Scan barcode
A review by socraticgadfly
The Great War for Civilisation: The Conquest of the Middle East by Robert Fisk
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.