Middle East Books

Detailed analysis of U.S. relations with Saudi Arabia
American foreign policy exists simultaneously at several levels. Talk radio and TV pundits occupy the surface level, while foreign policy professionals understand increasingly deeper layers of information, history and interpretation. Rachel Bronson uses a scholarly approach for this in-depth discussion of America's complex relationship with Saudi Arabia. Linked by their animosity toward communism, and a fundamental supplier-customer relationship based on oil, the Saudis and Americans were allies throughout the Cold War. Then, they worked clandestinely to thwart the Soviets. But in the post-Cold War environment, conditions changed. The Saudis faced a major threat from other Islamic nations over their monarchy and their close relations with the U.S. Bronson densely packs her book with historical events in diplomatic, military, religious and cultural frameworks. Much of this material was classified and unavailable previously, so Bronson has fresh information. We consider this essential reading for anyone who wants a deeper understanding of the vital, evolving relationship between Saudi Arabia and the United States.

Rachel Bronson, who works at a prestigious New York City think tank dedicated to Foreign Affairs, has written an excellent book on the history of the relationship between the governments of the United States of America and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The thesis of her book is that contrary to what some say, this friendship has been based on more than oil, that is also on shared antagonisms of Communism and Colonialism, and mutual strategic benefits. If you're a diplomat or political scientist, this well researched and meticulously documented book, which includes little tidbits that are rarely discussed, such as Mussolini's bombing the Dhahran oil installations at the beginning of the Second World War, will prove immensely useful to you.

But if you approach this history as a history buff, sociologist, or interested citizen, Bronson's almost pedantic focus on the political aspects of this long relationship and her emphasis on brevity are such that this book probably won't meet your needs. In distilling the history of this relationship to its bare bones, Bronson elides fascinating historical details that greatly help to understand the history. Bronson, for example, mentions that after they had helped him conquer his kingdom, King Abdul Aziz fell out with his Islamic shock-troops, the Ikhwan, who were only subdued with British help. Had she written that one of the straws that broke the camel's back was King Abdul Aziz's use of the radio, which the Ikhwan took as proof of that their King was an "idolater" and hence illegitimate, and the British Royal Air Force had to be called in to restore order, this book would have more local color.

I agree completely with Bronson that the Saudis were rightfully wary of allying themselves with the British, who at the time wielded an inordinate amount of influence in the region, and that an alliance with the Soviet Union was inconceivable; hence the alliance with the US. But I think she omits one of the reasons why this partnership worked so well for so long: strong cultural similarities between many of the Americans who worked in Saudi Arabia and the Saudis themselves. Texas was one of the hubs, if not the hub, of the American oil industry, and a disproportionate number of the American expatriates in Saudi Arabia were Texan. The Texas of the 1940s shared much more history, topography and culture with Saudi Arabia than Britain or any other European country keen on good relations with Saudi Arabia: many Texan preachers and Saudi mullahs were equally fond of alcohol and (often) intellectuals; both societies had had large populations with a nomadic tradition, Bedouins and Cowboys, a history of gunfights, a patriarchal and clan-based culture, a history of racial inequality (Saudi Arabia outlawed slavery at about the same time the United States ditched their Jim Crow laws, etc.) Neither Odessa, Texas nor large swathes of Saudi Arabia are quite as verdant and lush as the Garden of Eden was.

These similarities and tensions even played off of each other. Abdullah Al-Tariki, a Saudi petroleum minister, studied at the University of Texas, and was said to have left Austin with a chip on his shoulder because as a student he had been denied entry into some Austin bars by bouncers who thought he was of Mexican origin. When he returned to Saudi Arabia, he set out to found a Saudi equivalent of the Texas Railroad Commission, which the world came to know as OPEC.

To sum up, as a concise and heavily documented summary of the relationship between the American and Saudi governments this book is easily worth five stars. It is not, nor was it meant to be, a deeper, wider, and more thoughtful look at the shared history between these two nations.

The painstaking research undertaken by Rachel Bronson is formidable. She remained objective, except for the conclusions drawn at the book's end. There was a point at which everything finally seemed clear. I eagerly await her next endeavor.

Rachel Bronson's book is an exceptional accomplishment. She uses a vast number of authoritative sources and weaves a compelling and readable account of complex geopolitical relationships. Marshall Lilly's recent (August 6, 2006) review is right on target. Thomas G. O'Brien III, Palm Beach Gardens, FL

I honestly find this book very hard to criticize and give "only" a 4 star rating to. As far as a work of history goes this is pretty impressive. The author clearly researched the living heck out of her subject and has more than ample footnotes to prove it. There's no reason to doubt any of her facts as anything but 100% true, and mostly comprehensive. She has a dispassionate writing style letting the facts she has uncovered speak for themselves, untempered by either leftist or rightist interpretation. And although her topic itself can be a bit dry at times, she writes quite well and the book is not a chore to finish. All of these things are like rare sparkling gems in most works of history geared towards popular audiences (i.e. as opposed to textbooks . . . in which case the above traits would probably be even more precious.)

You will learn some good information in this book. It has a brief review of Saudi Arabia's history, but the focus of the book is really on the relationship between the US government and the Saudi government so it doesn't really start until the '20's or '30's where America first begins exploring for oil in the peninsula, and doesn't get meaty until the '40's when official government relations are upgraded to embassy level and FDR and Abdel Aziz met onboard the USS Quincy. True to her title the US Saudi relationship has been about more than oil, and has taken on an air of surprising friendship in many cases, where both sides really are genuinely helping themselves out by helping out each other. On the oil front Saudi Arabia has used it as a weapon against America far less so than it's neighbors and other OPEC nations, being a reliable source to counterbalance what OPEC is doing, and covertly supplying the US military even during periods of embargo. On the geographic front they are key to American access to the gulf, and have generally been more reliable than is reported in allowing military operations from or through their territory. On the economic front Saudi Arabia has invested largely in America, and on the political front we were true allies in fighting communism. However, with the end of the Cold War this anti-communist bond dissolved, and as many know the infrastructure built to channel radical islamist fighters into Afghanistan didn't, setting much of the stage for 9/11 and our current war on terror. The info in this book regarding these events is very good.

Where this book falls short is that it seems to be missing the forest for the trees. It's so focused on the intergovernmental relationships and on presenting mostly a chronolog of what's happened, that as you read you feel there's an 800 lb guerilla in the room that no one's talking about: mainly Saudi society and the population at large. Because much of this book is sort of chronolog, there's very little satisfying analysis of why the things she's reporting are happening, and little attempt to understand this. A happens, then B happens, then C happens, and that's about it. Many would argue this is a good thing since it lets the reader make up their minds, but I would counterargue that because Saudi society (as well as practically any mention of American society) is mostly left out there's not enough comprehensive information for readers to make a truly well grounded opinion. Much allusion is made to the house of Saud's fear of being deposed and that it can't alienate its population too much, but what really IS the Saudi population like? What are the major camps of political and religious thought? Just how radical or pragmatic are they? What do they believe? How educated are they? How much grassroots support for terror is there, and how much can the government really feasibly curtail local "charitable" giving? Unfortunately you won't get much on the above type of questions.

Ultimately the author believes, and says so early on in the book, that the world is practically driven by government policies and the world's problems can thus be solved with government policies. Thus the nearly singular focus on governmental relationships without delving into the makeup of Saudi Arabian society seems natural, but just as much to be tragically missing the overall big picture. Last her "solutions" to the strains on current Saudi-US interactions sound like a UN debate on what to do about Darfur, and about as effective. We need a more "nuanced" this to "promote stability", a "smarter" policy that to "reduce radicalism", a "laser-like focus" on this issue. But it's all very non-specific and general, with little analysis on whether a US governmental change of tract can actually change Saudi popular behavoir. When she does mention specifics of policies they're incredibly weak. She lauds, for example, how great a $100,000 grant is to a Women's university in Jeddah is to help them work with Duke university, and how this was some huge public relations victory in the kingdom. But I highly doubt anyone in the kingdom even knows about the program, or in what appears to be a very fundamentalist Islamic nation barely cares even if they did hear. WTO membership is another one of her big solutions. Again I find it hard to believe that those supporting the terrorist (who rarely seem to be in it for economic gain as far as I can tell) will throw in the towel when they see that the US has paved the way for Saudi participation in a complicated worldwide uber-bureaucratic entity which may or may not make the general Sauid population a little bit richer.

There's good info in here, its meticulously researched and completely fair, it just seems a bit too myopic to be as useful as it could have been.

Of the several guidebooks I've bought in three trips to Istanbul, this is the one that stays with me at all times when I'm finding my way around that most fascinating city in the world. The maps of the Old City and Taksim are the best and most accurate I've seen, and the bird's eye view cutaway shots of places such as the covered bazaar are extremely helpful. If you get only one Istanbul guide, let it be this one.

This book made my trip to Istanbul much more enjoyable than it would otherwise have been. Very well organized and jam-packed with helpful information. You'll still need a bigger street map of the city when you get there, but that's true about any destination.

Even my native Turkish friend, who is originally from Istanbul and whom I visited this past spring (with this book in hand), was fascinated by this book! He was really impressed with the layout, all the detailed and pertinent (and sometimes unique/unusual) information, the photos/drawings, the maps, etc. It also has good info about places outside the city.

I accidentally left the book behind after I put it down to pay for some things in a photo shop and didn't realize it was missing until a few hours later (I was with my own personal "tour guide," after all ;-)...my Turkish friend made his way back to the shop just to retrieve it for me (and thankfully the shop owner had kept it safe in hopes of the owner returning for it...and even he had looked through it and commented how good it looked)!

Going to Istanbul? GET THIS BOOK!

I just got back from Istanbul and I can say that this book was one of the things that made this a memorable vacation. The information is complete and (mostly) up to date (visa costs had been increased) but otherwise I found it easy to use and informative. The only other book I would recommend is "Imperial Istanbul" for the true history buff traveler.

This is THE BOOK to get for your travels to Istanbul - or Constantinople to us Greek Orthodox :-) I used this book when I was there five years ago, and let me be frank: it got me around every street, every landmark, every side alleyway, every bus route, every boat ride. The City is covered from head to toe in this book, with tons of useful information about hours of operation of mosques, churches, museums, and restaurants, plus great maps of the City and its surrounding neighborhoods, with detailed bus and tram schedules. In the back, it offers all the up to date information on hotels and hostels, plus important addressess and phone numbers for police, tourist bureaus, airports, and bus stations.

My personal favorite aspect of this book are the detailed pictoral discriptions of some of the great landmarks of the City: Hagia Sophia, St. Saviour in Chora, the Blue Mosque, Suleymanie Camii, Topkapi Palace to some of the more "off the beaten path" locations, such as the Church of Pammakaristos, the Basilica Cisterns, the Church of Sts. Sergius and Bacchus (Kuckuk Aya Sofya), and the residence of the Patriarch of the Greek Orthodox Church. Rather than other guides such as Fodors simply writing it all down, Eyewitness literally "shows" you the information, so it's not only a great book to help you navigate the City, it's great to help you navigate the locations!

I carried this book with my at all times when I was in Turkey. I cannot recommend this book more than Amazon allows, but I'd give this book 10 stars if I could. It is the absolute best travel guide on the market today! I hope it will also serve you as well as it did for me!

This is one of my favorite books--fascinating and informative. I've sent copies to several family members.

I have always fantasized about being a world traveling journalist living a life of adventure and bringing my unique point of view to my readers. Alas, that is not to be. However, I certainly have a deep appreciation for up-close and personal viewpoints of world events. That's why I absolutely loved this book and devoured the entire thing in one big orgy of uninterrupted reading.

Subtitled "A Journey on the Frontlines of Islam, from Bagdad to Timbuktu", Yaroslav Trofimov, an Italian citizen, is a Wall Street Journal reporter whose knowledge of languages, including Arabic, gave him access to people and places often denied to Westerners. He wrote this book between 2001 and 2005 and his writing style is simple, personal and full of facts, history and perspective. As I turned the pages, I was right there with him as he traveled around the Islamic world talking to clerics, ordinary Muslims and heads of state about their views on the current "War On Terror" that has brought attention to their perspective and, especially in the case of Iraq, has turned their lives upside down. He visited Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Yemen, Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Mali and Bosnia. That's quite a lot of places for one small book. They are all different, of course, but all share the Islamic world view, which, to my western eyes is a fresh perspective which gave me the chills as I slowly grasped the mounting significance of the present-day conflicts in all of these regions.

The clashes have been going on for thousands of years, but modern technology has accelerated the process and there is a culture class on a grand scale happening all over the world. The author devotes four full chapters to Iraq, and, to his credit, acknowledges the difficult job of American and British military personnel whose presence in the region has created a whole new set of problems for the Iraqi people who once viewed them as liberators. Those days are gone forever though. I knew all this before I read the book, of course, but it's one thing to read newspaper accounts and watch a small sound byte on CNN or Fox News. It's another thing entirely to feel I was in the shoes of this reporter, eating the food, dodging the gunfire and talking to individuals. My own sensitivities have also been stirred deeply and I know I will never quite view the Muslim world the same again.

The book is short, a mere 303 pages, but the author's skill managed to enlighten me about so much. Bosnia is very different from Timbuktu or Yemen, and sometimes it seemed as if these peoples have little in common. But the Islamic point of view is always there and very different from the Western world view. I applaud the author for clarifying this for me. Highly recommended.

I love this book so much that I already bought another to send to a friend. I will probably do it again if another friend did not buy it already on my advise. Mr. Trofinov succeed in making laugh while teaching me stuff about the world of Islam while others succeed only in making me cringe, fear, making my blood boil. The Journal is lucky to have him as a reporter.

This is a good book filled with personal experiences of a talented journalist who has travelled extensively in the arab world. It contains haunting images of people and suffering and explores the ironies and contradictions of the Arab world. One is presented with an image of a hypocritical Saudi Arabia, which uses Islam to keep its people down, and comparisons with a more secular Mali, which has found a way to reconcile modernity and religious values.

The book is unflinching in its critique of the American invasion of Iraq and the unintended consequence of the occupation. It is harrowing in its depiction of the vehemence of anti-Americanism from the wealthy suburbs of Cairo to the slums of Yemen. It create different looks at the seeming monolithic Hezbollah, unified by both public service and violent opposition to Israel.

The one drawback is that the book is totally framed by the perspective of the author. To say it is an uncomprimising look at the contradictions of Modern Islam and the failure of US foreign policy is to overlook the subjectivity of the writing. Choosing to focus on mismanagement or soldiers gloating over Arab deaths, the author ignores the nobility of others who struggle to make a positive impact. Some things in the book are taken at face value, when more thorough inspection should be required. For instance, at some point the book claims American forces shot and killed an Iraqi man for discharging his gun, thinking his house was being burglarized. How did the author arrive at this conclusion ? Ask the dead man ? The conclusion to be drawn is that Trofimov took representations of others at face value, but when Trofimov experience pro-US sentiment, he assumes it to be the result of toadying rather than genuine sentiment.

In the end, you have a well written book, containing fascinating yet selective experiences of the author. I recommend it as a fascinating journalistic travel journal, but like any journal one shaded by the authors subjective opinions.

Popular contemporary Islamic culture gets an airing in Yaroslav Trofimov's FAITH AT WAR, and the the non-islamic world is subject to a rude awakening 312 pages later. The author is very much a part of and participant in his inquiries into the attitudes that fuel resentment against the West and the US, whether in Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan or Bosnia.

I was astonished to learn of the paranoia and proclivity to believe the wildest conspiracy theories throughout Islamic societies. Indeed, and as a validation of Trofimov, a personal friend of mine recently visited Iran with his Iranian wife. On a mountain climb above Tehran with his Iranian-American daughters, he encountered two AK-47 wielding guardians of the Islamic revolution who were keen to ply my friend with all manner of anti-semitic conspiracy theories, including the long-discredited Protocols of the Elders of Zion and the "Israeli plot" to blow up the World Trade Center. Similar notions abound in Trofimov's accounts of his travels to "the frontlines of Islam" in the wake of the September 11 Al Qaeda attacks in the US.

FAITH AT WAR is a model of engaging journalism, with its riveting insights and Trofimov's determination - even at great risk to the writer's life - to get Islamic spokesmen to speak with him, revealing their livid concerns and lurid fixations. The paperback edition comes with an updated afterword and there is a helpful glossary of terms as well. The book is a fine primer/introduction to the contradictions inherent in the contemporary global Islamic resurgence largely fueled by the fanatical, retrogressive Saudi Arabian brand of Wahabist Islam. Highly recommended.

I was more than a little leery coming into this book knowing Mr. Glantz worked for Pacifica. I was afraid I might find a one-sided diatribe about how the U.S. invasion and the government is terrible and what a horrible crime the invasion was, but what I found was a balanced look at the situation and firsthand account from some Iraqis on how the invasion and occupation have affected them.

One of the telling moments of this book for me was when Mr. Glantz talks about having problems with his editors only wanting stories that paint a certain kind of picture of the Iraqi situation. With U.S. media this is so often the problem; a story will be bent depending upon the people reporting the stories own political leanings rather than the unvarnished truth. So often the Right and Left are pulling so hard that the story, which is actually somewhere in the Middle, gets lost, and the people who end up getting hurt are the victims (Iraqis) and the people who are relying on these reports to understand the situation and make informed decisions based on this information (U.S. citizens).

Mr. Glantz chronicles the failures of this administration and military leaders to understand the peoples they came to free. As I read his interviews with everyday Iraqis a picture emerges that should have been seen early on this occupation. Iraqis were happy the Americans toppled this mostly hated regime, but this enthusiasm would only go so far. It would only last so long. As the U.S. military continued to commit excesses and as life on the ground for ordinary Iraqis either deteriorated or remained the same, as under Saddam, that patience and enthusiasm wore thin until finally it broke.

As the U.S. broke every rule of fighting a counter-insurgency in Iraq, I have to ask myself what did they expect would be the result of this policy? What did they expect Iraqis with no jobs, no money and no prospects to do?

Here in the U.S. we too often forget about those we have chosen "liberate" and only focus on ourselves. Mr. Glantz gives us an Iraqi perspective that is sorely missed in our media today. He gives us a fair portrait of life in Iraq and for that he should be thanked. It is the stories from the Middle that are the most honest and important.

Mr. Glantz's book reads like a narrative of many of the events in Iraq told through experiential stories of conversations with every day Iraqi's. Mr. Glantz visits Iraq and travels through out the country talking with people about America in Iraq and how the Iraqi's he is talking to view the United States presence in Iraq.

Mr. Glantz is careful to paint the picture in 2005 as a loss for the United States. This is prior to any with drawl of American forces in the region, and demonstrates a bias noting the leveling of Fallujah and the picking of a fight with al-Sadr as mistakes the United States government undertook.

There is also an interesting perspective that isn't addressed in this book and that troubles me the most about Iraq and the discussion about the hardships of the average Iraqi in general. These perspectives in this book miss them completely.

In Iraq, you have a country that has known only war and destruction for over 20 years. From a societal perspective, if you had skills, and were not in the weapons making business you did your best to leave Iraq. The brain-drain in Iraq has hurt the Iraqi people more than any single cultural factor and rightly so.

Saddam has brutalized the Iraqi people until 2003 when the United States showed up and liberated the country from Saddam. The country suffered a horrible war against Iran where millions of people died and there were terrible exchanges of chemical weapons and all these horrible things happened to people in this country. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis disappeared in the Middle of the Night as they may have been considered political dissidents. Their mass graves prove that a terrible tragedy has been committed against the Iraqi people.

Given this unique circumstance, unique to the history of the world, the Americans have come to assist in the rebuilding of the country. When Saddam's regime disappeared, there were many plays for power in the local and regional governments. The United States made some difficult choices in the newly emerging democratic state and those choices were not supposed to be popular or easy decisions to be made.

While the author is quick to criticize the US Civilian contractors in Iraq who have not had a perfect record that meets American standards in terms of production, the author misses a broader point. The local corruption of the Iraqi's and the sectarian strife associated with the vacuum left by Saddam's removal make companies like Bectel and Halliburton the logical choice even given the challenges.

It fails to address the non Iraqi nationals flowing into the country and the inability of the sovereign Iraqi government to control its own borders as though America is supposed to be viewed as occupiers by the Average Iraqi when Syrians and Iranians are coming into their country to spread hate and violence and sabotage their own oil infrastructure.

The apathy created by all those years of destruction creates problems for many Iraqi's and villages. It creates problems of trust. This book gives a very human perspective on some of those perspectives but should be taken into the context that although the United States is responsible for the removal of Saddam Hussein, the assumption of the United States government has been that freed people would rise to their own occasion and commit to their own civil service projects with their own money. This has not happened effectively in Iraqi due to the brain-drain. Saddam often killed smart people. It was a control mechanism of the old régime.

Let us hope that this problem can resolve itself over the next few years, as this is not a problem that Mr. Glantz can take out of context of a few months. The historical precedents for this are rare if any and if you make comparisons to Germany and Japan, they did not have the Brain-Drain as we do in Iraq. That being said the Iraqi's were sovereign and operational with in a shorter time than either of those two countries. The Iraqi's in 2007 appear to be developing a sound oil policy for the entire world, which will help with oil companies and investment dollars.

The Americans will come home eventually, when their job is done. Perhaps the Iraqi people should worry more about their own security now that they have control of their own country and the ability to have their own elections. The war is not lost by America. It was won. Saddam is gone. That was public law and the goal. The rest of the pros and cons are the United States doing Iraq a favor. Reconstruction is the American people doing their best to help the Iraqi's help themselves. That is hard to do with militants from other countries crossing the border and attempting to kill you in Iraq just because you are an American. What Mr. Glantz isn't talking about is Arab on Arab, Muslim on Muslim violence which isn't there because Saddam is not in power anymore-- there is a different social reason for that and I'm afraid that Mr. Glantz wasn't too fair in his book for addressing those cultural aspects on the ground level between Iraqi's.

America has learned from those kinds of issues when we had millions of decent Americans fight for their civil rights. There were riots, massacres, violence, civil strife, and best of all heroes that came out of that. We are a great society because we were able to overcome our differences in many ways and have the ability to see each other as Americans and secularize our society. There was a lot of blood shed, involvement with National Guards, the Klu Klux Clan, and all kinds of other clashes between groups in this country. Ultimately it can be defined as great because if Mr. Glantz was writing the same kind of history about the American Civil Rights movement in the 1960's he would have called it a loss before it was really over...

Mr. Glantz, give those processes of democracy a chance and provide a better forum to show the Iraqi's how to do that. America is great because we were able to do it... we have the Stewardship to show Iraqis how to do it too. They can because they are human beings. They have a chance because Saddam and his brutes are no longer in power. That is the decent thing for Americans to do...

If that means eliminating Sadr in the political process through violent means, he is not a peaceful man. He should not be hiding in his Mosques taking shots at Americans like a coward behind those walls. He should show his followers a better way. He should lead them in a peaceful process to reform the politics of his newly formed country. Sunnis and Shiites have more in common than they are different and in that they should build their common framework for a new Iraqi society. Start by making the neighborhoods safe again. Take the violent criminals off the street...just as all civil societies do. Help secure the borders and eliminate corruption in your organization.

Mr. Glantz should not pick on Halliburton or George Bush and the Administration. Pick on the Iraqi's for not doing what they need to do now in this time of transition for their better way of life. I realize this is not ever the dream of the 'Hate America First Crowd', however, let us at least level the playing field.

Let us talk about some Iraqi heroes who are fighting for justice and freedom in their country for their compatriots...not about some folks who focus thier misfortune on the USA. That's always an easy scapegoat that fails to address some real purriahs in Iraq.

Glanz shows in a progressive manor, through Iraqi opinions how things spun out of control. He shows occurances that have been well hidden. Long before the Abu Ghraib debacle, there were injustices that lead up to copmplete frustrated as illustrated by the Iraqi opinions. He does present things as he witnesses them and tries to offer no opinion, but there are some stories that are gut wrenching, and he admits that he cried often. That is the part I liked the best.

Glantz punctures both left and right in this balanced analysis of what has gone wrong in Iraq. A powerful story that should be required reading for politicians and political groupies of all leanings.

Aaron Glantz, a Pacifica radio correspondent, painstakingly traces where and how the United States repeatedly messed up in Iraq. His title radically differs from other books on the subject, using multiple sources to deliver one of the most multidimensional and sophisticated critiques of Iraq.

Specifically, he talks to the Iraqi people themselves to get their own perspectives on this event. Not surprisingly, they were initially skeptical of his intentions, but he built up enough trust to produce this book. It is disturbing that talking to the Iraqi people themselves is considered a radical action.

Saddam Hussein was this infamous tyrant who appeared uninterested in his own people's well being so they were happy to get rid of him--until they also lost what basic services which they had been previously receiving. Glantz then writes that suicide bombings can be profitable for people who have been and are receiving little money otherwise in an allegedly rebuilt Iraq (pp. 119-120).

Because I predominantly receive my own news about Iraq (and the Middle East) from American news media, I had not previously considered the economic incentives to participate in a suicide bombing. Some people are participating in these activities to feed themselves and/or their families, with many other options currently unavailable. I had honestly assumed that the people who participated in these events were doing this for socioreligious sincerity alone; however I guess it's easy for Washington officials to moralize and grandstand when they don't have to worry about their own children starving.

Glantz also critiques us on the left for getting too in love with protesting against this very war. According to him, we are loosing perspective of the larger goal, again because we are also predominantly coming from and with an American-centric perspective.

While we need to be concerned what is happening with American soldiers and tax dollars, we cannot forget that the Iraqi people might lack even the most rudimentary services which we take for granted. We talk about how hard organizing is, but many American activists (myself included) live in a country where we know that sanitation and electricity is working and we do not have to worry about roadside bombs as we travel around our cities. Perspective is everything in and to effective community organizing.

There is considerable irony that President Bush and the Republican-controlled United States Government are so eager to talk about self-rule and democracy, but will not let the Iraqi people actually control their own lives.

Hazelton's book is rich in detail and authentic due to it's authors knowledge of the land of the bible which she lived in for many years and her fluency in Hebrew. Religious fundamentalists will be challenged by this book because it challenges the traditional view of the Hebrew prophet Elijah and challenges fundamentalists from all religions of the dangers of their extremist views in the judgement of others. It also gives an empowering view of Jezebel as a woman, a queen, and a wife to Ahab. It is totally relevant to our time in its challenges to the consequences of religious fundamentalism whether it comes from Judaism, Christianity, or Islam. Good work, and much needed at this time!

For any thinking person this book holds much more than meets the eye!!! In fact it is an EYE opener! Not only does Hazleton bring Jezebel to vibrant life, she also shows us how the misconstrued facts, the base humanity, and the religious zealotism extant way back then have stayed alive and well clear on into our times. She connects the dots from the past to the present. This book will make you sit up and take note, of yourself and of those around you. Hazleton is not afraid to broach those questions you've kept in the recesses of your mind about man and God.

Jezebel is extraordinary -- an awesome tale, so skillfully told. Well-researched facts and fictions are woven into a cursive narrative that is both scholarly and seductive.

I personally loved her descriptions of visits to small sites in Israel that left vivid impressions...and got scared as hell by those dogs in Listib.

Loved the descriptions of Jezebel herself, her costumes and her jewels - so imaginative, so rich.

And I appreciated the thorny ideas from which she did not shrink- especially the idea of exile as a catalyst for a new religion, and those about identity & geography.

...as they would say in the Old Testament: Kol Hakavod! Congratulations!

"Jezebel" is a smoothly written book that blends fragments of history with a literary perspective of "magic realism" that provides a readable pastime. It is written somewhat like the "DaVinci Code" in that it tries to put some pace, drama, and speculation into the lives of people that did exist, but about whom we have little knowledge. It is that crossing of nonfiction information with fiction methods.

Those fiction methods (the drama, narrative, conflict, character development, etc.) allow the writer a great deal of flexibility with the truth (as in Oliver Stone's movie, "JFK," about the assassination of President John Kennedy). If you just go with the book for the fun, it's a good read. It does not bear very close inspection on a factual basis, however, and her interpretation of Biblical text is shaky at best. The comparison to the movie "JFK" is apt. As long as you don't take it seriously and just enjoy the entertainment, it is a good read; but, if you hope to gain "true" insight into the characters, events, and meaning of Jezebel, this book is as reliable as "JFK."

Lesley Hazleton has done a superb job of filling int the context and teasing out the facts regarding Jezebel. This well footnoted book, with its frequent asides and rich background material, moves quickly and surely. It is fascinating to read, and ends altogether too soon.

Jezebel, whom we learn really was called Itha-Baal, was a Phoenician princess from Tyre who married the Omride King Ahab. She appears to have been neither significantly better nor significantly worse than other royalty of her time. Nevertheless, her spectacular clash with the intransigent desert prophet Elijah eventually resulted in her being denigrated and reviled unfairly in the Hebrew Bible.

Add to that the fact that the current understanding of language has changed so much that many no longer understand such terms as metaphor and allegory. (For the effects of this lack of understanding, see, for instance, Karen Armstrong's excellent work, "The Battle for God.") As a result, the term "harlot," which was applied metaphorically in Biblical times to those who worshipped many gods and were not too fussy about which gods they worshipped, has come to be understood literally. Not so, Ms. Hazleton points out quite correctly. And she goes on to show that the Biblical account in Kings in fact makes no claim that Jezebel literally was a harlot in the sexual sense. Ms. Hazleton similarly addresses other misreadings and euphemistic mistranslations throughout this book. All of these should be of interest to anyone interested in learning what actually has been said of Jezebel, even by the victors who so reviled her.

In summary, "Jezebel" is a smooth-flowing work which is a delight to read while being educational at the same time. This book is well worth the time and money. A keeper.

This an unbelievably well-written book that keeps you on the edge of your seat, and I couldn't help wondering what I would have done if I were thrust into a similar circumstance. Calling these guys the Greatest Generation is uttering an understatement.

By the fall of 1944, the USS Tang, commanded by Commander Richard O'Kane, had compiled a war record of astronomical proportions. O'Kane's sub had sunk more tonnage, rescued more downed aviators, and successfully completed more surface attacks than any other American submarine. O'Kane had also been decorated numerous times with countless medals for bravery. However, the Tang still had one more mission left, and this one promised to be even more dangerous than the others.

O"Kane and his crew were ordered to sail to the Formosa Strait to intercept Japanese convoys operating there. But, on their way to the assigned area, the Tang ran into a terrible typhoon with extremely high winds and seas. Although the sub survived the typhoon, the men seemed to sense that this mission was shaping up to be very dangerous.

Arriving on station, the Tang quickly made her presence known by sinking several enemy ships. The sub had expended twenty three of the twenty four torpedoes allocated to her. All that was left was to fire the final torpedo into a wounded enemy vessel and head back to San Francisco. As soon as the final torpedo left its tube, the men began to celebrate. Unfortunately, the last torpedo proved to be the only one that failed to operate correctly. The torpedo malfunctioned, turned back on a circular course, and struck the Tang with such force that half the crew was killed instantly. Commander O'Kane was thrown into the water. The sub was mortally wounded, but the bow stayed afloat in the shallow water due to the air inside. Despite this, the men still alive inside the sub appeared to be hopelessly trapped.

Some of the men managed to escape from the 180-foot depth by using Momsen lung breathing devices. These allowed the men to ascend to the surface without suffering the bends. Nine men out of a crew of eighty-nine survived. The ordeal was just beginning for them, though. Soon, the survivors were picked up by a Japanese patrol boat. Due to the nature of the sub's attacks on Japanese shipping, the Japanese refused to consider the men of the Tang to be POWs, instead classifying them as special prisoners of Japan. No record of the men's survival was passed on to the Red Cross, so their families had no way of knowing the men were alive.

For the next several months, the men were routinely beaten, starved, and humiliated by the Japanese. They became extremely sick and lost lots of weight. Despite this terrible treatment, the men managed to survive until the end of the war.

Despite surviving captivity, the men faced other challenges upon returning home. Some of the men's wives had remarried after learning that the Tang was lost. Others faced constant flashbacks and dreams of being in captivity. Despite these setbacks, the men returned to mostly productive lives and had regular reunions.

This is an excellent book. Author Alex Kershaw does a fine job of describing the life of Commander Richard O'Kane and the USS Tang. O'Kane was a relentless commander who always sought to destroy as much enemy shipping as possible. He accomplished this feat with flying colors, as the Tang was responsible for the destruction of more enemy shipping than any other American submarine. The book is divided neatly into several sections, each dealing with a different aspect of the story. This division makes the book easy to follow.

I give this fine book my highest recommendation; it is a must-read for fans of submarine stories.

I have the privilege of being the friend of the son of one of the men who served on the USS Tang, and through him I learned of this book that includes considerable mention of his father. This personal aspect amplified the impact of the book for me, but even without this I could not have read the book and not been humbled by reading this true story of those who served. In these troubling times when irreverence and disrespect are rampant on virtually every front, "Escape from the Deep" is a welcomed and refreshing look at men who knew honor.

These submariners were true pioneers in many ways. Operations while under attack and previously untried escape techniques from a disabled submarine pushed them into extraordinarily dangerous uncharted territory. Additionally, when they served they did not know what the outcome of the war would be, and neither did their families. Germany and Japan were winning in those first years of the war. The times were perilous. We need to be reminded of this history and take nothing for granted.

The USS Tang was an aggressive attack submarine commanded by a determined and focused captain and a crew that rapidly became a formidable team. This story of first their operations and later the capture and imprisonment of the few survivors after the sub's sinking makes these men's lives and the lives those who never escaped real to the reader. Inasmuch as it is possible, you begin to try to imagine what it would be like if you were in those circumstances, and you know that it would take everything you have and then much more to endure. This is about courage, honor, guts, agony, and victory.

You come away from this book with a great appreciation for all those who sacrifice so much to try to ensure a future for the generations to come. These are the kinds of people who deserve our great thanks and respect. This book goes a long way to achieve this recognition. It is very easy to read, does not embellish at all, and simply is powerful. Alex Kershaw has done these men and us a service by telling this story.

I really enjoyed this book. It talks about the trials these men went through before the Tang sank, after it sunk, their imprisonment and when they came home. Another home run for Alex.

Alex Kershaw did a very compelling job on this book. My name is Bruce Keller and one of the survivors of the Tang,Floyd Caverly, is my uncle.The book, Escape from the Deep, is very informative as the the happenings that went on aboard the boat after it went down.I know that Alex did a lot of research when writting it.When I heard of the book I got one as soon as I could and had a hard time putting it down until I read it cover to cover. Then went back a read it again.

Being that I have a connection to one of the survivors, it was rather emotional at times in reading it. I would have to put the book down and compose myself to continue. Floyd Caverly, Unk as we call him has maitained quite a sense of humour in spite of all the hardship that him and the other survivors endured.

I would like to thank Alex for writting this book to tell the story of these brave men and what they did for this country and the world.

Thank you
Bruce Keller

Professor Urwin has contributed a priceless addition to the collection of great American historical letters. Perhaps one of the best compilations of Wake Island information that at no time reads like the encyclopedia it resembles.
This is a huge and potentially intimidating book that is worth every bit of its seemingly steep price tag. Invest in your brain, you get what you pay for and then some!

REVIEW EVERY BOOK YOU READ, AUTHORS DESERVE YOUR OPINIONS!

Author Gregory Urwin spent years researching the epic defense of Wake Island using uncovered documents, personal interviews of civilian and military survivors, diaries, library archives and just plan hard leg work. The author to this day still honors those that served at Wake by staying in touch with the survivors at their yearly reunions and was instrumental in making the documentary on The History Channel become a reality. 'Facing Fearful Odds' brings the battle to life again through the eyes of those that were there and gives a balanced view on the Devereux-Cunningham contravercy which showed beyond doubt the shabby treatment given to the Navy Commander. The book is a must read to anyone who wants to learn about dedication, friendship, survival and love of country.

Most people only know about wake Island from the William Bendix movie made in 1942 when very few facts of the battle were known. What was know was that in 1941, as most American outposts in the far east fell in hours, this small Island with a garrison of some 450 marines and a few airmen held out for weeks and became a symbol of hope for Americans in a world of otherwise bleak news. The papers called this unlovely rock "The Alamo of the Pacific" in rememberance of that other famous last stand.
What Dr Urwin goes into is the detail beyond these facts, having interviewed survivors from both sides of the battle and poured over navy records he takes Marines who were little more than faceless icons, and made them human, with fears and hopes and lives all their own, and in so doing makes their stand more iconic. He gives them lives and personalities with annecdotes and humor as remembered by their friends in later years that shows them as a uniquiely American force.
Is it a big book? yup. Is it easy to read? Oh Yeah! The early chapters are about the finding, losing and refinding the atoll known as "Wake," then going into how it was developed in an attempts for commercial air travel in the 1930's. These chapters were so easy to read I found myself wondering if there were books on this, A topic I'd previously had no knowledge of or desire in. The writing is that good.
"What better way for man to die, then facing fearful odds, for the ashes of his fathers and the Temples of his gods." yup, sums it up well.

I am a student in one of Dr. Uwrin's classes and he assigned this book for us to read. Usually I get annoyed when this happens because it is usually a way for teachers to throw their ideas further onto students and make them pay (literally) for it. Urwin's is one of only two professor written books that I have enjoyed reading for class. Dr. Urwin's writing is extremely clear and easy to follow, and he grips the reader. The language is not the pompous scholarly language one usually finds in books like this. You don't have to be a student of WWII to read this, anyone could pick it up and read it without problems. And to answer someone's musing that if Dr. Urwin's lecturing is as good as his writing, it is and then some! READ THIS BOOK!

The title, Facing Fearful Odds, is taken from Macaulay's "Horatius at the Bridge" (a poem I lovingly remember reading as a schoolboy), and it's evocative of the dramatic siege of Wake Island in the immediate aftermath of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

Gregory Urwin is a fine writer who vividly portrays the drama of a handful of Marines and civilian construction workers who repelled daily assaults by the Japanese navy and air force for 16 harrowing days before finally capitulating to overwhelming force. In stunning detail, the author depicts the frantic preparatory events leading up to the siege, the fierce resistance, and the bitter aftermath. It is sad that these heroic events are little known by today's generation.

What is compelling about Mr. Urwin's account of the Wake Island story is his depiction of ordinary men thrust into extraordinary circumstances. Although the Marines were volunteers, many of them joined the Corps to escape the Depression, and many of them never expected to find themselves in such a perilous position. Nonetheless, like Horatius at the Bridge, these men did more than their duty.

Facing Fearful Odds describes how the United States failed to marshal its considerable resources during the year and three months that Europe had been at war; we were dreadfully unprepared militarily, economically and psychologically for the sudden impact of the terrible defeats Japan dealt us. If we view the events of late 1941 in the context of the smug condescension most Americans felt toward Japan, and the fact that we woefully underestimated Japanese military prowess, we can begin to understand how shattering Pearl Harbor was. Americans were angry as hell and damned scared.

Then, a few gritty Marines and civilian construction workers - every one of them a regular "Joe Everyman" with whom any American could identify - held off the mighty Japanese navy and air force for more than two weeks and dealt them a stunning, crushing blow. That we ultimately lost Wake Island mattered little. That these brave men showed the world that Americans could - and would - fight back meant everything to the people at home and to those in the service. These few men lifted America from its fear and helped focus its anger in a powerful resolve to defeat the enemy.

The Marines of Wake Island were expendable, and they knew it. Mr. Urwin enables the reader to imagine why a man would willingly put himself in harm's way knowing - with near certainty - that he was unlikely to survive. One could argue that the man doesn't have a choice, but of course he has a choice - he can surrender. Urwin shows us that the willingness to fight and not surrender came from something more than patriotism. Though they fully expected to die, it was a matter of pride; though they believed no one would ever know it, they were determined to make the enemy pay dearly for American lives. They knew if they did that, someone else might live a little longer.

Facing Fearful Odds is about defiance in the face of certain death, of abject determination to make the enemy pay a terrible price for their arrogance. The men of Wake Island didn't save the world - that was for the men and women who came after them to do. But they saved America's face. Guam surrendered immediately. Wake Island did not.

Several weeks before the battle of the Alamo, Mexican troops marched into San Antonio demanding a siege cannon that the Texan rebels held. The Texans' reply was, "Come and take it." Implied were the words, "...if you can." Gregory Urwin gives the reader a rare opportunity to know how the men of Wake Island felt when they made the Japanese Navy "come and take it."

The book opens with a history of the state of Iraq from its establishment after WWI to the present time. An understanding of this history is vital in coming to an understanding of the present difficulties facing the country. Two very salient points demonstrated persuasively by Iraq's history are that violence as a political instrument was institutionalized in Iraq long before the regime of Saddam Hussein. His regime was more a logical culmination of events which preceded it than a historical aberration. The second point relates to the primary reason for the development of institutionalized violence. The state of Iraq was constructed from disparate ethnic, religious and cultural groups to serve the political ends of the British at the time. This political expediency has lead to a state that has never been able to develop the sense of unity necessary to become a nation. Violence has been the primary means of keeping forces in line that could tear the state apart.

The history is followed by an examination of the perspectives of each of the three major groups that make up the state of Iraq - the Sunni Arabs, the Shi'a Arabs and the Kurds. Though this structure entails a certain amount of repetition of information from the first section of the book ( especially in the section on the Shi'a), it does help us understand the position of each of the three groups and what they stand to gain or lose as a result of different potential constructions of their future.

The third section of the book is devoted to examining the options available for the future of Iraq, including their potential positive and negative consequences and the likelihood of prevailing conditions allowing each option to become reality.

All three major groups in Iraq are shown warts and all. The book shows no favoritism in its analysis. The issues are analyzed with penetrating depth and the belief of the American government that the people of Iraq would welcome Western style democracy with open arms is scathingly laid bare as the ludicrously naïve position it is. A must read for all who truly want to understand the situation in Iraq.

Anderson and Stansfield have written a wonderful book that will appeal to both general readers and students. Its calm tone is a welcome change from a lot of the polemics about Iraq and it provides the reader with clear analysis of Iraqi history. My only complaint is that it is out of date. Hopefully a new edition will come out soon.

This is an interesting book. Anyone who is interested in an alternative to the right wing talk radio and tv news should seriously consider checking out the Thom Hartmann radio show opposite Rush Limbaugh weekdays at: thomhartmann dot com / showlisten.shtml

Whether democrat, republican, or indepedent, so many of the facts out there are completely ignored by the mainstream media and talk shows. This show is one strong example of an examination of the facts regardless of your political affiliation. I am not affiliated with the show in any way, just struck by the facts so many seem to ignore.

This book is structured in a very simple manner, following the history of this country:

First, the monarchy from 1920-1958;

Second, the revolution from 1958-1968;

Third, the Ba'ath Regime from 1968-1988;

Fourth, the wreck of Iraq from 1988-2003.

These chapters recount the history of Iraq from its beginnings after World War I--when the British created a country where none has existed before--with three parties holding very different views--Sunnis, Shiites, Kurds.

Each of these three groups is examined as the basis for speculation as to what is to come in the future. The authors wonder if Iraq might end up splintering into three distinct countries--Sunni, Shia, and Kurd. Questions emerge from this scenario: Is this desirable? Would the needs of all three groups be optimized in this manner? Will this encourage additional "ethnic cleansing"? Even beyond what we have seen? Would such a solution mark success--or failure--of the American intervention?

The future? America's role in that future? We cannot say at this point. However, it does appear that the American intervention never really understood the historical and cultural context. We can only hope that the Iraqi incursion turns out well. But it is also clear that Americans sadly misunderstood the context into which they entered. . . .

This book should have been required reading for those eager to enter Iraq, overthrow Saddam Hussein, and install a Western-style democracy. The book has three main points: (a) a history of Iraq from its flawed beginnings after World War I; (b) an analysis of each of the three main groups--Sunnis, Shia, and Kurds; (c) an examination of different scenarios that might illuminate the future of Iraq.

Each element is well done and provides context for the reader interested in something more than current events weith respect to Iraq. The end result of reading this book is to wonder at the arrogance of the war planners who apparently did not consider historical and ethnic and religious context as that critical for the outcome of the war. As one of the neocons once mentioned, reality is not so important to the United States; the country can create its own reality. To this point, the reality being created on the ground in Iraq is far different than it might have been had history acted as a guide.

In my second visit to Istanbul I bought this book at the Istanbul airport minutes before boarding the plane back home as a "divertissement" for the long flight. It turned out I couldn't put it down. Is a poignant memoir of a life style gone forever and happy times that would never come back. As a woman I ached for the mother, she is really the central character of the book, and of the author's life as well.
Is a sad, beautiful book which I enjoyed very, very much

Exellent book realy well written (if a little dry in some parts) This is Irfan Orga's personal biography of most of all how his mother held the family together in one of the most difficult periods of Turkish history. How his father sadly passed away fighting in Galipoli (something many Turks can relate to) but most of all the sad, pointless way he died as so many Turks did during those years not just in Galipoli but on the Eastern front against the Russians not by bullets buy by poor supply lines, confusion and lack of communication and support.

It should be kept in mind that Irfan Orgas family were of the middle class and were largely receptive of the reforms of Ataturk (I would be interested to read something from those who were not) There are some interesing parts of this book such as how when he was at school under the old system students would be punished for missing prayers under the new system they are now punished for attending them. How their hats (so important in Ottoman days) where slowly changed to have a peak on them in order both to make them more 'western' and also to prevent prayer.

Well written and interesing, worth a read.

"Portrait of a Turkish Family" is a memoir of the decline of old Istanbul, and of the author's once-wealthy merchant family, during the military and economic crises that followed Turkey's entry into World War I, the wars of the early 1920s, and Mustafa Kemal's (Ataturk's) nationalist revolution. The book, republished by Eland Publishing Ltd., was written originally in English and in an elegant, end-of-the-19th Century style. In the Afterword, the author's son Ates, hints that his father Irfan planned the book and wrote a sketch, but that his aristocratic English mother drafted it. This warm and tragic remembrance is a minor classic of English literature; it echoes the aching nostalgia of the British upper classes for things oriental in 1950, the evening of the British Empire.

Though British in style and sentiment, the book belongs to Irfan Orga's very Turkish memories of childhood. It is his touching, often moving, evocation of the charms of a world lost forever; the world of servants, comfort, and of cloistered women and small children. Women of this social class stayed mainly at home in the Ottoman era, leaving their homes only with relatives and completely veiled. Small children were happily spoiled.

This charmed if out-dated existence was destroyed by Turkey's entry into the First World War and by the succession of military reversals that followed. These brought blockade, food shortages, inflation, and repeated drafts of militarily unqualified civilians. Many died, including the author's father; who was drafted, hardly trained, and sent off with his battalion, dying en route from marching day after day on swollen, bloody, and then infected feet. The fires that periodically ravaged old Istanbul burned the family home, and most of its savings --in paper notes- were lost. The tale follows the family's quick slide into poverty and even hunger, Irfan's mother's struggle to remake her self, by acts of will, to earn money through labor, and his grandmother's incapacity to adjust to new realities.

With the victory of the Mustafa Kemal's revolution, their mother places Irfan and his younger brother in officer candidate school, to avoid hunger and provide some education, and Irfan goes on to a career in military aviation and, during World War II, to a posting in Britain. What follows is sad, and according to the Afterword; although this book won recognition and sold reasonably well in Britain when it was first published, Irfan Orga fell into poverty once again.

Although Orientalism is famously out of fashion, this book is worth reading for its sincerity of feeling, for its extraordinary style, and for its personal point of view on the end of Ottoman Turkey. For an alternative point of view on Old Istanbul, this time of the 50s and 60s, read the Nobel laureate Orhan Pamuk's Istanbul: Memories and the City. This is also a mémoire of childhood and youth, but it is less sentimental, and instead, absorbed with eccentric aspects of Istanbul's near-past.

Bought in a bookshop in Istambul in a more expensive edition. Found it deep on both sides of personal and historical insight. Relates from a child clear and sharp eye the involvement of Turkey in WWI and Ataturk "modernizing" impact on the country. Individual struggles outlined on common sufference and historical stream. Mooving and never pathetical. For foregner reader language is quite easy, reveals a non-native-tongue writer, yet is subtle and sort of classical. Pity most of I. O. books are out of print.
a.m.negri, pavia, italy

Portrait Of A Turkish Family is the true and biographical story of a Turkish family's effort to persevere through incredible and disastrous wartime hardships by Irfan Orega, a son of that family. World War I brought poverty and desperation to the formerly affluent Orega family, and small triumphs over something as small as a silver candlestick became crucial pieces of hope for the family's survival. A powerful true story of endurance and adaptation, Portrait Of A Turkish Family is an extraordinary biographical testament and very highly recommended reading.

Mr. Horovitz has written an excellent account of both the personal side to living in a time of constant terrorist attacks as well as a factual account of the detail that have been overlooked or misreported by most of the world's press outlets. Included in this book are some brief analyses of the political climate in Israel before, during and after some of the more violent bombings as well as Israel's responses. At times the author disagrees with the government's decisions, and is not ashamed to say it. In general, an excellent read and a good look into the facts of the situations as seen by a reporter who has to raise his family while enduring these terrible bombings.

When peace talks at Camp David collapsed in 2000, a conflict began which was stronger than any previously: Jerusalem Report editor and author David Horovitz considers the effects of this latest conflict and its terrorism in Still Life With Bombers, a survey of life in Israel since 2000. Israeli experience is the focus in a survey of daily lives, violence, and politics, with chapters juxtaposed between interviews with government officials on both sides of the conflict to experiences of relatives, refugees, and his own friends and family, creating an intimate social and political portrait of a country at war within its own boundaries.

This book is absolutely incredible! Thank you so much David Horovitz! I want to read your day-to-day accounts of life in Israel beyond the end of this book.

I have been a religious right-wing supporter of Eretz Israel, anxiously awaiting the time that I am in a financial position to make aliyah. I have strongly supported the anti-disengagement fighters.

Your book has made me think. It has opened my eyes to the Arab side of the story, as well as details of politics on both sides that I was not previously aware of.

This book has filled me with hope of someday living in the holy land and at the same time has made me cry, and evoked terror. Reading the chapter on Yussuf makes me wonder if there is ever any hope for peace - on the political side there is, but on the religious side it seems hopeless, as religious Jews can never voluntarily relinquish the Temple Mount or any of Jerusalem.

There have been times that I have had to put it down and walk away for a while to digest what I have just read (and cry) - and I'm only on page 166!

For a long time I have thought the solution to this problem was for millions of North American religious Jews to make aliyah and change the government in Israel, now I'm not so sure... More to come...

Reading through a volume of literature having to do with the Arab-Israeli Conflict, one is sooner or later impressed (or depressed)in realizing how little new ground is ever, really covered by the defenders of Israel, and by those of the Arabs. The same ground is laboriously traversed, over and over and over; the same charges thrown at the opponent, the same anger and outrage, the same impossible hopes floated. To paraphrase an unnamed British military man from Mandate days, "and Jew will kill Arab, and Arab will in turn kill Jew, now unto the end of time."
Horovitz's book, written by an Englishman who emigrated to Israel in the early 1980's, belongs to the Arab-bashing, or in his particular case, Arafat-bashing variety of books in this genre. He soon dispenses with his worm's eye view of fellow Israelis in the midst of the horror of the al Aqsa Intifada, perhaps the strongest and most interesting part of the book, and gets to his main argument.
To wit: all the violence that has afflicted Israel since the collapse of the Camp David Summit in 2000 can be left at the door of Yasir Arafat, who opted, at Camp David as after, to ignore substantive negotiations, even with a negotiation-mad Israeli leadership, and to proceed with the bombing.
Well, yes, this argument is possible, but Horovitz dins it into the reader's memory, again and again and yet again. There is nothing, he argues, that might explain Arafat's evident loathing for dealing responsibly with Israel save his long-harbored malificent desire to wipe out the Jewish state, by short range suicide bombings, or long-term Palestinian overbreeding. I resent propaganda, especially from a side I would otherwise support, and Horovitz's so-evident desire to "put the account straight" makes for a tedious, maddening reading, where objectivity is thrown out the window when it might uncomfortably intrude into his little truth.
How might he improve his work? Well, here is one way: tell the reader why so many Palestinians are willing to strap explosives under their belts and assure their own extinction, along with those of so many complete strangers. What, in other words, has Israel done to the Palestinians to make them so desirous of death?
I do not expect Mr. Horovitz to pick up the cue on this one. Whether or not he admits it, his political sentiments are that of the political right. He might have been a wet-behind-the-ears liberal naif back in the later 1980's or early 1990's, when he was still finding his feet on the treacherous Israeli soil, but he now, in this book, shows himself to be a Likudnik back to front. He never, ever, finds fault with the Israeli policy of saturating the Territories with Jewish setlements, depriving Palestinians of their land, their water, and their hopes of national sovereignity. He doesn't note the right wing religious-nationalist Jewish psychotics (Baruch Goldstein, Meir Kahane and his "Kach" neo-fascist thugs) whose own merry band of terrorists have further poisoned the atmosphere between Palestinian and Israeli. He doesn't talk much, most importantly, about the atmosphere of everyday Israeli inhumanity that makes Palestinian life so tedious and hard. But he does blame, vociferously,monotonously and uncritically, the string of Palestinian terror bombings, that he, again,views as Arafat's mark of Cain.
He forgets that Israel herself bears the mark of Cain, in bloodying the Palestinians, in taking their land, in treating them as second or third-class citizens of "Greater Israel".
In short, Horovitz's book is propaganda, not a study of history or current events; comforting for die-hard supporters of Israel, but in the end answering no new questions, breaking no new ground.

After the collapse of the Camp David talks in 2000, Arabs launched a wave of terrorist attacks on Israel. And while some people in faraway nations may have failed to see just who the aggressors were, those who lived in Israel could not avoid noticing.

Horovitz does a superb job of describing living with the threat of terrorist attacks. We see how both Jews and Arabs react to all the fighting. And he also explains the extent to which the conflict is misdescribed by many in the media. I was shocked to discover that several star reporters were under the misimpression that the West Bank and Gaza had been some sort of independent sovereign territory prior to 1967. Other disturbing signs were the reluctance of reporters to believe Israelis who disagreed with Arab lies, the eagerness of reporters to believe that Israel Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was some sort of wicked war criminal, and the "conventional wisdom" that Israel was to blame for the conflict since it was holding territory that it did not stake a sovereign claim to. In addition, I was puzzled by the fact that a reporter insisted that Israel had to be held to a "higher standard."

The author explains how the Big Lie technique was used to accuse Israel of war crimes at, of all places, Jenin (where Israel went in with ground troops, dramatically sacrificing the lives of many soldiers to reduce Arab civilian casualties). And he quotes Kofi Annan, who maliciously asked "Can the whole world be wrong (in condemning Israel)?" Horovitz has a one-word answer. Yes. Any reasonable person would, if shown the facts that European Union officials were demanding to punish Israel for trying to thwart terrorist bombings and simultaneously shown that the EU was supporting the bombers financially, letting them buy explosives with its money, would see that the EU is wrong. His point is that a misinformed world will indeed be wrong.

For me, the mangling of truth by the media stood out in this book as the most serious aspect of the fighting. It is sad that Arabs are attacking Israeli civilians. It is good that the media are positioned to report on this. I think even vaguely honest reporting would bring enough political pressure to bear so that the attacks would stop. That is why it is such a pity that we are seeing nothing of the sort.

There are many other regions in the world where there is plenty of violence. They don't have anything like the media coverage we see in the Levant. If the media are failing so utterly in covering the Arab-Israeli conflict, one has to doubt their ability to get anything right.

I highly recommend this book.