14 ms·

While this is a good development. Everything in this part of the world is on a rinse snd repeat cycle ever since the Assyrians and the Babylonians - it hasn't

While this is a good development. Everything in this part of the world is on a rinse snd repeat cycle ever since the Assyrians and the Babylonians - it hasn't changed much except maybe its actually a little more humane then it was in the past (which says something). Sorry for the cynical take but this just does a temporary stop.

spoonfeeder006 2y ago
But if it is in fact more humane than in the past (hard to imagine TBH), hopefully that trend of gradual improvement will continue?
- boringg 2y ago
  They literally razed Bablyon to the ground including the entire population after over 15 months being under siege and afterwards trying to change the lands hydrology so that people couldn't resettle - probably one of the harshest destruction but not the only one. I guess its an improvement - not one thats remotely impressive.
  - growthwtf 2y ago
    Are you being metaphorical when you say literally? Or is this a reference to the conquest by Cyrus the Great? I'm not trying to be pedantic here. I'm just not familiar with any historical event you are describing. From what I've heard, and I'm not an expert, I wouldn't characterize any of the conquests of Babylon as a 'razing', And the eventual abandonment of the city was more a result of slow decline and changing geological conditions. I do like to learn about the history of the area, so if it's just something I'm not familiar with, please point me in the right direction.
    - mikestew 2y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Babylon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Babylon
      - throwup238 2y ago
        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Babylonian_Empire https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Babylonian_Empire And literally decades later the coronation of Nabopolassar founded the Neo-Babylonian empire, soon before the Assyrian empire that destroyed old Babylon crumbled. It remained a major settlement after the destruction, it just took them a few decades to rise again. 99% of historical accounts about the sacking and destruction of cities are exaggerated. Even Carthage grew as a settlement mere years after the Romans destroyed it (the whole “salting the land” thing is an 18/19th century invention).
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - growthwtf 2y ago
        Thanks!
      - chmod775 2y ago
        That's a bit light on details. Here's an account by king Sennacherib: > I destroyed the city and its houses, from foundation to parapet; I devastated and burned them. I razed the brick and earthenwork of the outer and inner wall of the city, of the temples, and of the ziggurat; and I dumped these into the Araḫtu canal. I dug canals through the midst of that city, I overwhelmed it with water, I made its very foundations disappear, and I destroyed it more completely than a devastating flood. So that it might be impossible in future days to recognize the site of that city and its temples, I utterly dissolved it with water and made it like inundated land. However since he was punishing Babylon for rebelling one time too many, he had reason to exaggerate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sennacherib https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sennacherib
        growthwtf 2y ago
        Even better. Thank you!
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
  - tstrimple 2y ago
    The destruction of water resources seems to be going ahead as planned still. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/destruction-gaza-water-wells-deepens-palestinian-misery-2024-07-30/ https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/destruction-gaza-w...
- bbor 2y ago
  Hmm, what do you mean? Like, compared to ancient times, or compared to a previous point post-WWII? Certainly the organization of one side of this conflict into a state rather than militias naturally has tempered things since the early days where entire villages were being wiped out at random, but both sides are pretty openly engaged in terrorism to this day (targeting civilians for political reasons).
  - boringg 2y ago
    Babylon wasn't a village at that time - it was likely a population of 200,000 +- 100,000 people. It was cultural Zenith of the planet at that time.
gravisultra 2y ago
That's not true at all. The current conflict isn't some thousand year old feud. It was very much caused by the deliberate provocation and importation of European settlers via Zionism. It's easy to wave our hands and say "it's so complicated!" or "they've been doing this for thousands of years!" but it's not complicated, much like apartheid South Africa, Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were not complicated. Colonialism and ethno-centric racism are never good.
- emchammer 2y ago
  Doesn't the Torah count for something? It works slower than fiber optics but is massively parallel.
  - gravisultra 2y ago
    No, that's mythology. Actual history is The Balfour Declaration: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration And Nakba: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakba https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakba
    - DiscourseFan 2y ago
      The land claims of the territory both come from the Torah, in the end. Its just that the Jews and Muslims disagree on who God was referring to.
      - shprd 2y ago
        > The land claims of the territory both come from the Torah, in the end. Its just that the Jews and Muslims disagree on who God was referring to. What? Palestinians don't claim the land based on a promise by God. They claim it because they hold the legal documents going back for centuries. Even those expelled in 1948, still have the fucking keys covered with their grandparents blood after the Nakba ethnic cleansing. You know what? let's forget about legal documents, about who is native to the land by DNA, since it's you know "complicated", right? 1. Zionists today (not a story in the past) continue to put outposts in Palestinians farms to snatch more and more land. 2. Israeli troops and settlers killed 171 Palestinian children in the west bank (an area smaller than Delaware) in 2024 alone [1]. 3. They continue building illegal settlements on Palestinians land that's illegal even by US admission. 4. Israel is taking advantage of the power vacuum in Syria and advancing deeper inside Syria borders while taking more and more cities. It's literally provoking and asking for another war where they will claim they were victims. 5. The blood of tens of thousands of civilians in Gaza is still fresh [2] and more crimes in the past with no one held accountable, soldiers are literally posing and filming their war crimes with no accountability. Many humanitarian orgs believe the number of those killed is actually undercounted as many are still undocumented. They celebrates killing babies (who they claim will be terrorists of course) so soldiers are praised and incentivized to annex entire blood line like savages. Here's a challenge for you: Emit labels like "Palestinians" and "Israelis" and ask someone with no prejudice, hearing it for the first time, "who is in the wrong?" If you are honest and not manipulative you'll get your answer. But nah let's stick to the theory that the entire world is against us and respond to any other theory that it's "complicated" while continue committing war crimes openly admitted by our soldiers ever since Israel was established.[3] Do you agree that everyone who was involved in war crimes to be held responsible, no matter what ethnicity, religion, or passport they hold? That is the core of the problem, Israeli have done more terrible things than the side they claim as terrorists. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/nov/19/west-bank-children-killed-unprecedented-rate https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/nov/19/west-bank-chil... [2] https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/how-many-palestinians-has-israels-gaza-offensive-killed-2025-01-15/ https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/how-many-palestini... [3] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt16378034/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt16378034/
cobbzilla 2y ago
Actually it goes back a bit further, basically to the dawn of civilization. The first battle in recorded history was between Egypt and the Hittites, the Battle of Megiddo, in what is today the state of Israel [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Megiddo_%2815th_century_BC%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Megiddo_%2815th_cent...
mrandish 2y ago
[flagged]
- eastbound 2y ago
  What swayed me to one side was not looking at the past, but looking at the future. One side is able to develop this land and benefit the rest of the world. The other side is unstoppingly doing damage to others, even in my home country (France), while providing no value whatsoever. What you do with your life matters.
  - Thiez 2y ago
    What an absurd thing to say. You could say the same of any oppressor and/or colonizer in history. "Well at least they're doing something useful with the land, the people that are being crushed under their boots are just screaming angrily and acting aggressive. All the oppressed are good for is slave labor and dieing." Lucky many people around the world have evolved their morality beyond 'might makes right'.
    - eastbound 2y ago
      What do you mean, have evolved their morality. They threw 7000 rockets in resident housing for 6 months, kidnapped civilians with babies 9 months old, and you support their right to create a state with an army, and last time they had a state, they voted 51% Hamas. Sounds awfully like a crime against humanity, and supporting this is probably illegal.
bigstrat2003 2y ago
I like how even in this thread, you have many people - almost certainly very few of whom have no real stake in the fight - bitterly arguing about who is right and wrong (turning it into a fight about US politics as a bonus). Human nature and tribalism really is a terrible thing sometimes. I agree with you, although I certainly hope you and I are wrong. It would be nice to see people let go of past injustices on both sides long enough to have a lasting peace.
- amanaplanacanal 2y ago
  Letting go of past injustices might work, if they weren't ongoing.
- username135 2y ago
  My friend, its tribalism all the way down. Thats what we do.
- bbor 2y ago
  Not to sound terse, but I think the retort here is clear: morality exists, and it's important that we do our best to follow its guidance. It matters who's right and who's wrong! I absolutely agree that deciding on absolute historical blame for one "side" or another over many generations isn't helpful, but we absolutely need to litigate who's violating whose rights if we want to set things straight. "It's all complicated and people in this part of the world are unusually tribal/violent" has been used to explain away this conflict since its inception in the US, which we have no right to do as a primary stakeholder. We (US citizens) have a stake in Gaza because the situation would be completely different without our aid, both direct (i.e. massive shipments of weapons and offering the services of our military) & indirect (i.e. using our UNSC vote to block otherwise unanimous resolutions against Israel). To bring it all back to the one absolutely-litigated conflict in the western canon for clarity, as we so often do: was WWII about "tribalism" and both sides being prone to violence, or was it about unjustified aggressors and justified responses? Despite the nuances of Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I think we would all immediately endorse the latter position. Why not in this case, too?
  - 2y ago
tiahura 2y ago
[flagged]
- bbor 2y ago
  No offense (really!!!) but "that's just how people of that race are" isn't a very cool thing to say, my friend. They're humans, just like us -- that's the problem!
wl 2y ago
The conflicts with the Assyrians, Babylonians, and Hittites came down to geopolitical factors that don't exist anymore. Mostly, the Levant separated the empires of Mesopotamia and Anatolia from Egypt. The numerous battles that happened at Meggido occurred because that was a chokepoint of the Way of Horus, the principal land trade route from Egypt specifically and Africa generally to the rest of the world. Besides trade, the Levant had tended to serve as a buffer zone between pharaonic Egypt, which preferred hegemony over outright empire, and other empires who always seemed to want to expand towards Egypt. The Assyrian military campaigns in particular are a reaction to the 25th dynasty in Egypt convincing rulers in the Levant to ally themselves more closely with them at the expense of the Assyrians. The current conflict is a different beast. The fall of the Ottoman Empire and the careless meddling of western powers in the aftermath. The Jewish diaspora, Zionism, and the Holocaust. The Sunni-Shia conflict.
- tkel 2y ago
  Thank you for providing an educated response to the exhausting "ancient conflict" discourse
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > the Levant separated the empires of Mesopotamia and Anatolia from Egypt. The numerous battles that happened at Meggido The Egyptians were a major force in fomenting regional frictions with Israel. And the Levant remains a crossroad—it borders by land or sea the spheres of influence of the EU, Russia, Turkey, Iran, the Gulf monarchies, Egypt and America. > convincing rulers in the Levant to ally themselves more closely with them at the expense of the Assyrians Iran versus the West (and Gulf monarchies) in literally Syria. The region isn’t pre-destined for chaos. But the geography and history make peace difficult. (There is always another person who can “legitimately” claim some land when you’re sited next to the cradle of civilisation.)
- boringg 2y ago
  The Sunni-Shia conflict falls pretty close to the same line between the Babylonians (south) and Assyrians (north). The Assyrians were constantly attacked by proxies helped out by Egypt (Elamites, Medes, Babylon).
colordrops 2y ago
Where has it not been on rinse and repeat. Some other parts of the world just operate on a bit longer cycles.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
lostlogin 2y ago
> Sorry for the cynical take but this just does a temporary stop. It’s hard to disagree. But Ireland was an impossible problem at one stage, and while it’s still far from resolved, it’s a hell of lot less violent.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
zkry 2y ago
> Everything in this part of the world is on a rinse snd repeat cycle ever since the Assyrians and the Babylonians That's an incredible statement, as if the rest of the world is somehow different. The only thing special about these regions is that they've had complex states for longer, so of course state-based warfare would go back farther. On another level, there absolutely have been periods of stability in regions of the middle east, for periods of time we would consider long.
- redmajor12 2y ago
  Western Europe went through ~200 years of brutal religious wars from the advent of Protestantism. The same is going on in the Mideast, it just started only 100 years ago with the fall of the Ottoman Empire.
  - 6510 2y ago
    https://youtu.be/-evIyrrjTTY https://youtu.be/-evIyrrjTTY

spoonfeeder006 2y ago

But if it is in fact more humane than in the past (hard to imagine TBH), hopefully that trend of gradual improvement will continue?

boringg 2y ago
They literally razed Bablyon to the ground including the entire population after over 15 months being under siege and afterwards trying to change the lands hydrology so that people couldn't resettle - probably one of the harshest destruction but not the only one. I guess its an improvement - not one thats remotely impressive.
- growthwtf 2y ago
  Are you being metaphorical when you say literally? Or is this a reference to the conquest by Cyrus the Great? I'm not trying to be pedantic here. I'm just not familiar with any historical event you are describing. From what I've heard, and I'm not an expert, I wouldn't characterize any of the conquests of Babylon as a 'razing', And the eventual abandonment of the city was more a result of slow decline and changing geological conditions. I do like to learn about the history of the area, so if it's just something I'm not familiar with, please point me in the right direction.
  - mikestew 2y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Babylon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Babylon
    - throwup238 2y ago
      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Babylonian_Empire https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Babylonian_Empire And literally decades later the coronation of Nabopolassar founded the Neo-Babylonian empire, soon before the Assyrian empire that destroyed old Babylon crumbled. It remained a major settlement after the destruction, it just took them a few decades to rise again. 99% of historical accounts about the sacking and destruction of cities are exaggerated. Even Carthage grew as a settlement mere years after the Romans destroyed it (the whole “salting the land” thing is an 18/19th century invention).
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
    - growthwtf 2y ago
      Thanks!
    - chmod775 2y ago
      That's a bit light on details. Here's an account by king Sennacherib: > I destroyed the city and its houses, from foundation to parapet; I devastated and burned them. I razed the brick and earthenwork of the outer and inner wall of the city, of the temples, and of the ziggurat; and I dumped these into the Araḫtu canal. I dug canals through the midst of that city, I overwhelmed it with water, I made its very foundations disappear, and I destroyed it more completely than a devastating flood. So that it might be impossible in future days to recognize the site of that city and its temples, I utterly dissolved it with water and made it like inundated land. However since he was punishing Babylon for rebelling one time too many, he had reason to exaggerate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sennacherib https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sennacherib
      - growthwtf 2y ago
        Even better. Thank you!
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- tstrimple 2y ago
  The destruction of water resources seems to be going ahead as planned still. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/destruction-gaza-water-wells-deepens-palestinian-misery-2024-07-30/ https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/destruction-gaza-w...
bbor 2y ago
Hmm, what do you mean? Like, compared to ancient times, or compared to a previous point post-WWII? Certainly the organization of one side of this conflict into a state rather than militias naturally has tempered things since the early days where entire villages were being wiped out at random, but both sides are pretty openly engaged in terrorism to this day (targeting civilians for political reasons).
- boringg 2y ago
  Babylon wasn't a village at that time - it was likely a population of 200,000 +- 100,000 people. It was cultural Zenith of the planet at that time.

gravisultra 2y ago

That's not true at all. The current conflict isn't some thousand year old feud. It was very much caused by the deliberate provocation and importation of European settlers via Zionism. It's easy to wave our hands and say "it's so complicated!" or "they've been doing this for thousands of years!" but it's not complicated, much like apartheid South Africa, Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were not complicated. Colonialism and ethno-centric racism are never good.

emchammer 2y ago
Doesn't the Torah count for something? It works slower than fiber optics but is massively parallel.
- gravisultra 2y ago
  No, that's mythology. Actual history is The Balfour Declaration: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration And Nakba: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakba https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakba
  - DiscourseFan 2y ago
    The land claims of the territory both come from the Torah, in the end. Its just that the Jews and Muslims disagree on who God was referring to.
    - shprd 2y ago
      > The land claims of the territory both come from the Torah, in the end. Its just that the Jews and Muslims disagree on who God was referring to. What? Palestinians don't claim the land based on a promise by God. They claim it because they hold the legal documents going back for centuries. Even those expelled in 1948, still have the fucking keys covered with their grandparents blood after the Nakba ethnic cleansing. You know what? let's forget about legal documents, about who is native to the land by DNA, since it's you know "complicated", right? 1. Zionists today (not a story in the past) continue to put outposts in Palestinians farms to snatch more and more land. 2. Israeli troops and settlers killed 171 Palestinian children in the west bank (an area smaller than Delaware) in 2024 alone [1]. 3. They continue building illegal settlements on Palestinians land that's illegal even by US admission. 4. Israel is taking advantage of the power vacuum in Syria and advancing deeper inside Syria borders while taking more and more cities. It's literally provoking and asking for another war where they will claim they were victims. 5. The blood of tens of thousands of civilians in Gaza is still fresh [2] and more crimes in the past with no one held accountable, soldiers are literally posing and filming their war crimes with no accountability. Many humanitarian orgs believe the number of those killed is actually undercounted as many are still undocumented. They celebrates killing babies (who they claim will be terrorists of course) so soldiers are praised and incentivized to annex entire blood line like savages. Here's a challenge for you: Emit labels like "Palestinians" and "Israelis" and ask someone with no prejudice, hearing it for the first time, "who is in the wrong?" If you are honest and not manipulative you'll get your answer. But nah let's stick to the theory that the entire world is against us and respond to any other theory that it's "complicated" while continue committing war crimes openly admitted by our soldiers ever since Israel was established.[3] Do you agree that everyone who was involved in war crimes to be held responsible, no matter what ethnicity, religion, or passport they hold? That is the core of the problem, Israeli have done more terrible things than the side they claim as terrorists. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/nov/19/west-bank-children-killed-unprecedented-rate https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/nov/19/west-bank-chil... [2] https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/how-many-palestinians-has-israels-gaza-offensive-killed-2025-01-15/ https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/how-many-palestini... [3] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt16378034/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt16378034/

cobbzilla 2y ago

Actually it goes back a bit further, basically to the dawn of civilization. The first battle in recorded history was between Egypt and the Hittites, the Battle of Megiddo, in what is today the state of Israel [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Megiddo_%2815th_century_BC%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Megiddo_%2815th_cent...

mrandish 2y ago

[flagged]

eastbound 2y ago
What swayed me to one side was not looking at the past, but looking at the future. One side is able to develop this land and benefit the rest of the world. The other side is unstoppingly doing damage to others, even in my home country (France), while providing no value whatsoever. What you do with your life matters.
- Thiez 2y ago
  What an absurd thing to say. You could say the same of any oppressor and/or colonizer in history. "Well at least they're doing something useful with the land, the people that are being crushed under their boots are just screaming angrily and acting aggressive. All the oppressed are good for is slave labor and dieing." Lucky many people around the world have evolved their morality beyond 'might makes right'.
  - eastbound 2y ago
    What do you mean, have evolved their morality. They threw 7000 rockets in resident housing for 6 months, kidnapped civilians with babies 9 months old, and you support their right to create a state with an army, and last time they had a state, they voted 51% Hamas. Sounds awfully like a crime against humanity, and supporting this is probably illegal.

bigstrat2003 2y ago

I like how even in this thread, you have many people - almost certainly very few of whom have no real stake in the fight - bitterly arguing about who is right and wrong (turning it into a fight about US politics as a bonus). Human nature and tribalism really is a terrible thing sometimes. I agree with you, although I certainly hope you and I are wrong. It would be nice to see people let go of past injustices on both sides long enough to have a lasting peace.

amanaplanacanal 2y ago
Letting go of past injustices might work, if they weren't ongoing.
username135 2y ago
My friend, its tribalism all the way down. Thats what we do.
bbor 2y ago
Not to sound terse, but I think the retort here is clear: morality exists, and it's important that we do our best to follow its guidance. It matters who's right and who's wrong! I absolutely agree that deciding on absolute historical blame for one "side" or another over many generations isn't helpful, but we absolutely need to litigate who's violating whose rights if we want to set things straight. "It's all complicated and people in this part of the world are unusually tribal/violent" has been used to explain away this conflict since its inception in the US, which we have no right to do as a primary stakeholder. We (US citizens) have a stake in Gaza because the situation would be completely different without our aid, both direct (i.e. massive shipments of weapons and offering the services of our military) & indirect (i.e. using our UNSC vote to block otherwise unanimous resolutions against Israel). To bring it all back to the one absolutely-litigated conflict in the western canon for clarity, as we so often do: was WWII about "tribalism" and both sides being prone to violence, or was it about unjustified aggressors and justified responses? Despite the nuances of Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I think we would all immediately endorse the latter position. Why not in this case, too?
- 2y ago

tiahura 2y ago

[flagged]

bbor 2y ago
No offense (really!!!) but "that's just how people of that race are" isn't a very cool thing to say, my friend. They're humans, just like us -- that's the problem!

wl 2y ago

The conflicts with the Assyrians, Babylonians, and Hittites came down to geopolitical factors that don't exist anymore. Mostly, the Levant separated the empires of Mesopotamia and Anatolia from Egypt. The numerous battles that happened at Meggido occurred because that was a chokepoint of the Way of Horus, the principal land trade route from Egypt specifically and Africa generally to the rest of the world. Besides trade, the Levant had tended to serve as a buffer zone between pharaonic Egypt, which preferred hegemony over outright empire, and other empires who always seemed to want to expand towards Egypt. The Assyrian military campaigns in particular are a reaction to the 25th dynasty in Egypt convincing rulers in the Levant to ally themselves more closely with them at the expense of the Assyrians. The current conflict is a different beast. The fall of the Ottoman Empire and the careless meddling of western powers in the aftermath. The Jewish diaspora, Zionism, and the Holocaust. The Sunni-Shia conflict.

tkel 2y ago
Thank you for providing an educated response to the exhausting "ancient conflict" discourse
JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> the Levant separated the empires of Mesopotamia and Anatolia from Egypt. The numerous battles that happened at Meggido The Egyptians were a major force in fomenting regional frictions with Israel. And the Levant remains a crossroad—it borders by land or sea the spheres of influence of the EU, Russia, Turkey, Iran, the Gulf monarchies, Egypt and America. > convincing rulers in the Levant to ally themselves more closely with them at the expense of the Assyrians Iran versus the West (and Gulf monarchies) in literally Syria. The region isn’t pre-destined for chaos. But the geography and history make peace difficult. (There is always another person who can “legitimately” claim some land when you’re sited next to the cradle of civilisation.)
boringg 2y ago
The Sunni-Shia conflict falls pretty close to the same line between the Babylonians (south) and Assyrians (north). The Assyrians were constantly attacked by proxies helped out by Egypt (Elamites, Medes, Babylon).

colordrops 2y ago

Where has it not been on rinse and repeat. Some other parts of the world just operate on a bit longer cycles.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

lostlogin 2y ago

> Sorry for the cynical take but this just does a temporary stop. It’s hard to disagree. But Ireland was an impossible problem at one stage, and while it’s still far from resolved, it’s a hell of lot less violent.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

zkry 2y ago

> Everything in this part of the world is on a rinse snd repeat cycle ever since the Assyrians and the Babylonians That's an incredible statement, as if the rest of the world is somehow different. The only thing special about these regions is that they've had complex states for longer, so of course state-based warfare would go back farther. On another level, there absolutely have been periods of stability in regions of the middle east, for periods of time we would consider long.

redmajor12 2y ago
Western Europe went through ~200 years of brutal religious wars from the advent of Protestantism. The same is going on in the Mideast, it just started only 100 years ago with the fall of the Ottoman Empire.
- 6510 2y ago
  https://youtu.be/-evIyrrjTTY https://youtu.be/-evIyrrjTTY