Israel - Iran and regional players | Please post respectfully

Giggsyking

Full Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2013
Messages
8,519
So true. The parallels need to stop being drawn. Palestinians have been under occupation for 75 years. They live in an apartheid state and subjected to settler attacks, stealing of their land and of course murder.
The Ukrainians side with Israel, the oppressor! Now wtf is that all about?
Imagine suffering injustice and your land taking away from you by an imperialistic power, but still side with Israel the occupier. Ukrainians sending their troops to invade Iraq side by side with the US and British is a stain of shame too.
 

Pav1878

Full Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2014
Messages
1,152
Imagine suffering injustice and your land taking away from you by an imperialistic power, but still side with Israel the occupier. Ukrainians sending their troops to invade Iraq side by side with the US and British is a stain of shame too.
Couldn’t agree more.
 

Giggsyking

Full Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2013
Messages
8,519
Im going to assume this is in good faith and is posted with emotion and ignorance as opposed to malice.

During the Russian empire, Ukraine suffered from mass depopulation and repopulation. Certain sub ethnic groups in Ukraine were seen as problematic so they were forcibly relocated to other parts of the Russian empire. People lived in filth and shit and everything anyone did was owned by someone else (see the state). It was literally slavery without the racism. Russian landowners could kill any Ukrainian peasant and there would be no consequence.

during the Soviet Union there was the holomodor which was a genocide of millions and millions of people. Families were forced to eat human bodies to survive, there were cases of corpses being sold on open markets as food.

then the war happened and Ukraine was used as fodder. Most of the population were forcibly recruited to the army and those that did not were gulaged.
After the war came the massive deindustralization and moving of assets away from Ukraine. People were confined to townships and they couldn’t even leave said location without papers which were nigh on impossible to get. Life expectancy was crushed and Ukraine had the second lowest life expectancy in Soviet Union. All resources were extracted away from Ukraine and the only two things Ukraine had was mass farming and mass weapons manufacturing for the soviet military. Starvation was constantly a problem and you couldn’t even complain about it because you would be locked up on political charges.
On multiple occasions the soviet military went into certain parts of Ukraine and killed people for organising any form of dissent.then you had Chernobyl

how is this incomparable to Gaza?
I probably should have worded my statement better, Ukrainians have been living in their own country for 34 years now, Palestanians not. Some of the policies Russia used is similar to the Israeli practices, but the level of injustice in modern times in front of our own eyes live on TV is not comparable.

I find it very unpleasant that the public and the official view in Ukrain side with Israel when they themselves swallowed the same medicine by Russia.
 

VorZakone

What would Kenny G do?
Joined
May 9, 2013
Messages
32,965
I probably should have worded my statement better, Ukrainians have been living in their own country for 34 years now, Palestanians not. Some of the policies Russia used is similar to the Israeli practices, but the level of injustice in modern times in front of our own eyes live on TV is not comparable.

I find it very unpleasant that the public and the official view in Ukrain side with Israel when they themselves swallowed the same medicine by Russia.
I get what you mean but it doesn't help that Israel's enemy Iran has supplied Russia with weapons that are being used against Ukraine.

Also, some nuance added (from Wiki):
In November 2022, Ukraine supported a UN resolution that asked the International Court of Justice to investigate Israel's "prolonged occupation, settlement and annexation of Palestinian territory". In response, Israel summoned and admonished Ukrainian ambassador.[15] Shortly after, in "an apparent act of retaliation", Israel did not vote for a UN resolution calling on Russia to pay reparations for invading Ukraine.[16]

During the 2023 Israel–Hamas war, Ukraine's Foreign Ministry condemned attacks on Palestinian civilians in Gaza and supported a two-state solution to the conflict.[17] More than 300 Ukrainian scholars, activists and artists expressed solidarity with Palestinians in an open letter.[18] Most of the Ukrainian community in Gaza was forced to flee the country because of the war.[19]
 

VorZakone

What would Kenny G do?
Joined
May 9, 2013
Messages
32,965
IMO, failure of US leadership is a very big factor in all of this clusterfeck. Their support of Israel's aggressive behaviour has been a disgrace.
 

2cents

Historiographer, and obtainer of rare antiquities
Scout
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
16,282
I find it very unpleasant that the public and the official view in Ukrain side with Israel when they themselves swallowed the same medicine by Russia.
Ukraine’s entire future as an independent state may hinge on convincing reluctant Republicans in America to continue arming them. It makes a lot of sense for them to loudly identify with the state that those same Republicans absolutely love arming.
 

The United

Full Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2015
Messages
5,796
There is no such thing as permanent enemy in geopolitics or something. Many of today's alliances and adversaries were aligned on opposite ends of the spectrum at some point?
 

Giggsyking

Full Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2013
Messages
8,519
Ukraine’s entire future as an independent state may hinge on convincing reluctant Republicans in America to continue arming them. It makes a lot of sense for them to loudly identify with the state that those same Republicans absolutely love arming.
Understandable, but it leaves a sour taste in the mouth.
 

VorZakone

What would Kenny G do?
Joined
May 9, 2013
Messages
32,965
There is no such thing as permanent enemy in geopolitics or something. Many of today's alliances and adversaries were aligned on opposite ends of the spectrum at some point?
Iran under the Shah had if I recall correctly decent relations with Israel to the point where the Iranian SAVAK were also trained by Israelis.
 

The United

Full Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2015
Messages
5,796
Iran under the Shah had if I recall correctly decent relations with Israel to the point where the Iranian SAVAK were also trained by Israelis.
It is why viewing these conflicts through moral lenses can seem somewhat amusing, though not to diminish the real suffering and loss involved. If you are a victim of one of those, it is understandable to be frustrated by all these double standards for you and your people. But it is pointless in claiming some moral victory over all of these in general because you or your stance might be unfair to someone else at some point. I am guilty of it myself. But it may be why some people just stick to one side and die on that hill because they are not going to be right or fair to everyone all the time?
 

Kaos

Full Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
31,802
Location
Ginseng Strip
Ukraine’s entire future as an independent state may hinge on convincing reluctant Republicans in America to continue arming them. It makes a lot of sense for them to loudly identify with the state that those same Republicans absolutely love arming.
It'll do them no good though. The GOP in its current iteration has been fully plagued by Trumpmania, which itself is fully compliant and borderline submissive to Putin. They aren't going to come at loggerheads with Russia. I appreciate Ukraine's desperate position, but aligning themselves with another expansionist occupying state with the hope it'll improve their standing and fortunes with the potential future US government is futile at best.
 

That_Bloke

Full Member
Joined
May 28, 2019
Messages
2,879
Location
Cologne
Supports
Leicester City
IMO, failure of US leadership is a very big factor in all of this clusterfeck. Their support of Israel's aggressive behaviour has been a disgrace.
This is the most crucial factor and I personally think that it completely shattered the US' and the West's reputation, which wasn't great to begin with, in the rest of the world. That and what was left of international laws.

Months ago, people were already warning about the danger of the conflict spilling over the region, and that this unconditional support to the most extreme far-right government on the planet was a recipe for disaster. Yet here we are.

This will be a stain on Biden's international legacy forever and he will mostly be remembered for it.
 
Last edited:

langster

Captain Stink mouth, so soppy few pints very wow!
Scout
Joined
Jun 28, 2014
Messages
21,587
Location
My brain can't get pregnant!
From reading the majority of the posts here since Iran retaliated (those that are not just petty squabbles or disagreeing over what is or isn't genocide or disagreements over Iran's intentions with their response) I think most are actually on the same page.

For me, the biggest issue is the hypocrisy from the so called superpowers in the West. Biden himself said Israel's attack on the consulate in Damascus was a surprise. Nobody was warned or briefed, Israel just did it. Prior to that Biden and almost the rest of the worlds leaders and press had shifted round to condemning Israel and asking them to reign it in and seeking avenues for a ceasefire or a total halt to operations in Gaza.

Israel, for the first time was actually being called out by those who previously defended them or stayed silent. They attack the consulate and instead of being defended the opposite happens.

All this time Iran stay relatively silent and calm. They expressed their grievances and follow the correct avenues for doing so. They also clearly state the attack will not go unanswered and repeat that many times. Then when they do respond they notified everyone they needed to and gave fair warning. The attack comes with minimal damage and injury but they are now in the wrong and everyone is against them and blaming them. All the focus has shifted from the atrocities in Gaza and The West Bank and they again are public enemy number one around the world and it's dominating all media.

Meanwhile so much more has come out regarding Israel's crimes in Gaza, they have continued to attack including killing schoolkids in a playground and yet still Iran is the devil and now they are threatened by an Israeli reply and the possibility of other countries joining in.

Yet again the innocent people are the ones left suffering, scared or the ones with the most to lose and worry about.

The hypocrisy is sick. I have no love for Iran, absolutely the opposite but at the moment I see Israel and their allies as being far more dangerous than Iran.

A large part of the political hierarchy in the US has had a hard on for Iran for decades and will use any excuse to go after them. Israel knows this and I think have played them and others in the international community like a fecking fiddle. Now even in here the same game is being played. Showing any kind of understanding or empathy for Iran is jumped on and those doing so are being slammed as Iranian supporters or apologists the same as any supporting Palestinians was jumped on initially after 10/7

I'm not playing these games anymore and won't get in to semantics or gotcha arguments. It's just all so sad to watch, but it's a perfect replication of what is going on around the world.

The big benefit we have is we can post from relative safety while those in the middle of all this are either dying from being shot or bombed, starving or living in absolute fear because their leaders are all a bunch of massive cnuts who can't sit down and sort this all out like adults. However, if this continues to escalate then we could all be a lot closer to understanding than we would like.
 

That_Bloke

Full Member
Joined
May 28, 2019
Messages
2,879
Location
Cologne
Supports
Leicester City
Interesting that they hold so much disdain for MBS. I take it that's because of the Saudis seemingly being quite keen to pursue normalised relations with Israel.
It's absolutely unsurprising.

Out of all the Arab countries, Saudi Arabia is the one with the biggest international pull and which really could've done something for them.

MBS agreeing to the Abraham Accords which effectively sold the Palestinians down the drain, was the latest stab in the back and the hammer blow.
 

Kaos

Full Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
31,802
Location
Ginseng Strip
It's absolutely unsurprising.

Out of all the Arab countries, Saudi Arabia is the one with the biggest international pull and which really could've done something for them.

MBS agreeing to the Abraham Accords which effectively sold the Palestinians down the drain, was the latest stab in the back and the hammer blow.
Tbh you could say the same regarding Erdogan.

The man talks a big talk when it comes to the issue of Palestinian solidarity, but the reality is Turkey remains one of Israel's biggest trade partners in the region, and both countries under his watch have enjoyed extensive military, diplomatic and cultural ties. Erdogan loves a good speech with Israel in his verbal crosshairs to appease to his demographic, but as always it often comes to nothing. He only ever intervenes when it comes to the Kurds (like how he essentially helped ISIS in Syria during the Rojava campaign against the YPG). So you have to wonder why he enjoys overwhelming popularity amongst Palestinians, unless the lip service was enough.

The Assad hate is also curious. Objectively Assad is certainly an odious tyrant, but I can't see why he'd be hated more than the leaders of Saudi, Emirates and Jordan, whom unlike Assad, have been actively helping Israel in recent episodes.
 

2cents

Historiographer, and obtainer of rare antiquities
Scout
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
16,282
The Assad hate is also curious. Objectively Assad is certainly an odious tyrant, but I can't see why he'd be hated more than the leaders of Saudi, Emirates and Jordan, whom unlike Assad, have been actively helping Israel in recent episodes.
Perhaps because Assad is actually responsible for the deaths of far more Arabs and Muslims - including many Palestinians - than the others.
 

Real Name

Full Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2020
Messages
14,284
Location
Croatia
Morally, of course not, in isolation. But there is an argument to be made that Japan were never going to surrender otherwise, and were prepping the population for a land invasion that would have cost a lot more lives in the end. The psy ops were all based on 'to the last man' rhetoric and that it would be better if Japan were wiped out than surrendered.

The atomic bombs did something that would otherwise have been impossible in breaking the Japanese zeal for war. Which in the end probably saved more lives than it took.
You're right, I was just going with the 'population is at fault so they had it coming' sick logic.
 

MDFC Manager

Full Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2005
Messages
24,307
IMO, failure of US leadership is a very big factor in all of this clusterfeck. Their support of Israel's aggressive behaviour has been a disgrace.
Exactly this. But hey, it's all good business... The War Machine needs actual wars to make money.


An interesting poll about how Palestinians view some of the influential leaders in the region.

https://www.pcpsr.org/en/node/967
Always amuses me how the gimp Erdogan is placed in such high regard. Not just in this case but in the Muslim world in general. Just another snake oil merchant.
 

Revan

Assumptionman
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
49,636
Location
London
Tbh you could say the same regarding Erdogan.

The man talks a big talk when it comes to the issue of Palestinian solidarity, but the reality is Turkey remains one of Israel's biggest trade partners in the region, and both countries under his watch have enjoyed extensive military, diplomatic and cultural ties. Erdogan loves a good speech with Israel in his verbal crosshairs to appease to his demographic, but as always it often comes to nothing. He only ever intervenes when it comes to the Kurds (like how he essentially helped ISIS in Syria during the Rojava campaign against the YPG). So you have to wonder why he enjoys overwhelming popularity amongst Palestinians, unless the lip service was enough.

The Assad hate is also curious. Objectively Assad is certainly an odious tyrant, but I can't see why he'd be hated more than the leaders of Saudi, Emirates and Jordan, whom unlike Assad, have been actively helping Israel in recent episodes.
Turkey has always had a very good relationship with Israel, and only since Erdogan they have been criticizing Israel and at this point the relations have massively deteriorated. Erdogan himself is probably the only ‘Western’ leader who criticizes Israel all the time, and calls Netanyahu with all sort of names. In addition, they probably remember that maritime episode when that Turkey ship with humanitarian aid tried to pass Israel’s blockade of Gaza.

So yes, while Turkey is still an ally of Israel in some sense, their relations under Erdogan are at an all-time low, which is why I expect Palestinians like him. And countries like Saudi Arabia despite still not recognizing Israel, are improving the relations with them.

More interesting is why they like Xi Jinping? Has he ever talked about the Palestinian issue and is China doing any investment there?
 

Kaos

Full Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
31,802
Location
Ginseng Strip
Perhaps because Assad is actually responsible for the deaths of far more Arabs and Muslims - including many Palestinians - than the others.
A fair point, but again so was Saddam, and yet the Palestinians worshipped the ground he walked on.
 

The Corinthian

I will not take Mad Winger's name in vain
Joined
Dec 10, 2020
Messages
11,863
Supports
A Free Palestine
Since the 1950s it has been widely accepted within the Iraqi Jewish community that migrated to Israel that at least some of the five bombings of 1950-51 were linked to the Zionist underground active in Iraq. The Iraqi government itself put on trial and hanged those they claimed to be responsible, while the Israeli government launched a couple of investigations into the matter in the 50s and 60s, determining that they bore no responsibility. Various historians throughout the years have concluded that Zionist involvement was likely in some of the bombings (e.g. as early as 1970 in an essay titled "Minorities" the conservative Iraqi-Jewish historian Elie Kedourie determined that the Zionists were "certainly capable" of such actions).

Avi Shalim claims to have found conclusive evidence confirming Zionist involvement in three of five bombings that took place during 1950-51. I have read his recent memoirs where he makes this claim, and although I'm not qualified to reliably judge on the credibility of the evidence he presents, I do find it compelling (it's based on testimony given to him by an elderly Israeli man who was involved in the Zionist underground in Iraq, and who, Shlaim claims, presented him with an Iraqi police report produced at the time confirming that the Zionists had compromised a member of the Baghdad police force and bribed him to help execute the most destructive bombing that killed four Jews at a Synagogue in January 1951).

However, I don't accept Shlaim's claim that the bombings were the primary cause of the flight of Iraqi Jews to Israel (and as Shlaim himself acknowledges, he is not an expert on Iraqi history). The first bombing took place in April 1950, just after the passing of a law allowing Jews to denationalize and move to Israel (low-scale but growing illegal emigration via Iran had been underway since 1948). Shlaim concludes that this particular bombing was the work of members of the Arab nationalist Istiqlal Party. Between that time and January 1951 when the second bombing at the synagogue happened, around 86,000 Jews - the vast majority of the community - had registered to leave, and were waiting in desperate conditions in Baghdad for their journey to Israel to be facilitated. Shlaim's own family left in the summer of 1950 (he was four years old). So by the time the bombings that can be credibly linked to the Zionists happened, the exodus of Iraqi Jews was already near completion. In any case, a few minor bombings simply cannot explain the decision of well over 100,000 people to pack up and flee the country they'd called home for generations.

The question then arises - what was the purpose of the bombings of 1951? It seems unlikely that their purpose was to drive the Jews out of Iraq since (a) that was already happening, and (b) the Israeli government was facing major problems at that very moment receiving, processing, and housing hundreds of thousands of other migrants from Eastern Europe (especially Romania and Poland). Shlaim acknowledges that there is no evidence to suggest that the Israeli government had a direct hand in the bombings. Other historians have speculated that the bombings were an attempt to draw the attention of the Israeli government to the plight of the Iraqi Jews then in limbo in Baghdad and hurry up their departure, as the Israelis had prioritized the incorporation of the aforementioned European migrants ahead of them. But until further evidence comes to light, it's impossible to say for sure.

Ultimately, the flight of Iraqi Jews was driven by a growth in fear and uncertainty about their future in Iraq that had developed among them over the course of the previous decade and a half...



The broad context was the growth of Arab nationalism in Iraq and the brewing conflict with Zionism in Palestine. There were lingering resentments at the Iraqi Jews' pro-British stance during the mandate years (the Assyrians had paid for their own pro-British stance with a horrible massacre in 1933). And increasing suspicions that they were in bed with Zionism further fueled a general growth in hostility directed at them, with very little distinction made between Jew and Zionist by hostile nationalists (in fact, the Iraqi Jews had little interest in Zionism at all, at least until the Farhud, and were culturally embedded in the Islamo-Arab society of post-Ottoman Iraq). Measures directed against them in the mid-30s included the banning of the teaching of Jewish history and Hebrew in Jewish schools, while Iraqi nationalist media increasingly agitated against them, especially after the outbreak of the revolt in Palestine in 1936. There was some mob violence aimed at them, and occasional murders, although the level of violence depended on which particular government happened to be in charge.

The Farhud was the culmination of this general growth in hostility, but it didn't prompt the immediate flight of the community. However, it provided a convenient episode which Zionist emissaries could point to in order to try convince the Iraqi Jews that they had no future in Iraq, and from 1941 onwards there was a small growth in Zionist activism among young Iraqi Jews.

Things came to a head with the 1948 Palestine War, which the Iraqi government used as a pretext to directly target the Jews, having come to determine that the national interest would be served by the departure of a community increasingly understood as a potential fifth column, either due to the perceived threat posed by Zionism or by the disproportionate Jewish involvement in the Iraqi Communist Party (one of the biggest Communist Parties in the Arab world). Prime Minister Nuri al-Said even planned a population exchange of Iraqi Jews for Palestinian Arab refugees, and it was his measures to freeze and confiscate the assets of the departing Jews in 1951 which brought the saga to a close. By 1952 the Iraqi Jewish community had effectively ceased to exist.
Thanks for this write up - I do have some follow up questions but hard to articulate on the phone when I'm on the go. Will edit this post later and ask.
 

Kaos

Full Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
31,802
Location
Ginseng Strip
Turkey has always had a very good relationship with Israel, and only since Erdogan they have been criticizing Israel and at this point the relations have massively deteriorated. Erdogan himself is probably the only ‘Western’ leader who criticizes Israel all the time, and calls Netanyahu with all sort of names. In addition, they probably remember that maritime episode when that Turkey ship with humanitarian aid tried to pass Israel’s blockade of Gaza.

So yes, while Turkey is still an ally of Israel in some sense, their relations under Erdogan are at an all-time low, which is why I expect Palestinians like him. And countries like Saudi Arabia despite still not recognizing Israel, are improving the relations with them.

More interesting is why they like Xi Jinping? Has he ever talked about the Palestinian issue and is China doing any investment there?
I take the point about Erodgan being the only NATO leader to speak openly and harshly about Israel, but this dance has happened time and time again - the two countries have a 'falling out' after some moment of adversity, only for them to reconcile and recognise their important ties. Its also no coincidence that Erdogan fires up his anti-Israeli rhetoric whenever he's he's navigating a period of domestic turmoil or battling elections.

As for Xi, my guess there would be the treatment of Uyghur Muslims, who the Palestinians probably resonate with in some form. That and they might have lumped him in the same boat as Putin - i.e. partners of Assad, a leader they seem to overwhelmingly dislike.
 

The Corinthian

I will not take Mad Winger's name in vain
Joined
Dec 10, 2020
Messages
11,863
Supports
A Free Palestine
Interesting that they hold so much disdain for MBS. I take it that's because of the Saudis seemingly being quite keen to pursue normalised relations with Israel.
I'm yet to meet an Arab or a Muslim that has a positive thing to say about MBS, and that's not just from talking to UK folk. I don't think Palestinians would be any different.
 

Revan

Assumptionman
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
49,636
Location
London
I take the point about Erodgan being the only NATO leader to speak openly and harshly about Israel, but this dance has happened time and time again - the two countries have a 'falling out' after some moment of adversity, only for them to reconcile and recognise their important ties. Its also no coincidence that Erdogan fires up his anti-Israeli rhetoric whenever he's he's navigating a period of domestic turmoil or battling elections.

As for Xi, my guess there would be the treatment of Uyghur Muslims, who the Palestinians probably resonate with in some form.
He has 61% Good and just 18% Bad, so actually his approval rate to Palestinians is the highest of them all (even more than Erdogan). So, that is very weird indeed, especially when you consider his treatment of Uyghur's.

But I guess it is more a matter of alliances or perceived alliances. Just look at Kosovo-Palestine relations (or lack of), with Palestine firmly opposing Kosovo's independence and Kosovo having their Israel embassy in Jerusalem. Despite having a similar story, in the end it mostly comes to alliances, rather than resonating with other people suffering and sharing a similar history of oppression. So I think it is as simple as China being nowadays the US' main 'enemy', thus China are good.
 

Kaos

Full Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
31,802
Location
Ginseng Strip
He has 61% Good and just 18% Bad, so actually his approval rate to Palestinians is the highest of them all (even more than Erdogan). So, that is very weird indeed, especially when you consider his treatment of Uyghur's.

But I guess it is more a matter of alliances or perceived alliances. Just look at Kosovo-Palestine relations (or lack of), with Palestine firmly opposing Kosovo's independence and Kosovo having their Israel embassy in Jerusalem. Despite having a similar story, in the end it mostly comes to alliances, rather than resonating with other people suffering. So I think it is as simple as China being nowadays the US' main 'enemy'.
Thought it was 18/27% bad, unless I've read the graph wrong. As for it being down to alliances, its feasible but the complex and seemingly arbitrary nature of some of these perceived alliances (which are often in a constant state of flux) makes it an unreliable indicator.

I think ultimately polls like these (or indeed any poll for that matter) only really capture the fickle sentiments at that given time. It would have been interesting to see for example how they perceived the likes of Erdogan and Biden prior to October 7th.
 

Revan

Assumptionman
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
49,636
Location
London
Thought it was 18/27% bad, unless I've read the graph wrong. As for it being down to alliances, its feasible but the complex and seemingly arbitrary nature of some of these perceived alliances (which are often in a constant state of flux) makes it an unreliable indicator.

I think ultimately polls like these (or indeed any poll for that matter) only really capture the fickle sentiments at that given time. It would have been interesting to see for example how they perceived the likes of Erdogan and Biden prior to October 7th.
You're actually correct, I cannot read graphs.
 

Kaos

Full Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
31,802
Location
Ginseng Strip
I'm yet to meet an Arab or a Muslim that has a positive thing to say about MBS, and that's not just from talking to UK folk. I don't think Palestinians would be any different.
Yeah fair enough. Though by the same token I don't see why Erdogan seems to be so admired when he's just as much of a lackey, empty speeches withstanding. Could be my inner Kurd biases creeping through, but I always found it equal parts confusing and infuriating that a tyrannous and insincere hack like Erdogan somehow gets put on a pedestal. I suppose being the de facto leader of the country that acts as the custodians of Islam's most revered sites and behaving the way he does doesn't do MBS any favours.
 

Idxomer

Full Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2014
Messages
15,311
Thought it was 18/27% bad, unless I've read the graph wrong. As for it being down to alliances, its feasible but the complex and seemingly arbitrary nature of some of these perceived alliances (which are often in a constant state of flux) makes it an unreliable indicator.

I think ultimately polls like these (or indeed any poll for that matter) only really capture the fickle sentiments at that given time. It would have been interesting to see for example how they perceived the likes of Erdogan and Biden prior to October 7th.
It was done before the war. There are actually two other polls dealing directly with countries from before and after October 7th. Only Iran improved their favorability after the war and Turkey dropped quite a bit.





I've read the polls from the source and AB7 was a previous poll conducted in 2021 by the way, close to the Abraham Accords.
 

The Corinthian

I will not take Mad Winger's name in vain
Joined
Dec 10, 2020
Messages
11,863
Supports
A Free Palestine
Yeah fair enough. Though by the same token I don't see why Erdogan seems to be so admired when he's just as much of a lackey, empty speeches withstanding. Could be my inner Kurd biases creeping through, but I always found it equal parts confusing and infuriating that a tyrannous and insincere hack like Erdogan somehow gets put on a pedestal. I suppose being the de facto leader of the country that acts as the custodians of Islam's most revered sites and behaving the way he does doesn't do MBS any favours.
I don't want to derail the thread too much - but most Arabs outside of the Gulf states have formed a dim view of the Gulf Arab leaders. If it wasn't for the Haramain, what would the rest of the Muslim world really need Saudi for? Add that to their decadent behaviour and the un-Islamification of the 'holy land', ie music concerts, nightclubs, alcohol, even Shk Sudais has made some really odd duas and khutbahs recently basically signalling that the religious clergy are in the pocket of MBS, or nationalism is more important to them than religion...which is in stark contrast to Erdogan in Turkey who's created (or attempting to create) a more Islamic Turkey. They've increased the number of madrasas across the country. To the wider world it probably matters very little in the grand scheme of things, but to the Muslim population, it speaks to something deeper.
 

Kaos

Full Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
31,802
Location
Ginseng Strip
It was done before the war. There are actually two other polls dealing directly with countries from before and after October 7th. Only Iran improved their favorability after the war and Turkey dropped quite a bit.





I've read the polls from the source and AB7 was a previous poll conducted in 2021 by the way, close to the Abraham Accords.
Ahh interesting.

The US and UK figures are predictably amusing.
 

nickm

Full Member
Joined
May 20, 2001
Messages
9,173
This is the most crucial factor and I personally think that it completely shattered the US' and the West's reputation, which wasn't great to begin with, in the rest of the world. That and what was left of international laws.

Months ago, people were already warning about the danger of the conflict spilling over the region, and that this unconditional support to the most extreme far-right government on the planet was a recipe for disaster. Yet here we are.

This will be a stain on Biden's international legacy forever and he will mostly be remembered for it.
I don't agree. If Ukraine defeats Russia, he will mostly be remembered for that.
 

nickm

Full Member
Joined
May 20, 2001
Messages
9,173
Yeah, there was always a risk. I can't deny that.

Iran still had to hit something whilst trying to reduce that risk to the minimum. A dozen of missiles and drones would've never got past the combined Israeli anti-air systems plus the combined UK / US airforce, especially when the latter were warned. I'm personally happy that no one died, although an Arab-israeli girl was sadly seriously wounded by a missile debris.

It was theater, but not meaningless. It was about saving face and drawing a line without being destroyed in the process.

Amen to that.
I think it is wishful thinking to assume that Iran's "theatre" has simply reset everything to the status quo, I think the Israel embassy attack and Iran's escalation has been potentially destabilising.

- Iran has demonstrated the means and the willingness to attack directly, whereas previously they responded indirectly. That is new.
- Iran has demonstrated a willingness to escalate, whereas previously they tended to retaliate. That is new.
- Israel's Arab allies showed they were prepared to help, or enable Israel to be helped militarily against Iran. That is new.
- Although Iran has signalled it does not wish to escalate further, given the size, directness and nature of the attack, Israel may feel it has no option but to respond in a way that shows strength and has deterrent value. That is dangerous.
 
Last edited:

nickm

Full Member
Joined
May 20, 2001
Messages
9,173
I probably should have worded my statement better, Ukrainians have been living in their own country for 34 years now, Palestanians not. Some of the policies Russia used is similar to the Israeli practices, but the level of injustice in modern times in front of our own eyes live on TV is not comparable.

I find it very unpleasant that the public and the official view in Ukrain side with Israel when they themselves swallowed the same medicine by Russia.
Wait til you find out who the West allied with to defeat Germany in WW2!
 

Kaos

Full Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
31,802
Location
Ginseng Strip
I think it is wishful thinking to assume that Iran's "theatre" has simply reset everything to the status quo, I think the Israel embassy attack and Iran's escalation has been potentially destabilising.

- Iran has demonstrated the means and the willingness to attack directly, whereas previously they responded indirectly. That is new.
- Iran has demonstrated a willingness to escalate, whereas previously they tended to retaliate. That is new.
- Israel's Arab allies showed they were prepared to help, or enable Israel to be helped militarily against Iran. That is new.
- Although Iran has signalled it does not wish to escalate further, given the size, directness and nature of the attack, Israel may feel it has no option but to respond in a way that shows strength and has deterrent value. That is dangerous.
I mean Iran demonstrated they were willing to attack directly, if they themselves were directly under attack, which they were considering Israel's bombing of the consulate, which is considered Iranian territory under international law. So I don't see why we're placing the burden of escalation on them. They've also considered the matter resolved, so by choosing to retaliate to a retaliation, Israel are in fact prolonging and further risk destabilising the region.
 

Raven

Full Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2012
Messages
6,730
Location
Ireland
To be fair, as weird as may it sound we do not even have opposing views. I guess we both dislike Iran and think that Israel is doing evil in Gaza. Just that we put different weights in these things.
I meant more generally speaking. On this topic, we do appear to have similar views, I could never back a country that is committing genocide or apartheid. I can't quite wrap my head around the idea that others can.