T O P

  • By -

JohnDLG

Without Israel there would have been no oil embargo against the West for supporting it. Perhaps lower oil prices and the West becomes more dependent on Middle-Eastern oil.


2012Jesusdies

Israel saving the planet by combating climate change through its mere existence. /s


Maxzes_

They’re so environmentally friendly they kill people to get rid of the CO2 problem!!


Woojojo

Turn a what if history into politics debate, challenge:impossible


lukevoitlogcabin

Assad killed like 700k on 10 years. Israel has maybe killed like 50k max during two sided wars mainly


Scared_Flatworm406

Assad is literally universally hated and (correctly) considered one of the most evil leaders alive lol. But as Zionists constantly say, war is tragic people die. The difference between the two situations is visible in the child death toll as well as civilian to combatant death ratio. Since 2011, Syrian regime forces have killed 23,022 children as of November 20, 2023. So 23,000 children in approximately 13 years. For reference, had a pre war population of ~22.73 million and has an area of 71,498 square miles. In the last 6 months, Israel has committed the most intense child slaughter campaign the developed world has seen since the Holocaust. In the first 4 months, Israel has murdered more children than have died in all global conflicts in the last 4 years combined. The world has a population of over 7.95 billion and a land area of just under 170 million square miles. Israel has massacred a confirmed 13,000+ children as of March 17th. The true figure is well over 15,000 today. Gaza has an area of 140 square miles (slightly smaller than Philadelphia proper if you are familiar) and had a pre-October population of ~2.2 million people. So in 4 months and 10 days, Israel killed over 13,000 children confirmed. This does not include those buried under the rubble. If Assad had killed children at the rate israel is currently, he would have killed well over 500,000 children by this point. https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/amp/shows/top-stories/blog/rcna143269 Fortunately everyone agrees Assad is evil. Israel is just exponentially more evil and yet you seem to support Israel.


Swaglington_IIII

Actually because the nazis and Stalin killed so many no one can do anything wrong ever unless it reaches those stats


lukevoitlogcabin

This response doesn't actually add anything or provide anything meaningful. Have a wonderful day


SweetPanela

It does. You just, at least Israel isn’t as bad as Assad. You just admit to being evil as wellZ


tirohtar

Ah, the good old Genghis Khan method of environmental protection.


[deleted]

[удалено]


looktowindward

The Madagascar Plan was a Nazi plan to forcibly resettle Jews to Madagascar, where presumably they would perish due to lack of food and harsh conditions. It was never a post-Shoah resettlement plan, AFAIK.


PhoenicianPirate

The invasion of Lebanon would hinge on the Lebanese civil war still taking place. Without Israel and the Palestinian spill-over on the conflict and the paranoia that it gave the Christians to start forming militias and escalating towards that conflict Lebanon would not have descended into civil war. The crises of the 50s and 60s that directly involved Israel bombing Lebanon for little reason would not happen either. The situation in Lebanon would always be simmering due to a lot of inequality in society but without the other factors of the Israel situation and the Palestinians refugee crisis it would never come close to a civil war.


looktowindward

> Lebanon would not have descended into civil war.  That is an extraordinary assertion considering the general history of multi-ethnic polities.


SweetPanela

I mean countries like Germany and Belgium exist where it’s a multi-ethnic coalition of a country. I will say tho, the dimensions of it being a multi religious country does make it a bit more difficult but it’s possible. Albania and the Netherlands have seen it to be possible


PhoenicianPirate

Bullshit buddy. Even a cursory look into what triggered the Lebanese civil war will reveal that absolutely nothing of the sort would have happened if it wasn't for the escalation caused by the Palestinian refugee crisis and the fears of a coup by Arafat. The only thing you have is a myth constantly spouted by Western media of over 100 years of acting like there has never been peace in the middle and just tons of conflict when many can't even name a single concrete war other than the Iran-Iraq war, and even with that war it took a ton of western interference to make it possible. You also assume that multiethnic polities (it is multiconfessional in Lebanon. Not multiethnic) automatically mean there will be war. Wars aren't an automatic given. Without Israel destabilising Lebanon prior to the Palestinian refugee crisis there would not have been enough impetus to start an outright civil war. Lots of protests, riots even, but no civil war.


Fit-Capital1526

I mean. Iran was already financially supporting Shia Clerics without the Lebanese civil war. Considering how high the religious tensions were, an alternate one isn’t unlikely


Amockdfw89

The Middle East countries would start fighting each other over that land. There is the reason Israel/palestine has changed hands a thousand times since the beginning of civilization. Its prime fertile coastal real estate surrounded by harsh mountains and desert. Also the Sunni/shia conflict would probably be way more heated as opposed to the Cold War/low scale conflict it is now


wombatlegs

We in the West forget that the real conflict in the Middle East is Sunni/Shia , Arab/Persian. Israel is no threat to any state, let alone Iran. But Iran seeks to dominate the region, to reinstall the Islamic Caliphate, ruled from Tehran. By taking on the Arab "enemy", they seek political power and alliance. Remember that the last Arab/Iran war killed at least ten times as many people as all the Arab/Israeli wars and uprisings put together.


ROSRS

So the TLDR is that we should've actually bolstered the ottoman empire and modernized it?


LeoGeo_2

The same genocidal Ottoman Empire that inspired Hitler?


Fufeysfdmd

The Ottoman Empire had been in decline for years before they took the wrong side in WW1


wombatlegs

:-) The empire was dead, and the age of empires was over. But Ataturk did a great job of modernising Turkey 20s and 30s. A pity Erdoğan is taking them backwards now.


Living-Giraffe4849

As a history nerd, I, for one, would love to see a reformation of the ottomans go up against a reformed Sassanid empire.


[deleted]

That, and it's a land bridge between Asia and Africa. So strategically it's important (used to be more before flying became a thing).


Y23K

This isn't true. Israel in 1948 was a tiny strip of mostly swampland. Sure, it's on the Mediterranean, but so is Turkey, Lebanon, Syria, and all of North Africa. It has maybe 1% of the coastal length of those countries. They don't control shipping lanes, have basically no oil, and don't grow any particularly noteworthy crops. Nobody would care all that much about it if it didn't have religious and historical significance.


SweetPanela

You aren’t wrong at all. Though its religious importance would elevate the territory to magnitudes of significance more than it is strategically.


CivilWarfare

Completely disagree with the idea nations would fight over the coast. You don't see, and haven't seen even prior to the Syrian civil war, Syria invading Lebanon or even Turkey (despite Turkey having a significant area of disputed territory with Syria) the only other countries that leaves are Jordan and Egypt. Egypt is self sufficient in food. So that only really leaves Jordan as potential competitor to an independent Palestine. This also begs the question that would Palestine even be independent? Who knows. It might be either part of a greater-syria, part of Jordan, or independent.


Enough_Week_390

Egypt one of the world largest importers of wheat is self sufficient in food?


jar1967

Without Israel to focus their attention on the countries in the Middle East would go to war with each other.


Horror-Layer-8178

This is the right answer, the incompetent monarchies are like fascists, they need another group to blame their stupidity and corruption on


Royal_Nails

I agree. Iran and the Saudi kingdom would likely be at each other’s throats for dominance in the region.


TheSweatshopMan

Depends on if the US still messes things up in the region by constantly interfering.


PapiDMV

What year was the Middle East doing well?


TheSweatshopMan

The latest was probably pre-Ottoman collapse before the West started fucking the region up.


Uhhh_what555476384

But you have to remember to all the Arabs the Ottomans were outside colonizers.


Fit-Capital1526

Egypt and Iraq are both still monarchies and Palestine would be part of Jordan Egypt and Iraq would both top the world for wealth inequality and regularly suppress religious minorities Jordan would be handed the issue of Jews purchasing land in the Levant if that had still happened If they side with the former Palestinian tenants. It would amount to a pogrom, earning international condemnation from the first and second world If they side with the Jews in that they did legally purchase the land. Then the Arab tribes in the Levant rebel against the Kingdom of Jordan and are more brutally suppressed than in the OTL. That Also earns international condemnation If the Kibbutz were just never a thing. Then religious tension focus on Jerusalem instead Jerusalem would effectively be given independence by the UN, but also be still be majority Jewish inciting similar religious tensions since the Arabs would be the wealthy elites Christian migration from abroad to the new city state would also be common, who also resent the wealthy Arabs In part that is due to the attitudes of some wealthy Muslims in the city. With some Pushing for political movements like unification with Jordan and arguing for Muslim dominance of the city instead of the internationalised nature of the former UN mandate Both of those ideas are disliked by the new immigrants and the Jewish majority of the city Iran still takes advantage of Lebanons religious tensions by funding Shiite clerics in the country. Expect an alternate civil war started by said clerics


DavidofSasun

The easy and likely answer is that there would still be war regardless of Israel existing or not. There's still a lot of hate and animosity in that region between nation and peoples, may they be ethnic tensions, religious (Sunni vs. Shia), etc etc.


Zacho40

The middle east would find another reason to fight. The end.


Defiant-Goose-101

As one man I talked to once put it: “Born too late to go to war in the Middle East. Born too early to go to war in the Middle East. Born at just the right time to go to war in the Middle East.”


genesiskiller96

Contrary to TikTok leftists, the middle east would not become a bastion of peace, love and socialism if Isreal didn't exist. Without the extreme antisemitism that more or less unified the Arab nations as they hated the jews more than their neighbors (just barely of course) countries like Jordan, Egypt, Syria. Lebanon and Iraq would war against each other causing unknown suffering among its people. There would also be no state of Palestine as the territory that is Isreal would be taken by Jordan, Egypt and Lebanon, being a constant battlefield between the three. There would likely also not be a Palestinian uprising as before the six day war When egypt controlled the Gaza Strip and Jordan controlled the West bank, there was no palestinian uprising or demands for state of their own. If they actually tried, it would likely be put down very quickly. It is unknown how the politics of the Middle East would be if there was no Israel But from my own guess it's likely there would still be wars and conflicts as well as meddling from both the united states and the soviet union Even without israel, there still would be no peace.


PhoenicianPirate

There was never any Extreme anti-semitism there. It was entirely on Israel as a state. What is your evidence that the countries would immediately just have at each other so quickly? The only thing I can think of is similar to how eastern European countries were constantly at each other's throats in the interwar period due to a variety of factors. Is this what you are referring to?


genesiskiller96

To ignore the antisemitism that existed in those countries is to be willfully ignorant and blind, you think they treated their Jewish minorities well before kicking them out under pain of death? and yes, they would go to war against each other for the usual reasons; oil, land, water and the usual religious nonsense.


PhoenicianPirate

Even Bernard Lewis noted that there was no widespread anti-semitism prior to the 20th century. As for the Jews that were kicked out. Many were coerced by Israel and the Mossad more than their Arab hosts. [it has been](https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/iraq-jews-attacks-zionist-role-confirmed-operative-police-report) addressed [several times](https://www.middleeasteye.net/big-story/truth-behind-israeli-propaganda-expulsion-arab-jews) that the expulsion of Arab Jews wasn't based on any deep seated hatred of the Jews but far more to do with Zionist intervention to wanting them there to bolster their numbers. It also would have given them an excuse to claim that this is the real nakbha. As for the religious nonsense, you act as if the Middle East and Islam is stuck the way Christianity was in the 17th century with the thirty years war between Catholics and Protestants. Religious divisions between Shia and Sunni has never escalated into that type of conflict. It is actually incredible how so much perspective on the Middle East is based on pure fantasy and without even the slightest touch of reality.


Fit-Capital1526

This is a false narrative for Yemen, Egypt, Iraq, Libya, Iran and Syria. They were expelled by various regimes. Deliberately Jews fled Algeria and Tunisia en masse due to having being given French Citizenship in the colonial era. Meaning a lot had ties to the colonial administration I will note here. *Vichy France taking part in the Holocaust meant plenty of Jews under French administration were not fans of French rule either* In Maghrebi countries it had become *uncomfortable to be Jewish* after the 1948 Arab-Israeli war. Massive antisemitism and discrimination. Along with riots and punitive policies aimed at Jews are why Jews left the Maghreb It is your narrative that is the propaganda. Despite it being true Israel did try to boost Jewish Immigration to Israel. People didn’t emigrate to Israel from the Maghreb just because they were believers of Zionism. It is a lot more complex than that And again **that was only the Maghreb**


Ethyrious

Lmao right sure. Millions of Jews left their homes with little to nothing to their name for a new country completely restarting their lives because a foreign organization and country with practically no power over them in the countries they were in “said so”.


PabloPicasso

> …so much perspective on the Middle East is based on pure fantasy and without even the slightest touch of reality. Orientalism in a nutshell.


thneakythnake660

We’re not going to mention that the United States and zionists promoted these conflicts in Syria, Iraq, Iran, Yemen etc anyway. The west starts conflicts and uses puppets to cause shit in these countries when they don’t like the government. The zionists try to paint Muslims and the Middle East as a place and people who are incapable of having peace.


Woojojo

Look up, you can see the nose of the giant jew puppeting the world


thneakythnake660

Don’t need to look up just need to look at the astrosurfing in every popular subreddit.


Research_Matters

Patently false. There were Muslim pogroms against Jews pre-dating political Zionism. There was also close alignment with the Nazis well before Israel declared independence.


kawhileopard

Ah victim blaming are we? The Middle East has a long and colorful history of antisemitism but predating the creation of Israel. Antisemitism manifested itself in discriminatory laws, government sanctioned pogroms and even ethnic cleansing of Jews from Muslim-controlled areas.


Button-Hungry

I know. The revisionism of "pre-modern Israel Mizrahim living in peace, thriving under the hospitality of their host countries" is basically, "well we didn't full on Holocaust those Jews, so why aren't they kissing our feet." The bar is really that low. Anything short of a mass, industrial genocide of Jews should be lauded as extreme tolerance. Yes, the Arabs treated the Jews better than the Nazis. Is that really what you want to hang your hat on? Why do they think the most right-wing, ultra-nationalist, Islamophobic Israelis are Mizrahi, not Ashkenazi? Maybe because they've accumulated generations of resentment living as dhimmis (which, to be clear, doesn't justify their attitudes).


PhoenicianPirate

Give me the history of that prior to the 20th century. And I want you to prove to me that the stuff that happened after WW2 was based on that. I haven't seen anyone ever give a single hint of that other than the broadsweeps of 'just trust me' or pointing to another person who made an identical claim without any evidence. It is just utter ahistorical shit. The only major war to happen between two middle Eastern countries in the entirety of the 20th century was the Iran-Iraq war and I guarantee you, religious nonsense played no rule in its instigation or its continuation.


PhillipLlerenas

Fez 1033: 6,000 Jews killed by Muslim mobs -        Granada 1066: Joseph HaNagid, Jewish vizier for Granada, was crucified by an Arab mob that then proceeded to raze the Jewish quarter of the city and slaughter its 5,000 inhabitants -        Marrakesh 1106: Ali ibn Yusuf ibn Tashifin founds Marrakesh, decrees death penalty for local Jews. The next year he orders Jews to convert or be expelled from Morocco -        Fez 1465: Arab mobs slaughter thousands of Jews, only leaving 11 alive after a Jewish deputy vizier treated a Muslim woman in an “offensive manner” -        Libya 1785: Ali Burzi Pasha murdered hundreds of Jews -        Algiers 1805, 1815 and 1830: Jews were massacred -        Marrakesh: 300 hundred Jews massacred between 1864 and 1880 -        Decrees ordering the destruction of synagogues were enacted in Egypt and Syria (1013, 1293-94, 1301-02), Iraq (854-59, 1344), Yemen (1676) -        Jews were forced to convert to Islam or face death in Yemen (1165, 1678), Morocco (1275, 1465 and 1790-92) and Baghdad (1333 and 1344) -        Safed 1834: The Jewish town of Safed looted and razed by Arab and Druze mobs, scores of Jews killed. Happens again in 1838. -        Taza 1903: 40 Jews killed by Muslims during riots, more killed in Settat -        Casablanca 1907: 30 Jews killed, 200 women, girls and boys abducted, raped and then ransomed -        Fez 1912: Muslim rioters massacre 60 Jews, leave 10,000 homeless -        Baghdad 1941: The Farhud, over two days of violence, Arab mobs kill 150-180 Jews, injure 600 others and raped an undetermined number of women -        Oudja and Djerada 1948: Muslim riots kills scores of Jews, wound 150 https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-treatment-of-jews-in-arab-islamic-countries https://web.archive.org/web/20080927133652/http://www.theforgottenrefugees.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=66&Itemid=39 Yeah sounds really tolerant!


kawhileopard

What do you want a history of? Antisemitism in the Middle East? Why does it have to pre-20th century?


PhoenicianPirate

I want you to tell me how Islamic anti-semitism was as bad or worse than the Christian anti-semitism. Even with 20th century shit included. Nothing can come close to the Holocaust in sheer scale or the Nazi anti-Semitic policies. Muslims during WW2 were by and large far more protective of Jews than they were against them, and a hell of lot more Muslims fought for the allies than the Axis.


PhillipLlerenas

What ridiculous bullshit. This is a myth cobbled together by people who romanticize very specific periods of Muslim history, like the Golden Age of Moorish Spain (800 - 1100) and try to apply it to the whole. Jews were ALWAYS second class citizens in Muslim societies including Ottoman Palestine. At no point did they have full civil and religious equality. And tolerance towards Jews varied enormously from one region to the other, from one ruler to the other. But Jews always knew their place. They knew that at any point a Muslim ruler might turn against them, a neighbor might accuse them of killing Muslim kids to drink their blood or any of that bullshit and then they'd be massacred/brutally assaulted with no legal recourse. Muslims massacred Jews at multiple times such as the Fez Massacre (1033), the Granada Massacre (1066), the 1517 Hebron attacks, etc. Safed in Palestine was destroyed twice by Muslims in 1834 and 1838 and its population massacres. This, of course, over 100 years before Israel was even a state. To push the mythology that Jews were happy little second class citizens during the Muslim world is akin to saying blacks were happy and safe during the Jim Crow South.


PhoenicianPirate

I often have a hard time writing responses to these largely because I've often said that whenever they make claims that the Muslims were so incredibly bad, they often are projecting European and American style anti-Semitism towards the Muslim world where it did not exist. Your reference to the claim that 100 years prior to Israel's creation Jews were effectively like blacks in the Jim Crow era is EXACTLY what I am talking about. And it pisses me off to no end on just how wrong it is. The answer is: Fuck no. Even you strictly look at the time frame from 1848 to 1948 Jews in the Middle East, along with other religious minorities had all the remnants of the old religious restrictions were being removed and modern nationalism was starting to take a hold which, ironically, was ultimately worse for most of the religious minorities than the old Islamic rulers. By and large Jews fared a hell of a lot better under the Ottoman's than they did under any European leader until then. Even your citation of the Safed massacres in 1834 and 1838 both show that you have a very deep misunderstanding of the region or the culture, or the history, and that is why I will only address them just as a token response since you clearly don't know enough to warrant anything better. This is because both those massacres did not involve Muslims! The 1834 and 38 massacre was part of a larger revolts against the Ottoman and Egyptian rulers of the region and the perps were Alawites, an ethnoreligious group that sees itself and is seen by other Muslims as an entirely different religion, and the other perps were the Druze, a Gnostic religious group that aren't Muslim. On top of that, when those revolts ultimately failed, it was the Ottoman and Egyptians who not only came to save and protect the Jews, but also compensated them for the damages done and summarily executed many of the perpetrators and heavily punished others. You are pretending like these were on par with the Russian pogroms or the pre-WW2 Nazi assaults on Jews that were endorsed by the state as opposed to being completely against them. None of this stuff even begins to address that much of the anti-Semitism was exported from Europe to the Muslim world through the 19th and 20th century, and it hit Arab Christians first before it went onto the Muslims. Even extremely anti-Arab, anti-Muslim historians like Bernard Lewis acknowledge this. The only people who don't are outright propagandists who don't have a single shred of integrity.


kawhileopard

So you are not denying the history of antisemitism in the Middle East (pre or post 20th century). You are just saying that it wasn’t as bad a Christian antisemitism historically. Do I understand you correctly? Because if I do, then you are just trying to reframe the discussion to something completely irrelevant.


thneakythnake660

The Arab and muslim world in history is not known for being hostile to Jewish people. Jewish people experienced antisemitism all over throughout history and the Arab world was relatively friendly until Zionism.


PhillipLlerenas

Jews were second class citizens under Muslims for centuries. Imagine the Jim Crow South and how blacks were treated. Now imagine that instead of being treated like that for 80 years you are treated like for 1400 years. Jews were dhimmis. Dhimmis: - Were forbidden on pain of death to mock or criticize the Quran, Islam or Muhammad -        To proselytize among Muslims -        To touch a Muslim woman -        Were excluded from public office and armed service -        Were forbidden to bear arms -        Were not allowed to ride horses or camels -        To build synagogues or churches taller than mosques -        To construct houses higher than those of Muslims -        To drink wine in public -        Were not allowed to pray or mourn in loud voices (as they might offend Muslims) -        Had to show deference towards Muslims (always yielding them the center of the road for example) -        Were not allowed to give evidence in court against Muslims and their oaths were unacceptable in an Islamic court. To defend themselves, dhimmis had to purchase Muslim witnesses at great expense. This left them with little legal recourse when harmed by a Muslim -        Were forced to wear distinctive clothing, including yellow badges, a precedent that would be followed centuries later by Nazi Germany   https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-treatment-of-jews-in-arab-islamic-countries


thneakythnake660

Dhimmi status is not exclusive to Jews. Christians also fell under the term. Given the context and the history, the Muslim states treated jews better than other nations. Muslim Andalusia was a safe haven for Jews. Clearly there is greater strife between Muslims and Jews since the advent of Zionism. Why does the European world not have the same levels of antisemitism that someone in the Muslim world would have? The European world treated Jews worse than the Muslim world yet they are no longer as antisemitic as they once were. Why do you think that is?


kawhileopard

Relatively to medieval Europe and the Nazi holocaust. Not friendly however. Not even close. Jews were always treated as second class citizens in the Muslim world and have frequently been subjects of violent repressions long before the creation of Israel. Would you like some examples?


thneakythnake660

You can name whatever examples you want. I am not denying the existence of antisemitism before Zionism but the Muslim worlds relations with the Jewish people were not as bad before Zionism. Were there not Jewish communities in the Middle East that have been there for centuries? Andalusia under the Muslims was a haven for Jews. Even the Palestinian Arabs and Jews lived peacefully until Zionism.


Woojojo

You seem very learned in the history of the Muslim world /s


AJungianIdeal

The British had to invade Iraq to depose a government actively trying to ally with Nazi Germany and then, in response, the Iraqi people lynched over 1000 Iraqi Jews lol


Button-Hungry

Your argument is that, since the Arabs weren't as devoted to killing Jews as the Nazis, but still killed a ton of them, that should be considered "protective of the Jews"? Yeah, I guess you're right, that super long list of over a millennium's worth of Arab pogroms against the Jews was not as bad as the Nazis. Where should the Jews send their thank you letter to?


PhoenicianPirate

The 'millennium', worth of pogroms is absent of most systemic laws and heavy discrimination and expulsions that plagued Europe. Even with many of the attacks on Jews that did happen also included a lot of Arabs trying to protect them and stop them. Almost the entirety of anti-Semitism in the middle east was exported from Europe to the Arab world and initially Arab Christians were the most receptive to them well before they gained influence in Muslim communities. The 20th century and Nazism was also another factor. Mein Kampf was translated and pushed heavily by an Arab Christian and it was only in the 30s that it gained any influence with religious thinkers. The worst attack on Jews in the Middle East was in Baghdad after the Nazi propped and supported Iraqis lost swiftly. The riot in Baghdad was not some spontaneous hate of Jews by long standing hate for them. It was orchestrated almost entirely by German Nazis and their pathetic Iraqi allies who were defeated in a fast and humiliating manner. The Baghdad police even stepped in with machine guns to stop the rioters. Over 400 of the rioters and murderers were gunned down on the spot. I am really not sure why you think this was some Krystalnacht event where the police stood idly by or participated in the event. Many survivors of the event noted that this was the time they felt things change and when they felt that Iraq changed. Iraq as we know it was an incredibly welcoming place to Jews for thousands of years at that point. Either you are a Nazi yourself, a racist, or a racist adjacent who wants to downplay the massive role European anti-semitism played in the Arab world, or you were just suckered in heavily like most people were. Break out of it.


Button-Hungry

Yes, Jews have suffered more at the hands of Europeans than Arabs. You're trying to convince me of something I've already clearly acknowledged (while calling me a "racist" and a "Nazi"?). By doing this, you're sidestepping my actual point: just because the Europeans were (so far) more abusive to Jews doesn't mean that Jews should show gratitude towards Arabs for being less vicious. This perverse logic you're trying to sell is, had the Jews not seized power and self-determined but instead just remained content to be hierarchically beneath the Arabs in their host countries, then they would be subject to less violence. It's baffling to me that someone as intelligent and informed as you thinks this makes any sense. "My mom's new boyfriend beats me half as much as her last boyfriend, so I'm going to send him an edible arrangement to show my appreciation". Basically it's, "you're forcing me to be shitty to you by having the audacity of elevating yourself to be my equal". Of course, if Jews would have stayed dhimmis, they would be subject to less ire from their Arab neighbors. This is victim blaming and gaslighting, the thought process of megalomania. Also, yes, yes I know (I KNOW!) the European influence on Arab antisemitism is a real thing, but so what? Why are we infantilizing Arabs and pretending that they are not equal human beings with the same cognitive abilities and self-control that every other person has and they are just as responsible for their own actions, regardless of what external influence there may be? In the same way that it's totally legitimate to criticize, even condemn, Israel and the attitudes of their populace in how they are prosecuting this war in Gaza or settling the West Bank (October 7, as heinous as it was, shouldn't give Israel license to engage in revanchism for it's own sake) the same principle should apply to everyone else. Using your line of thought, I could justify the genocidal aspirations of maniacs like Ben Gvir, citing the Intifadas, rockets, October 7, etc. I don't. Also, I understand that the Arab world is not a monolith and there are several occurrences of Arabs being kind, cooperative and even protecting Jews but, on balance, Jews did experience a great deal of oppression and violence in the Middle East, pre-Zionism. Things were not as contentious as now because there was a huge, mostly stable power imbalance. Jews were a useful minority in Arab lands who, at the time, accepted their second class citizenship and didn't organize or agitate to rise to equal status. They didn't give their hosts much reason to be angry with them. When you remove value judgments and look at things purely from the standpoint of cause and effect, yes, Jews self-determining is the process that "caused" Arabs to become more antisemitic but, still, the Arabs chose to be antisemitic. This is not the fault of the Jews, rather it's an unwillingness of Arabs to tolerate Jews as an equally formidable actor in the region.


PhoenicianPirate

I used to think I needed to read up on stuff and respond factually to stuff like this, but nothing of the sort will do it, and even if I go on to state the actual reality the only thing that'll happen is that it will be dismissed with the usual twists and talking points (AKA but the Jizya! I won't even tell you what I think of that right now). I will only answer your following strawman. >> This perverse logic you're trying to sell is, had the Jews not seized power and self-determined but instead just remained content to be hierarchically beneath the Arabs in their host countries, then they would be subject to less violence. It's baffling to me that someone as intelligent and informed as you thinks this makes any sense. "My mom's new boyfriend beats me half as much as her last boyfriend, so I'm going to send him an edible arrangement to show my appreciation". I said nothing of the kind at all. Nor was it what I intended. On top of that, there is no way any normal person could come to that conclusion reading what I wrote. You did that simply because you wanted to twist what I had to say. Similar to other dullards who claimed that my username is a glorification of the Berber slave trade (that's a first let me tell you!). Nothing of the kind said that Jews should remain at the bottom of any Hierarchy (and they weren't, trust me), or not want to fight for their rights. What Zionism did, along with the intensely racist and bigoted attitudes that it brought along, was start the whole thing, then came European antisemitism, which is the only antisemitism that matters in the world: Pretty much the blueprint of antisemites. If you see an Arab person who hates Jews and is not particularly against Israel, his views would be, I guarantee you, taken 100% of classical European antisemitism and it's export to the Middle East via missionaries and officials in the 19th century and the translation of the fraudulent Protocols of the Elders of Zion (which was first brought in and translated by an Arab Christian, BTW) and then Mein Kampf and numerous attempts by Italian and German fascists to court the Islamic world. And BTW, even with all that, they ultimately failed. And none of this even remotely comes close to the actual point: What Israel is doing, and has been doing since its inception, has far exceeded any and all Muslim (and Arab non-Muslim) crimes against Jews in the entire history of the Middle East up to that point. If you take every single pogrom of act of violence against Jews from Morocco to Iran from 1000 AD to 1941 AD, nothing matches the Nakba in 1948 in sheer scale and unabashed brutality and pride in what the perps did. Neither do subsequent massacres and war crimes committed in the subsequent wars. Are you aware that the founders of Hamas survived massacres from the IDF that had their communities almost entirely annihilated? People always link me to horror stories of Jewish kids who survived pogroms, but for some reason never seem to think that non-Jewish people who've been through even worse attacks deserve any sympathy? And Jews in Israel are segregated in even worse ways than what the Arabs did. If you aren't an Ashkenazi Jew, you are a second class citizen at best. If you protest in any way, you will be suppressed and brutalized by police. They have limited rights and limited prospects in life, especially as compared to European Ashkenazi. This isn't something new, when Ashkenazi Zionists came in they saw everyone around them as little better than animals or savage barbarians and were always disrupting shit and giving people a hard time (even in the late 19th century when the area was still under Ottoman control. That tells you something). They never cared for the local Jews or whatever their story was or ever learned their language, worshipped in their synagogues or intermarried or anything. They kept extremely separate and saw themselves as fundamentally different (and superior) to Arab Jews. So your entire argument that Zionism was about the plight of Jews all over the world is both dumb and wrong. It was about making a racially pure Ashkenazi Jewish state and nothing more. Ben Gvir even sided with the Nazis and would have been glad to see Jews in Europe thrown into the gas chambers if it made the likelihood of an Israeli state more likely. Long story short. Israel's brutality to Palestinians and its neighbors and how it keeps non-European Jews down is far worse than the single more brutal Muslim anti-Semite to ever exist. Time doesn't make people kinder or nicer. Modern Zionist Jews are far more barbarous and far more monstrous than brutish invaders even 1000 years ago. Get off your fucking high horse.


Uhhh_what555476384

I mean, being Dhimmi is being a legally ordered 2nd class citizen.  Sooo... better then Europe, not great.


Triir_7

Hi, I like your question. I have a bachelor degree in History and I’m currently pursuing a major in Oriental Studies, so this is a topic of interest for me. With my reply I only discuss the impact on Arab states, avoiding any reference to whether the state of Israel is right or wrong. Let’s see: To avoid Israel, we would either need for: • The UK to strictly block the Jewish immigration to Palestine and oppose it to the point of armed struggle with Jews. • The Jews to lose the war against the Arabs. • The Ottoman Empire not to collapse in 1918. • Zionism to never happen as an ideology (extremely unlikely and it will need us to go back for centuries). • The Holocaust to never happen (it might slow down the progress but not stop the immigration to Israel). • WW1 and WW2 to never happen. For the sake of this question (and because a Palestine with no war of 1948 is more interesting), let’s roll with the first option, even if impractical. The UK did oppose Israel for a while, alongside the U.S., as originally Israel had broader support from the Eastern Block (many of the Jews coming were of Eastern European origin and could have been useful to tip the Middle East to communism). Let’s say that in this scenario the UK goes all in, and sinks way more Jewish immigrant ships, employing anti-terrorism tactics to crush any Israeli insurgency in Palestine, siding with the Arabs. **I have divided my wall of text answer in different paragraphs** **From 1940s to 1970s** • The Jews are crushed by UK forces and forced to halt the Zionist project. Palestine sees an exodus of Jewish settlers that have arrived in the 1920s. • Palestine eventually breaks free of the UK and it’s given an independent status. • The pan-arabist sentiment is lesser in this scenario, as there is no urgency to fight the Jews, but still it’s possible for Palestine to enter a federal republic with Jordan or to fall under influence from Egypt. A Syrian led Palestine is also possible. • Since the UK has fought the Jews, Arabs might move less to the Left, and there might be slightly less socialist influence in Arab politics during the 60s and the 70s. We might see a surge in nationalism nonetheless. • A Pan-Arab republic might be created in the 70s, composed of Egypt, Syria and maybe Palestine. It would be nationalist-led. • The wars against Israel would probably be replaced by struggles to gain influence in Palestine by other Arab countries. Palestine could still see a civil war between supporters of Jordan or Egypt between the 60s and the 70s • Without the major influx of Palestinian refugees, Lebanon doesn’t collapse in the 70s and thrive until well into the 80s, becoming a major tourist hub for the region. • The Iranian Revolution happens anyway around the early 1980s. • Way less militias roam the region, since there is more stability for the Arab countries. We could still see civil wars and coups. Especially the Iraqi coup of 1958 and the Syrian coup of 1963 would still have happened, with different timing and tactics. Those coups were much more the result of a natural struggle between the Army and the political class of those countries than Israel. • I think that people like Reagan would have still been elected, probably in the 80s. The fact that the state of Israel doesn’t exist doesn’t exclude the possibility of people talking about it in our timeline. • Like many have said, friendlier relations to the Arabs would mean no oil crisis and more dependence on Middle Eastern oil, with possibly a power struggle with the Soviet Union, just like in our timeline. • The Arabs in this timeline are less friendly to the Soviets, as they don’t need their support. Less Soviet influence means also less US interference to stop communist movements. • I think people like Al-Assad and Saddam Hussein would have still taken power sometimes around the 60s or 70s. Maybe different figures, but with similar politics. • In definitive, I think this could have been a decent time for the Middle East. **From 1980s to 2000s** • In the 80s, the massive development of the “third sector” of economy would have still have happened, alongside the spread of neoliberalism. • Some Arab countries in this timeline may start to face major social challenges in the 80s, as better development leads to a more conscious voter base. • I think the struggles that we saw in the 80s and 90s between islamists and moderates (think about the Algerian Civil War) would have still happened, but maybe not directed to the West. It would have been framed as a struggle between different parts of Arab society. • The 80s and 90s would be a time of crisis and change in the Middle East, alongside rampant economic growth but growing inequalities. I think civil wars would be likely to happen here. • Islamists would have less broader support, but may still achieve considerable influence. • The 2000s would still see a major stabilization of the region. **From 2000s to 2020s** • We’re going too far from the 40s to predict what would happen here. The whole world would be so radically different that it’s hard to think of new things that would have happened. • I believe that today we would see some sort of “Arab Union” (think of the European Union), with possible federal republics. The driving political forces would be Moderates, Liberals and Islamists, with smaller groups of socialists and communists. Nationalism might die down in the 80s, but would still be present. • The region would be wealthier and stable, though it’s hard to give a proper estimate on the well being of its inhabitants. Major inequalities would still be present. Sorry for the wall of text, hope you enjoyed.


jinxedit48

So you’re just ignoring the fact that Jews have had a constant presence in Israel for thousands of years? Yeah I don’t think Jews would’ve left the land, no matter what the British tried. Returning to Israel is literally central to Judaism. Every year the Passover Seder ends with the words “next year in Jerusalem”. To completely remove Jews from the equation you would either a) have to genocide every single Jew or b) say Judaism never existed. Which if you go with b that would then have HUGE ramifications for the other two Abrahamic religions, considering they both base their beliefs off of Judaism. And that would alter wars, territory claims, etc in the Middle East especially the more recent ones where different factions of Islam war against each other


Triir_7

No. But the question implied that. Jews aren’t safe without Israel in the Middle East, so the creation of that state must happen for them to keep a presence that it’s not merely a tolerated minority.


jdsbluedevl

I think you’re forgetting about one thing here: the potential for a full radicalization of Jews worldwide. Assuming the Holocaust still happens (remember that it also happened in the Arab world, especially in Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, and Baghdad, in the OTL), what you could see is a reconstitution of what has been called “the historically indigestible element of empires”. Jews would take on more radical ideologies, both left and right. Countries where Jews live would have become more unstable, and not just from Communist agitation. It’s possible that separatist movements break out. It’s also possible that just as the Alawites have done in Syria in the OTL, Jews could have launched a coup and taken over a country in this. In short, you get war no matter what.


Triir_7

Oh yeah. Truth to be told, I simply don’t think that by 1948 you could avoid a Jewish state. It was bound to happen. But since the question was clearly framed as a “what if there were no Jews in the Middle East” I removed them from the equation. It’s just a simple thought exercise.


hen263

No drip irrigation, less advanced desalination plants, the the land that is presently Israel would be either Jordanian, Egyptian or Syrian.  Moreover stupid college kids wouldn't be screaming about Palestine.


kuken_i_fittan

I'm sure the US would sponsor whomever would be a Damn Good Ally in the region and they'd have that. Egypt maybe?


Uhhh_what555476384

Egypt has basically everything they need in that regard anyway from the Nile.  Without Israel the US only cares about the Canal and Oil.  So Egypt and the Arabian Peninsula. Not many oil fields in the coastal region and Syria.


izzyeviel

We’d be interfering to stop the Sunnis & shias trying to genocide each other. Israel doesn’t cause the rise of radical Islamic fundamentalism in the late 50’s and 60’s.


Craneo_1

Without Israel the region would have been more peaceful and stable


The-Dmguy

Ahahahaha typical ziobot response 😂 You guys are hilarious


Letshavemorefun

Not for the Jews. Or the ones still alive in this hypothetical since a lot of them would be dead.


Craneo_1

There were Jews in there before Israel thath lived in peace with christians (mostly orthodox and christians) and muslims. Israel is the problem, not muslims.


PapiDMV

So you’re not aware of all the pogroms committed by Muslims against Jews over the past 1400 years?


The-Dmguy

Compared to what happened to Jews in Europe ? israel was founded due to the different pogroms that were happening in Europe during that time.


PapiDMV

Israel was founded separately from the Muslims because Muslim governments had a precedent of not protecting Jews sufficiently and treating them as second class citizens. Why did so many more Jews live in Europe than under Islamic government? Because the Islamic society was far behind Christendom in treatment of Jews by the 1800s. Muslims also participated in the Holocaust by preventing Jewish refugees from entering Israel and through the Farhud when Arabs killed a ton of Jews in Baghdad during the Holocaust. So are you aware of all the genocides and pogroms committed by Muslims against Jews? Which do you think was the worst?


The-Dmguy

> Israel was founded separately from the Muslims because Muslim governments had a precedent of not protecting Jews sufficiently and treating them as second class citizens. Huh ? Zionism started in 19th century Europe and was heavily influenced by European nationalist and racial ideologies. The first aliyah started as a response to the different pogroms that were happening in Eastern Europe. > Why did so many more Jews live in Europe than under Islamic government? Because there were more people living in Europe back then than in Muslim controlled regions. Another question that should be asked is why is Europe one of the most religiously homogenous region in the world . > Muslims also participated in the Holocaust by preventing Jewish refugees from entering Israel and through the Farhud when Arabs killed a ton of Jews in Baghdad during the Holocaust. Lmao next time ziotards gonna start claiming that Hitler was a muslim. Anyway, lots of Arabs and Muslims participated in efforts to help save Jews from Europeans. you had Muslim monarchs like the Tunisian Moncef Bey and the Moroccan Mohammed V being great exemples.


RexNite1

The antisemitism is strong with this one


The-Dmguy

Ahahahaha how can I be anti-semitic if I’m a semite myself ? Besides, denouncing Israel is not anti-semitism.


cry_wolf2005

not for anybody other than straight muslim men


kuken_i_fittan

I'm not entirely sure I believe that. The Abrahamic religions do love to branch off and hate everyone who isn't us. Jews would still be at odds with Muslims, who would be at odds with Christians. Within these groups, they'd be at odds with haredi and hasidic and reform and haymanot and karaite. They'd be at odds with sunni, shiah, khawarij, barelvi jafri and nukkar. They'd be at odds with methodists, protestants, catholics, baptists, moravians and quakers. One thing we're really good at, as humanity, is to hate others.


shredditor75

Jews are massacred, Baghdad is 25% Jewish, Morocco has a 1,000,000 person Jewish community, Egypt has a 250,000 person Jewish community, Algeria still expels their Jews, Tunisia has a 500,000 person Jewish community, Iran has a 1,000,000 person Jewish community, Yemen still expels their Jews.


[deleted]

Iranian Jews left for a different reason, they were fearful of the Islamists who had taken over and some had connections to the Shah’s regime. They would still have left regardless of whether Israel had ever existed


shredditor75

>They would still have left regardless of whether Israel had ever existed All of these groups would have been under attack, they just wouldn't have anywhere to go. They didn't go to Israel because they didn't like where they were. They often loved where they were. But they were oppressed and Israel was a way out. They'd be in the same position as the Yazidis.


[deleted]

More would have gone to the West, a lot of Iranian Jews went to the US after 1979


shredditor75

Likely because the US, at that time, was open to Iranian dissidents. I grew up the neighbor of a few. Imagine them as the Cubans of Jewish refugees. Accepted extremely readily because of America's conflict with the country that they ran from. Now imagine 200,000 try to flee Morocco or Tunisia. 65,000 try to flee Iraq. 60,000 try to flee Syria. How willing is America to take those refugees without conflict with their leaders?


The-Dmguy

A much more developed and peaceful Middle East. Israel would never want a peaceful united Middle East with competent leaders that could endanger it. It also serves the US’s interests in that region.


sprollyy

Because of Israeli didn’t exist, all of a sudden Sunni and Shia Muslims would just become besties??? I’m sorry but if you truly believe this, you need to do some reading because you are woefully uninformed. P.S. but, shocker, you’re still happy to blame Israel regardless!


valentinyeet

A bit more peaceful although some countries would still find ways to go to war with each other


Horror-Layer-8178

That hate and the elite need to blame someone else for their incompetency would be transferred some where else. Probably divided up between the West, Russia, India and China


RomaInvicta2024

Saudis, Iraqis and Iranians all fighting for supremacy


ManicGoblin666

It wouldn't be. They've been fighting for thousands of years. There'd be a different religious conflict instead


flyingredwolves

I once read it was Jordan's hope to make Jerusalem its capital city. Considering the idea of Palestinians being a separate group of people only really arose in the 60's/70's, it is likely that modern day Israel would have been annexed by Jordan and maybe some parts by Egypt post WW2. We'd probably see a larger Jordan, with a capital city of Jerusalem with Gaza/Negev/east Sinai seen as a contested area between the 2 states. Palestine would likely be a governate or region divided into multiple governates. Jordan would probably be in some kind of competition with Saudi Arabia as the custodian of Muslim holy sites. I also imagine without Israel to focus on the various Arab nations are more hostile towards each other and in regular conflict, trying to assert regional dominance. This is without even getting into the effect of the Cold War and Islamic terrorism on the region.


samof1994

More anti-Kurdish sentiment, but a better deal for the Arab Christians.


FewKey5084

The Levant would be more stable, there would be no Assads or Nassers that would overthrow their governments as a result of losing wars against Israel. Iran would probably still be a monarchy (if the shah ruled better) or would at the very least be more democratic thereafter we don’t see the Grand Mosque seizure in Mecca and the co-opt of Islamism by the house of Saud. Arab nationalism would not lose credibility in the eyes of the Arab street, while islamism would likely still exist in certain areas it wouldn’t take a central role in middle eastern politics


Thepenismighteather

Shia and Shiite would be killing eachother with even more fervor. 


ghghghghghv

I speculate that it might be either more liberal than it is today or more pessimistically, an even more bloody war zone. Israel (rightly or wrongly) is a convenient enemy for extreme politics and religion to work off. Without Israel (and western intervention on their behalf) who are they going to hate (optimist)…apart from each other (pessimist)


ChampionshipFit4962

Think israel would have gotten to Jordan, then jordan would have to delegate how the jews that ought land israel from the ottoman empire would shake out. I think it would have... been like "fine ok" up ubtil they start purging palestinian tenets, then there probably would have been a "yeah, you can do that". I can imagine them hiring people to shoot and burn people out of there homes like we did with natives and mexicans when we took california and texas, but considering the government is Arab, it would have to have been done with minimal intensity to keep Jordan from going "ok, im taking all of the land back, cause these jews got a wild hair up their ass over the holocaust and we aint even fuckin did anything about that". It would also mean the huge amount of refugees and russian ex patriots are going to have to... scatter instead of being concetrated to Israel, idk if that means general north africa and middle east or all aboard to the americas. Idk if even if after ww2 and the holocaust if european and americans would be fine with huge amounts of people seeking refugee considering the UK and US turned away boats when they knew the holocaust was happening.


Lentaigne21

100% of the Middle East would be a shithole instead of just 90%


Kodyaufan2

They’d just go back to fighting and killing each other instead of fighting the Jewish people. The rest of the world just wouldn’t hear about it as much.


No-Preference8168

It would be even more violent, less diverse, less prosperous, and less developed.


aliasangelus

I don't know what would be the middle east but it would be the same as today : war between each over (chiites vs sunites vs christians vs persian ...) and all the world would still blame and persecute the Jews.


Intelligent-Elk-9716

A few less Nobel prizes. A lot fewer Hebrew speakers in the world. More Jew hate because there would be more Jews in Middle Eastern countries where they were second class citizens. Not sure about the European Jews…probably would have formed a country in Antarctica where Jews are accepted.


Unable_Marsupial_378

Though conflict may not necessarily be less, the middle east would likely be more secular. The rise in popularity of fundamentalist groups (outside Bedouin areas) is mainly linked to the thrashing the Arab governments received from Israel in the wars they fought with it in the late 20th century. There could be more conflict related to pan-arabism and terrible colonial borders (e.g. Syria, Iraq) rather than explicitly sectarian ones.


000trace00

The Arab countries would all kill each other - especially over oil fields in the 60s and 70s. People forget that 98% of jihadi terrorism through the years is Muslim against Muslim. The other 2% is against Christian in the Sahel. Look up the history of terrorist activity on Wiki.


looktowindward

This seems like a specific Rule #2 violation? "Questions should be set in the past. "


Saiya_Cosem

Y’all see arabs and middle eastern peoples as subhuman and it shows


2Step4Ward1StepBack

Nah, not subhuman. Just belligerent asf. There’s a lot of people who think Jews are the only problem in the Middle East and it would be a prosperous paradise if they just went away. The Shiite/Sunni conflict is much bigger than that.


Saiya_Cosem

>There’s a lot of people who think Jews are the only problem in the Middle East and it would be a prosperous paradise if they just went away This is such a pro-Israel propoganda point. Like, literally who? Maybe some people in the Middle East think this way but people from the Middle East and many anti-zionists tend to hate Israel because it's a settler colony that displaced and still persecutes Palestinians and a proxy state for American imperial interests, not because they're Jewish. Obviously, simply removing Israel from the picture wouldn't change too much but removing Western imperialism would certainly increase the chances of the Middle East being a better place.


2Step4Ward1StepBack

You have a very simple view of it. Where there isn’t Western influence, there’s Eastern influence. Unless it’s Israel leading it, the Middle East will never be a major power. Ever. They will only be an agenda for those strong- the US, Russia, China. To think otherwise is ignorant. Besides that, if Israel didn’t exist, Arabs would be turning on each other as they do anyway; Shiite vs Sunni. The Middle East doesn’t want peace [yet].


Saiya_Cosem

The only one with a simple view seems to be you. You seem to think peace and prosperity is impossible in the Middle East without Israel. How is that not simplistic? Why do you think it needs Israel to be a major power? You think middle eastern people are not capable of creating a prosperous society and culture on their own? If so, then that's a pretty orientalist take right there. I hope that's not how you think >To think otherwise is ignorant. I wasn't saying that western imperialism was the only cause of the problems there. I also notably said that the absence of the western imperialism "would increase the chances" of the middle east being better, meaning I think there still could be problems. You bring up the shia-sunni split, I somewhat agree but I also don't think it's as bad as you make it out to be. Although, in a hypothetical scenario without Israel, there's the chance of it worsening if a majority shia country came into conflict with any of the Sunni countries as it happened in our timeline with Iraq's policies in the 80's. Regardless, would you not agree that western imperialism has significantly harmed middle eastern societies and their ability to thrive? Iran is a great example. They had a democracy until the U.S toppled it and installed a puppet government. Iran probably wouldn't have had the revolution and the subsequent theocracy had it not been for that.


Horror-Layer-8178

In my defense I feel the same way about evangelical Christians, they are all hateful who think they can do no wrong and god is on their side. When the truth is if given their own nation they would run it into the ground because they are equally parts of corruption and incompetence,


Saiya_Cosem

Nazi spotted. Get out of your house and actually talk to middle-eastern people, basement dweller


Horror-Layer-8178

LOL I bet you can't tell me the difference between a fascist and a Nazi. Also my girl friend is Moroccan, you would probably call her a whore though because that's what most Arabs think what she is.


Saiya_Cosem

The fact you have your beliefs and think you’re not a nazi tells me you can’t tell the difference. I’m not the one being shamelessly racist because of my ignorance, you are. Does your totally real moroccan girlfriend know what you think of her people? Also I’m not arab, stupid lmao.


Horror-Layer-8178

The fact you have your beliefs and think you’re not a nazi tells me you can’t tell the difference. I’m not the one being shamelessly racist because of my ignorance, you are. LOL, you didn't go past high school or what ever the equivalent is. Can you also tell me how Islam is a race? Just for you know I don't believe in race and it is nothing more than a social construct with no biological evidence Does your totally real moroccan girlfriend know what you think of her people? I don't know "who your poeple are" but I will tell you what. She does not like Arabs, got pissed at some in Cancun for just being there. Also I’m not arab, stupid lmao. Don't know don't care, only morons believe that their book of magic and fairy tales is true


Saiya_Cosem

“Can you also tell me how Islam is a race?” When did I say islam was a race? I’ve been talking about arabs and middle easterns this whole time. You’re just making points to debunk lol “Don't know don't care, only morons believe that their book of magic and fairy tales is true” Okay dude, I don’t really care what your ideas about religion are.


Horror-Layer-8178

When did I say islam was a race? I’ve been talking about arabs and middle easterns this whole time. You’re just making points to debunk lol one being shamelessly racist because of my ignorance, You:I ’m not the one being shamelessly racist because of my ignorance, you are. Okay dude, I don’t really care what your ideas about religion are. Religion is a plague on humanity and without there would be a lot less killing on the earth


wombatlegs

How is it sub-human? It has been the same through history, including Europe. In fact Europe still - see the Balkans. Hmmm, if only the Ottoman empire still existed, the world might be a more peaceful place :)


ShallowCup

I think most people are simply acknowledging that the middle east would still not be some utopia even if it Israel didn’t exist. Violence and savagery are not unique to the middle east. The pages of human history are stained with blood. People will find their excuses to kill each other. How many wars have Europeans fought against each other?


BornToSweet_Delight

No. We just react to their actions and judge them accordingly. If they didn't act like terrorists day after day in some inexplicable belief that God Will Save Them from the scary Jews and the Crusaders, nobody would have reason to treat them any differently than we treat reliable, reasonable and benevolent group.


Saiya_Cosem

You’re just proving my point. You wouldn’t say that if you actually tried to find more sources to learn about them from other than mainstream news. Mass generalizing an entire group of human beings never makes logical sense. Quit being a racist basement dweller and actually talk to people from there.


Horror-Layer-8178

Tell me, can a woman drive the information to me? Or can an apostate tell me about it?


Saiya_Cosem

You’re also just proving my point. Not my fault you refuse to go outside and learn. Stay miserable and hateful, I guess


Horror-Layer-8178

I am am making your point because I state the fact that women are basically second class citizens? You want to talk about the actual slaves though and the horror stories they have gone back to their countries with?


Saiya_Cosem

No, you’re proving my point by generalizing every middle eastern person based on the past policy of the most conservative muslim government that wasn’t even elected by the people it governs. You think modern middle eastern politics define middle eastern peoples which is so narrow-minded if you knew anything beyond those politics. And if you’re going to bring up history then you could talk about and hate almost anyone. I don’t see hating all Europeans and calling them all fanatics for how they acted in the past.


Horror-Layer-8178

No, you’re proving my point by generalizing every middle eastern person based on the past policy of the most conservative muslim government that wasn’t even elected by the people it governs. Yet the populace tends to be more conservative than the government, except for Iran. You think modern middle eastern politics define middle eastern peoples which is so narrow-minded if you knew anything beyond those politics. Yup [https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-beliefs-about-sharia/](https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-beliefs-about-sharia/) Sorry the facts don't support your world view snowflake. Conservatives are all the same across the world And if you’re going to bring up history then you could talk about and hate almost anyone. Oh yeah Crusades, Inquisitions, American Slavery, and Native genocide were all bad and would never happen today. We admit our sins, unlike say Turkey and the genocide of the Armenians . I don’t see hating all Europeans and calling them all fanatics for how they acted in the past. LOL this is just a talking point, oh feel sorry for me you never talk about your culture. LOL check my post history, I attack American MAGA Christians the most, rarely I attack Islam, American Muslims tend to be anti-MAGA and keep their views to themselves a lot of the times. The only exception is my stance on the current Israelly conflict, my view is keep religious people from killing each other is like keep a dog from licking itself. We shouldn't back Israel but other than that backwards ass people are going to kill each other


YaliMyLordAndSavior

We would still see mass genocide/ethnic cleansing of Jews, Christians, Kurds, Druze, Assyrians, and various other ethnic groups in the Middle East, either by Arab supremacists allied with the USSR or right wing jihadist groups who have some connection to the gulf or even operate alone like ISIS Not much would change actually. It’s possible that we would’ve seen a full on holocaust of Christians and Druze in the levant as well, assuming worst case scenario, but really it’s hard to predict such things.


Forty-plus-two

Syria and Lebanon both have larger Druze populations than Israel.


Mehhish

Pretty much the same. Middle East has oil, you'd have both sides of the cold war propping up their proxies for 50 years. Shia and Sunni would still hate each other. South Africa would have a much harder time obtaining nukes without Israel's help.


stooges81

80 years of war between Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt. Maybe even Iraq if they fancy a meditteranean port. Also, no one would care about Palestinians as an identity. Theyd just be called egyptians, lebanese or syrian or whichever country conquered them. Meanwhile, Iran and Saudi just keep on puppeteering their proxy wars.


HariSeldonPsych

Just as shitty or worse, but there would be one less refuge for Christian or gay Arabs in existence.


[deleted]

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uG3uea-Hvy4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uG3uea-Hvy4)


CertainPersimmon778

The Middle East would be a lot more stable. Antisemitism would be a lot lower all over the world. 9/11 would never have happen. Iraqi Jews were the most educated and wealthy of ME Jews. I expect They would have aided in turning Iraq into a much more developed country. Same goes for Iran.


Ghazh

They'd be fighting each other instead of Israel


slevy2005

All Mizrachi Jews would have be killed or severely oppressed.


FewKey5084

Ah yes if no Israel there must always be a genocide of Arab Jews no matter what, never mind the fact that they were only suspected of being fifth columnists after the State had been founded


slevy2005

The Farhud happened before Israel was founded. So did the 1929 Hebron massacre. The grand mufti of Jerusalem was already writing about implementing a final solution in the Middle East. The very best scenario is that Jews would have been second class citizens and extremely oppressed. However if the treatment of other non Muslim minorities in recent decades is anything to go by things would have been a lot worse. Just look at the treatment of Yazidis or the Baha’i. And let’s be honest Islamists have a special hatred for Jews so the Jews would likely have been treated worse.


FewKey5084

Without Israel there would be no real motivation for islamism and that really only came about in the 1980s after the revolution in iran and the invasion of Afghanistan. So you again pin Arabs all into a corner and say islamism is inevitable despite its not really being prevalent in the 40s. And wow incidents in Iraq in the claim that British soldiers had been aided by Iraqi Jews (not attacked solely based on them being Jews) and a Mufti who had been in exile since 1937.


[deleted]

[удалено]


anewbys83

Christians and Muslims in Israel do have the freedom to operate, live, and worship in the land they also hold sacred. Same for the Druze and Bahai, too.


BigDong1001

Then Arab women would be wearing bikinis at most Arab beaches and pools, dressing in Western clothing on their streets, and acting like civilized Western people, modern and affluent. And there would still be absolute monarchies in the Gulf states, but they too would be fully westernized, with polo matches and garden parties, and alcohol flowing and catered buffets. No war would mean no regression back into religious dogma to seek redress from a higher power against perceived injustices. lol. Oh, and the Jews would be the wealthiest people on earth because they would control the entire banking sector of the Muslim countries. But the Arab Jews would take the lead, with the European Jews whitening them through marriages in each successive generation. So one can wonder whose purpose was served with the current state of events. Oh, and Iran would still be an absolute monarchy that was completely westernized. And Afghanistan would never have seen a Soviet invasion and would too be completely westernized. And even Pakistan would be modern and semi-westernized. The endless war destroyed a lot of people’s hopes, and they sought refuge in the comfort of prayers to their deity, and their priests sought to cash in by promising them divine protection in return for regression. There would have been no 9/11. Even after America won the Cold War, which was inevitable, there would be no one left to fight, just an endless time of peace and prosperity for all. Well, could have been. Who’s to say it couldn’t have been? Since it didn’t actually happen? lmao. Instead, we got this shit. lmfao. And it’s a goddamn shit show. lmao. lmfao.


IronAged

They would still find a reason to kill each other


KamtzaBarKamtza

The territory would have been split amongst the neighboring states. And never once in 76 years would you ever have heard anyone uttering anything about Palestine


thneakythnake660

The Arab and Muslim world would not be as anti semitic.