral part of the civilized world for most of history. Imagine a map starting in western europe, encompassing the mediterranian, mesopotamia, iranian plateau, indian subcontinent, and continuing on to the sinosphere. That was pretty much the connected civilized world and everything outside of that was the hinterlands more or less. The middle east was the crossroads of this world and was exposed to all trade, technology, and culture going between east and west. Starting in the 16th century, europeans developed groundbreaking naval technology that allowed them to circumnavigate the middle east when trading. This caused the Middle east to lose it's advantageous geography and it just became another third world region on the four century long european world tour.
>And why is it, that this once so flourishing land has now become diseased with war and conflicts?
you could say that about asia or europe 80-100 years ago, or the americas 200 years ago. dumb question desu
>>505425
>artificial borders
well the middle east was/still some what is ethnically diverse down to the city level so there was really no way to create borders for nation states. Jews, Christians, Shias, Sunnis, Kurds, and Armenians were sizable populations in all MENA population centers.
>>505099
>My point still stands...
It doesn't, because the most of the current Islamic world's population converted after the last caliphate, and has existed for longer than there actually was a caliphate in history.
The Ottomans were a caliphate only as a matter of prestige, and it wasn't until the 20th century that it even bothered to use the title as anything comparable to its historical Umayyad/Abbasid/Fatimid context.
Semantics is incredibly important when discussing early Islamic history.
>>505055
>A pattern you see in Islamic history is giant caliphates forming, and then collapsing. Then a vacuum occurring, then another caliphate, etc etc. The most recent is the Ottomans of course.
What? No, that's not at all the pattern. You had the Rashiduns, a tribal confederacy ruled by elected sheikhs claiming military titles that devolved into civil war, resulting in the Umayyad dynasty which first claimed the title of Caliph beginning with its second ruler. Once a scribal class developed and ultimately legislated the concept and powers of a caliphate away from them, the Abbasids rose to power, shrinking in size from the Umayyad era and ever delegating to independent generals or aristocrats to consolidate an Iraqi core region. Once the dynasty was weakened the whole of the Middle East and North Africa broke apart into independent powers constantly changing hands and never again achieving the kind of political or religious unity of the early Umayyad-Abbasid period. In place of the caliphate an entire political doctrine was developed to legitimize military despotism or divine aristocracy in the absence of a caliphate, which has gone one for most of Islamic history by now.
Islam, historically, is NOT the opposite of what you just said, but is instead politically apathetic, even antinomian or anarchic, and its goal has been the establishment of a legal tradition that can function independent of kingdoms, the Shariah.
>>504945
>Perform air strikes against Assad forces
>Treat ISIS soldiers in Israeli hospitals
>Pro Assad
>>505079
>The Ottoman empire wasn't a caliphate, it was, like the name suggests, an empire
Except it was never called an empire in any of the cultures that were part of it. It was called Osmanli DEVLET, as in state.
It wasn't exactly imperialistic either desu
>>504902
>>inb4 ITS ISLAM DUH /pol/ TOLD ME
Well if you refuse the main reason there's not much to talk about.
>>504902
Islam (Mongols not Arabs), Ottoman Empire, Kurds, Ba'athists in that order.
>>504902
I wish the Assyrians didn't all leave/get genocided by Turks, Arabs and Kurds. They're probably the nicest people in the Middle East today and Iraqi Kurdistan is all Assyrian land. 3/4 of Assyrians live outside of the Middle East but no one ever asks why.
>>505359
>The middle east was flourishing under islam after hundred of years of stagnation....
Fairy tales.
>>507576
Baghdad, Cairo and Istanbul were consistently ranked at the second and third most populated cities in the world from the rise of Islam (behind Beijing/Kaifeng/Guangzhou) until the eighteenth century
So it was certainly flourishing by some measures
>>507598
>Baghdad
In the oldest center for civilization in the world.
> Cairo
Egypt.......
> Istanbul
Byzantine
Arabs were Raiders, they looted the old world, they didn't bring civilization, they captured it.
>>507612
There were two kingds of Arabs though: the cunts that settled and the cunts that are nomadic.
Hence the term "bedouin." (Desert Dwellers), who were distinct from the cunts that settled in villages and cities.
>>507622
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghassanids#The_Ghassanids_and_Islam
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakhmids
>>507612
Go back and read my post again.
None of those cities achieved world prominence until the Islamic era. Cairo also wasn't established until around 1000 when it was purpose-built as a new capital.
Arabs =/= Muslims. Sassanid Persia was percieved as incredibly wealthy and cultured by Turks, Arabs and Europeans alike if you go to the primary sources
>>507612
> Arabs were Raiders, they looted the old world, they didn't bring civilization, they captured it.
So did Romans and later Germanic tribes, tbqhwy.
>>507636
> Egypt
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fustat
>>507645
What has that to do with the present conversation?
>>507653
>founded 641
>>507657
Just like Romans and Germans, Arabs created their own unique culture based on ancient traditions they "looted", they didn't destroy Greek and Persian culture but integrated them into unified cultural space from Al-Andalusia to Indus. Basically, every major culture starts with "looting" the previous ones.
>>507676
> Alexandria
> Amr was able to write to the Caliph Omar, that he had taken a city containing "4,000 palaces, 4,000 baths, 12,000 dealers in fresh oil, 12,000 gardeners, 40,000 Jews who pay tribute, 400 theaters or places of amusement."
>>504902
The middle east has traditionally ruled by large decentralized powers. So once the Ottoman empire fell, and the Arabs who hadn't ruled anything for centuries suddenly found themselves in control of shitty pseudo-countries drawn by Britain and France, everything went to shit.
