Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I Am So Ignorant On The Middle East - Can Someone Recommend

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Dinger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-22-06 11:22 PM
Original message
I Am So Ignorant On The Middle East - Can Someone Recommend
an unbiased guide/book, etc. on the history of conflict in the Middle East? I want to learn.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
katinmn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-22-06 11:25 PM
Response to Original message
1. Go to Juan Cole's Informed Consent
Website
http://www.juancole.com/
Essays and OpEds
http://www.juancole.com/essays/essays.htm

There's another thread on books.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dinger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-22-06 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Thanks katinmn : )
I'll check it out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fuzzyball Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-22-06 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #1
18. Middle-East is a unique part of the world where not a single democracy
exists, except for one small lonely Israel.

No other part of the world has such overwhelming
lack of democracies. Egypt, Pakistan, Syria, S. Arabia,
Jordan, Iran, Kuwait, UAE, Somalia, Qatar, and others
all are run by military dictators or kingdoms. If it was'nt
for oil money, the whole area would be living in dark ages.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackNewtown Donating Member (703 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 12:05 AM
Response to Reply #18
25. Iraq and Lebanon are democracies
Edited on Sun Jul-23-06 12:05 AM by JackNewtown
It is time to revise the old "Israel is the only democracy in the ME" talking point. Of course, it doesn't sound as good if Israel is just one of three democracies. ;)

Pakistan is not even a ME nation and it essentially alternates between periods of democracy and military rule.

Israel is indeed small but it is the regional superpower and while it is lonely it has the full backing of the world's only superpower, which protects it from any economic, diplomatic, and political penalties from other major nations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fujiyama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 12:39 AM
Response to Reply #25
30. Iraq is a Democracy
according to Bush.

Pakistan has been run by one dictator after another, with short times during which it has been ruled by corrupt kleptocrats. I would not consider it democratic in the least.

But you're right. Pakistan is not in the ME.

Personally I don't even see how the previous post had anything to do with the history of the ME anyways.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fuzzyball Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 01:08 AM
Response to Reply #25
32. Iraq is a failed experiment of neocons in democracy
Lebanon is a joke. They can't even defend their borders.
Syria controlled Lebanon for years and had the Lebanese
prime minister assasinated. Hezbollah has more power in Lebanon
than the Lebanese government.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fuzzyball Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #25
47. Facts regarding Pakistan are as follows:
You are correct, technically Pakistan is not in ME, it is considered
part of South Asia along with India, Bangladesh & Sri Lanka (formerly Ceylon).
However Pakistan is for all practical purposes part of the middle-east in
terms of culture, religion, politics (dictatorship by military general),
and even ethnicity to some extent. Pakistan is the country where most of
the world's madrassa schools are located which preach the middle-eastern
religion of islam. Pakistan via its intelligence agency of ISI was the main
sponsor of Taliban in Afghanistan. Most of the 911 hijackers who were almost
all Saudi's, attended schools in Pakistan or Al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan
patroned by Taliban regime.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal_patriot_md Donating Member (93 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 01:55 AM
Response to Reply #18
37. Turkey is also a democracy. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theanarch Donating Member (523 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-22-06 11:26 PM
Response to Original message
2. i'd recommend...
...www.counterpunch.com...no, they are NOT unbiased, but given their POV, it's still one of the best sources of information around...this weekend's edition is superlative
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dinger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-22-06 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. I'll Check It Out (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scoot420fla Donating Member (284 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-22-06 11:29 PM
Response to Original message
5. A short vid
http://www.truthstream.org/2006/07/iraq-afghanistan-war-on-terror-noam

This relates to the current crisis, not the overall history of the sides.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lithos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-22-06 11:29 PM
Response to Original message
6. It's a decent list of books (Juan Cole)
Edited on Sat Jul-22-06 11:31 PM by Lithos
There are a few others, but truthfully the history of conflict in the ME is a very broad and deep subject. Until you get a decent grounding from something like that I would steer clear of the vanity sites out on the net. (Counterpunch, etc.). These sites tend to have weak editorial policy and there are authors who post there who sometimes play loose and fast with their facts and until you know the difference, you can get a misinformed opinion.

L-
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madeline_con Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-22-06 11:30 PM
Response to Original message
7. Also...
if you go to amazon.com and select "books" then type in keywords "democrat + petroleum" or oil, or "democrat + politics", you'll get a huge list of recommendations.


Happy reading! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Behind the Aegis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-22-06 11:30 PM
Response to Original message
8. These will help
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-22-06 11:32 PM
Response to Original message
9. i think the best would be something like a college textbook
which is mostly general information. to get an overview or understanding.

from there find sources that are more specific. but it's difficult. i don't think many who think they are informed really are. i know i'm not and i have read up on it a bit.

it's something you have to listen to different sides on also.

but i usually go for textbooks when it comes to controversial issues and from there i move on to books that give more specifics and which may have biases.

as for news sources, try BBC online. they have sections for individual countries like an encyclopedia. Haaretz is good also .

i know people don't like him but Tom Friedman , someone mentioned Juan Cole. these are not what i would consider unbiased, but you can learn something.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-22-06 11:35 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. country profiles on bbc
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/country_profiles/803257.stm

on the side link you can go to other nations also.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Posteritatis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 12:15 AM
Response to Reply #12
29. BBC's just generally a fantastic source. (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oberliner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-22-06 11:33 PM
Response to Original message
10. FYI
Those Juan Cole and Counterpunch sources you were given are far from unbiased and the perspectives found there are certainly not shared by General Clark or any Democrat in the United States Congress.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theanarch Donating Member (523 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-22-06 11:36 PM
Response to Reply #10
14. i believe i noted that caveat...
...in my post...yes, counterpunch IS biased, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're wrong; and it might be useful to get a perspective that ISN'T shared by BushCo., the M$M, or the DP...if only to see just how wide the variance between POV's really is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oberliner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-22-06 11:38 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. Point Taken nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-22-06 11:51 PM
Response to Reply #14
21. Counterpoint
has some really unsavory aspects to it, as Lithos notes so politely up thread. It has authors who do indeed play fast and loose with the facts, and they publish some real right wing creeps. In any case, it's not a good recommendation for someone looking for a factual and somewhat unbiased background.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theanarch Donating Member (523 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 12:03 AM
Response to Reply #21
24. i presume you mean counterpunch...
...and not counterpoint? As to the creepy RW's you allude to, would that be Paul Craig Roberts, by any chance? If so, i respectfully disagree; yes, the guy is one of the last of the supply-side true-believers, but his other writings on Bush's crimes against the economy are pretty much on par with, say Paul Krugman, only with a more in-Bush's-face rhetorical style. Please understand that, as much as i admire the site, i don't read it uncritically, nor do i recommend that it should be read as gospel truth; quite the contrary, i bring the same critical analysis to reading counterpunch as i to anything else...it just offers a unique perspective not found anywhere else. By all means, take the articles there with a boulder of salt, but read it nonetheless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 12:11 AM
Response to Reply #24
26. Robert's wrote a piece excoriating Brown v Board
nasty bit of work it was. And I don't hold with a mag that publishes an article with outright fabrications, and the Goff article twisted Hannah Arendt's words into something she'd never recognize. Not cool, no matter how much of a critical eye one has.

And thanks for correcting me; I did indeed mean Counterpunch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theanarch Donating Member (523 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 12:14 AM
Response to Reply #26
27. thank you...
...yes, sometimes i have to question some of the stuff they post, but again, i appreciate the different perspective...so refreshing (if sometimes questionable) from the pap and pablum one finds in the M$M...at least you and i seem to be able to agree to disagree, without being disagreeable about it; and for that, i am grateful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jonnyblitz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-22-06 11:34 PM
Response to Original message
11. there are two types of books. (my subjective biased opinion)
Edited on Sat Jul-22-06 11:40 PM by jonnyblitz
the "official line" and what really happened, as far as history goes.

Read books by Norm Finkelstein. He wrote what really happened to refute the book by Alan Dershowitz which is supposed to be the "official line". He also wrote a book about the misuse of the anti-semitism slur to stifle debate and how people use the holocaust to guilt people into support. this is a jewish guy writing this.

when i want to read a book critical of Israel (which is the majority of them out there) I tend to favor books by jewish authors so when i want to use them as a reference the person i am debating can't accuse my source of being anti-semitic. the harshest critics of Israel are often Jewish.

Israel Shahak and Chomsky right good stuff, too, in regards to Israel. all critical though.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oberliner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #11
46. this is similar to what the republicans do
When they have someone like J.C. Watts deliver the message of the Republican party.
How can the Republican party be racist? An African-American is arguing our case!

Norman Finkelstein, Jewish though he is, can and does hold views that are considered by many to be antisemitic.
Just as Alan Keyes has views on affirmative action that are considered by many to be racist.

Reading a book by Norm Finkelstein to learn about Israel is like reading a book by Ann Coulter to learn about feminism.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalpragmatist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-22-06 11:36 PM
Response to Original message
13. "Scars of War, Wounds of Peace" by Shlomo Ben-Ami...
is an EXCELLENT and very well-balaced book on the Israeli-Arab conflict, written by former Israeli Foreign Minister Shlomo Ben-Ami. Though the book has a slight pro-Israel bias, it is very well-written and very balanced. Ben-Ami, a prominent Israeli leftist and a participant in the Camp David talks, takes pain to address the Palestinians' grievances and the Arab point of view.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0195181581/sr=1-1/qid=1153628855/ref=pd_bbs_1/103-1577313-1423844?ie=UTF8&s=books

A book that is a more general history of the Middle East is William Cleveland's A History of the Modern Middle East. It's very-well written for a textbook and gives a nice overview. Unfortunately, as it is primarily used as a text book, it is relatively expensive. If you can find it used, it'll be more manageable.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0813340489/sr=8-1/qid=1153628742/ref=pd_bbs_1/103-1577313-1423844?ie=UTF8

And if you want a good overview of Islam, Christianity and Islam and the conflicts between them, check out Karen Armstrong's A History of God - http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0517223120/sr=1-1/qid=1153629023/ref=sr_1_1/103-1577313-1423844?ie=UTF8&s=books

And although I know he's not popular on DU, Thomas Friedman's From Beirut to Jerusalem is a classic. Say what you will about Friedman's positions on globalization or the Iraq War, he is one of the most perceptive observers of the Israeli-Arab conflict of anyone. The book also has a big focus on the Israeli-Lebanese conflict and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0385413726/sr=1-1/qid=1153629108/ref=sr_1_1/103-1577313-1423844?ie=UTF8&s=books

AVOID any books by Robert Kaplan or Bernard Lewis. Bernard Lewis is an old-school Orientalist, but his conclusions are challenged by most modern historians as overly West-centric. Kaplan is criticized by most experts as a dilletante, who is inaccurate and projects more than he actually knows.

If you can only get one, I'd get Ben-Ami's. Get all 4 if you can, however; and if you want a more general overview, then maybe go with Cleveland's; it doesn't have quite the same amount of detail, however, or the participant observations Ben-Ami has.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0385413726/sr=1-1/qid=1153629108/ref=sr_1_1/103-1577313-1423844?ie=UTF8&s=books


Hope those help!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fujiyama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 12:50 AM
Response to Reply #13
31. I agree about From Beirut to Jerusalem
It was an interesting read and seems especially relevant because it ties into the current conflict pretty well, considering it is largely about the Israeli invasion and occupation of Lebanon.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
otohara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-22-06 11:38 PM
Response to Original message
15. The Great War for Civilisation - Robert Fist
Editorial Reviews
From Publishers Weekly

Combining a novelist's talent for atmosphere with a scholar's grasp of historical sweep, foreign correspondent Fisk (Pity the Nation: The Abduction of Lebanon) has written one of the most dense and compelling accounts of recent Middle Eastern history yet. The book opens with a deftly juxtaposed account of Fisk's two interviews with Osama bin Laden. In the first, held in Sudan in 1993, bin Laden declared himself "a construction engineer and an agriculturist." He had no time to train mujahideen, he said; he was busy constructing a highway. In the second, held four years later in Afghanistan, he declared war on the Saudi royal family and America.Fisk, who has lived in and reported on the Middle East since 1976, first for the (London) Times and now for the Independent, possesses deep knowledge of the broader history of the region, which allows him to discuss the Armenian genocide 90 years ago, the 2002 destruction of Jenin, and the battlefields of Iraq with equal aplomb. But it is his stunning capacity for visceral description—he has seen, or tracked down firsthand accounts of, all the major events of the past 25 years—that makes this volume unique. Some of the chapters contain detailed accounts of torture and murder, which more squeamish readers may be inclined to skip, but such scenes are not gratuitous. They are designed to drive home Fisk's belief that "war is primarily not about victory or defeat but about death and the infliction of death." Though Fisk's political stances may sometimes be controversial, no one can deny that this volume is a stunning achievement. (Nov.)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/product-description/1400041511/ref=dp_proddesc_0/002-4056598-8369667?ie=UTF8&n=283155&s=books
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Posteritatis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 12:14 AM
Response to Reply #15
28. Have you read that? What's it like?
I've almost bought it a few times out of a mix of impulse and genuine curiosity, but I don't like dropping that kind of money on a large hardcover book unless I know I won't regret it too terribly.

I'm asking you directly because I've come to distrust Amazon reviews in general; aside from the editorial ones, folks really ought to pass a test or something to prove they actually read the book they're reviewing. Looking around some the other day, I found a book where a middle school teacher actually assigned her class the task of giving a book one-star reviews.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Violet_Crumble Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 01:50 AM
Response to Reply #28
36. You wouldn't be wasting yr money...
Apart from Fisky acting a little up himself at times, the book is a really good one....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-22-06 11:39 PM
Response to Original message
17. FRONTLINE has some good pieces, you can watch ONLINE if you'd like
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/

They cover subjects (Al Quaeda, Iraq, Insurgency) quite specifically and in-depth, but they're well done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DanCa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-22-06 11:46 PM
Response to Original message
19. Thank you for asking this Dinger
I am in the same boat as you are. There are a lot of fine answers in this thread. Thanks again for posting this. :hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flowomo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-22-06 11:50 PM
Response to Original message
20. "A Peace to End all Peace" by David Fromkin....
Edited on Sat Jul-22-06 11:52 PM by flowomo
when we invaded Iraq, I already knew the outcome because I'd read this book.

"No book published in recent years has more lasting relevance to our understanding of the Middle East" -- Jack Miles, LA Times book review
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Misskittycat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-22-06 11:59 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. Agree totally. That's the book I'd recommend. You can get used copies
on ebay or Amazon. Wonderful historical perspective back to the First World War when the world powers carved up the Ottoman Empire.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flowomo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 12:03 AM
Response to Reply #22
23. it makes the present situation so clear....
the Great Game goes on.... some new players, but same old story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Misskittycat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #20
48. I have the older version. What's different in the 2001 edition? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Douglas Carpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 01:24 AM
Response to Original message
33. 2 books with 2 different perspectives & A debate you MUST listen to
Edited on Sun Jul-23-06 01:42 AM by Douglas Carpenter
First I ABSOLUTELY must recommend listening to a very informative and very civil debate between former Israeli Foreign Minister Shlomo Ben-Ami and Professor Norman Finkelstein on the broader question of the Palestinian/Israeli conflict:

listen or download or read transcript - link:


http://www.democracynow.org/finkelstein-benami.shtml



(allow me to second the motion that Juan Cole is a very good site for daily updates on Middle East news. I don't always agree with him either..but it is still an excellent source: http://www.juancole.com/ )

I would also like to recommend a book by former Israeli Foreign Minister Ben-Ami:

http://ec3.images-amazon.com/images/P/0195181581.01._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-dp-500-arrow,TopRight,45,-64_AA240_SH20_SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg

Amazon Link:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0195181581/sr=1-1/qid=1153546420/ref=sr_1_1/104-2240026-0639147?ie=UTF8&s=books
_____________

Then I would like to STONGLY recommend:


A History of Modern Palestine: One Land, Two Peoples

by Ilan Pappe of Haifa University in Israel.

Amazon link:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0521683157/104-2240026-0639147?v=glance&n=283155

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 01:26 AM
Response to Original message
34. thank you for this question and all the responses
I too am interested in educating myself and I think I have resisted because I'm so sure it would be hard to find a non-based source.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Douglas Carpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 01:59 AM
Response to Reply #34
39. I have found the bias to be more in narrative than in actual rendering
Edited on Sun Jul-23-06 02:07 AM by Douglas Carpenter
of facts

If you take for example; arguably Israel's most prominent historian on the Israel/Palestine conflict, Benny Morris - Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in Be'er Sheva and compared his writing to that of America's most prominent Palestinian-American intellectual, the late Edward Said of Columbia University in New York -- they have relatively few major disagreements over actual historic facts. The disagreement is over the narrative, the politics, the morality and the interpretation of the facts.

p.s. I would have to qualify this statement as referring to scholarly work--not necessarily popular works..And I would be talking about works that came out in the last 10 years or so..not older works
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 02:28 AM
Response to Reply #39
40. interesting
as an "outsider" looking in (I have never had an opionion one way or the other and so consider myself unbiased) it all seems so inflamed depending on who is talking
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Douglas Carpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 02:43 AM
Response to Reply #40
42. if you're listening to politicians argue that is true..same goes for
popular writers --if you listen to scholars, at least the more recent ones, there is VERY strong disagreement over interpretation of facts..but relatively few major disagreements over the actual facts themselves.

As I mentioned above I must recommend listening to a very informative and very civil debate between former Israeli Foreign Minister Shlomo Ben-Ami (who is a competent Oxford trained historian in his own right) and Professor Norman Finkelstein (the famous or infamous--depending on ones point of view--anti-Zionist Jewish scholar) on the question of the Palestinian/Israeli conflict:

listen or download or read transcript - link:


http://www.democracynow.org/finkelstein-benami.shtml
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 03:20 AM
Response to Reply #42
43. I will do that
thank you!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 06:48 AM
Response to Reply #39
44. Great point.
I think it is worth reading the different interpretations of those same facts. That is where the essence of the conflict is found.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Agony Donating Member (865 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 01:35 AM
Response to Original message
35.  I asked the same question of myself
a year or so ago.... here is some of what i have found online...

http://www.btselem.org/English /
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/history/origin.html
http://www.merip.org/palestine-israel_primer/toc-pal-is...
http://www.juancole.com / (already mentionede above)
http://www.mideastweb.org /
http://www.palestineremembered.com/index.html
http://www.fmep.org /
http://www.aipac.org /
http://www.bitterlemons.org/docs.html
http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7

read all of that... and then make up your own mind. I am not pretending that this list of sites is comprehensive or unbiased...seems pretty hard to find unbiased material on the ME

I have seen enough to know in my own heart what I think.

Peace, Please?!
Agony
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal_patriot_md Donating Member (93 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 01:56 AM
Response to Original message
38. You could always join the Army, and get a guided tour :) n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Emit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 02:40 AM
Response to Original message
41. This site has some interesting articles
reports, analysis, CSPAN panel discussions clips, etc.:

http://irmep.org/Defaults.asp

Whether it's biased/unbiased is left to the individual reader/listener, I guess. I'm listening right now to one of the pod casts with Grant Smith on the Jim Greenfield show about the Israeli policy plan "A Clean Break" and the discussion (question - answer) is in depth with Greenfield pressing (arguing) Grant Smith of IRMEP pretty hard -- Smith is putting out some fairly rational arguments. Interesting. The back and forth of some of these interviews/panel discussions give me more information sometimes than jsut a one-sided book or article.


Neocon Clean Break plan or Beirut Declaration?
http://www.podcast.net/show/11153
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katinmn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 08:28 AM
Response to Original message
45. NPR: 2002 documentary The Mideast: A century of conflict
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2006/07/19/midday2/

Saw it has been put up on the website even though dated. I've heard it's good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 03:13 PM
Response to Original message
49. Read the actual documents... links here.. just bookmark them
Edited on Sun Jul-23-06 03:19 PM by SoCalDem
Here's the link..

I actually posted these in GD , since lots of people were never formally taught much, but it got dumped into I/P land where not many people venture (I don;t even have it as a choice in my forum set up)..

anyhoo.. bookmark these and read at your own pace..

The Avalon Project was done by Yale University and is a very thorough presentation of the various linkable documents that created the whole situation we find ourselves in.. \\and the other one is to a bunch of articles, speeches and documents of Truman..these are helpful as well


.......................................................................


SoCalDem Sun Jul-23-06 12:18 PM
Original message

Some important history for us all.. Please read...British White Paper .'39

Since I was "formally" taught NOTHING about the middle east, I have been reading all I can ..This site has crucial links and is a project done by no less than Yale .. I trust them as a source.. and the actual documents involved..a lot more than some of the obviously biased sites that are floating around.. This is an issue that's never easy to discuss, and all parties feel aggrieved, and have every right to feel that way.. There are no "fair" solutions..

It might help us all to read as much about this as possible..

..................................................................................................


http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/brwh1939.htm


British White Paper of 1939

In the statement on Palestine, issued on 9 November, 1938, His Majesty's Government announced their intention to invite representatives of the Arabs of Palestine, of certain neighboring countries and of the Jewish Agency to confer with them in London regarding future policy. It was their sincere hope that, as a result of full, free and frank discussions, some understanding might be reached. Conferences recently took place with Arab and Jewish delegations, lasting for a period of several weeks, and served the purpose of a complete exchange of views between British Ministers and the Arab and Jewish representatives. In the light of the discussions as well as of the situation in Palestine and of the Reports of the Royal Commission and the Partition Commission, certain proposals were formulated by His Majesty's Government and were laid before the Arab and Jewish Delegations as the basis of an agreed settlement. Neither the Arab nor the Jewish delegation felt able to accept these proposals, and the conferences therefore did not result in an agreement. Accordingly His Majesty's Government are free to formulate their own policy, and after careful consideration they have decided to adhere generally to the proposals which were finally submitted to and discussed with the Arab and Jewish delegations.

The Mandate for Palestine, the terms of which were confirmed by the Council of the League of Nations in 1922, has governed the policy of successive British Governments for nearly 20 years. It embodies the Balfour Declaration and imposes on the Mandatory four main obligations. These obligations are set out in Article 2, 6 and 13 of the Mandate. There is no dispute regarding the interpretation of one of these obligations, that touching the protection of and access to the Holy Places and religious building or sites. The other three main obligations are generally as follows:

To place the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish People. To facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions, and to encourage, in cooperation with the Jewish Agency, close settlement by Jews on the Land.

To safeguard the civil and religious rights of all inhabitants of Palestine irrespective of race and religion, and, whilst facilitating Jewish immigration and settlement, to ensure that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced.

To place the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the development of self governing institutions.

The Royal Commission and previous commissions of Enquiry have drawn attention to the ambiguity of certain expressions in the Mandate, such as the expression `a national home for the Jewish people', and they have found in this ambiguity and the resulting uncertainty as to the objectives of policy a fundamental cause of unrest and hostility between Arabs and Jews. His Majesty's Government are convinced that in the interests of the peace and well being of the whole people of Palestine a clear definition of policy and objectives is essential. The proposal of partition recommended by the Royal Commission would have afforded such clarity, but the establishment of self supporting independent Arab and Jewish States within Palestine has been found to be impracticable. It has therefore been necessary for His Majesty's Government to devise an alternative policy which will, consistent with their obligations to Arabs and Jews, meet the needs of the situation in Palestine. Their views and proposals are set forth below under three heads, Section I, "The Constitution", Section II. Immigration and Section III. Land.



snip... please click the internal links to the Balfour documents, etc.. ..I had to bookmark it.. (It's like a college course... :eyes:

.........................................................................................................................................


another place I found with a lot of information about how Truman viewed the whole issue "may" be a bit biased, but it has handy links to Truman speeches and documents

http://www.mideastweb.org/us_supportforstate.htm

President Harry S. Truman and US Support for Israeli Statehood

United States support for the partition of Palestine was crucial to the adoption of the UN partition plan and to the creation of the state of Israel. During World War II, the USA was anxious to maintain good relations with Saudi Arabia. President Roosevelt had promised King Saud that the USA would make no policy decisions about Palestine without consulting the Arabs, though Roosevelt tried to enlist Saud's support for allowing Jewish immigration to Palestine. Following Roosevelt's verbal promise to Saud to consult the Arabs about Palestine policy, he reiterated the promise in writing on April 5, 1945. However, a week later, Roosevelt was dead, replaced by Vice President Harry S. Truman, and the end of the war created a different political reality as well as bringing the revelation of massive murder of Jews in the Holocaust.

Despite his plainspoken ways, Harry S. Truman had a sweeping grasp of geopolitical realities. He was also a friend of the Jews who had made clear his support for the Zionist cause before WWII. He was strengthened in his resolve to help the Jews following the revelations of Nazi atrocities. On May 25, 1939, following the British White Paper of 1939 that limited Jewish immigration, Truman inserted a remark in the Congressional Record condemning the White paper as a repudiation of British obligations. At a Chicago rally in 1944, then Senator Truman said, "Today, not tomorrow, we must do all that is humanly possible to provide a haven for all those who can be grasped from the hands of Nazi butchers. Free lands must be opened to them."

Truman wrote in his memoirs, "The question of Palestine as a Jewish homeland goes back to the solemn promise that had been made to them by the British in the Balfour Declaration of 1917 - a promise which had stirred the hopes and the dreams of these oppressed people. This promise, I felt, should be kept, just as all promises made by responsible, civilized governments should be kept." Truman was inexperienced in foreign affairs and initially felt he was out of his league and crushed by the burden of his new office and responsibilities. Nonetheless, he did not forget the Palestine question as soon as World War II was over. About 250,000 Jewish displaced persons, refugees who had survived Nazi concentration camps, exile in Siberia and partisan battles, were now living in miserable camps in Europe, awaiting clearance for immigration and final settlement. The US, at Truman's instigation, began pressuring the British to modify their Palestine policy and admit displaced persons to Palestine. At the same time, Truman tried to gain support for admission of Jewish displaced persons to the United States. However, domestic opposition to enlarging immigration for Jews was fierce and adamant. Following the Harrison report on treatment of European refugees, President Truman wrote to British Prime Minister Clement Attlee, urging Attlee to allow a reasonable number of the displaced persons to emigrate to Palestine, but to no avail. On October 22, 1945, Senators Wagner and Taft introduced a resolution favoring a Jewish state in Palestine. The British were not interested in Truman's ideas or in admission of any Jewish refugees. However, as they were anxious to obtain a loan from the US to support their tottering economy, they suggested a commission of investigation that would report on the matter.

Truman was still averse to the idea of a Jewish state despite his support for immigration, mostly out of concern that it would require excessive US resources to defend it. This concern was to surface again and again and influence policy in the months ahead. He wrote to Senator Joseph Ball of Minnesota on November 24, 1945: "I told the Jews that if they were willing to furnish me with five hundred thousand men to carry on a war with the Arabs, we could do what they are suggesting in the Resolution - otherwise we we will have to negotiate awhile. It is a very explosive situation we are facing, and naturally I regret it very much, but I don't think that you, or any of the other Senators, would be inclined to send half a dozen Divisions to Palestine to maintain a Jewish State. What I am trying to do is to make the whole world safe for the Jews. Therefore, I don't feel like going to war for Palestine."



snip................................

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marie26 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-23-06 03:16 PM
Response to Original message
50. "From Beirut to Jerusalem" by Tom Friedman.
Edited on Sun Jul-23-06 03:20 PM by Marie26
It's excellent. I got the book last week & can't stop reading it. He really captures what life was like for the Beirutis during the Lebanese civil war. It's a little outdated now, because it was written in 1989, but it's still incredibly relevant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 02:36 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC