Not my downvote, corrective upvote actually. One of the saddest things is the religious hatred that underlies the ongoing animosity over the centuries. There

Not my downvote, corrective upvote actually. One of the saddest things is the religious hatred that underlies the ongoing animosity over the centuries. There have been a few generations since 1945-1948 but not a significant number compared to way back when this all started. It is difficult to be sure how the balance of actual oppression swung between the hating parties over that much time. I would imagine that during times of no oppression there was still lingering hatred which has risen and fallen, most likely in a political way. Always available to be stoked into destructive action by populists and/or mobs who favor that type of inhumanity. Actual oppressive action was probably taken more often during times when one hating faction is much more capable of destruction than the other. Whether or not violence still existed during times when there was not true oppression occurring simultaneously. Compared to that, the 20th century was already incredibly advanced up until World War II, great progress had been made but worldwide inhumanity had of course not been overcome, and the ultimate destruction would finally be enough to end the world. Ever since. As we are not supposed to forget. But before the war the people of the Mideast seemed to be so much more advanced than they are now in the way that so many Arabs & Jews had been living in relative "complete harmony" for centuries in a lot of places, scattered throughout the Mideast, compared to how it is between Israel & Palestine recently. There was still scattered hatred too, and if that could have been addressed back then the situation would not be as bad now. By 1948 it was already too late, WWII came and went without a complete cessation of hostilities in the Mideast. Like almost no where else. Missed it by that much. When most of the world is fighting truly evil political parties in WWII because those parties are an existential threat to the entire world, you're going to have to build up some kind of a defense just in case the threat comes your way, regardless of whether you are completely non-aggressive and totally neutral otherwise. Most of the world is fighting, the whole thing is threatened, practically that means the whole world is at war. This had never happened before or since, not nearly with WWI even though it was quite international too. A HUGE dividing line for the existence of human beings which makes EVERYTHING that happened before the war far less meaningful in some ways. Or makes absolutely meaningless any hatred which existed in the pre-war world, or anything else which could possibly lead in any other direction than world peace. No matter what anybody's ancestors thought before that, some of them almost destroyed the world and that was more widely recognized as stupid than it is now. It was more unanimous back in the 20th century that those kind of political parties would never have a chance again after such a devastating worldwide war. Because if another world war comes, there will be nothing left. Remember what it was like during the "Cold War"? If it had gotten hot none of us would even be here to oppress or be oppressed. If you can come out on the other end after the most-evil political parties have been overcome, and the whole world is supposed to relax and quit fighting, you are supposed to quit fighting too if you had participated. And if you never did face a direct enough threat which required you to participate in the destruction, the stupidest thing you could do with your strengthened defense apparatus would be some saber-rattling or to start fighting when the "smart money" has quit for good reason. Well hard-core humanity is just not yet universal enough to fix stupid, and stupid or inhumanity may or may not have been more prevalent then than now. Not everybody will be able to make the connection between stupidity, inhumanity, and ego, but it's there more prominently sometimes than others too. People have pinpointed a critical dividing line of 1948 which can not be denied or ignored, and I'll add something generic that not everyone considers which doesn't apply more to the Mideast than anywhere else. It's not the number of years since WWII that allows the forgetfulness of maximized inhumanity to occur, it's the number of human generations since. And some cultures, intentionally or not, beget numerous more generations over the same number of decades than others. Remember I wasn't born yet in 1948, but when the 6-day war took place in 1967, I first recognized the significance of that much-earlier 1948 upset, and have been exposed to all kinds of opinions and facts about it ever since. Some from people who were actually supporting either side before they were too elderly. Mostly one-sided one way or the other, which is not easy to navigate. I have always refused to take a side, and admit that my distillation has not yielded an unchanging response to either extreme yet. Now when I say human generations that means human beings, but look at it even deeper and an almost-separate element of "humanity" has its own generations. I guess there's a certain amount of forgetfulness that accrues through time on either terms. So really I'm worried about the oppression of the current generation more so than going back to 1948 most of the time any more. Now the WWII generation worldwide, which picked up after the war by declaring the most prosperous peacetime in living history, has dwindled to almost non-existence, it is naturally no longer a political force. While they were still influential might have been why civilization has lasted this long since 1948. When I take sides I try to make it humanity over inhumanity, and brilliance over stupidity. When all you have left is inhumanity and stupidity do you really want to be on one side or the other? Sorry for the long messages but this is more serious than ever and it's been on my mind for a while now. Trying to post in good faith.