Subject: Re: John Pilger annihilates the lies that underpin Israel's murder in Palestine Fri Jan 09, 2009 7:23 pm
What I was referring to was that control by proxy of Middle Eastern oil was central business in WWII. One of the crucial outcomes of the War was a shift of power from Britain to the US and USSR and with this the Palestinian protectorate disappeared in favour of a US backed, heavily armed Israel.
I could have, of course, said it started with the first World War, but it is adequate to say that without understanding WWI in the Middle East, you cant understand the Middle East today.
Quote :
The seeds of the current conflict in the Middle East were sown during and after the First World War. Between 1918 and 1923 the territories of the defeated Ottoman (Turkish) Empire were carved up by Britain and France. Britain gained control of Iraq and Palestine; France took Syria and Lebanon. As the film emphasises, the British fleet (on which her security and position as a world power depended) was converting from coal to oil even before 1914; oil was already recognised as the fuel of the future. Unless the implications of these points are grasped, an understanding of the current predicament in Iraq and Palestine is impossible.
The film provides a detailed and wide-ranging account of the fighting in Anatolia, Gallipoli, Iraq, Palestine, Syria and the Caucasus. There is much more here about blood than about oil. Much of this, informative though it is, is irrelevant to the basic premise. Turkey for example, although defeated in the1914-18 war and humiliated by the post-war treaties, is a member of N.A.T.O. and an aspiring member of the European Union. The film is heavy on information and light on analysis. As background to the current conflict, it would have been better to have focused more narrowly on Iraq and Palestine.
Iraq was a creation of the First World War. The British wished to construct a political entity containing major oilfields in the region which they could dominate - hence they forced together a Shiite Muslim majority with Kurdish and Sunni minorities under a Sunni monarch (Faisal) from what is now Saudi Arabia. This artificial entity could only ever be held together by some form of dictatorship (by direct or proxy British control or by Baathists like Saddam). Only supremely arrogant, ignorant and na�ve leaders such as those who directed United States and British foreign policy after 2001 could conceivably have believed otherwise. A Kurdish revolt against British rule in the 1920s was crushed with considerable brutality, involving indiscriminate aerial bombardment by the infant Royal Air Force under the leadership of none other than Arthur “Bomber” Harris of Dresden fame (that this butcher should have been honoured with a memorial statue in the Strand is a national disgrace). A Sunni-led nationalist revolt against Iraq`s pro-British rulers was defeated in 1941. British influence was finally brought to an end by the Baathist coup of 1957 which led in turn to Saddam`s dictatorship. How “democracy” is supposed to take root in this divided and artificial construct is beyond understanding.
The Palestinian problem too was a product of the First World War. The Balfour Declaration of 1917 gave British support to the establishment of a “National Home” for Jews in a predominantly Arab Palestine; the post-war treaties made Britain responsible for the government of Palestine under a so-called League of Nations mandate. By 1949 this “National Home” had become the state of Israel with a Jewish majority after the flight (or expulsion, depending on your point of view) of much of the Arab population. The wars of 1956, 1967 and 1973, as well as the two recent intafadas, are the enduring legacy of the injustices perpetrated on the Arab population of Palestine by the “peacemakers” of 1919.
None of this was inevitable. Had the principles of national self-determination been followed, what is now northern Iraq would have formed part of a state of Kurdistan. Instead of this, the 20 million Kurds are without a state of their own, scattered around Turkey, Iran Syria and Iraq. The rest of Iraq would have been divided along Sunni/Shia sectarian lines, as it had been in Ottoman times. But no - the British determination to control the oil took precedence over the interests of the inhabitants of the area. Ironically, a major British concern at the time was to limit FRENCH influence in the region! So much for the Entente Cordiale and Anglo-French co-operation during the 1914-1918 war! Similarly, an Arab state would have been created in Palestine had the principles of national self-determination been followed. Instead of this, the British chose to establish their own control of the country - not least in order to protect the Suez Canal (again the French were regarded as the major rivals!). A Jewish population in Palestine would, it was thought, help cement British influence there. Thus the 1914-1918 war was as great a disaster in the Middle East as it was in Europe, leaving the region in a condition considerably worse than it had been before.
Subject: Re: John Pilger annihilates the lies that underpin Israel's murder in Palestine Fri Jan 09, 2009 7:39 pm
cactus flower wrote:
imokyrok wrote:
scribe wrote:
zakalwe wrote:
cactus flower wrote:
You could in many ways look at the situation in Palestine as a continuation of WWII.
ww2 was a continuation of ww1 by that mark!
Actually I worked this out right back once ... and it goes all the way back to .....God!....
After all the Romans exported to Europe.. who then had the Holocost.. who exported back to Palestine.... But God's the person who exported them from Egypt and told them to kill anyone in their way....
They really believe the God of the Bible gave them the right to annilate the "philistines" as they call them. Of course that fact that the bible is mythology for which even the Israeli archaelogists have had to admit there is no factual basis, is of no interest to these people who believe that Gods miracles are the reason they lose so few citizens to the Hamas rockets while the IDF can kill hundreds of "philistines". I'm not exagerating here. This is what they broadcast on a daily basis.
If you are suggesting that this is what my admittedly short post was saying, you could not be more wrong and nowhere was it suggested in the post. To say I am put out is to put it mildly.
I'm not sure if you are replying to me here Cactus. My post was a comment on scribes post and reflects my despair at the use of religion by goverments - be they Israel or Bush's US- as an excuse and perhaps even a reason for their actions. I have no arguement with your POV re: WWII.
Guest Guest
Subject: Re: John Pilger annihilates the lies that underpin Israel's murder in Palestine Fri Jan 09, 2009 7:48 pm
My misunderstanding then, sorry, the flu is at me.
Bit of the "Blood and Oil" video here - its all available in bite sized pieces if your interested.
Portal 
