Wednesday, March 19, 2008

I liked Fisk's last article. It's so easy to be distracted with the rubbish said by both the people who are against the war in Iraq as well as those for it. That is why it is so refreshing to read an article from someone who has an accuate perspective of what's happening - and an interest in history. Regardless of criticisms, Fisk is good when he writes on most things except Lebanon where, I agree with Abu Khalil, he is virtually unreadable. Having said that, Pity the Nation will always be one of my favourite books.

America's massive military prestige has been irreparably diminished. And if there are, as I now calculate, 22 times as many Western troops in the Muslim world as there were at the time of the 11th and 12th century Crusades, we must ask what we are doing. Are we there for oil? For democracy? For Israel? For fear of weapons of mass destruction? Or for fear of Islam?


Arima said...

I've tagged you...10 random facts

wladimir80 said...

Fisk was once my hero and "Pitty the nation" counts for the most influencial book in my understanding of Lebanon.
But i have serious problems with his admiration for Churchill ignoring his obvious racism.
His frindship(?) with Rafik Hariri, Walid Jumblatt that put him to close to power to stay objective
He makes simple historical errors, for example when he talks about Saladin as "The Arab Muslim hero Saladin"(1) or "Saladin, the victorious Seljuk Turk"(2) where as he was a Kurd.

And foremost I'm still waiting for an excuse/explanation for his wrong prediction about the Shia/Sunni Conflict in Iraq. If you repeat like a mantra for years "There will be no civil war" you should stand up one day and say something and not just ignore the fact you have been wrong....

I still enjoy his writings in books and articles but i read him these days with much more scepticism then when i first got my hands on "Pitty the nation".

I guess all in all he was to often right so that he can't see anymore when he is wrong, uses questionable historic analogies, or seems in his opinion to be influenced by personal preferences.



Nicolas said...

(the previous comment was not by wladimir80 but Nicolas... note to myself: check who you are logged in as if you post a comment from an internet-cafe ;-) )

Amre El-Abyad said...

Robert Fisk the oriental trobadour, cracked down on Saddam Hussien and spread lies about the persecution of shiites, something that is utterly untrue and rediculous as it was only Iranian- Iraqis as well as the proponents of political Islam from both Sunni and shiites schools, that were persecuted. Yet, the regime had to be more caustious with POLTICAL shiite parties, given that Iraq took on its shoulders single handely crushing the Iranian encrouchment into the region.

When the idiot Fisk cracks down on Saddam, he is actually justifying the invasion.

More importantly, whenever hear the hypocryt speaking on the IRANIAN OCCUPATION OF IRAQ.

Vladimir, Saladin was totally Arabised. He spoke Arabic and his culture was Arabic, aklthough his ethnic background was Kurdish. It would be worth mentioning that many Kurds dislike him and consider that he was working for Arab glory not Kurdish one.

montag said...

Thanks for the interesting article.I enjoy articles about how we do not learn from history.

Actually, we do learn...and we let it blind us.
Here in the USA we are fond of calling people we disagree with "Hitler" and "Nazi", insults from 70 years ago. We do this so often that we never give a thought to what is going on right this minute and what we shall be called by future ages.

In the impoverished future, "Bush" will be the paramount insult.