The Quran doesn't say that.  Mohammed actually had a lot of respect for Christians and Jews, or People of the Book as he called them, and viewed them as friends who followed God but were led astray.  Mohammed's enemies were the pagans tribes that gave the Muslim community a very difficult time.  In fact, Mohammed was welcomed in Christian Ethiopia when he and his followers fled Mecca, and he eventually defeated the Meccan Pagans with the help of Christian and Jewish allies in Medina.

Not that history matters much for religion though, what matters is what people want their religion to be.

Immigration goes back before that, the Ottoman Empire actually invited Jews to live in Palestine and gave them land.

During World War I, the British promised German Jews (Zionist movement) that they would give them land in Palestine to create Israel, their motive being to weaken their support of the German war effort.  Note that Germany and the Ottomans who controlled Palestine were allies at the time.  The British also promised Palestinian Arabs that they would allow them to create their own country if they defeated the Ottomans, and many Palestinian rebel groups joined the British because of this.

So the British promised Palestine to European Jews and to the Arab Palestinians during World War I, but didn't uphold either promise and instead kept the land for themselves.

Yeah, funny how that stuff works out.  After WW2 they weren't even going to original give the jews palestine.  They wanted to give them Ethiopia at first.  Or some other african country I forget which.  Really the arabs should be made at the british not the jews.

Can you blame the Jews for being agressors every once in a while, wouldn't you want to mount an offensive against a people that was trying to iradicate you???  Anyway, the Coran makes it quite clear that Muslims are to kill all Jews. Seems to me that was a "holy" book long before Hitler came to power. 

He tried. One of the long-term plans was for the Afrika Corps to meet up with the Operation Barbarossa army coming around from the Caucasus.

They also fomented a temporarily successful anti-British revolution in Iraq, where a predecessor to the Baath party took over the country for a while, but the British quickly stamped them out, as well as pro-German Vichy French elements that were in control of Syria. The British and Soviets also worked together to oust the pro-German Shah of Iran (Reza Pahlavi i believe his name was)

It was an issue of priorities, of course. Much of the war could have been vastly changed if different groups had different priorities. The Japanese prioritized taking Southeast Asia over the Soviet Far East, and thus made their nonagression pact with the Soviets, though Hitler kept asking them to invade the area while Barbarossa still had steam. The Japanese could have steamrolled the Soviets if they had just prioritized it properly, and the whole course of the war changed.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

You can't be serious >.<

Lots of sources would disagree with ManusJustus on the animosity between Jews and Muslims being a very new thing:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths/mf15.html

You should probably keep out of this thread since you obviously have no idea what your talking about.

I couple of other people in this thread have already explained part of history of the relationship between Muslims and Jews, I recommend that you go back and read through the thread.

Of course there has been animosity, which has been the norm for minorities throughout history, but not 'war' as was previously stated by someone here.  Jews have gotten a bad rap from almost every culture in history, but before the creation of Israel Jews were better off in Arab countries than Christian European ones.

Also, I'd trust the Jewish Library about as much as I'd trust the Muslim Library.

Now your going back and revising your initial statement.

You said:

That is by and far away from 'of course there has been animosity, which has been the norm for minorities throughout history'.

I am not understanding why you'd discredit the article at a Jewish Library only because it seeks to make citations of where and why there has been animosity. Read the entire article, it did a fantastic job of painting times and places that Muslims got very well along with Jews, and when they were slaughtered. Just because it is a Jewish source doesn't mean it should be discredited, especially given the citations it used.