Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

jervoise t1_jcpgo8v wrote

Reply to comment by ChemoDrugs in TIL that a famine in Persia (Iran) between 1917–1919 lead to the deaths of an estimated 2 million people. It's an event that hasn't been studied by many historians. by icantthinkofaname940

For your edit, Because you were factual, until your last remark.

What “money” did the British gain from not allowing Jews to enter Palestine?

That area was quickly turning into a hotbed, it’s why the British would pull out in the next decade. But at the time, WW2 was ongoing. If the Arabs revolted mid war the British would not have the capacity to answer it. Ignoring even the strategic reasons, the Arabs would likely end up killing a lot of the Jewish refugees.

1

ChemoDrugs t1_jcpip22 wrote

Why else would you control land that is not yours to begin with? You don’t get to just pick “middle east hotbed” and not acknowledge why colonialism happened in the first place. The whole comment chain started because of it being on the British.

By stemming the tide of jewish refugees and putting the process in the hands of the Arabis, they fully intended to fix their image and maintain control. So they absolutely had money to gain.

0

jervoise t1_jcpkw32 wrote

The addition of more people doesn’t reduce the amount of money made though does it?

For sure, they intended to maintain control, but how can you argue the british losing control during WW2 would be good for anyone?

Who benefits from a vastly larger Jewish populations fighting Arab rebels with the British unable to intercede due to the Germans and Italians moving west from Libya?

Sometimes there’s a bit more to things than the British being a super villain. They were wrong to take that area in the first place, but the actions they took there aren’t turbo evil 24/7.

3

ChemoDrugs t1_jcpm6xf wrote

I guess my simplification does come off as super evil. The money to gain by doing what the population would want is a long term. Their control was slipping in India so the Empire was on full decline. To me it was reactionary damage control to try and keep it.

I appreciate your input though so I’m not tryin to come off as argumentative. But I’m not always good at that. Definitely learning a lot from the comments as a whole.

0