They had the Muslim brotherhood elected and they asked the army to genocide some tribes in the South. The army was "fighting" in bad faith, just shooting in their general direction and it ended with a coup that restored sanity.
That being said, they had, theoretically speaking, a civil war.
>bitterly divided by ethnicity and race >post-colonial pains, like shedding South Sudan from Sudan >authoritarianism is stronger here (for various reasons) and authoritarians have an easier time waging wars >multiple powers, like the USA and France, actively benefit from instability in the Middle East and deliberately inflame it >vast natural resources are a valuable target that is easy to consolidate; e.g. if Iraq had won the Gulf War, the Kuwaiti oil would've given them billions and billions, so they had a huge incentive to invade >region lacks abundant arable land to share, forcing conflicts over it both between and within countries >central geographic location means that multiple powers can easily project power in the region >rising powers like Turkey are feeling out their sphere of influence, causing instability in the short-term
no strongman to put order
Who did Egypt fight?
Hes probably going to say something really fucking vague like "ISIS".
If OP means actual full on confrontation then you can also remove Iran, Jordania, Kuwait, UAE, Qatar, Cyprus
how does this not count for iran?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_War
And here is for egypt:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yom_Kippur_War
>six-day war
>in the last 30 years
boomeranon, i...
>in the last 30 years
Do you know how to count?
What's 2023 minus 30?
Fucking retard I knew someone was going to take the bait.
They bomb Libyans.
They had the Muslim brotherhood elected and they asked the army to genocide some tribes in the South. The army was "fighting" in bad faith, just shooting in their general direction and it ended with a coup that restored sanity.
That being said, they had, theoretically speaking, a civil war.
they're brown
That region has always been zesty
>Why
many of them either speak a semitic language or have larger neighbour that wants something from them
>bitterly divided by ethnicity and race
>post-colonial pains, like shedding South Sudan from Sudan
>authoritarianism is stronger here (for various reasons) and authoritarians have an easier time waging wars
>multiple powers, like the USA and France, actively benefit from instability in the Middle East and deliberately inflame it
>vast natural resources are a valuable target that is easy to consolidate; e.g. if Iraq had won the Gulf War, the Kuwaiti oil would've given them billions and billions, so they had a huge incentive to invade
>region lacks abundant arable land to share, forcing conflicts over it both between and within countries
>central geographic location means that multiple powers can easily project power in the region
>rising powers like Turkey are feeling out their sphere of influence, causing instability in the short-term
Zionism and pan-Arabism are British inventions
Pan-Torkism was made by a israeli Hungarian and propogated by the British and Russiams
So the answer to your question is: Europeans
Ok