Robert Fisk: "for Iraq 1917, read Iraq 2003. For Iraq 1920, read Iraq 2004

[G_j]

Robert Fisk contends that "Britain's 1917 occupation of Iraq holds uncanny parallels with today - and if we want to know what will happen there next, we need only turn to our history books..." Is the US repeating the British mistakes of the early twentieth century? According to Fisk: "for Iraq 1917, read Iraq 2003. For Iraq 1920, read Iraq 2004 or 2005." (Independent)

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/history/2004/0617iraq1917.htm

Iraq, 1917 (June 17, 2004)

They came as liberators but were met by fierce resistance outside Baghdad. Humiliating treatment of prisoners and heavy-handed action in Najaf and Fallujah further alienated the local population. A planned handover of power proved unworkable. Britain's 1917 occupation of Iraq holds uncanny parallels with today - and if we want to know what will happen there next, we need only turn to our history books...

On the eve of our "handover" of "full sovereignty" to Iraq, this is a story of tragedy and folly and of dark foreboding. It is about the past-made-present, and our ability to copy blindly and to the very letter the lies and follies of our ancestors. It is about that admonition of antiquity: that if we don't learn from history, we are doomed to repeat it. For Iraq 1917, read Iraq 2003. For Iraq 1920, read Iraq 2004 or 2005.

Yes, we are preparing to give "full sovereignty" to Iraq. That's also what the British falsely claimed more than 80 years ago. Come, then, and confront the looking glass of history, and see what America and Britain will do in the next 12 terrible months in Iraq.

Our story begins in March 1917 as 22-year-old Private 11072 Charles Dickens of the Cheshire Regiment peels a poster off a wall in the newly captured city of Baghdad. It is a turning point in his life. He has survived the hopeless Gallipoli campaign, attacking the Ottoman empire only 150 miles from its capital, Constantinople. He has then marched the length of Mesopotamia, fighting the Turks yet again for possession of the ancient caliphate, and enduring the grim battle for Baghdad. The British invasion army of 600,000 soldiers was led by Lieutenant-General Sir Stanley Maude, and the sheet of paper that caught Private Dickens's attention was Maude's official "Proclamation" to the people of Baghdad, printed in English and Arabic.

..more..

[nodictators]

1. Excellent find. Bu$h Inc copies from history again

Little wonder the Arabs don't trust us.

[G_j]

2. with American's lack of interest in history

especially of ME history, they aren't likely to ever have a clue.
The boundaries of present day Iraq were arbitrarily drawn up by a bunch rich white British men.

[struggle4progress]

3. Really excellent! eom

[swinney]

4. Sir Robert Fisk is the Walter Cronkite of European Press.

[Djinn]

5. Once again Robert Fisk

illustrates the difference between someone who has lived in the middle east for decades and socialises with those that live there and an "embedded reporter" or a white house press corp flak.

[LibertyorDeath]

6. Robert Fisk

One of the most informed Journalists of our Day & Time.

[trof]

7. Required reading.

kick

[EastofEdon]

8. very important article

please pass it on

[sonias]

9. a must read

Thanks for the link G_j. Robert Fisk is one of the best. I really learn so much from reading his articles. And I agree with a prior post that there is a huge difference in the quality of his reporting since he has lived in the area for decades. He knows the history and he tries to capture the feelings of the people with respect.

Sonia

[G_j]

10. kick

[G_j]

11. kick

[Disturbed]

12. "Clash of Fundamentalisms"-Tariq Ali

American failure is the most likely option.

The "new" Iraqi Govt. is a fraud and those that participate will be assasinated if possible if history is any guide at all.

Iraqis know colonialism. They will not let it stand.

[Stone_Spirits]

13. kick

[ColdWarZoomie]

14. Finally

A co-worker and I read about Iraq's "British Mandate" right after we invaded. It did not look promising. But all we heard from the pundits was post-WWII Germany and Japan without one peep about Iraq 80 years ago.

Every time some knucklehead would spout out our successes in post-WWII Germany and Japan as obvious "proof" that we will succeed in Iraq, I'd bring up the British Mandate as a much more accurate history lesson - same region, same peoples, same culture.

Fact is, the country that KNEW how to conquer foreign lands and run a far-flung empire FAILED in Iraq. As much as we try, we cannot run empires like the British did since our government was developed to thwart tyranny, not foster it.

Our Founding Fathers are spinning in their graves right now.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

17. "Finally"

Our Founding Fathers are spinning in their graves right now.<<


True... true... empires are a little harder to construct today... back then it was a little easier... hadn't invented the telly yet... not to mention the web.

[Pow_Wow]

15. Big Kick!

:kick:

[Lisa]

16. for a history major ...

... George W. sure didn't do his homework on this one.

[Stone_Spirits]

18. keep this one alive !

:kick: