Imagine being so dense an ignorant to compare the evolution of Eurpean borders through treaties and congress than the absolute shithole that the decolonization ended being and the absolute insanity that the shatter of Africa was
Clean_Imagination315 on
That’s weird, none of those borders are straight lines. I wonder why…
TheDickWolf on
Georgee HW Bush and Paul Bremer caused ISIS
soothed-ape on
Internal and external factors caused ISIS
Suspected_Magic_User on
Poland lore
WienerJungle on
It’s a shame the middle east cant be peaceful like 20th century Europe was.
John_Wotek on
The sykes picot stirred a lot of shit in the middle east, but ISIS is 100% on the USA destroying Iraq in 2003.
quwertzi on
You cannot just say no regard to nationalities/ethnicities, as for example Slovakia only exists because those ‘regards’. You can make the argument that ‘they’ could/should have drawn the borders to better represent them, that is a fact, but the nationalities/ethnicities were at least considered rather than completely disregarded as in the case of Africa
Cgi22 on
Intereuropean cultural suppression is based actually!
D’oc, Brythonic, Low German, Catalan, Corsican, Sardinian, Southern Italic Romance, Southern Italic Greek, Basque, Frisian? Who needs that shit anyway?
Dry-Progress-1769 on
well the european borders aren’t half straight lines
yourstruly912 on
Remember when Uncle Joe unilaterally relocated half of Poland?
Gold_Size_1258 on
Fun fact: all territories Germany lost after WW1 weren’t ethnically German and had small minorities at best.
CatonicCthulu on
So would a Strong Arab state have stopped a Wahhabist Islamist polity from forming in the context of the immediate fall of Iraq and Syrian Civil war? Potentially. First so many things would be diffident it might be a little confounding. My immediate counterpoint would be that Arab states like Egypt, Iraq, Yemen,and Syria were already no strangers to civil war and the Nasserist ideology probably weakened their economies and were foundationally weak due to dissent amongst military leadership. Although maybe someone with a stronger understanding of the evolution of pan-Arabism as an ideology and Wahhabism could elaborate on how it might affect the development. It’s a good counterfactual though.
Kamenev_Drang on
Finally, an actual meme
Trotsky_Enjoyer on
Banger
Cowboywizard12 on
I mean, up till post World War 2, Europe was going to war with itself every 30 years or so.
At one point there was a break from post franco prussian war till world war one because the Europeans decided they were going to rape and pillage as much of Africa as they could
comnul on
A multiethnical, multireligious country, that is divided by large mountain ranges cant be treated like a modern state. Believing such a decentralized place could ever become a liberal democracy is western delusion.
Looks at Switzerland:
Senior-Sale273 on
Yeah like that happened for 3000+ years? It’s literally the formation of the EU that stopped that.
Immediate_Gain_9480 on
Hey at one point they did start caring. Their solution was mass ethnic cleansing and forcing minority people’s to assimilate to make the borders work.
kardfogK on
Oh but when a hungarian says trianon was an overkill and not perfect he is stoned to death
A_Normal_Redditor_04 on
The Middle East was already unstable and quite a mess even before the Sykes-Piccot, and even before the Ottomans arrived. It only really did get pacified when the Umayyad and Abbasid Caliphates after that it was downhill from there. People often forget that there are a ton of tribes, ethnicities, and religions within the Middle East that are always at each other’s throats. Granted this was also the case in Europe but the emergence of strong nation-states like Prussia, England, Russia, and France ensured that there was always going to be a “primary culture” that is stronger than every other sub-culture who can force said subcultures to follow in line or get blasted (like what happened to the German Confederation and the millions of tiny German states after they tried to contain Prussia). There was no such state in the Middle East during the Modern Period. They have no Prussia to unite the region and strongarm everyone to be a good boy. They had no France that assimilated everyone or a Muscovite Russia that conquered every Russian principality.
The closest state you’ll have is unironically the Ottomans, they were able to somewhat centralize and keep Arabs in line with mixed success. They got dragged in WW1 and died. The 2nd closest would be Egypt, but they have neither the strength that Prussia and Muscovy had to unite Germany and Russia respectively.
tldr Arab divide runs deep, it isn’t just because of the Sykes-Picot and the Ottomans (although they still are big contributors), the Middle East was already quite chaotic and with no one to strong arm and keep the peace efficiently, the region keeps on being unstable.
Atari774 on
Sykes-Picot didn’t directly cause ISIS, but it did cause so many other problems with the Middle East. For starters, not giving the Kurds their own nation, leading to decades of oppression and genocide against the Kurds from Turkey, Syria and Iraq. Secondly, for not letting the Arabs establish their own nations like they had been promised during WWI.
Although the real thing that ruined any chances of peace in the Middle East, was the establishment of Israel. A foreign supported colony of mostly Europeans and Americans forcefully removing a native population of Arabs (creating a near perpetual refugee crisis) was bound to cause problems with the neighboring countries. Especially since the Zionist movement had laid claim to lands from every nearby country, even including Iraq and Saudi Arabia. It also didn’t help that they invaded Egypt within 10 years of their establishment, alongside the British and French, and for very little reason.
22 Comments
Imagine being so dense an ignorant to compare the evolution of Eurpean borders through treaties and congress than the absolute shithole that the decolonization ended being and the absolute insanity that the shatter of Africa was
That’s weird, none of those borders are straight lines. I wonder why…
Georgee HW Bush and Paul Bremer caused ISIS
Internal and external factors caused ISIS
Poland lore
It’s a shame the middle east cant be peaceful like 20th century Europe was.
The sykes picot stirred a lot of shit in the middle east, but ISIS is 100% on the USA destroying Iraq in 2003.
You cannot just say no regard to nationalities/ethnicities, as for example Slovakia only exists because those ‘regards’. You can make the argument that ‘they’ could/should have drawn the borders to better represent them, that is a fact, but the nationalities/ethnicities were at least considered rather than completely disregarded as in the case of Africa
Intereuropean cultural suppression is based actually!
D’oc, Brythonic, Low German, Catalan, Corsican, Sardinian, Southern Italic Romance, Southern Italic Greek, Basque, Frisian? Who needs that shit anyway?
well the european borders aren’t half straight lines
Remember when Uncle Joe unilaterally relocated half of Poland?
Fun fact: all territories Germany lost after WW1 weren’t ethnically German and had small minorities at best.
So would a Strong Arab state have stopped a Wahhabist Islamist polity from forming in the context of the immediate fall of Iraq and Syrian Civil war? Potentially. First so many things would be diffident it might be a little confounding. My immediate counterpoint would be that Arab states like Egypt, Iraq, Yemen,and Syria were already no strangers to civil war and the Nasserist ideology probably weakened their economies and were foundationally weak due to dissent amongst military leadership. Although maybe someone with a stronger understanding of the evolution of pan-Arabism as an ideology and Wahhabism could elaborate on how it might affect the development. It’s a good counterfactual though.
Finally, an actual meme
Banger
I mean, up till post World War 2, Europe was going to war with itself every 30 years or so.
At one point there was a break from post franco prussian war till world war one because the Europeans decided they were going to rape and pillage as much of Africa as they could
A multiethnical, multireligious country, that is divided by large mountain ranges cant be treated like a modern state. Believing such a decentralized place could ever become a liberal democracy is western delusion.
Looks at Switzerland:
Yeah like that happened for 3000+ years? It’s literally the formation of the EU that stopped that.
Hey at one point they did start caring. Their solution was mass ethnic cleansing and forcing minority people’s to assimilate to make the borders work.
Oh but when a hungarian says trianon was an overkill and not perfect he is stoned to death
The Middle East was already unstable and quite a mess even before the Sykes-Piccot, and even before the Ottomans arrived. It only really did get pacified when the Umayyad and Abbasid Caliphates after that it was downhill from there. People often forget that there are a ton of tribes, ethnicities, and religions within the Middle East that are always at each other’s throats. Granted this was also the case in Europe but the emergence of strong nation-states like Prussia, England, Russia, and France ensured that there was always going to be a “primary culture” that is stronger than every other sub-culture who can force said subcultures to follow in line or get blasted (like what happened to the German Confederation and the millions of tiny German states after they tried to contain Prussia). There was no such state in the Middle East during the Modern Period. They have no Prussia to unite the region and strongarm everyone to be a good boy. They had no France that assimilated everyone or a Muscovite Russia that conquered every Russian principality.
The closest state you’ll have is unironically the Ottomans, they were able to somewhat centralize and keep Arabs in line with mixed success. They got dragged in WW1 and died. The 2nd closest would be Egypt, but they have neither the strength that Prussia and Muscovy had to unite Germany and Russia respectively.
tldr Arab divide runs deep, it isn’t just because of the Sykes-Picot and the Ottomans (although they still are big contributors), the Middle East was already quite chaotic and with no one to strong arm and keep the peace efficiently, the region keeps on being unstable.
Sykes-Picot didn’t directly cause ISIS, but it did cause so many other problems with the Middle East. For starters, not giving the Kurds their own nation, leading to decades of oppression and genocide against the Kurds from Turkey, Syria and Iraq. Secondly, for not letting the Arabs establish their own nations like they had been promised during WWI.
Although the real thing that ruined any chances of peace in the Middle East, was the establishment of Israel. A foreign supported colony of mostly Europeans and Americans forcefully removing a native population of Arabs (creating a near perpetual refugee crisis) was bound to cause problems with the neighboring countries. Especially since the Zionist movement had laid claim to lands from every nearby country, even including Iraq and Saudi Arabia. It also didn’t help that they invaded Egypt within 10 years of their establishment, alongside the British and French, and for very little reason.