Stuck in the Canal
 

October 28, 2006

FIFTY years ago tomorrow — on Oct. 29, 1956 — Israeli paratroops were dropped deep behind Egyptian lines in the Sinai peninsula, opening the way for the ground troops that followed. In a lightning campaign lasting less than five days, the Israelis took control of the entire peninsula. The Israelis had a rendezvous at the Suez Canal with the armed forces of Britain and France. But the British and French stopped short of their goal. Like out of shape ex-champions attempting a comeback, the Europeans were unable to get past the first round in their effort to return to the Middle East.

The Suez crisis was a divide in the history of the Middle East. It was the moment when America pushed out the Europeans and then tried to take their place — and the reverberations are still felt today. The road that led to Suez began in 1947, when the British Foreign Office notified the American Department of State that Britain could no longer afford to hold its positions in Greece and Turkey against pressure from Russia. Soon the United States was engaged in an effort to hold the line against Russia — there, but also all around the world.

The Middle East was essential to this policy of containment. The Arabic-speaking Muslim world had been taken in hand by Britain and France after the First World War, and though they had since achieved independence, the countries of the Middle East remained predominantly Western-influenced. European and American oil companies played an important role in Middle Eastern affairs. Britain retained a presence at the strategically vital Suez Canal in the form of a major military base and a garrison of more than 80,000 men. Not until the autumn of 1954 did Britain agree to withdraw from this installation.

The United States had always deplored European — especially British — imperialism. In the First World War, President Woodrow Wilson seemingly hesitated as to which side to join (or whether to at all), and in the end joined Britain and France only as an “associated power” rather than as an ally, thus making clear that our country did not share the goals of the other belligerents — goals that Wilson claimed were imperialistic.

As the United States accepted the responsibility, therefore, of defending the Middle East against possible Soviet aggression, its government was conflicted. In the interest of cold war containment, the United States should have wanted to shore up whatever remained of British and French presence and power in the Middle East, but at the same time the worry was that any association with the Europeans would drag America down.

As early as 1952, the C.I.A. was searching for an Arab leader to support, someone who would make hard, unpopular decisions. Recognizing that such a leader could be expected to have an agenda of his own, the agency needed him to take the lead in defending against Soviet expansionism.

Initially Allen Dulles, director of central intelligence, proposed Gamal Abdel Nasser, the emerging Egyptian dictator. John Foster Dulles, Allen’s brother and the secretary of state, agreed. But it soon became evident that Nasser had little or no interest in fighting communism or the Soviet Union. A charismatic figure, he aimed to unite the Arab peoples, and he exploited resentment of Western imperialism to win support. Secretary Dulles then turned to create an alternative anti-Soviet force: the Baghdad Pact, a northern-tier alliance of Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Pakistan. The only Arab state in the lot was Iraq, led by its pro-British prime minister, Nuri as-Said, who was widely perceived as the Anglo-American candidate for leadership of the Arab world, and as such the rival of Nasser.

In putting Nuri as-Said up, Secretary Dulles had in effect challenged Nasser to a duel. Nasser, a military man whose objective was to build his army, showed his independence of the West by ordering arms in large quantity from the Soviet bloc. Dulles took this at first as a bluff; then, when he could not stop it, he took it as a mortal insult — but he floundered, unable to find the right reply
Continued..

I'm not sure I agree with the alpha male this time, but this reply is a classic.

:beer:

;)

Damn nic

Either you agree with him or you don't, what does that makes you?
:KA: :KA: :KA: :KA: :KA: :KA: :KA: :KA: :KA: :KA: :KA: :KA: :KA: :KA: :KA: :KA: :KA: :KA: :KA: :KA: :KA: :KA: :KA: :KA: :KA: :KA: :KA:

Diplomatic?

Try to not be such a bitch all the time. :KSY:

I got it from you ;)

Was there a point here or..... ?

well if you actually read the fucking thing.... :RE:

Western foreign policy in the Middle East has created one disaster after another for more than a century now and everyone in the West is being brainwashed to hate the Arabs because some of them are becoming more violent as time goes by..but no one wants to explain why they are so pissed off.

I got the point Multi.
Do I get a medal now?
I want one so bad.
:AF: :AF:

NO !
you only get one of them if you go to left-wing leaning threads
and act like a stuck up right wing jerkoff
you need to be a lot more ASSertive and learn to be a pseudo-intellectual
so you can piss on everything else anyone says...
most of all you need to be a DUMBFUCK for thinking anyone but the other shitheads with their heads up their asses
ever takes any notice

I wonder who you had in mind?

:sarc: :AP:

They had enough being :bcow: ?

Multi,

U're right about the west screwing the pooch in the middle east. Everything that has been done seems to have been a mistake, and the biggest one was backing Israel.

Just think what the hundreds of billions of bucks (no shit!) the west have given them could have done for the rest of the world. And what did we get for all that money? A little tiny chickenshit country that has nukes and has pissed off all them nice oil producing countrys.

Something has to give........... and it will.

you are right.. the rich western countries have been scammed .

The west is probably only guilty of letting itself be come influenced in a centuries long war between the Hebrews and the Arabs. Before the mid 1800's any ethnic minorities , ie. Jewish and Arabs could not influence the politics in the British Parliament but one of these groups emigrated en masse to that country after years of clever political manipulation in Europe the richest of them set up shop in the UK and started buying land in Palestine , as well as getting the British parliamentary Law's changed in their favor. Even then these people
were infiltrating countries from the inside who would of otherwise care less about some remote region in the Middle - East. The fact that we in Australia have any concern over there make me think we are all being scammed and have been for a very long time. Taking Gaza towards the end of WW1 was a pivotal point in what was to come later and was done with a few thousand Aussie Diggers with the help of thousands of Arabs who later would be betrayed by the British Gov. for their help . If anything the recent conflicts are starting to wake people up to why it all happened the way it did ,and why it is even an issue now.

All I can say is...
 

That is fucin' right.

Any can say what ever they want, but the proof is really in the pudding.

I read it but at first look on the title I thought it was in refferrence to this

:beer: :W:

they sent divers down yesterday to check underneath. too bad they didn't get them down beforehand. could've avoided a lot of grief. they're going to have to figure out some wy to remove the mud from under the ship if they ever hope to get her to drydock.

- js.

Yeh, I guess it should of been about that
:W:

did they get it out yet ?

looks like it'll be a while.

- js.