Timeline of Gaza | 3500 BCE to October 7th, 2023 

Proverb 24 (Septuagint/Nicholas King) Verse 11; Deliver those who are being led to death and buy back those who are being killed; do not spare [yourself] - I might be wrong but there appears to be a certain amount of prophecy going on.

Hello UsefulCharts, im new to your channel and i really enjoy your videos. Im really looking for a video where it shows the changes of our calenders. For i know the Jewish calender is different to the Julian calender as well as the Gregorian calender. Do you have a video on how the world ended up adapting to the gregorian calender? Or what calenders they were using in the past?

your implementation of terms is wrong. Bronze Age canaanite are the same iron age cannaits./ israel is a term called exclusively for people of a certain religion. Israel is a religious name not a geographic name. jews came from Mesopotamia not from the native canaan land. Amrits,Mobait,Adomits,Ammonites,Phoenicians are all canaanites. israelites literature is extremely influenced by mesopotamian religion not by canaanite religion. there is no such thing as iron age canaanites called Israelites.

Israeli operation in Gaza is not wrong/illegal. No one called the Allied forces genocidal when they bombed/starved Berlin. Unless it only applies when the victims are non-whites. Is that it? Read a book, More specifically, the rules of war as agreed and legally defined in UN Hospitals/Cultural/Historical places/Schools/places of worship. All lose their legal protection if they put weapons/ammunitions/hostages inside those places. Blame the Nakba on the Arab League who chose war instead of a citizen/land swap. Blame the Destruction of Gaza on those who put missiles/hostages under their children's bed just to score sympathy points.

@@NicitoStaAna WTF! Israel has no right to defend itself from the people it occupies

His use of the historical method should quell some of that "controversy". However the more contemporary claims in the video, and the solutions he advocates for are kind of problematic, as addressed below with timestamps: 30:14 "...the (Ashkenazi) Jewish newcomers were fleeing heavy persecution (in Europe) and *didn't really have anywhere else to go*" This is a statement which contradicts your earlier point on them (ie. secular/ atheist zionists) selecting multiple places to establish a nation-state. They had many places they could've gone to where the diaspora was living normal lives. They also had the option of settling other lands which were under colonial administration which may genuinely have been "empty", unlike the land they selected which was inhabited by *indigenous* Jew, Christians, Muslims and other religious groups with the same ethnic background (ie. the "mixed bag" you correctly referenced repeatedly). 30:55 *Worst ever genocide* is again, an objectively false statement. It's a popular talking point which is a form of genocide denial (ie. underplaying the many genocides outside of Europe which were quantifiably worse). Holocaust-esque genocides imposed by the colonial powers were the norm for the global majority - the reason it is (wrongly) portrayed as unique is because the Germans exerted that colonial violence *internally* onto Europe, which was deemed unacceptable by inter-colonial competition. 31:05 "Western countries were reluctant to take in Jews, thus the need for Jews to have their own state" First, the attempts to establish a Jewish state on this land preceded these events by decades via the explicitly *colonial* Zionist movement espoused by Herzl in collusion with the British who sought to use their classic colonial tactic of ethnic division to weaken a land. Second, Jews were living normal lives everywhere outside of ehite supremacist Europe. Third, the UN created a plan with borders which mirrored those of apartheid South Africa, with the indigenous inhabitants relegated to disconnected "bantustans" while the colonially imported population were given land on top of the homes of the indigenous. Out of the thousands of ethnicities most do not have a nation-state, as there are under 200 nations. We already established there have been worse genocides across the global majority, so that can't be the answer. Why should Ashkenazi Jews be the exception, especially given their colonial nation-state would be established on inhabited land? The answer is: they shouldn't. The nation state is an inherently backwards idea which inevitably results in fascistic nationalism in an effort to establish (fabricate) a unified "national" identity, as opposed to the "mixed bag" which has existed in the region forever. 31:20 "The two sides went to war" War is an inaccurate descriptor; it was one side resisting a plan created by an outright colonial/imperialist entity (the UN was a tool of imperialism at this point in history; still is to an extent). They were being expelled from homes they inhabited for dozens of generations so the victims of the holocaust (ie. European victims of European colonial violence turned inwards onto Europe) could settle on top of those homes. It was indiegnous resistance to colonialism. 31:38 "In reponse around the same number of Jews were expelled from the neighboring Arab countries". While the rise of nationalism did occur is *some* regions of the Arab world as the colonial powers lost their grip and created deliberately divisive nation-state borders (recall my point on the trajectory the nation-state inevitably leads to under a diverse society), the major cause of the outflow of Mizrahi and Sephardi Jews into the new colonial state of "Israel" was caused by *Zionist extremists* either committing violent acts to stoke further religious division or outright kidnapping their Jewish children to import into "Israel".

This reply should probably be moved to the main level as a Comment. Some important takes/perspectives to consider.

​@@af8828ok so you think you are right?

It is controversial.

@@af8828 You should make this a main comment (so more people and Matt can see it) with some citations of sources you based your arguments on, i agree with some of your points but i'm ignorant on others (like the pogroms on Jews post UN partition plan).

Same (I mean before I unsubscribed). 700,000 Azeri refugees in First Nagorno-Karabakh war. Nakba number. But nobody talks about it because it doesn’t interest the left, because those secular Turkic Muslims’ blood isn’t as red as the Arabs. In particular, it isn’t as red as Palestinian blood. In particular, Azerbaijan is not situated in the site of a holy site contended by Islam and the religion it plagiarised and whose clerics are most scared of, so it’s less important to talk about.

Yes! I'm pretty sure a lot of people would be surprised to learn that in the last 420 years about 270 years the Azerbaijani population was the ethnic majority in what now is known as Armenia.

​@@bneymanovHistory of Armenia would be like mostly Urartians in the ancient ages, Romans in the first millennium CE with a bit of Arab Caliphates, and Turkic dynasties in the 2nd millennium CE with a tiny amount of Mongol rule

@@nenenindonuarmenians has nothing to do with urartians. Their redorded history started with 5th century AD writings which in itself is borrowed from ephiopians…

@@gurbanabbasov Yes Urartians indeed have nothing to with Armenians just how Romans & Turks don't, I just mentioned them as a former ruling entity of what is now Armenia

I guess it depends on if your history is the truth or just embarrassing nonsense

In this survey timeline, is there any indication of what not to repeat, huh?

Praying that our and yours are safe.

As educated rational people, we only care about facts and research, not blind beliefs. I can confidently say, as a Malay you are no way related to this area or the Arabian dogma. You are just fed this since childhood. Connect to your real Malay roots.

@@exploratorize7703 You don't need to teach me about my roots. You just need to respect Muslims and what their belief as we respect others. It is not about Arabian dogma or any race. It is about Abrahamic Religions and world's geopolitics. So if you are an atheist, that's your life, not mine.

@@faiznaaman define muslim beliefs?

@@exploratorize7703 Based on our 5 pillars of Islam and 6 pillars of faith. You can Google it yourself and read.

​​​@@exploratorize7703 What does him being a malaysian have to do with anything? So you have to be a certain race to talk about political subjects?? For example do i have to be ukranian or russians to talk about that war ?? M cofused

Italy

🇬🇧

Bermuda

The Moon ...not yet at least

@@4sythdude549 It's only a matter of time

Both him and you are correct, he said the bronze age collapse lead to the downfall of Egypt which is true as Egypt did survive it but it was so weakened from the events that it continued declining while new emerging powers kept rising in power till Egypt itself was conquered by foreigners like the Libyan and Nubian dynasties (3rd intermediate period and late period in A. Egypt). So yes you are correct that Egypt did not fall in the bronze age collapse, but he is also correct that the collapse was one of the direct causes of Egypt's downfall. Alongside weak rulers who could at best slow the rapid decline of the Egyptian empire, such as all the Ramsisides from Ramses 5 and on.

yes! it is still survive today!

Egypt however would be forever ruined aftee the Nuabian invasion and the intermixing. After the Nubian Invasion, Egypt was always controlled by various empires.

This comment should be pinned

Ethnicity in general is a modern idea. Just like Zionism, which is simply ethnicity with extra steps.

Exactly. Nationalism itself didn't begin until the 17th Century at the earliest.

Not true with your concept of Italy. As Italia it existed already in Roman times, although languages evolved differently, but they all were Italian in a way or another. It was just the single noble houses, along with international affairs (French and Austrians in the North, Spanish in the South, with the Pope in the center), that would keep it apart.

Ethno states have existed in all recorded history , Nationalism is nothing new, conquest, colonisation and settlement was the norm .

It’s true.

@@TracyD2 unfortunately when having to answer the question “who is the aggressor” it’s really going to be whoever is answering that question is going to answer with who they are aligned with. Because there are arguments for both unfortunately.

@@185MDE Both siding a genocide?

@@185MDE would you have both sided a genocide if the Palestinians were westerners?

@@philo9046 please don’t twist my words

Not the entire Levant, just west of the Jordan and Orontes. To the east it was populated by Arameans, and other Arab(ish) groups (edomites, nabateans, moabites, ammonites, so on). To the north there were Assyrians and Hittites and Armenians. The Arameans that migrated north became known as Syriacs.

@@habibi_sport312 Arameans, amorits,(edomites,Moabits,Ammonits are canaanites too

@@habibi_sport312 No, they weren't confined like that, they were all over the ancient world. The Canaanites spread across the Mediterranean and founded many colonies that became major cities (e.g., Carthage), even as far as Spain.

@@habibi_sport312 But I do get the point that the areas you mentioned were _mainly_ populated by these other peoples.

Ba'al Hammon be praised!

better still if Rome never fell and Christianity and Islam never came to be.

Ok go tell that the Nebuchadnezzar II

Ramses lll is the one who make them settle there after a treaty with them those people likely where running from 300 years of drought in the region

Hello there. How do you do? A very intelligent comment. I respect you for it.

Totally calm as forecasted.

There are more of these comments than controversial ones

Honestly I can't see any crazy comments

@@duduchannel6729 In my defense, I wrote this like 2 minutes after the video came out, but hey, I'd rather be pleasantly surprised than not!

You can’t have “peace” if one side refuses to actually accept your existence and wants to eradicate you from existence. 😒

You can’t work together towards “peace” if one side doesn’t want to. 😒

@benclark However you can if a majority of people want peace and it’s just the keyboard warriors, such as yourself, polarised people and radicalised people who believe that their side is just.

@@snomcultist189 Which isn't the situation currently in Palestine, neither in Gaza nor in the West Bank.

@@snomcultist189 funny how I never said that one side was actually “just” lol. 😒 also do you REALLY think that the side who ALWAYS refuses peace when it’s given to them is the one who actually wants it? 🫤

Wait for it… the Mongols!

Why the sarcasm? The comments are civil.

Indeed they are.

@@AxlTCU 🔥🇮🇱🔥

@@cometmoon4485 the comments ARE civil, the replies however...

The Dynasty numbers were decided before the period before Dynasty 1 was well understood. There is a Dynasty 0. That's who this refers to.

Unfortunately, this is a veneer. We are all biased, and Matt's fundamentally pro-Israeli stance reveals itself here in his contemporary statements, as alluded to in other high ranking comments.

​@@figrollin He's not that fundamentally pro-Israel right? In the end he says he supports the current protests against what the Israeli government is doing.

The key word is "selling". Every Jewish owned land up to 1945 has been legitimately owned by them. They didn't commit any land theft, and that meme has to stop...

@@adrianblake8876 lol by 1947, they owned less than 7% of the land.... and then in 1948, they were awarded about 55% by the imperial powers to form their state, at the expense of the native population ofcourse. Cut the bull.

​@@levantineking98 If I am not mistaken Arabs have around the same Precentage of ownership ~10%,Jews lived and migrated to Israel since beginning of recorded history before Arabs even been there so saying they "Native"(while they came ad conquering empire)is dumb

@@yakov95000 modern day palestinians aren’t descendants of peninsular Arabs, they were just conquered by them lol. And you are mistaken, Arabs owned around 35 percent of the land and the rest was state owned, and besides, the land ownership system was different as they had communal ownership, before the European colonizers arrived. What you’re saying sounds like “well native Americans didn’t technically own the land according to our European standards/laws, they just lived there.”

​@@adrianblake8876Approximately 15% of all land in israel is owned by the JNF, a private organisation that explicitly REFUSES to sell land to non-Jews. In 2004, the JNF proudly declared in the Supreme Court of israel that it does not have a duty to practice equality to all citizens of the country. israel is a vile apartheid state built on ethnic supremacy.

The information in this video are not all accurate. Not historical nor religious accurate .most of information provided in this video Contradict with the archaeological and genetic informations.

Can you suggest academic material that proves your point?

guess not, I read it in your comment

​@@hanojo6098 How so? What archeological and genetic evidence contradicts anything in the video? I'm not aware of any.

The election where the winning party had publicly declared they would hunt all of the jews around the planet? No, palestinians would never vote for something that openly violent and hateful.

thank you

Wouldn't that be hypothesis then?

@@sonicgoo1121 not necessarily. An hypothesis comes earlier in the process before any research has been done.

He didnt mention a lot of important things.. So many misinformation, and information leaving out the most important details are spread on the internet. And then when it fits their narrative, people thank for the 'unbiased info.

why Baker has always been straight

In an imperfect world where nobody is completely straight, he sticks landings with more consistency than many/most. I seem to recall one time I was annoyed with a take of his in a different video. It should definitely be noted that of all the history and news sources I watch, I think I can say quickly off the top of my head he has annoyed me the least number of times and the count still stands at only once in quite a few years and perhaps hundreds of videos. Not perfect technically but I'd challenge others to do better than that and I wouldn't expect them to succeed.

If Hamas is too popular and Arafats legacy has withered and died too much, then unfortunately Baker essentially stopped talking right at the important moment. By the arguments he himself makes for what he supports, Hamas is beyond the pale. At the very least Israel is far more sympathetic than Hamas, and there either will be or won't be a restoration of Arafat. It would be significantly important to give more indication of how strong Hamas is and whether there's anything left of the version of Palestine that would work. Arab Spring matters. Afghanistan matters. Did the radicals remove obstacles in their way helping to bring the war to an escalated peak forcing Israel to fight in an existential matter. I am concerned about the possibility of it being up to that bad while struggling to find clear minded sources willing to sift through report honestly reveal what they know and make clear what the situation truly is, whether it is too late to go back or not. It would seem like Israel is frightened that if it does not do what it is doing they will be extinguished. And when Jews bring up that they are afraid of extermination it pays to listen. I can't find a lot of people willing to bring up Yasser Arafat at all Which worries me that Hamas has obliterated and replaced that option with a much more impossible situation than was present as recently as the 90s. It's an important issue to untangle. If Hamas cannot, does not, and should not represent all Palestine, most of the way things are being reported needs to change. But it seems like Hamas desires to be all Palestine and has taken steps to try to achieve that. None of that was addressed in the video at all and that was really the only part that would have been mysterious to basically anyone with an internet connection in the past 20 years.

​@@darthparallax5207it's your third to last paragraph that really hits me because when you get accustomed to it, you can tell when a lot of journalism/press has to be approved by hamas or fall into the "party line" (for lack of a better term for my knowledge) of hamas to be allowed out into the world. it has been so harmful. as someone with close ties to israel i just want peace. regardless of arguments about who got there first or everything that happened in the past, the solution should never be to keep killing each other, but it seems that any glimmer of stability was destroyed in October. most of the activists I see on either side, especially the popular ones, believe all the land is theirs and the other must be taken out. it really hurts. I want future generations to grow up in a safe and free environment, but the more this goes on, everyone is just going to be radicalised to the point where it really never ends. I am so sad about it. what could have been a brilliant place is getting destroyed

@@darthparallax5207ive read the words of Israel’s goverment ministers ben givir and Shimoltrovich and they have pretty clear genocidal intent towards the Palestinians, they want to take all their land and dont want to give the Palestinians citisenship, so where are they meant to go?

True

The ppl who have always been there are no longer there/no longer exist/ were not established there long enough to be considered natives. No one who lives there now is REALLY native. Their ancestry can be connected really far back in history, but no one who was there first stayed there for long enough to be native. And also, the British and other ignorant westerners were a huge cause of a lot of the current problems now, so why are you believing everything they are saying and taking them seriously?

Maybe because we’re (Americans) aren’t calling them natives? Idk where you heard that from 😂. Point is, most Israeli Jews are Mizrachi (native Jews/ descendants of the Cannanites) so if anything they could be deemed “native” I guess. Most didn’t come from Europe. Also I think when you fight your opponent and win the spoils of war go to the victors (as we’ve seen happens throughout the humanity). They won, they rule it. Just like when the Muslims empires colonized it in the past.

The Exodus has to be explained in Theological Terms . Which the narrator is not a Theologian.

He has already talked about the historical view of the exodus multiple times on this channel.

That's true, they sold their land that's why Arafat never accused Israel for stealing lands..

no, it was bought from the landlords. when the Ottoman empire moved to a more European-style system of "whoever has the money can own the land" (as opposed to the earlier, habitation-based model), suddenly rich people who didn't even live there could own the land in the empire, including Palestine. the actual occupants often owned nothing under this system and therefore frequently suffered when the supremacist zionists came in and evicted Palestinians so they could hire Jewish labor.

@@bella-hi4ooso the illegal settlers we have today ?

​@@CleHasToSayIt are not illegal settlers. The biggest so-called settlement in Hebron, an area the Arabs genocide the Jews out of in 1929. They have every right to resettle the Jewish quarters.

@@CleHasToSayIt They are illegal settlers of course they are putting their house in a Palestinian government own land..I do believe that PLO and Arab league refers only to the Israeli citizens before 1948-1967..Muslim countries exiled many Mizrahi Jews that's why, they settled in East Jerusalem and Westbank.. Israeli Government removed all Jews in Gaza, then they can or will remove the Settlers in Palestinian territory. The problem is most of the settlers are Arab Jews.

It would make the most sense, but they really do not seem to want it anymore.

Israel offered it and they said no

Egypt doesnt want it lol

Many things are not correct in the video. Read the comment above your comment for example.

this is dubious. The Philistines were there and the reference is to the people, while the Romans referred to the geographical area.

Except for the parts where he said "war broke out" instead of "Israel was attacked."

@@VesnaVK go back and have a better listen Sweetheart.

❤️🇵🇸🍉

​Correct. Israel is the one that started this in 1948

@@aj.a1845 please be specific.

You mean claimed by no state entity, but Palestinian Authority surely claims at least East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza.

When Egypt and Jordan refused to take Gaza and the west bank they should’ve been left to be ruled by the people living in them, instead Israel put them under military occupation fearing that the Palestinian refugees who had fled in 1947 would return to them and it sponsored its people’s building settlements in that land to make sure it would never be possible for a Palestinian state to exist in future.

Would be difficult to make an accurate timeline with the Americas

That would be awesome but unfortunately a lot of dates would only be approximate with the exception of the Maya and last century before Columbus

The "crossing of the land bridge" WAS a colonization.

@@JeffinBville Colonization of uninhabited land, yea. Or is it your opinion that there were humans (or otherwise intelligent beings) living in the Americas even before the first humans arrived?

Read Origin by Jennifer Raff. You will learn that there was no original people, just wafts of various peoples over time. It is based on DNA and she correlates with folklore.

Maybe the creator chooses the largest population or the current ruler..

Canaan was a huge land..

The name israel dont mean a clan The name was an agreement between tribes in cnaahan to form a kingdom The name of the kingdom was israel

yep, that is what the conflict is all about. Guess who is the intollerant side?

And any people anywhere would have felt the same. Especially since they were promised control of the area after the fall of the Ottomans.

​@@mauricehalfhide3982were they? Heijazy Arabs collaborated with Britain and sons of Hussein Abdullah and Feisal got Jordan and Iraq. They would like to have all the land they might try to overthrow turks all on there own but one who participate in campaign gets a part of game. Why is it not fair?

@@jasperchance3382there were a lot more than two sides from 1920-50. There were plenty of Arabs willing to accept Jews, plenty of Jews willing to compromise on the Balfour Declaration. Unfortunately, extremists used violence to consolidate control. Still going on today.

✌️

left in control of meaning left in the control of

Grammatically, it's correct.

The video is correct

It's regrettable, but they didn't have much of a choice. The Gaza Strip is very densely populated. You have to put new housing somewhere.

yea, he died killing plishtim (Hebrew pronunciation) and the romans later names Israel Palestine to discourage jews (by naming the land after their biblical enemies)

Sampson was a myth after Hercules

I agree with you, 💯 Zionism is good but the way the Israeli government is trying to make it happen is not.

Nobody, it seems, sees how non Arabs are treated as second class citizens in most Arab countries, but hey, that's not something that Israel enemies would see, even if it were pointed out to them.

"I fully support the right of Israel to exist as a nation" Well you seem to be somehow more reasonable than most people in Israel so think again about whether Israel deserves to exist as a country or be returned to their original inhabitants previous to colonization

@@jmiquelmb It's a long series of colonizations, so you can have no clear picture of who is original to the land (have you watched the video?) but Jews belong there, too and Israel is as legit as Jordan, Lebanon or Pakistan, so it's right to exist is pretty damn obvious.

@@jasperchance3382 That's like saying the appartheid was valid because the Bantu people displaced the Khoisan centuries before the Afrikaners came to the region. Israel doesn't have a right to exist. A single state solution might be possible but that state can't be called Israel, this name is inherently linked with an ethnostate supremacist idology.

not entirely accurate, the elections were only in Gaza they weren't connected to Fatah they are separated in that regard however couple of years ago it was encouraged to make elections in the West Bank but polls showed hamas winning there too so the elections were stopped

@@etgarmoyal No the 2006 elections were for the Palestinian Legislative Council which covers both Gaza and the West Bank. Hamas won that election. There have been no further elections since then because Fatah rejected the results and seized control of the West Bank and have no interest in losing another vote.

This is what confused me about this video. Theres no record of anyone calling themselves a "Palestinian" before the British Occupation and the land itself was only ever referred to as "Palestine" by western and central Europeans, not any Arabs. As for the Nationalism, theres really no record of that either other than maybe just the Arabs of the land maybe expressing a wanting for independence, but no action and certainly no branding with the name "Palestine" or "Palestinian"...

You have to understand all the nations of the Middle East are man made and not by nationalism/ethics. Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia. European decided the arbitrary borders. What happens if they could form their own nations? Well maybe a pan-Arabic country, or syria eats up Lebanon, or Saudi Arabia eats all of the peninsula. But I know for sure that if there was no Jewish independence then the area would’ve been carved up in between Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. Since the Palestinian have no national identity. All they are Arab colonial by product.

Well, the idea of boundaries is a new thing to this area, but it was known for people that this land was called Palestine (the land of Philists), nationalism wasn't necessary until the end of ottomans very long rule, and the beginning of colonialism and the drawing of boundaries, from then Arab nationalism including the Palestinian (by Arab I mean Arabic speaking nations) got stronger and stronger especially with the slow moves played by Z1onists some years before the ottomans fall and the British rule, it was a game of politics between strong Jewish voices in Europe snd the colonizers, and some Palestinian reporters were aware of that (with recorded evidence) So that's my research's conclusion on Palestinian nationalism as it's known today, there may be some deeper roots but I haven't got to them yet

@@Fai9albinKhalid3 But what was included in Palestine?

Historically the region between the Jordan river and the Mediterranean is Palestine.