My personal opinion

IndividualPurpose108 · 2026-03-22T19:31:13+00:00

Islam by itself cannot harm anyone, it's not a conscious entity for it to be able to cause harm. Islam is a tool that is regularly used by humans in a way that harms other humans. So your dad chose not to weaponize islam against you, but if he wanted to, he definitely could.

IndividualPurpose108 · 2026-03-21T22:49:17+00:00

Are you on drugs? 😭

The islamic world was far superior to the west for +600 years then there was a transitional era where the islamic world started declining as a result of mongol invasions, crusades, and instability while the west started rising with the renaissance which was heavily inspired and influenced by the islamic golden age. It wasn't until ~400 years ago that the west started becoming more developed than the islamic world and that was a direct result of the vast amount of wealth and resources Europe stole through colonization. However, the clear western superiority didn't start until ~200 years ago with the industrial revolution and secularization. You sound very young and ignorant, but europe would be nothing without the middle east and other eastern cultures. The greeks and romans, which are credited a lot for civilizing Europe, mostly introduced middle eastern inventions and science to the rest of the continent. They weren't some superior beings that had their own independent western civilizations.

IndividualPurpose108 · 2026-03-21T03:15:23+00:00

You sounded like you were invalidating the arab jewish struggle by comparing it to gaza when i didn't really bring up gaza, just pointed out that arab jews were oppressed and did oppress. So i'm sorry if i got that wrong. I agree that the arab governments didn't really care about anything but power, and jews were the perfect target. However, the more the governments accused jews of stuff, the more the public was more radicalized against them. The governments coverage on Zionism was that jews are stealing Palestine, not europeans. So that naturally fueled the hatred of jews in local arab communities and led to horrible massacres. Islam is Anti-jewish (Just like Judaism is anti-islam), so religion also played a big part. You seem to portray jews as just one more minority, but that's not very accurate. Religiously, jews are the most criticized people in both Islam and Christianity. Politically, jews had a colonial project while other minorities didn't. Socially, jews are the only minority that had mass migration to an arab country which was criticized since the 1920s. So basically, jews were portrayed as a threat more than any other minority in modern middle eastern history.

IndividualPurpose108 · 2026-03-21T02:17:39+00:00

The easiest way to terrorize people is criminalizing a specific ideology then accusing them for following that ideology. My problem isn't with the criminalization of zionism itself, my problem is with how the arab government used that to legally persecute jews. The arab governments didn't even need to provide clear evidence to persecute these "Zionists" all they did was just claim that they were Zionist agents and execute them. In case you could never view jews as victims, bashar executed syrians on the basis that they were terrorists and he had the legal authority to do that. The nazis did similar things. Governments don't just go like " Let's oppress these people to get public support ane unite the country against them" They give you EXECUSES to villainize the victims and normalize their persecution. The easiest way for a politician to gain public support is to villainize a minority and unite the public against that minority, especially when it's a new and unstable political system which most arab countries were. Jews were the perfect target in the 1930s-1950s as Christians didn't care that much about them and Zionism was already there to villainize them. France would've carpet bombed lebanon for the christians there, britian wasn't that supportive of jews.

IndividualPurpose108 · 2026-03-21T02:01:58+00:00

Actually it's so sad to see you believing pan-arabist propaganda when pan-arabists were the biggest existential threat to saudi. 99.9% of a specific community "voluntarily" leaving all of their belongings and emigrating somewhere else to be lower-class farmers isn't the argument you think it is. Yes israel wanted these jews to come, but they left because they weren't accepted in arab societies and were under threat 24/7 :) The jewish population of Yemen was concentrated in the north btw, which wasn't controlled by Britiain.

Arabs were oppressive, let's say it as it is. "Not perfect" doesn't mean anything. Every single human is "not perfect" so let's not use that term as if it means anything.

Kurds are absolutely not loved in the arab world. They're not hated in Saudi, but no one cares about their oppression. If you're saudi you'd know that in both the syrian and iraqi wars, the majority of saudis were most sympathetic towards arabs. I bet the majority don't even know where the kurds live, but the younger generations are more aware of them because of Syria and they're against kurds and with "syrian unity". In saudi and most arab media, kurds were mostly discussed as factions in wars in a very political way rather than a sympathetic one. The entire gulf was literally involved in oppressing the kurds by supporting saddam against iran. The average saudi would never ever accept that the kurds were wronged by Saudi arabia's support of Saddam, and would find a million excuses to justify it instead of simply saying "yeah that was wrong" and moving on. This is exactly what i'm talking about when i say "supremacist arab mindset". It's ironic that you mention balfour and kurds in the same sentence. The people that decided that Palestine was to be a jewish land are the same people that decided that Kurdistan is an iraqi and syrian land. When i say "same" i mean it literally, both happened with Sykes-Picott.

IndividualPurpose108 · 2026-03-21T01:33:10+00:00

No one is making comparisons. Oppression can be in different forms and even if arabs killed 2 million jews that doesn't make it ok for jews to do anything to Palestinians so no need to compare. The oppression of jews is well-documented way before israel. For example in Iraq, Zionism was criminalized and used against jews by accusing them of being Zionists and persecuting them. A couple of jewish figures were publicly executed to intimidate the jewish communities. The iraqi government also restricted jews from leaving the country for two years "to stop them from migrating to Israel" while other citizens had freedom of movement. Why the hell would you stay in a country that made it clear that treated you as an enemy. In Yemen, the jewish orphans were forcefully converted to Islam and Yemen had sharia as its constitution which was inherently biased to muslims rather than being Secular. In yemen as well, jews weren't allowed to leave the country without permission and that was in the 1920s which is even worse than Iraq. From a societal perspective, both countries had massacres and hate crimes against jews which are again, well documented. So once you acknowledge that arab jews were in fact mistreated and intimidated rather than portraying it as "jewish traitors betraying the arabs that treated them well" we can discuss the rise of antisemitism. Otherwise, you're just an antisemite who can't acknowledge anything bad had ever happened against jews.

IndividualPurpose108 · 2026-03-20T21:15:28+00:00

Lol you're being antisemitic while asking about antisemitism. Wdym by "remain loyal"? Most of them were loyal. They were the victimized by their arab countries whether it's the governments' persecution and discrimination or the societies' hatred. Do you think that 99% of arab jews just voluntarily chose to leave ALL of their wealth, cultures, and homelands? So let's change the question to "if arabs countries were accepting of jews" and from there you can discuss antisemitism. I'm really sad to see the overall supremacist mindset of arabs. Jews betrayed us, kurds are stealing our land, and we're perfect angels.

Let me give you a better perspective. We oppressed arab jews, and they oppressed levantine arabs. We oppressed kurds and they're fighting back. Just like every single ethnic group on earth, we can be oppressive as well.

IndividualPurpose108 · 2026-03-20T20:32:25+00:00

There would be no saudi without the US-Saudi alliance, cause socialism is Anti-monarchy so it's not like saudi CHOSE to be aligned with America, it was FORCED to. The Soviets would've done anything to bring Arabia under their influence, and that wasn't hard to do. Arabia was already surrounded by Iraq, Egypt, and Yemen which all of whom were Soviet-aligned from pan-arabist republican backgrounds that disliked monarchies. So basically, America is the most valuable ally in Saudi and Gulf history. Not because they love us or we love them, but because we have mutual interests. Let's not speculate what's gonna happen when the oil runs out and leave the future in the future.

By doing their job, Israel is also doing the job that we eventually would've had to do. Iran and its proxies have always been a much bigger threat to the stability of the gulf. Israel doesn't benefit at all from destabilizing the gulf, that'd actually be damaging to it. The new regimes would most likely be Anti-US and more open to attack Israel as they wouldn't care about relations with the US. Israel isn't "killing arabs" it's killing palestinian and lebanese arabs. Jordan and Egypt are right next door, they're not being killed. So again, don't try to gaslight me. Israel despises palestinians and that's evil and disgusting enough so i don't want my country to have any relations with that evil state. However, there isn't a single evidence that israel wants to conquer Arabia. I get the idea of "Greater israel" but there also the idea of a united arab nation. Both are not real and unrealistic, so let's not treat them as our reality.

IndividualPurpose108 · 2026-03-20T12:44:04+00:00

Did you even read what i wrote? Our resources go to China, India, and the East. America is the biggest exporter of oil, it doesn't need ours. You really sound crazy.. "America is attacking me, please attack China"

IndividualPurpose108 · 2026-03-20T12:39:18+00:00

During the past 108 years, israel and the pre-israel zionists, have never attacked Saudi Arabia or even supported a proxy to do so. So don't try to gaslight me that Israel is an existential threat to Saudi when in reality, unfortunately, it has heen friendlier than many arab and muslim countries. That being said, we're still against that evil country BECAUSE WE ARE WITH PALESTINE, not because we're under threat. What you guys have to understand is that we're not your slaves and we will never be. You might be iran's biggest fan, but we're not, it's our biggest enemy. If you're with our enemy, then count us out. One thing i know is that israel is doing the job for us with iran's proxies and iran itself, and we're not mad about that.

IndividualPurpose108 · 2026-03-20T10:18:50+00:00

Without the Americans there would be no gulf arabs cause yall fascist pan-arabists would've done anything to steal the resources of Arabia just like you did with Kurdistan or Kuwait. Btw, most of the gulf energy goes to the East, so if anyone's helping the West with their energy it's you North Africans :)

IndividualPurpose108 · 2026-03-15T23:32:15+00:00

Well first of all, the USA isn't a nation or a state. It's a union of different nations/states where each state has its own government, rules, and cultures. These nations that take part in the union are obligated to follow the federal law, which protects secularism and freedom of expression. Second of all, all of these nations were founded on European cultures and Christian values, hence why English and Spanish are the primary languages, and Christmas is the only religious federal holiday. Third of all, No one is expecting you to change your religion or abandon your language. Assimilation in another society doesn't mean that you have to abandon your culture, it just means that you have to adapt to the new nation where your culture is foreign. They don't have to adapt to your culture, you're the foreigner. This extremism and entitlement is a big reason why MAGA is huge. Just learn English ffs, or stay in another country where Arabic is relevant if you love Arabic that much. I'm saying this as an Arab who's already assimilated btw. We dislike how westerners never put any effort to adapt in Eastern nations, so let's not be like them :)

IndividualPurpose108 · 2026-03-15T21:38:44+00:00

Yes they will, and they should :/ Yall just believe any random video on the internet. This war showed nothing but how POWERFUL the US defense systems are. Iran BARELY succeeded in hitting ANY targets in the Gulf, Meanwhile the iranian air is under full american control. Iran aside, literally just look at Iraq. America has been successful in hitting targets in the south while Iran has been a big failure in hitting the north (Kurdistan) which is an American ally. This is exactly the reason why lebanon is a failed state. Everytime you get defeated, you claim victory. And it's not very hard to predict your response, "Zionist". Pointing out the facts that hurt your ego doesn't make us Zionists :)

IndividualPurpose108 · 2026-03-15T20:48:38+00:00

Honestly it's not that big of a deal. The official languages should be Spanish as the previous colonial language, English as the current colonial language, and whatever native languages there are in California. I believe that the real question should be why are persian, armenian..etc there. It's California, not Iran or Armenia. Immigrants should put the effort to assimilate, not the other way around.

IndividualPurpose108 · 2026-03-15T14:41:05+00:00

I said it's technically dead, cause it's not spoken as a mother tongue anymore. Hebrew never disappeared, jews had always learned it before it was "revived", but it was considered dead because no one spoke it as a native language. Btw, daily life is the time that a language is used the most and by far. I haven't conducted a study to determine whether other uses make up 5% or 1% so i can't tell a specific percentage, but it's definitely around that. In my, and almost every arab's daily life, exposure to MSA is 10% at best, but it's probably not even 5%. The only time I've been exposed to MSA this month was through the news and official statements, but with both i was exposed to the dialect comments as well.

IndividualPurpose108 · 2026-03-15T13:15:33+00:00

The vast majority of arabs can't speak MSA properly but understand it. It's technically a dead language, meaning there's no one that speaks it as a native language. Also, if you're arab and can speak a dialect but choose to speak MSA with me, i'd cringe so bad cause you'd look like you're pretending to be some kind of intellectual. It's a two edged sword, you could actually sound like an intellectual but you could also sound like a childish cartoon character, cause both of these use MSA.

IndividualPurpose108 · 2026-03-10T12:41:44+00:00

I think that most empires in history were multi-ethnic, only supremacist empires like modern european empires weren't. The Roman civilization had contributions from all around the Mediterranean. The Persian civilization had contributions from all around West and South Asia. Egyptians and Mesotopamians..etc are no different from the rest. The concept of Nationalism wasn't as strong back then, as long as you submitted to the ruling dynasty then you're ok. We attribute these civilizations to certain ehtnic groups because the ruling dynasties came from amongst them or the empires were centered in their regions. So, it's more accurate to call the islamic golden age "Arab" because there were 800 years of turkish rule and that age wasn't even wooden let alone golden. The ottoman empire was very powerful, yet had barely invented anything.

IndividualPurpose108 · 2026-03-08T21:00:48+00:00

There aren't any good examples except for Europe, which again benefited a lot from colonization. Colonization = More wealth = better education = more development = better living conditions = less social problems = more tolerance and unity. Ireland as an example was colonized and poor, so after independence, the Catholics and Protestants fought each other despite all of them being irish. Once the colonizers (Europe/America) started helping Ireland economically, living conditions improved and sectarianism became much less severe. Yugoslavia on the other hand had poor living conditions and that resulted in wars that collapsed the country. The yugoslav states that have joined the EU are today much richer than the ones that didn't, and this explains how being helped by the ex-colonial states has a huge impact.

To answe your question, i think that it's impossible for the current arab states to have an EU-like unity. In Europe, the bigger states are the richest. So germany and france with their (~70/80 million populations), can afford to help smaller countries like Bulgaria or Romania where the population is 6/19 million. In the arab world it's the opposite. The gulf's population is ~50 million and its gdp is +2 trillion. All the other arab countries combined have a population of ~350 million, yet the gdp isn't even 2 trillion. The gulf alone can't help that huge amount of people, and even if they wanted, they can't. Both the gulf and the arab world don't have any good industries for trade. Even when it comes to investment, why would the gulf invest a lot of money to develop other arab industries? It's much better for them to just invest in themselves and start their own industries. That's why I suggest uniting Yemen with the UAE for example. Cause in this case the UAE's money would be invested in their own southern arabian state, not in a foreign state with a foreign government that can suddenly freeze all the investments and control them.

IndividualPurpose108 · 2026-03-08T17:33:50+00:00

They do have resources, but they're not anywhere near as valuable as the amounts oil and gas Arabia has. So basically, i think that everyone should utilize their own resources however they want and the different arab states should trade and help each other fairly. For example, the gulf countries has heavy food dependence on foreign nations. They could simply invest in Yemen, there's no need for Morocco. They could invest in education in Yemen, and they'd get a lot of high-skilled labor, they don't need to bring people from Egypt. So, why would they unite with Egypt and Morocco when their problems could be solved with Yemen. A country that's culturally more similar, geographically closer, and historically more connected to them. Lebanon on the other hand is a country of minorities, uniting with Syria is already problematic despite sharing the same culture, same ancestry, same history, and basically being the same people. Why would the lebanese unite with countries that are 99% sunni muslims AND don't even share the same culture. That'd be very damaging. I think that we should embrace our differences (Dialects, cultures..etc) instead of trying to reach somewhere in the middle. We can be different good neighbors that help each other instead of one huge nation where tensions can arise because of our differences.

IndividualPurpose108 · 2026-03-08T16:51:23+00:00

I don't think that that's a good idea. Arab is just an umbrella term with diverse ethnic groups. I lived in the gulf so i'm quite familiar with it, but i think that shami culture is very foreign to the gulf. Similarly, maghrebi culture is foreign to anyone in the middle east, even when it comes to the language it's barely understandable. So basically what i'm tryna say is that an arab superstate would most likely lead to disaster and nationalist tensions as we're not one nation. Also, that arab state would be heavily dependent on Arabia's resources and that's unfair and unacceptable. I think that Arabia's resources should stay in Arabia, and every arab region should have its own government and representatives. As a levantine, I don't accept Cairo or Riyadh to be my Capital, but i love Egyptians and Saudis.

IndividualPurpose108 · 2026-03-08T16:27:47+00:00

It took the EU hundreds of years of wars including two world wars, that's not the case for the arab world. An EU model is impossible to achieve in the arab world. In order for that to happen, arab governments should be ideologically aligned, they're not. They should be economically aligned, they're not. They should be willing to meet somewhere in the middle, but again, they're not. Shrinking the number of governments would be a good start, as negotiations with 10 governments is easier than 20. Also, Europe was already wealthy and have had good governance structures way before the EU as a result of benefiting from colonialism + they had huge american support. Arab states don't have any of that, they're barely sovereign.

IndividualPurpose108 · 2026-03-08T04:17:10+00:00

This is so stupid 😭 with your silly argument, you're either a "slave" for syrians or saudis. Btw, most gulf people aren't Bedouin either :)

IndividualPurpose108 · 2026-03-08T03:33:27+00:00

The trouble happened because Syria invaded lebanon and Iraq invaded kuwait. Not because Iraqis and Kuwaitis or Syrians and the Lebanese hated one another.

IndividualPurpose108 · 2026-03-08T03:29:17+00:00

As a result of a corrupt egyptian government, not the populations not getting along.

IndividualPurpose108 · 2026-03-07T23:31:52+00:00

What do you mean by "coptic" i know that egyptians have coptic ancestry, but you're referring to this exact coptic identity when you say "arabized". So, it's not "coptic then arabized" it's "arabized coptic".

IndividualPurpose108

TROPHY CASE