Robert Fisk on the middle east wars

[David Guyatt]

[Danny Jarman]

Israel has the entire region by a stranglehold, like a snake squeezing it's prey. Lebanon is stagnated and held in a noose. Syria in chaos with the "Rebelz" and Egypt also, in turmoil. Hezbollah are the strongest and most organised group in the region, but even they have their limits, the rest is up to Iran to counter Israel's power and influence in the region.

The more noise Israel makes in the media about Iran = The more powerful Iran is growing.

A very simple and truthful equation.

Israel does not want the day to come where they can't bomb Syria, Lebanon, or even the Sinai unscrupulously.

[David Josephs]

Does all Israel bashing come with slaps on the back of one Mr Fisk by you David?

Do we not either live in a state of "perpetual peace" or that of "perpetual war"... and that the state of war the sovereign nations of the world find themselves existing within REQUIRES they play by the rules of war and not peace?

I would challenge you, both of you, to see WAR as not the racket but the depletion of inventory which in turn requires restocking...

Is it not the preparation for war that is the most profitable?
The loaning of money for the build-up and ultimate restocking of the war machine, that produces the most profit...

That the WAR itself part acts on many fronts to shift the borders and command and control structures?

I am truly aghast at this thread. Mr Fisk's obvious alignment against allowing Israel to defend itself, or exist at all... without a word about the history of anti-Israel, arabian politics and aggression... as if it's justifiable because it's Israel and Jews.

David G... I will now take the time to look thru the rest of the forum's posts in regards to Israel so I may get a better sense of the key poster's POVs... Reading that article and the comments that followed made me ill...

From my talks with so many others on these forums, the respect for you is well deserved... do you condone "anti-Israel"... or is this only a part of a much bigger Evica-Drago model discussion?

Israel has the entire region by a stranglehold, like a snake squeezing it's prey. Lebanon is stagnated and held in a noose. Syria in chaos with the "Rebelz" and Egypt also, in turmoil. Hezbollah are the strongest and most organised group in the region, but even they have their limits, the rest is up to Iran to counter Israel's power and influence in the region.

The more noise Israel makes in the media about Iran = The more powerful Iran is growing.

A very simple and truthful equation.

Israel does not want the day to come where they can't bomb Syria, Lebanon, or even the Sinai unscrupulously.

Mr Jarman

8 million Israelis surrounded by 370 million whose majority would deny their right to even exist.

water desalination technology that has created surplus and exportation to the benefit of millions... which I gather you'd spin into some criminal enterprise of control and power...


Syria has NEVER accepted Israel as a state other than to focus on its destruction... when Israel kicked if a$$ - 3 times now - Israel was forced into a "land for peace" position to give back to an enemy that would see them wiped off the planet, land they lost as a result of their own hostilities....


Prior to the 1967 Six Day War, intermittent hostilities centered on the Demilitarized Zones, water issues and shelling and infiltration from the Golan Heights. Since the war, the focus of negotiations has been "land for peace," in particular a demand that Israel return the Golan Heights to Syria along with Syrian recognition of Israel and establishment of peaceful relations with it, as stipulated in UN Security Council Resolution 242. And yet, in the US-brokered Syrian-Israeli talks during the 1990s, Syria demanded that Israeli future withdrawal would be to the "June 4, 1967 Lines", namely west of the former British Mandate border with Syria.[SUP][1][/SUP] Syria attempted to recover the Golan Heights in the Yom Kippur War, but was unsuccessful, only recovering a small part of it in the 1974 disengagement agreement, while committing to distance its armed forces further eastwards compared with their 1967-1973 positions.


I do not hold Israel faultless... as we have learned, the principle defining aspect of a sovereign state is the ability to wage war or defend itself against such waging.

ALL the sovereign states are culpable... ALL are guilty...

Reading this appears to me as if to say we would hold the US/UK at fault for the defense of itself and the push back of Germany... Because Syria and its allies simply did not like the decision of the UNGA, they declared an never-ending war on Israel... for you or anyone to blame that on Israel is absurd and imo, shows an extremely biased understanding of history

On 29 November 1947, the United Nations General Assembly recommended the adoption and implementation of the partition plan of Mandatory Palestine. On 14 May 1948, David Ben-Gurion, the Executive Head of the World Zionist Organization[SUP][9][/SUP] and president of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, declared "the establishment of a Jewish state in Eretz Israel, to be known as the State of Israel," a state independent upon the termination of the British Mandate for Palestine, 15 May 1948.[SUP] [/SUP]Neighboring Arab armies invaded Palestine on the next day and fought the Israeli forces

[Magda Hassan]

Reading this appears to me as if to say we would hold the US/UK at fault for the defense of itself and the push back of Germany... Because Syria and its allies simply did not like the decision of the UNGA, they declared an never-ending war on Israel... for you or anyone to blame that on Israel is absurd and imo, shows an extremely biased understanding of history

Syria and its allies didn't just 'not like' the decision. The decision was wrong, immoral and imposed by others on the region against their wishes. Regardless of its legal standing. What I get from Fisk's article is that everyone in the region, Arabs, Jews, Beduin etc, have suffered due to the historical meddling by France and Britain. The past cannot be changed but to create a viable future for all it needs to be acknowledged openly what has happened and some accommodation need to take place. We all need learn to live together as human beings regardless if we are talking neighbourhoods, cities, nations or planet. Israel's historical amnesia cannot be justified or accommodated by others. Nor can they continue to make policies based on such a fantasy. Ultimately it will be to Israel's own detriment and downfall if they continue down this path.

On 29 November 1947, the United Nations General Assembly recommended the adoption and implementation of the partition plan of Mandatory Palestine. On 14 May 1948, David Ben-Gurion, the Executive Head of the World Zionist Organization[SUP][9][/SUP] and president of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, declared "the establishment of a Jewish state in Eretz Israel, to be known as the State of Israel," a state independent upon the termination of the British Mandate for Palestine, 15 May 1948.Neighboring Arab armies invaded Palestine on the next day and fought the Israeli forces

Yes, Israel jumped the gun. Were the people of Palestine part of this decision to dismember their land? No.

[David Josephs]

Israel's historical amnesia cannot be justified or accommodated by others

"In 1516, the Ottoman Empire invaded the Mamluk Sultanate of Egypt, conquering Syria, and incorporating it into its empire"
"By AD 640, Syria was conquered by the Arab Rashidun army led by Khalid ibn al-Walid"
"Syria briefly came under Armenian control from 83 BC, with the conquests of Tigranes the Great, who was welcomed as a savior from the Seleucids and Romans by its people. The Armenians retained control of Syria for two decades before being driven out by the Romans."
"The AchaemenidPersians took Syria from Babylonia as part of their hegemony of Southwest Asia in 539 BC"

Magda, how far back would we like to go? Historical amnesia in Syria is not the provenance of the Israelis... Conquer and expand has been the human condition since the first people picked up a stones or sticks and killed those trying to take their food, or steal their women, or whatever other cause you'd like to name.

No, it is not right or just... yet to start the clock running on Syria the day after Israel declares itself a nation is to push historical amnesia to its limit.

What I get from Fisk's article is that everyone in the region, Arabs, Jews, Beduin etc, have suffered due to the historical meddling by France and Britain.

I'm sorry but that's not what I get when I look at the article as a whole.

I read an awful lot of anomousity toward Israel in that article... with virtually no mention of the long history of abuses to the people of that region from all sides for all of time.

The Assyrian Empire conquered most of the "Kingdoms" in that geogrphical area.... including Israel... should Israel's borders be returned to the days of Solomon and David because of the unjustness of the conquering kingdoms?

the Kingdom of Israel was eventually destroyed by Assyrian king Tiglath-Pileser III around 750 BCE.

Beginning with the campaigns of Adad-nirari II from 911 BC,[SUP][2][/SUP] it again became a great power over the next three centuries, overthrowing the Twenty-fifth dynasty of Egypt and conquering Egypt,[SUP][2][/SUP] Babylonia, Elam, Urartu/Armenia, Media, Persia, Mannea, Gutium, Phoenicia/Canaan, Aramea (Syria), Arabia, Israel, Judah, Edom, Moab, Samarra, Cilicia, Cyprus, Chaldea, Nabatea, Commagene, Dilmun and the Hurrians, Sutu and Neo-Hittites, driving the Ethiopians and Nubians from Egypt,[SUP][2][/SUP] defeating the Cimmerians and Scythians and exacting tribute from Phrygia, Magan and Punt among others

Magda,
What exactly does one expect within a Kingdom establishing what ultimately would become known as "colonies" after the defeat of another Empire... ?
To me, the article appears to be blaming Israel's current situation on that decision... borders do not define the hatred of a jewish state Magda...

I hope you see that.
DJ
====

This is quite a good presentation and gives us all a good idea of the turmoil of that region over 3500 years... including the FACT that a Kingdom of Israel existed over 3000 years before the establishment of an Israeli state and only 2700 years after Abraham. When the Jews finally escaped Egypt, they too fought and founded their own Kingdom... only to lose it to a succession of Empires.

http://www.mapsofwar.com/ind/imperial-history.html

[ATTACH=CONFIG]5752[/ATTACH]

[Magda Hassan]

Mmmmm...no, the borders should not be returned to the days of Solomon and David. Though there are some who might say that is the ultimate intention of some Israelis particularly those in the settler movement and those who find them useful. While the historic presence of Jews, amongst many others, in the middle east, is not disputed there is no correlation between biblical kingdoms and current day Israel. Not should foreign policy be made on any biblical prophesy of what ever version. In any case we are talking about living history not ancient. These people are alive and living today and legitimately seek redress to this wrong that happened in their lifetime.

I don't see the same animosity in Fisk's article that you do and I have never found him to be anti Jewish or anti-Israel. Just another person trying to cope with the absurdity of living in the area with so many vested interests all jostling for position. And for Israel to blame Lebanon for anything that Hezbollah might do as a result of the Israeli air force bombing in Lebanon (which really should be called Syria) that they refuse to admit to having done just has to fall in to the category of absurd.

Shhh! Don't mention the war.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfl6Lu3xQW0

[Danny Jarman]

Mr Jarman

8 million Israelis surrounded by 370 million whose majority would deny their right to even exist.

water desalination technology that has created surplus and exportation to the benefit of millions... which I gather you'd spin into some criminal enterprise of control and power...


Syria has NEVER accepted Israel as a state other than to focus on its destruction... when Israel kicked if a$$ - 3 times now - Israel was forced into a "land for peace" position to give back to an enemy that would see them wiped off the planet, land they lost as a result of their own hostilities....

Sigh - David, believe me, I know the history.

Of course Syria has never accepted Israel as a state. It's gestation was through ethnic cleansing and terrorism. Many of the early government officials were known terrorists belonging to groups such as Irgun and the Stern Gang, and infact many of the government officials in Israel today still have association or history with these groups.

So why on earth would Syria, or anyone, accept Israel as a state?

[Magda Hassan]

So why on earth would Syria, or anyone, accept Israel as a state?

In actual fact it is accepted as a de facto state by its neighbours. And more importantly it is accepted by Palestinians. They know that the Jewsh people are not going anywhere. Well some are because they don't want to live there if they can avoid it. But the majority of them will be staying on because they don't have any where to go and it is up to three generation for most families now and roots have grown. This is accepted, perhaps reluctantly, but understood on a human level. But it is not accepted that the Palestinians will have their future denied. Unfortunately it is not just Israel who have been denying them that but the corrupt leadership of their Arab brothers as well.

I think only a bi-national one state solution with right of return for all will save both people but in the end we need a world with out any borders.

[Magda Hassan]

It's gestation was through ethnic cleansing and terrorism.

This really needs to be acknowledged. And I see it hasn't come close to it in Israeli public discourse. As resident in a land which was some one elses I know the wound is not healed and memories are not forgotten and that a great crime has been committed and little justice has come. This is after more than 200 years now. I know my law tells me this is my country. My passport says so too. But it will never be my land. At least in my life time. Maybe my great great great grand children's one day. While I know I am accepted and welcomed by some of the aboriginal people as a sister here but I also know I still walk on some one elses land. Between two worlds.

[David Guyatt]

David, I have no part in the Drago-Evica model. I've heard about it obviously, but to be perfectly frank, I haven't a clue what it is. And am not particularly interested in learning about it anyway.

I have no problem with Fisk at all. For me he seems to be one of the more enlightened middle eastern correspondents to write cynically in the mainstream UK media. I applaud him for it. He is unusual in this respect so far as I can see too.

But that is really besides the point. I don't read him as a matter of course, nor quote him faithfully. In fact, I don't "follow" any correspondent anywhere in the world - although I have a soft spot for some whistleblowers who now write for a living.

The media, for me, is largely a profession of contrived lies, disinformation and designer misinformation and more often than not, is vectored for business / political interests etc etc. I have almost zero faith in it, or for that matter most journalists too. However, every now and then, I am surprised. It is rare, but sometimes they actually do their job honestly.

I find your challenge about war being a "depletion of inventory" peculiar to be perfectly honest. It is an interesting twist, or take, on reality anyway. The "consumable" argument --- the poor starving of the arms business simply filling a human need.

The arms trade is slightly different to that of the butcher, baker or candlestick maker imo. For one thing bribery and corruption are rife. For them to sell more of their product they need wars to "deplete" it on a continual revolving basis. So wars need to be manufactured - and human nature being what it is, that ain't a hard a thing to do. Fear and greed being two principal motives of humanity. Clearly, this is not a difficult equation to understand. Remarks made by the late irrelevant and witty UK government Minister for Trade, Alan Clark, are informative in this respect. Ditto the less likeable and longer dead Sir Basil Zaharoff.

I can speak personally and in some depth about the arms trade because I spent many years as a City banker specialising in that business sector; although whether or not I'll speak in depth about those times remains to be seen. Probably not. But I do remember a particular arms dealer - a freelancer (or was he a "useful" cutout?) - a wall eyed pirate type who had a colourful career arming the middle east back in the 1980s/90s. I was young and naive back then. It was an educational time for me.

So yes, you should read my other posts in this regard. All of them. Not simply ones related to Israel. My view is that war is absolutely a for profit activity and one that I find entirely reprehensible. And Israel, very clearly, is part and parcel of this highly profitable business enterprise. But so are the other nations of the middle east too.

Arming both sides of a conflict is as old as the hills. When the British armoured brigade invaded Saddam's Iraq in 1991, they found British made armoured piercing 155mm sabot discarding shells facing them. They were lucky, in fact, as train loads of British made anti tank missiles had been reluctantly "pulled" from the same consignment to Saddam via the fig-leafed so called "Jordan Package". During the air war phase of the same conflict, American CIA representatives were still trying to convince Saddam to buy shoulder fired anti-aircraft missiles.

Oh, what a lovely war...