Nothing particularly ageless about it. These things go in cycles. By historical standards, this is actually a pretty peaceful period, for the region and just about anywhere else. Heck, the Vietnam War's death toll comprised about 4% of the Vietnamese population. The press is whining over the death of 0.5% of the Syrian population, and talking this up as if it were a rerun of the Mongol sack of Baghdad.
Has the Middle East ever encountered anything like the 100 Years' War, which saw France's population cut in half from start start to finish? 100K dead is peanuts out of a population of 22m. Wars in antiquity and the medieval era used to routinely kill off anywhere from 10% to 70% of the population via famine and famine-induced disease. The amusing thing is that those casualties did not lead to pacifism, whereas the relatively minor, by historical standards, death tolls of WWI and WWII, has led to worldwide pacifism. I suspect a great deal of it has to do with most of the world's population no longer living on the edge, just a bad harvest away from famine.
“I suspect a great deal of it has to do with most of the world’s population no longer living on the edge, just a bad harvest away from famine.”
Interesting thought, that!