Who Do You Support: Black September aka The Jordanian Civil War

[Admiral Yi]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYDDug-egGg

I checked out this clip that popped up.  Learned the fun fact that Mohammed Zia ul Haq was involved, on the Hashemite side.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_September

So i read the wiki, hoping to learn more.  The clip gave the impression that ul Haq was commanding troops and engaged in massacres.  Wiki says he was the head of the Pakistani military training mission.

I'm voting Hussein in my own poll, but I think there are good arguments on the other side, and I don't think it's as one sided as my 25 year old self believed.

Also learned about the 10,000 Syrian troops on the PLO side.

[Grey Fox]

King Hussein

[grumbler]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYDDug-egGg

I checked out this clip that popped up.  Learned the fun fact that Mohammed Zia ul Haq was involved, on the Hashemite side.

No slanting of the narrative in that video.  No, sir!     Arafat claimed that 25,000 Palestinians were killed, while independent observers estimated 2,000-3400 (according to the NYT as cited in the wiki article), so the video compromises and uses the 25,000 figure. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_September

So i read the wiki, hoping to learn more.  The clip gave the impression that ul Haq was commanding troops and engaged in massacres.  Wiki says he was the head of the Pakistani military training mission.

I'm voting Hussein in my own poll, but I think there are good arguments on the other side, and I don't think it's as one sided as my 25 year old self believed.

Also learned about the 10,000 Syrian troops on the PLO side.

I'm not sure what the "good arguments" are for the PLO side.  They challenged the sovereignty of the Kingdom of Jordan, and got smacked down for it, eventually having to evacuate top Lebanon (where they did the same thing, but more successfully).

The Syrian invasion was new to me, but just weakens the argument that the PLO were in the right.

[Razgovory]

Are you saying that Palestinian leadership would lie about casualties?

[Admiral Yi]

The good points I see on the PLO side are that Hussein was a Saudi imposed as a monarch by the British on a largely Palestinian population.  The will of the people, self determination, that sort of thing.

[grumbler]

The good points I see on the PLO side are that Hussein was a Saudi imposed as a monarch by the British on a largely Palestinian population.  The will of the people, self determination, that sort of thing.

Jordan's population was not mostly Palestinian (the Bedu are the largest ethnic group and there were few Palestinians in Transjordan when the Hashemite dynasty came into power) and the Hashemite dynasty was not "Saudi" when it came into power, since Saudi Arabia only came into existence at the same time as Transjordan. 

I have not seen any indication that the PLO were angry about some historical injustice, but rather that it felt that, since Palestinian refugees had swollen the population of the West Bank and Jordan following the Israeli War of Independence, Palestinian interests should be paramount in Jordan, a stance irreconcilable with the position of the Bedu and King Hussein.  It was modern power politics, not historical grievances, that made many of the Palestinian militias question the legitimacy of the dynasty.

[Darth Wagtaros]

I had thought the only people who thought the PLO were in the right were the PLO.  The Syrian intervention was just in the hopes the PLO would win and fuck with Israel, not because they like the Palestinians.

Then they went to Lebanon and did the same thing. Then they supported Saddam Hussein in Kuwait.  They don't have a great track record, and their modern day successors don't either.

[Sheilbh]

Obviously King Hussein.