Which Has Caused More Harm to the Middle-East?

[Fifty]

Choice 1: Oil & Geographical Location. A lot of people think these are the main reason for wars in the middle east, former colonial presence and current client states, etc.

Choice 2: Religion. Lots of crazy religions are pretty important there, most obviously Judaism, various Muslim sects, probably Christianity to some extent. They don't get along too well.


I'm guessing most people will choose Choice 1, which I think is correct, but who knows given how atheisty some people here are!

 

[civver_764]

I'm an atheist and I still think it's obviously choice 1.

 

[JollyRoger]

If it wasn't for the superior moral values displayed by such a strongly religious collection of people, I imagine the Middle East would be a real hellhole. Gotta be the oil.

 

[BSmith1068]

This is hard question. Oil is only relevant for the past century or so, and the area has a very long history of conflict, so I hesitate to say oil is the bigger problem. Geographic location is much more likely, as it has been the nexus of so many different cultures and civilizations.

Religion to some degree is a big issue there because of the geographic location and the mixing of cultures and people. While many of the problems/conflicts/etc. in the region have been in the name of religion, I actually think that the overriding issue is the geographic location acting as an enabler.

 

[PeteAtoms]

Historically I would say religion.
Not until oil became valuable to industry did it become an issue (I think). So at present I think it is a matter of oil and politics (religion is often blamed, but I think it's mostly political).

 

[Love]

Choice 2 if you look in the history.

 

[Fifty]

This is hard question. Oil is only relevant for the past century or so, and the area has a very long history of conflict, so I hesitate to say oil is the bigger problem. Geographic location is much more likely, as it has been the nexus of so many different cultures and civilizations.

Yeah I included "geographical location" in there with oil because I figured back in the pre-oil days it might have been a strategically important area or something since its at the nexus of so much crap? I dunno much history.

 

[Fifty]

For the love of God please don't turn this into Israel v Palestine debate #23496296

Everyone knows Domination's views are completely crazy, please don't let it pollute this thread.

Moderator Action: No need to make it personal. Warned.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Zardnaar]

Oil is reasonably recent but the ME has been a basket case for years. Gateway to 3 continents.

 

[Yoda Power]

What time period are we talking?

 

[Mathilda]

Moderator Action: Israel vs. Palestine discussion removed. Try to stay on topic.
And the next one to demonise a religious group will[/] get infracted.

 

[Imrahil91]

If you think of earlier than the last centuries, weren't most of the parts of the world just as violent back then?
Today I think it's a mix between the legacy of the colonial times and angry, stubborn and violent people, especially leaders. Religion is just a catalyst that heathens the conflict, with Judaism and Christianity making it extra spicy. Maybe oil and resources are giving them more to fight for too.

 

[Zardnaar]

ME generally has peace ofr a few centuries whenever a strong power can take it and hold it for a few years- Persians/Romans/Arabs/Turks. Throughout most of history the ME was trying to invade europe, not the other way around. Rome being an exception of course.

 

[Love]

Meh, ever heard of the crusades?

 

[Till]

I don't know much about the history of the ME, but i generally regarded the caliphates as having a positive influence on the region. Both in terms of social/scientific advancements, and in terms of keeping the peace between the various ethnicities there. Religion was instrumental for establishing the caliphates.

I think the most harm was caused by the Mongols (who brought the Islamic Golden Age to an end) and later the Europeans.

Might well be totally off here, though, and am ready to be educated.

 

[illram]

The current brand of crazy religious people and their influence in that area sprout from the dynamics created by oil and geography so I go with oil and geography.

 

[bombshoo]

I chose religion. Oil has only been a problem for the past century. Although geography has always been an element in the conflicts there in past ages, it was usually religion acting as a catalysts for most of the major conflicts.

 

[Pacifist46]

I went for religion. The thing about the Muslim religion is that it doesn't seem to advocate peace or condemn violence, which means that conflict often results.
It only takes a minority, obviously the vast majority are peaceful, but they can be radcialised in a way that doesn't happen with even the most zealous, for example, Christians. The suicide bombings in New York and London show that.
Add into the mix Israel, which seems to operate very shadily in general, and Iran/Iraq, and you haven't got a recipe for the Nobel Peace Prize.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

1. Obviously if we're talking about the current situation.

I'm sure if you drag history into it, it would seem religion, but more likely it would be good ol' fashioned greed.

 

[History_Buff]

I say geography. Religion has certainly been the catalyst in recent centuries, but if you look back at say, the Greco-Roman period, the place was still a swirling mess of empires, which had nothing to do with religion.