Scan barcode
gadicohen93's review against another edition
4.0
You can see why Robert Fisk is controversial. He comes off as one-note, unceasingly ranting, venomous towards the West and obsessed with describing and lamenting the suffering of people in this very troubled part of the world. He is morally unmovable, and to a large extent his unyielding stance opened my eyes. So many figures that we've seen as fanatical and wicked actually tried to fight what they saw as the great evil facing their people, Western imperialism, from Bin Laden to the Ayatollahs to Saddam Hussein, and they were somewhat justified.
There were many memorable accounts in the book, enough to fill a 1000 pages (which they do.) His gruesome reporting from the trenches of the Iran-Iraq war and the Gulf War; his investigation into the origins of weaponry Israel used to recklessly strike civilians in Lebanon; his piercing interviews with Bin Laden; his fearless reports from the blood-soaked quagmire of the Algerian civil war; his historical forays into the Armenian genocide and the First World War. This was doubtlessly a tour-de-force, a lifetime's work of bravery and heart and representative of an inspiring campaign to push the world closer to what is right.
I did find some of his research and focus regrettably partisan, especially when discussing Israel/Palestine, which I've done much research on, being an Israeli myself. Fisk constantly returns to the Sabra and Shatila massacres as an exemplary motivation for revenge against the West, and he constantly refers to the occupation as a primary reason for 9/11, but taking these justifications at face value ignores the complicated web of responsibility that gave rise to the original crimes. Did the IDF know that Phalangists were massacring refugees? Is there not a significant push within Israeli society to end the occupation? With respect to the Israeli peace process, Fisk never discusses how the issue of refugee return has nipped in the bud any possible separation between two future Israeli and Palestinian states, choosing only to focus on settlements, or "colonies", as he calls them. And he also attributes US involvement in Iraq War to the Israeli lobby, something I've never heard before, that Fisk doesn't even go into detail about, that seems plainly wrong. These omissions definitely raise questions about the veracity and integrity of the rest of the book.
There were many memorable accounts in the book, enough to fill a 1000 pages (which they do.) His gruesome reporting from the trenches of the Iran-Iraq war and the Gulf War; his investigation into the origins of weaponry Israel used to recklessly strike civilians in Lebanon; his piercing interviews with Bin Laden; his fearless reports from the blood-soaked quagmire of the Algerian civil war; his historical forays into the Armenian genocide and the First World War. This was doubtlessly a tour-de-force, a lifetime's work of bravery and heart and representative of an inspiring campaign to push the world closer to what is right.
I did find some of his research and focus regrettably partisan, especially when discussing Israel/Palestine, which I've done much research on, being an Israeli myself. Fisk constantly returns to the Sabra and Shatila massacres as an exemplary motivation for revenge against the West, and he constantly refers to the occupation as a primary reason for 9/11, but taking these justifications at face value ignores the complicated web of responsibility that gave rise to the original crimes. Did the IDF know that Phalangists were massacring refugees? Is there not a significant push within Israeli society to end the occupation? With respect to the Israeli peace process, Fisk never discusses how the issue of refugee return has nipped in the bud any possible separation between two future Israeli and Palestinian states, choosing only to focus on settlements, or "colonies", as he calls them. And he also attributes US involvement in Iraq War to the Israeli lobby, something I've never heard before, that Fisk doesn't even go into detail about, that seems plainly wrong. These omissions definitely raise questions about the veracity and integrity of the rest of the book.
jada's review against another edition
5.0
after like 6 months i've finally finished. this was definitely a comprehensive history of the middle east, starting in the 80s in afghanistan, and ending with the us invasion of iraq after 9/11.
reading about all the war crimes that happened in this region and the west's seeming indifference was hard at times (i had to take a break in the middle of the armenian genocide section because it was too heavy) but now I have a better understanding of history, and that's definitely a good thing.
reading about all the war crimes that happened in this region and the west's seeming indifference was hard at times (i had to take a break in the middle of the armenian genocide section because it was too heavy) but now I have a better understanding of history, and that's definitely a good thing.
vayeate's review against another edition
dark
emotional
informative
reflective
sad
tense
slow-paced
5.0
Robert Fisk wrote an amazing book, however the book itself is filled with horrible and gruesome facts. While reading this book you choose to ignore these facts you are ignoring history and the truth.
Robert explores many dicey subjects in his creation, some of these subjects initially I only hard as rumors, for example everything that Robert wrote about Armenia. I heard a little about Armenia, but this book enlightened me. Anyway I recommend this book to everyone, but beware the book is filled with death and suffering.
Robert explores many dicey subjects in his creation, some of these subjects initially I only hard as rumors, for example everything that Robert wrote about Armenia. I heard a little about Armenia, but this book enlightened me. Anyway I recommend this book to everyone, but beware the book is filled with death and suffering.
n_nazir's review against another edition
4.0
Really tough read, not because of the (considerable) length but just because after finishing a chapter I felt I needed a break from the almost relentless horror being reported. The most depressing part of the book is the recycling of history - no one it seems, ever learns from their mistakes. This book should be essential reading for all world leaders - in fact until they read it, and complete a comprehensive quiz at the end, they shouldn't be allowed to take power. Just a thought...
emma_ireland's review against another edition
5.0
Before reading this, I had a very limited knowledge of the history of the Middle East, or the issues that still affect it today. I feel I have a much better (although of course not comprehensive) understanding now. This book had me alternating between rage and tears on numerous occasions, and as other reviewers have said, it's not easy to read: at times I was left with such a feeling of responsibility and helplessness. I've been growing progressively more cynical in relation to the media as I've got older, and this book confirms a lot of what I already suspected; it certainly makes me see the news I've watched in recent weeks in a different light (Operation Moshtarak was reported as "going well" on Sky News this evening, despite the deaths of numerous civilians). This should be compulsory reading for everyone everywhere.
socraticgadfly's review against another edition
4.0
Very good info, but .... needs an editor for organization!
First, let me say that Fisk is a very good journalist, and it shows through in the personal details he records. He knows how to both write well and ask good questions. He also knows how to connect the dots well. And, he has stuck his head out -- a lot -- to get real war stories while refusing to "embed," whether with American troops, British ones, or any other forces.
Second is that he has what will probably seem to most Americans to be a refreshing, if not challenging, take on both Arab-Israeli issues and how the U.S. has often compounded trouble in the Middle East, primarily but by no means solely due to how it has handled Arab-Israeli issues.
Third, while, while his take on modern Israel could be called "anti-Zionist," it's a canard and a red herring to call it anti-Semitism. It's a canard because equating criticisms of the nation of Israel with attacks for ethnic reasons on the Jewish people is a simple lie, one propagated by intensely pro-Israel (vs. pro-Jewish/Judaism) lobbying agencies in the U.S. And, it's a red herring because it's designed to divert people's attention from Israel's legitimate human rights and international law problems, and the U.S.'s blind backing of much of this.
Related to that, he's not "anti-American" just against much of current American foreign policy in the Middle East.
Fourth, Fisk does report this fairly; above all, while asking the "why" questions about the 9/11 attacks that American journalists play "ostrich" with, he makes clear in many ways that he doesn't believe in "moral equivalence" or anything similar.
That said, the book is open to legitimate criticism. First, 1,000-plus pages is too long. About 750 would have been plenty; increase the type size 1 point and you're at 800. That said, better editing would have achieved that, plus tried to get more organization on the book. Fisk's reminisces about his father, while nice, should have been moved to another book. For organization, either a clearer chronological structure, or a tighter country-by-country structure, might have helped.
First, let me say that Fisk is a very good journalist, and it shows through in the personal details he records. He knows how to both write well and ask good questions. He also knows how to connect the dots well. And, he has stuck his head out -- a lot -- to get real war stories while refusing to "embed," whether with American troops, British ones, or any other forces.
Second is that he has what will probably seem to most Americans to be a refreshing, if not challenging, take on both Arab-Israeli issues and how the U.S. has often compounded trouble in the Middle East, primarily but by no means solely due to how it has handled Arab-Israeli issues.
Third, while, while his take on modern Israel could be called "anti-Zionist," it's a canard and a red herring to call it anti-Semitism. It's a canard because equating criticisms of the nation of Israel with attacks for ethnic reasons on the Jewish people is a simple lie, one propagated by intensely pro-Israel (vs. pro-Jewish/Judaism) lobbying agencies in the U.S. And, it's a red herring because it's designed to divert people's attention from Israel's legitimate human rights and international law problems, and the U.S.'s blind backing of much of this.
Related to that, he's not "anti-American" just against much of current American foreign policy in the Middle East.
Fourth, Fisk does report this fairly; above all, while asking the "why" questions about the 9/11 attacks that American journalists play "ostrich" with, he makes clear in many ways that he doesn't believe in "moral equivalence" or anything similar.
That said, the book is open to legitimate criticism. First, 1,000-plus pages is too long. About 750 would have been plenty; increase the type size 1 point and you're at 800. That said, better editing would have achieved that, plus tried to get more organization on the book. Fisk's reminisces about his father, while nice, should have been moved to another book. For organization, either a clearer chronological structure, or a tighter country-by-country structure, might have helped.
rachofspades's review against another edition
emotional
informative
reflective
sad
tense
medium-paced
4.5