Reddit mentions: The best israel & palestine history books

We found 750 Reddit comments discussing the best israel & palestine history books. We ran sentiment analysis on each of these comments to determine how redditors feel about different products. We found 245 products and ranked them based on the amount of positive reactions they received. Here are the top 20.

1. Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid

    Features:
  • Paperback
  • First Edition first printing numbers 1-10 are present
  • Nobel Peace Prize in 2002
Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid
Specs:
Height8.36 inches
Length5.54 inches
Number of items1
Release dateSeptember 2007
Weight0.59 Pounds
Width0.78 inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

3. A History of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict (Indiana Series in Arab and Islamic Studies)

Indiana University Press
A History of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict (Indiana Series in Arab and Islamic Studies)
Specs:
Height9.21 Inches
Length6.14 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateMarch 2009
Weight3.13938261088 Pounds
Width2.04 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

4. The Israel-Palestine Conflict: One Hundred Years of War

    Features:
  • Used Book in Good Condition
The Israel-Palestine Conflict: One Hundred Years of War
Specs:
Height9 Inches
Length6 Inches
Number of items1
Width1 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

5. The Israeli Solution: A One-State Plan for Peace in the Middle East

a one-state plan for peace in the Middle East from the Israeli viewpoint
The Israeli Solution: A One-State Plan for Peace in the Middle East
Specs:
ColorWhite
Height9.53 inches
Length6.44 inches
Number of items1
Release dateMarch 2014
Weight1.25 Pounds
Width1.18 inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

6. The Missing Peace: The Inside Story of the Fight for Middle East Peace

    Features:
  • A Game of Thrones (Song of Ice and Fire) Hardcover
The Missing Peace: The Inside Story of the Fight for Middle East Peace
Specs:
Height8.999982 Inches
Length6 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateMay 2005
Weight0.661386786 Pounds
Width1.996059 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

7. A History of Modern Israel

    Features:
  • Used Book in Good Condition
A History of Modern Israel
Specs:
Height9 Inches
Length6 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateMarch 2013
Weight1.4109584768 Pounds
Width1.12 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

8. War and Peace in the Middle East: A Concise History, Revised and Updated

War and Peace in the Middle East: A Concise History, Revised and Updated
Specs:
ColorGrey
Height0.45 Inches
Length7.74 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateAugust 1995
Weight0.29982867632 Pounds
Width5.1 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

9. Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years (Pluto Middle Eastern Studies)

    Features:
  • Used Book in Good Condition
Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years (Pluto Middle Eastern Studies)
Specs:
Height8.51 Inches
Length5.39 Inches
Number of items1
Weight0.45415225972 Pounds
Width0.405 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

10. Covering Islam: How the Media and the Experts Determine How We See the Rest of the World

    Features:
  • Vintage
Covering Islam: How the Media and the Experts Determine How We See the Rest of the World
Specs:
ColorCream
Height7.98 Inches
Length5.22 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateMarch 1997
Weight0.440924524 Pounds
Width0.6 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

11. Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid

    Features:
  • Length: 10 ft
  • Left Connector(s): 1 x optical plug 3.5 mm - male
  • Right Connector(s): 1 x TOSLINK - male
Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid
Specs:
Height9.75 Inches
Length6.75 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateNovember 2006
Weight1.35 Pounds
Width1 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

13. The Seventh Million: The Israelis and the Holocaust

    Features:
  • Fabric Content-100% Cotton
  • Moisture Management/Wicking-No
  • Moisture Management/Wicking-Yes
  • Earth-Friendly-Yes
  • Logo-No
The Seventh Million: The Israelis and the Holocaust
Specs:
ColorMulticolor
Height9 Inches
Length5.999988 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateNovember 2000
Weight1.79897205792 Pounds
Width1.3448792 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

14. Arabs & Israel for Beginners (Writers and Readers Series)

    Features:
  • Used Book in Good Condition
Arabs & Israel for Beginners (Writers and Readers Series)
Specs:
Height9 Inches
Length6 Inches
Number of items1
Weight0.80248263368 Pounds
Width0.75 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

15. Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict: A History with Documents

Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict: A History with Documents
Specs:
Height9.21 Inches
Length6.1 Inches
Number of items1
Weight1.67110394596 Pounds
Width0.865 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

16. On Saudi Arabia: Its People, Past, Religion, Fault Lines--and Future

    Features:
  • Vintage Books
On Saudi Arabia: Its People, Past, Religion, Fault Lines--and Future
Specs:
ColorMulticolor
Height8 Inches
Length5.16 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateJune 2013
Weight0.5 Pounds
Width0.63 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

17. The Gun and the Olive Branch: The Roots of Violence in the Middle East (Nation Books)

Used Book in Good Condition
The Gun and the Olive Branch: The Roots of Violence in the Middle East (Nation Books)
Specs:
Height8.5 Inches
Length5.5 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateAugust 2003
Weight1.55 Pounds
Width1.6 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

18. The Israel-Arab Reader: A Documentary History of the Middle East Conflict, 7th Edition

The Israel-Arab Reader: A Documentary History of the Middle East Conflict, 7th Edition
Specs:
Height8.4 Inches
Length5.5 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateApril 2008
Weight1.3 Pounds
Width1.7 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

19. Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of the Modern Middle East

Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of the Modern Middle East
Specs:
Height1.06 Inches
Length9.21 Inches
Number of items1
Weight1.9400679056 Pounds
Width6.14 Inches
▼ Read Reddit mentions

20. My Promised Land: The Triumph and Tragedy of Israel

My Promised Land: The Triumph and Tragedy of Israel
Specs:
Release dateNovember 2013
▼ Read Reddit mentions

🎓 Reddit experts on israel & palestine history books

The comments and opinions expressed on this page are written exclusively by redditors. To provide you with the most relevant data, we sourced opinions from the most knowledgeable Reddit users based the total number of upvotes and downvotes received across comments on subreddits where israel & palestine history books are discussed. For your reference and for the sake of transparency, here are the specialists whose opinions mattered the most in our ranking.
Total score: 275
Number of comments: 65
Relevant subreddits: 3
Total score: 256
Number of comments: 48
Relevant subreddits: 6
Total score: 26
Number of comments: 6
Relevant subreddits: 2
Total score: 23
Number of comments: 6
Relevant subreddits: 2
Total score: 20
Number of comments: 9
Relevant subreddits: 3
Total score: 16
Number of comments: 16
Relevant subreddits: 2
Total score: 12
Number of comments: 9
Relevant subreddits: 2
Total score: 12
Number of comments: 6
Relevant subreddits: 1
Total score: 10
Number of comments: 7
Relevant subreddits: 2
Total score: 9
Number of comments: 14
Relevant subreddits: 11

idea-bulb Interested in what Redditors like? Check out our Shuffle feature

Shuffle: random products popular on Reddit

Top Reddit comments about Israel & Palestine History:

u/Lard_Baron · -1 pointsr/worldnews

You know facts tayaravaknin but you always add Pro-Israeli nuance. I remember your inane post about Camp David. I didn't reply at the time, why bother?, but I will now. It will be a nice lesson for you.


There are two myths regarding camp David and Baraks offers.

  1. Arafat was offered everything, the best offer ever, but kept saying no. This was later used by Sharon as the excuse to expand settlements, as Arafat could not be regarded as a reasonable partner for peace.
    This is the Israeli myth that you have used here.

  2. Israel offers were awful, the West bank and Gaza split into 4 cantons. A non-viable state. This was proof of Israeli bad faith as it would not allow a viable Palestine.
    This is the Palestinian myth.

    The truth is well documented and all parties agree on what happened, but neither add any context that explains what happened. My sources are Dennis Ross's book, The Missing Peace, and articles I've read written by the Israeli Slomo Benami and Palestinian Hussain Aga, both Camp David negotiators. All agree on the facts but differ widely on value judgments.

    The offer was what was it was claimed to be by the Palestinians, its right there in Ross's book, but that was the starting point for Israel, by the end the offer was of a contiguous state with a Jordanian border. Palestine would lose 9% of the West bank but gain 1% of Israel, also Israel would control Palestine border and airspace, and East Jerusalem would be largely annexed. That was the Camp David offer, more was offered later in Taba, and this further offer is often conflated with Camp David offer for propagandist reasons.
    The Taba summit was as close to peace as the two parties have ever come. That's a good Wiki on it should you care to look. ( Barak pulled out of that negotiation to fight an election that he lost.) Both sides think they were 6 weeks from Peace. Sharon nullified the talks.

    The Palestinian myth focus's on the first offer, The Israeli myth on the 5 month later offer.
    Both are true, both fudge the timing.

    A thumbnail sketch of the Camp David talks.

    Barak wanted a Short sharp negotiation, he watched Rabin's political capitol drain away and did not want a repeat.
    Arafat wanted pre-negotiation with final talks after outline agreements made.

    Barak had a plan that Ross went along with it. The plan was, A high stakes summit, A low offer, after 2 days Arafat would be under pressure to get something out of the summit, then make a offer Arafat would find acceptable. The US agreed to go along with this.

    The trouble was the Palestinians would not play ball. Their position could be thought of as this, if you have a car worth $11,000. and some one makes an offer of $2000 you do not start haggling from there as if that is your start point its unlikely you'll get close to $11,000. If you start haggling at $9,000, you'll get closer. So Palestinians simply would not even start negotiating. They also were very aware that is was a Israel + USA v Palestinians, with all the America advisers being pro-Israel Jews, ( Ross was AIPAC's policy wings chief of staff.)

    Thus the no's. This angered the Americans. "Why can't you start haggling?" they asked, "Why are their tactics OK and mine not" was the Palestinian reply.
    The Americans shuffled back and forth, "the time for games was over start talking" said Ross. But the whole exercise was an Israeli game with the US going along with it.
    Each time the Americans came back with a offer they said, this is the final offer for starting, but each time the Palestinians said "No" the came back with a better offer. This made them look complicit with the Israeli's which they were.
    For example, Ross wrote "I will always side with Israel strategic necessities over Palestinian aspirations." ( something like that.) but surely for Palestine controlling your own border with Jordan is an absolute necessity, not an aspiration?

    The Clinton Parameters after this and the Taba talks based on them were much better. This is what the US should have done in the first place, present what they though was a reasonable deal and got the others to sign up and discuss it. Dennis Ross was incapable of pressurizing the Israelis.
    It would be like having your mother-in-law brokering your divorce. She's not going to be able to pressurize her daughter in favor of you.

    I've obviously not written this for you, but others might read it and know the truth, you'll plough on regardless spouting about the "great" Camp David offer in future threads.


    I suppose I could go into the other "great" such as the Olmerts

    Here's the story on that one.

    Palestinian leadership accepted the 2008 offer, but Olmert had resigned and announced an election which he did not win and thus the offer was null and void.
    The timeline is
    Offer made Sept 16th 2008 24 hours later [Sept 17th Olmert resigns.]

    Palestinians accept Olmert peace offer

    Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas on Wednesday said that the recent peace offer made by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is enough to get a final status agreement signed, but recognized that the outgoing Israeli leader does not have the ability to implement the proposal.

    "We could have peace in two days" if Olmert's offer could be implemented, Abbas told a group of Muslim clerics at the tail end of the Islamic holy month of Ramadan.


    (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_legislative_election,_2009#Background)


    Feb 2009 Bibi Wins.


u/Juggertrip · 18 pointsr/worldnews

The OP is a bit one sided to be fair. He conveniently left out Taba Summit for example. So Here is a Comment someone wrote a long time ago about the Camp David talks( I will link it later in a quick edit Im on mobile now). The situation is much more nuanced than you think it is. The same applies for the different peace talks.


>That's not true. You need two to make peace, period. For example, as much as Barak was pro-peace, he couldn't do anything if Arafat kept rejecting his offers.

Please Educate yourself You know nothing of offers Nidarus.


Edit: Baraks "offers". Please read and digest and never refer to them again.

There are two myths regarding camp David and Baraks offers.

  1. Arafat was offered everything, the best offer ever, but kept saying no. This was later used by Sharon as the excuse to expand settlements, as Arafat could not be regarded as a reasonable partner for peace.
    This is the Israeli myth.

  2. Israel offers were awful, the West bank and Gaza split into 4 cantons. A non-viable state. This was proof of Israeli bad faith as it would not allow a viable Palestine.
    This is the Palestinian myth.

    The truth is well documented and all parties agree on what happened, but neither add any context that explains what happened. My sources are Dennis Ross's book, The Missing Peace, and articles I've read written by the Israeli Slomo Benami and Palestinian Hussain Aga, both Camp David negotiators. All agree on the facts but differ widely on value judgments.

    The offer was what was it was claimed to be by the Palestinians, its right there in Ross's book, but that was the starting point for Israel, by the end the offer was of a contiguous state with a Jordanian border. Palestine would lose 9% of the West bank but gain 1% of Israel, also Israel would control Palestine border and airspace, and East Jerusalem would be largely annexed. That was the Camp David offer, more was offered later in Taba, and this further offer is often conflated with Camp David offer for propagandist reasons.
    The Taba summit was as close to peace as the two parties have ever come. That's a good Wiki on it should you care to look. ( Barak pulled out of that negotiation to fight an election that he lost.) Both sides think they were 6 weeks from Peace. Sharon nullified the talks.

    The Palestinian myth focus's on the first offer, The Israeli myth on the 5 month later offer.
    Both are true, both fudge the timing.

    A thumbnail sketch of the Camp David talks.

    Barak wanted a Short sharp negotiation, he watched Rabin's political capitol drain away and did not want a repeat.
    Arafat wanted pre-negotiation with final talks after outline agreements made.

    Barak had a plan that Ross went along with it. The plan was, A high stakes summit, A low offer, after 2 days Arafat would be under pressure to get something out of the summit, then make a offer Arafat would find acceptable. The US agreed to go along with this.

    The trouble was the Palestinians would not play ball. Their position could be thought of as this, if you have a car worth $11,000. and some one makes an offer of $2000 you do not start haggling from there as if that is your start point its unlikely you'll get close to $11,000. If you start haggling at $9,000, you'll get closer. So Palestinians simply would not even start negotiating. They also were very aware that is was a Israel + USA v Palestinians, with all the America advisers being pro-Israel Jews, ( Ross was AIPAC's policy wings chief of staff.)

    Thus the no's. This angered the Americans. "Why can't you start haggling?" they asked, "Why are their tactics OK and mine not" was the Palestinian reply.
    The Americans shuffled back and forth, "the time for games was over start talking" said Ross. But the whole exercise was an Israeli game with the US going along with it.
    Each time the Americans came back with a offer they said, this is the final offer for starting, but each time the Palestinians said "No" the came back with a better offer. This made them look complicit with the Israeli's which they were.
    For example, Ross wrote "I will always side with Israel strategic necessities over Palestinian aspirations." ( something like that.) but surely for Palestine controlling your own border with Jordan is an absolute necessity, not an aspiration?

    The Clinton Parameters after this and the Taba talks based on them were much better. This is what the US should have done in the first place, present what they though was a reasonable deal and got the others to sign up and discuss it. Dennis Ross was incapable of pressurizing the Israelis.
    It would be like having your mother-in-law brokering your divorce. She's not going to be able to pressurize her daughter in favor of you.

    I've spent to much time on this. I'ii leave it here.





u/PIK_Toggle · 13 pointsr/IAmA

Not OP, but I asked the same question years ago and I compiled this list:

​

  1. This is the best book on the subject that I've read. It is as fair to both sides as one can be. In fact, I came away with a better understanding of how and why the Palestinians feel the way that they do after reading the book.

    ​

  2. The Arab Spring. This is a great journey through all of the countries affected by The Arab Spring. It helps understand where we are now.

    ​

  3. The Prize. Technically, it is the history of the oil industry. As you should expect, it covers a lot of ME history, too.

    ​

  4. Black Flags: The Rise of ISIS This book helps you understand how radical ISIS really is compared to AQ.

    ​

  5. Michael Oren has two good books: Six Days of War and Power, Faith, and Fantasy. Despite Oren's affiliation with Israel, his books are fair and interesting reads.

    ​

    A book on the fall of the Ottoman Empire is another good place to start. I have not read this one yet. I've heard that it is a good read.

    ​

    ​
u/JeffB1517 · 1 pointr/IsraelPalestine

I did read Fateful Triangle many years ago I don't remember it well. I liked it didn't love it. I think he has some good lines about the Liberal delusions about what Oslo agreed to. And he certainly said this stuff far earlier than most in this book. Credit where credit is due.

I often enjoy Chomsky but I tend to disagree too much to consider him a great writer. The big problem I have with Chomsky is he tends to have rather unrealistic views of what countries do and then "shocks" his readers by talking about how the USA doesn't meet those standards. If you start with the basic premise that the USA is rationally pursuing its self interest along with other entities pursuing their self interest I think a good deal of the shock wears off. The hypocrisy he insinuates just isn't there. The USA does support humanitarian norms, it is just about the 15th priority on the list, not the 1st or 2nd. Similarly the purpose of Israel is to act in the collective self interest of the Jewish nation. Democratic norms are obeyed and enhanced in Israel in so far as they are in accord or at least don't conflict with that goal

You asked for book recommendations.

u/mjsolaro · 1 pointr/AskReddit

Its chapter on the history is short, but if you're interested in people's current views on it and how it impacts current life (at least as of 1989), I would strongly recommend Thomas Friedman's "From Beirut to Jerusalem".

Yeah, it's the same guy who wrote "The World is Flat". He was stationed as a reporter in Beirut during the period around the Lebanese Civil War and covered all kinds of Israeli-Palestinian conflicts. His reporting at the time won two Pulitzers, and the book won the National Book Award. It's an immensely fascinating read.

And yes, Friedman is Jewish, but his writing is pretty fair, and acknowledges bias where it exists. He's pretty heavy-handed in condemning many of Israel's tactics, probably to the point of holding them to a higher moral standard than the PLO.

Give it a shot.

u/ahi · 1 pointr/reddit.com

> If you want to read a good book about Orthodox Judaism, and the concomitant Talmudism, this book is very good: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0745308198/104-2180085-3718365

> "Milking on the Sabbath. This has been forbidden in post-talmudic times, through the process of increasing religious severity mentioned above. The ban could easily be kept in the diaspora, since Jews who had cows of their own were usually rich enough to have non-Jewish servants, who could be ordered (using one of the subterfuges described below) to do the milking. The early Jewish colonists in Palestine employed Arabs for this and other purposes, but with the forcible imposition of the Zionist policy of exclusive Jewish labour there was need for a dispensation. (This was particularly important before the introduction of mechanised milking in the late 1950s.) Here too there was a difference between Zionist and non-Zionist rabbis. According to the former, the forbidden milking becomes permitted provided the milk is not white but dyed blue. This blue Saturday milk is then used exclusively for making cheese, and the dye is washed off into the whey. Non-Zionist rabbis have devised a much subtler scheme (which I personally witnessed operating in a religious kibbutz in 1952). They discovered an old provision which allows the udders of a cow to be emptied on the Sabbath, purely for relieving the suffering caused to the animal by bloated udders, and on the strict condition that the milk runs to waste on the ground. Now, this is what is actually done: on Saturday morning, a pious kibbutznik goes to the cowshed and places pails under the cows. (There is no ban on such work in the whole of the talmudic literature.) He then goes to the synagogue to pray. Then comes his colleague, whose 'honest intention' is to relieve the animals' pain and let their milk run to the floor. But if, by chance, a pail happens to be standing there, is he under any obligation to remove it? Of course not. He simply 'ignores' the pails, fulfills his mission of mercy and goes to the synagogue. Finally a third pious colleague goes into the cowshed and discovers, to his great surprise, the pails full of milk. So he puts them in cold storage and follows his comrades to the synagogue. Now all is well, and there is no need to waste money on blue dye.

> "Similar dispensations were issued by zionist rabbis in respect of the ban (based on Leviticus 19:19) against sowing two different species of crop in the same field. Modern agronomy has however shown that in some cases (especially in growing fodder) mixed sowing is the most profitable. The rabbis invented a dispensation according to which one man sows the field lengthwise with one kind of seed, and later that day his comrade, who 'does not know' about the former, sows another kind of seed crosswise. However, this method was felt to be too wasteful of labour, and a better one was devised: one man makes a heap of one kind of seed in a public place and carefully covers it with a sack or piece of board. The second kind of seed is then put on top of the cover. Later, another man comes and exclaims, in front of witnesses, 'I need this sack (or board)' and removes it, so that the seeds mix 'naturally.' Finally, a third man comes along and is told, 'Take this and sow the field,' which he proceeds to do."

Very weird... one almost gets the sense that there is an unspoken expectation that God would take delight in witnessing such artfully executed subterfuge.

u/Luzzatto · 2 pointsr/explainlikeimfive

I'd be happy to help answer any questions to the best of my ability. I'd also recommend learning about the conflict not via a historical book arguing a particularly interpretation but rather a documentary source book. This one is wonderful and will give you direct access to many primary source documents so that you can make up your own mind about the conflict.

After learning the primary sources, then it's worth reading some more opinionated histories, like Benny Morris's or Efraim Karsh's.

The best advice I can give is to not forget that the conflict is really about people. People whose lives, families, and societies are on the line and whom are often caught up in the games of much bigger players who care little for them.

u/rmyeid · 8 pointsr/Foodforthought

Let us go with your argument and see where we reach ...

First, this resolution never gave Israel the right to kick Palestinian from their land. The independence of Israel never meant not giving citizenship status to the original Palestinians living in their land. Actually, [UN resolution 194] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_General_Assembly_Resolution_194) gives them the right to return back. The right that they were never given by Israel at any time since its creation. But you know what, let us assume that those Palestinians who were kicked out "according to UN resolution 181" deserve the suffering and yes it was hard to loose your land and home but this is UN whenever they decide something in New York, everyone should follow it.

You talk about UN resolutions as Israel respect any of them! According to the same UN, Israel should not be in the West Bank [UN resolution 242] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_242) and call it an OCCUPATION. I do not see why resisting an occupation is something questionable. Of course, there are other resolutions that you may like to read, you can look [UN resolution 3236] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_General_Assembly_Resolution_3236).

It is easy to blame each other for things happened in 1947 or 1948. But if we are serious about finding a solution, we need to accept that occupation still exists and all nations on Earth has the right to live freely.

You may never agree with me, but I suggest you read War and Peace in the Middle East: A Concise History which is a book written by an Israeli historian Avi Shlaim who is a professor at Oxford.

I find both parties politically incorrect, however, occupying millions of people on a historical pretext of promised land and killing thousands of civilians every time your government has a political game is not really the way for humanity to advance in the 21st century.

u/wanderingtroglodyte · 2 pointsr/todayilearned

We don't really proselytize, so you wouldn't be "sold" necessarily. Also, are you thinking of an academic primer or something more basic?

There's the [Idiot's Guide to Jewish History and Culture] (http://www.amazon.com/Complete-Idiots-History-Culture-Edition/dp/1592572405/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1341422012&sr=1-2&keywords=Idiot%27s+guide+to+judaism) and Essential Judaism. Those are both pretty good books. Also, Chabad has an excellent and very informative website, though in person they're a bit too much for me.

On a tangential note, I highly recommend From Beirut to Jerusalem and Orientalism if you're interested in the Middle East.

NB: While I'm expecting to catch some flack for the idiot's guide link, it is basically an "Explain Like I'm Five" book series.

u/sargentum · 2 pointsr/Israel

If you're looking for scholarly history research, the first books from Benny Morris like 1948 and After are as unbiased as you can get in this controversial issue. His later books, on the other hand, are more complete and include new relevant information that came since to the light, but you'll have to take into account that he went to the far-right politically by then.

If you are looking for lighter reading, O Jerusalem!, from Dominique Lapierre and Larry Collins is pretty balanced (though still slightly pro-Israel). I still prefer the The Gun and the Olive Branch, from David Hirst, but the author does not hide his sympathy for the Palestinians' plight in that one. Not such a bad thing, I would say, as long as you stay true to the facts and your heart is in the right place.

u/[deleted] · 4 pointsr/syriancivilwar

For anyone interested in learning more about Saudi Arabia, I highly recommend this book, written by a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist with in-depth knowledge of the country.

As a frequent traveller to Saudi Arabia and the wider Persian Gulf region, I can attest to the book's observations. As Winston, from Orwell's 1984, once said: the best books are those that tell you what you know already.

u/Qwill2 · 0 pointsr/booksuggestions

Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict by Charles Smith was quite balanced, as I remember. Check out the reader's reviews. More reviews of it here.

I agree with bugbunz that there's plenty of propaganda on both sides, so when you read the reviews of that one, or any other book on the conflict, remember that supporters of each side will typically view different books as "one-sided" or "skewed". I suppose the only way to get through all that is to read even more books, to eventually reach something of a 'balanced understanding', whatever that is... Good luck! :)

EDIT: I chose Smith's book in part because it contains plenty of historic documents, like the Balfour Declaration, the White Paper, speeches in the UN etc.

If you don't end up buying the Smith book (and even if you do), you should at least get a hold of one or more document readers, like this or this one. Here is another one, that you can browse through here. Beware that bias is also possible in the selection of documents to present (or of which sections to quote).

u/partysnatcher · 1 pointr/worldnews

My favorite book was a Norwegian one by Sidsel Wold - "The country that promised everything". https://spartacus.no/boker/landet-som-lovet-alt-104 Not available in English I believe.


Basically a journalist who was a huge Israel fangirl for decades (leader of Norwegian friends of Israel, went to several kibbutzes etc) and later it soured when she realized the amount of groupthink involved.


A lot of colorful detail about the various ethnicities internally in Israel and the various protopolitics from the first settlers to Russian jews "invading" Israel at the fall of the Soviet Union, as well as constant sideglances to the implications for Palestinians.

This one is pretty unbiased, albeit maybe a bit overly academic: https://www.amazon.com/History-Modern-Israel-Colin-Shindler/dp/1107671779

I've followed Noam Chomskys talks and writings on Israel as well, although that is, of course, politically charged through and through. He doesn't lie though..

u/Cool_Bastard · 6 pointsr/samharris

It sounds like you have two subjects, Sam Harris on Israel and is there anything stopping them. I am no friend to Islam, in fact I am in agreement with Sam that "it's the mother load of bad ideas." However, my feelings towards Islam does not blind me to the plight of the Palestinians. It's painful to watch and the sorrow that Israel heaps upon them only fuels and legitimizes the Arab/Muslim world against the West, specifically the US for funding Israel. What is going on there is nothing short of globally accepted genocide.

I too am a huge fan of Sam Harris. For the most part, I agree with everything he so eloquently states...except for Israel. I listen to his podcast every day and find myself marveling at his use of the English language in expressing such well thought out concepts and ideas. However, I try to avoid his talks on Israel, but it's really not that hard since it doesn't come up much. I just accept him for being soft on the subject.

Regarding "nothing stopping them" I hate to submit to the idea that they are on the path to steamroll all Palestinians and nothing will stop them. As long as the US is their money-guy, they will do whatever they want and nobody can say anything. Why? Because there is a huge Israeli lobby by the name of AIPAC that will destroy any American politician that questions Israel. They are organized towards one goal and fund both right and left leaning politicians and to see that goal come true, which is to ensure Israel takes ownership of the entire country of Israel and push out the Palestinians. Zionism is alive and well and its victim is the Palestinian people. Unfortunately, to say anything about the subject turns the speaker into a bigot and antisemite; there is no room to criticize Israel.

I suggest reading two books on the subject The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy and Jimmy Carter's Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid.

u/jsaf420 · 0 pointsr/booksuggestions

Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid By Jimmy Carter (of presidential fame) is a pretty good overview of the history of it all. He comes down pretty harshly on Israel iirc. The information is all there and he has a very unique perspective to share and personal stories that you can't get elsewhere.

u/deixj · 1 pointr/changemyview

>Highly unlikely. Neither solution is acceptable to the ultra-religious settlers. I mean, I would agree that both solutions would be ok from the neutral's point of view, but if we are trying to find a solution that Israel will politically accept, neither one of those will do.

Sacrifices are going to have to be made on settlements no matter what. There's simply no way to absorb all of them without annexing the entire West Bank. This is why Israeli policymakers are increasingly calling for separation between the two populations. Evacuating settlements beyond the separation wall is considered a centrist position within Israel: it's certainly not impossible for it to happen. At least giving settlers the option to remain in Palestine would allow religious hardliners who care more about the land than the authority ruling over them.

>Would it? This states that there is now a parity, which is expected to grow in the future. Would the Jews of Israel want to take such a gamble?

This is including Gaza, which has a very high birthrate and which Israel would never take, and it's a temporary setback. The Jewish birthrate only recently surpassed the Arab one. The death rate is still higher since Israel's population is older, but this won't last. There's also the potential for more aliyah, especially from Europe, though this is of course difficult to predict.

>Again, I can see this working (look at Belgium), but that would require a lot of goodwill between the Jews and Muslims before the democracy could work. A country with two communities that hate deeply one another won't work even if one side has a slight majority.

I agree: it would be tense and likely violent for a long time. It's nevertheless a way for Israel to maintain a Jewish majority and a democratic form of government. Likely it would happen slowly, and West Bank Palestinians would have the option to apply for Israeli citizenship without it being automatically bestowed upon them (like in East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights).

>If such a solution is sought, it should be done on the same basis as other countries with such deep divides have been made to work (Northern Ireland, Belgium, etc.) with guarantees for both parties to be treated equally. Northern Ireland assembly could never work if it were run by a tiny protestant majority. It only works as both the catholics and the protestants are guaranteed a place in the government. Belgium was in governmental crisis some time ago as the French and Flemish speaking parties were unable to form a coalition government. The country would collapse if the Flemish-speakers would form a government on their own with their majority (about 60/40). That's how it would be in Israel as well. At least in the beginning, all governments of such a state would have to have both Jews and Muslims in it. Possibly if in some later state the importance of the religion disappears, normal (non religious-identity) politics could resume. In the case of Israel I would expect this to take decades.

This is assuming some kind of federal model is attempted, which isn't necessarily the case. There could very well be a tyranny of the majority. It's an impractical solution and the two-state solution makes more sense on pretty much every level, but there are proposals, mostly from the Israeli right, to either annex the West Bank and maintain a unitary Jewish state or to create a federation that preserves the Jewish identity of the state.

u/x_TC_x · 3 pointsr/WarCollege

IMHO, it all depends on what exactly do you want to read: geo-political backgrounds or military history; official line based on recollections and opinions, or official documentation; and, then it of course depends on whether you want to take sides or remain neutral.

From my POV, starting point for anybody with intention of obtaining a neutral position requires the reading of such works like:

  • Arabs & Israel For Beginners

    At first look, this one might appear as 'on the light side', or at least a 'light/easy to use'. Actually, this is a concise, well-supported collection of historical facts, providing an indispensable introduction to the Arab-Israeli conflict. IMHO, it shouldn't be missing from any serious reading list to this topic.

  • Taking Sides: America's Secret Relations with a Militant Israel, 1948-1967.

    Partially used as a source of reference for above-mentioned work by David, this one is also an indispensable read. It is based on primary sources - foremost official US documentation that seems to have been completely ignored by all other authors. 'Taking Sides' is a relatively small book, but it is incredibly well-supported, detailed, and offering clear insights into the coming into being of Israel (and the US support for the same); into how Israel actually survived the first 20 years following its creation; and then especially into how Israel established itself in a position of military hegemony over most of the Middle East.
u/LaszloK · 5 pointsr/books

I have the book that you mention by Harms & Ferry, and I can confirm that it is a very good intro to the topic, and well worth buying.

Another good introduction is The Israel-Palestine Conflict: One Hundred Years of War by James Gelvin, which was a required textbook for me at Uni. It doesn't appear to be available from Amazon.com though, so you might want to look around for it. It is available on Google Books so you can have a look at it there.

Another good book for further reading (specifically about Palestinian identity) is The Iron Cage by Rashid Khalidi.

Hope that helps.

u/s-ro_mojosa · 1 pointr/Esperanto

> Just because Islamic terrorism exists doesn't mean that Israel gets a blank cheque.

Sure, no nation state under heaven is perfect. For a deep dive into imperfections and strange quirks of the Israeli political scene, you might want to read Catch The Jew!. Be advised the work is very satirical in it's approach to the subject, but none the less quite accurate. Enjoy the chuckles as you read, it is as funny as it is enlightening.

> Errors are: the wildly inaccurate map…

Yep, you're right. I read the words and didn't pay attention to the pictures. That map is more than a bit silly. Especially because the creator of the map makes the all too common error [among Westerners] of conflating "Arab" with "Muslim" to the point of using the terms interchangeably. Also, big chunks of the map that are marked in red for "Arab/Muslim" are relatively unpopulated such as the interior of the Sinai Peninsula which also makes no sense.

> In short it is contrary international law to settle your people in occupied territory in order to demographically alter the region, which is exactly was Israel is doing.

*Sigh.* Jerusalem is not a settlement anymore than Moscow is settlement. The regions of Judea and Sumeria aren't settlements either. They have been occupied by Jews since very ancient times.

The fact is, as I suspect you well know, the "Palestinian state," already exists: Jordan. A second concurrent "Palestinian state" is not needed.

> …calling people who have lived in Palestine for centuries "squatters" and "brutal terrorists".

I'll concede this point too, but I do not think you'll like the result. Non-Jewish residents of these regions should be brought into the fold and offered full Israeli citizenship. If they cannot stomach Israeli citizenship they may voluntarily relocate if that is truly their wish. The most efficient path to peace therefore would be The Israeli Solution: A One-State Plan for Peace in the Middle East. Wouldn't you agree?

Before dissenting from the One State solution, please consider this: virtually every time Israel has extended an olive branch along "two state" lines both the Israelis and residents of the Palestinian Territories have been made to suffer. Just look at Gaza. Israel seeded control and militants promptly moved in and began shelling Sderot. (Irony of ironies: the first Qassam rockets were made using "recycled" materials from greenhouses the State of Israel left in Gaza to the Gazens get on their feet, economically.) Israel, having a moral obligation to protect its people, was forced to act with an embargo and, at times, limited military strikes.

The very sad truth is: Palestinians are made to suffer because their own leadership reckons them as useful political pawns than as settled and naturalized Israeli citizens. The optics of the situation are then exploited to create the appearance of a moral crisis that would not otherwise be present if Israel held unchallenged autonomy over its borders. This is also why residents of Palestinian territories don't relocate, they're generally prevented from doing so by neighboring powers perpetuating the "crisis."

What are your thoughts /u/TeoKajLibroj?

u/Subotan · 1 pointr/worldnews

You could also read a book? Complaining that you know nothing and want to know more, then asking for Youtube videos on the subject is like saying you're starving then choosing to feast on a whole M&M.

Shindler's History of Modern Israel is a little dry (feel free to skim the intricacies of Israeli cabinet politics), but it covers the internal but public Israeli debates really well and explains why the Israelis continue to occupy the West Bank and Gaza as truthfully and even-handed as you can get in this subject. Joe Sacco's Palestine remains not just a landmark in comics twenty years after it was written but also the definitive account of the Palestinian experience under occupation, and the drudgery and oppression that go with being unfree in your own land. Both books will help you empathise, in different ways.

u/Pearlbuck · 1 pointr/AskReddit

Ah, yes, classic tactics--call anyone who points out the truth about Zionist control of U.S. foreign policy insane, a neo-Nazi and a conspiracy theorist. Problem is, hasbarah (that's what you are, whether you are paid or volunteer) fewer and fewer people are falling for that fallacious b.s. anymore. That's why you're throwing such a tantrum--this is the death throws of the censorship you defend. Mearsheimer and Walt couldn't even get their paper published in a major U.S. outlet. Things have changed a LOT since then. You're losing.

Anyway who knows anything about U.S. politics knows that a candidate stands virtually zero chance of getting elected unless he kisses the Zionist Lobby's ring. There are occasional miracles of zero consequence, like Ron Paul, but exceptions prove the rule. AIPAC brags about destroying U.S. candidates who don't toe the line! And you can't deny it!

I'm not delusional--if you didn't think there was a chance other people might be reading this, you wouldn't be going to such embarrassing lengths to distract front he truths I'm laying down, DAWG.

Here's that great article by former CIA officer Phil Giraldi. And make sure to google "hasbara." It's stunning.

http://www.crescent-online.net/2014/06/how-the-israel-lobby-works-philip-giraldi-4504-articles.html

And here is the wonderful book by the wonderful Jimmy Carter. It's a shame Zionists sued him over this book, but what are you gonna do?

http://www.amazon.com/Palestine-Peace-Apartheid-Jimmy-Carter/dp/0743285034/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1421022795&sr=8-2&keywords=israel+apartheid+state

And yes, I am absolutely sure that Gen. Petratraeus' woes are partially the result of his comments that enraged Zionists. This is by no means an insane POV. It's a totally rational interpretation. Your ranting and raving and "Neo-Nazi" accusations won't change that fact.

http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/when-former-cia-chief-david-petraeus-enraged-israel-lobby

And here is a great video from that famous neo-Nazi, Ralph Nader:

https://zionismkills.wordpress.com/tag/ralph-nader/

u/qoumran · 4 pointsr/books

Great choice of interest - I have studied Israel for the last couple of years and it has been very interesting.

There are two books I would recommend:

Martin Gilbert, Israel: a History. Almost 800 pages, but you could read it selectively. I recommend this because I often find that in order to understand something about Israel you need to know something about its background. The conflict starts a long time before the formation in 1948 when Jews bought land from the locals.

David Hirst. The gun and the olive branch. More focused on the conflict(s), but also sets out from the time before the declaration of state. Slightly shorter and more readable than Gilbert's book.

Both of them are well known books on the subject and perhaps more likely to be available from a nearby library. They also come as reasonably priced paperbacks.

u/axelorator · 4 pointsr/AskHistorians

Not about my country, but I'd recommend reading [The Israel-Palestine Conflict: One Hundred Years of War] (http://www.amazon.com/The-Israel-Palestine-Conflict-Hundred-Years/dp/0521888352) by James L. Gelvin. I used to think I knew what I needed to know about this conflict from watching news through the years, but after having read this I realize I didn't have a clue. Unbiased, interesting and at times witty. My favourite quote, about the Americans accepting Soviet participation in the Madrid Conference: "American policymakers believed, in the words of an old arabian proverb, that it was better to have a camel inside your tent pissing out than a camel outside your tent pissing in."

u/deepsearch · 0 pointsr/history

A really brief but super-informative survey of 20th century Middle Eastern history is Avi Shlaim's War and Peace in the Middle East.

David Lesch's The Arab Israeli Conflict: A History focuses primarily on the eastern Mediterranean but discusses the region more broadly as well.

Trita Parsi's Treacherous Alliance covers the history Israeli-Iranian relations in a really engaging way.


u/lyagusha · 1 pointr/Judaism

Excellent article, excellent points, especially the penultimate article paragraph. American Jewry must embrace an understanding of American Jewishness as being separate from Israeli Jewishness and go their necessary different ways

Neusner is not the first to discuss the effect of the Holocaust, btw. Tom Segev wrote about the effect of the Holocaust on Israel.

u/tayssir · 3 pointsr/reddit.com

In that case, my nation-state (the US) could withdraw the billions of foreign aid we send to Israel every year. And to Egypt for not attacking Israel. (They're by far the top recipients, unless we count Iraq. And it's probably not even counting other forms of military aid we send them.) Let the mightiest and most militant survive without my nation's intervention.

Or, we could support the significant Israeli and Palestinian peace movements, and eliminate what president Carter calls "apartheid."

u/DontMentionWombats · 2 pointsr/forwardsfromgrandma

Eh, it's among the more ok-ish pieces on the topic that's out there. Sure he's biased, and some of his points are awkward at best, but the amount of either anti-semitic or anti-Arab nonsense is just mind blowing. It's hard enough to find anything that provides original sources.

And regardless of the quality (or lack thereof) of scholarship on the subject, al-Husseini had some pretty reprehensible ideas.

This is one of the best books on the history of Middle East conflict - if you search a bit, you can find PDFs of older versions.

u/noflippingidea · 2 pointsr/ReligiousDebates

This is a great idea. I recently read a book about Jewish religion and history and one of the chapters had to do with laws against non-Jews. The main premise of that chapter was to show how the Talmud distinguishes between Jews and non-Jews (Gentiles), and that non-Jews aren't afforded the same rights as Jews under rabbinical law. (This book was written by a Jewish Israeli so I'm inclined to believe most of what he said; plus he added a lot of commentary and research to back up every point).

I'm a Muslim, so I know what it's like for someone to take sections of the Quran out of context to make us look bad, so I don't want to do the same here. I try not to believe everything I read when it comes to religious texts, because they were written ages ago and have been interpreted a number of different ways over the years.

Still, though, I can't help but notice similarities between these laws and the way Arabs are treated in Israel, and I'm starting to wonder if there is some sort of link. I guess I want to know your opinions on the matter - when you were young, were you taught that there was a difference between Jews and non-Jews? What do you know about the education of Israeli children on these issues? Do you think that's why there's so much mistrust between Jewish Israelis and Arabs? Any opinions/thoughts would be appreciated. Also, I'm sorry if this was in any way offensive; I don't mean it to be, I just want to learn more about it and I really appreciate you taking the time to do this.

u/Shakshuka · 0 pointsr/AskHistorians

The history of Zionism is such a long topic that it cannot be summarized by starting only with Herzl.


The gentleman who has posted here his views of a syllabus for Israel hasn't come close to scratching the surface of what it takes to have an even basic understanding of this conflict. While he has done a great job putting his list together, things as basic and important as the Jewish exodus from Arab/Muslim countries after the creation of Israel and the Yom Kippur war are missing.


Also, without a fundamental understanding of the history of the Jewish people and their Ancient Hebrew ancestors on this land, anything coming after will seem lacking historical basis.


The main thing I would recommend while in Jordan is to gain from what you could not if you were abroad. Ask Jordanians their intimate views and opinions, in relation to historical questions.


Ask them about why the Arabs refused the Partition Plan in 47 and would rather not have a Jewish state at all rather than both Jewish and Palestinian Arab states side by side.


Ask them also about 1967, and their loss of the Jerusalem and the West Bank.


Ask them what they did to bolster Palestinian independence while they were occupying the West Bank between 49 and 67.


Anyway, you can tell my cousins and neighbors in Jordan that we do not hate them, and that one day, Insha'Allah (or B'ezrat Hashem as we say) we will be able to live in peace and prosperity.


Do you mind telling us more about yourself as well? How old you are, what you are studying and such?

Edit: since everyone is posting a book they think is worth reading, how about Six Days of War, by Michael Oren.

http://www.amazon.com/Six-Days-War-Making-Modern/dp/0195151747

u/TryhardPantiesON · 5 pointsr/conspiracy

Of course it is insane, everything you have been led to believe is false... including Hitler, i sincerely and wholeheartedly ask you to investigate, and question the reality you live in.

Want me to blow your mind? Investigate who is Fred Leuchter, investigate the Leuchter report, read The Seventh Million, read The biggest lie of the 20th century, read The transfer agreement, read The great holocaust Trial.

u/H00ded · 2 pointsr/worldnews

A really interesting book I read on Saudi Arabia once, On Saudi Arabia. Worth a read for anyone interested in learning more about the Kingdom.

u/Ghost_Church · 1 pointr/Christianity

This is probably the best source out there. It is incredibly balanced and incredibly comprehensive.

u/law-talkin-guy · 1 pointr/explainlikeimfive

Former President Jimmy Carter wrote a book he called Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid. So the comparison is clearly made, and quite publicly so, even in the US.

u/chaironeko · -1 pointsr/books

This book is somewhat out of date but I really enjoyed it. You can read it in a sitting.

Arabs & Israel for Beginners (Writers and Readers Series) by Ron David et al. http://www.amazon.com/dp/0863161618/ref=cm_sw_r_udp_awd_.YxWtb17TM1GG

u/maybetoday · 2 pointsr/AskReddit

A standard history of the region is important, as well as info about the colonizers who defined Palestine's borders, and then Israel's. Here are just some initial thoughts, but definitely keep searching.

A History of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict (read this years ago; assuming it's been updated?)

The Lemon Tree (good book that really humanizes the conflict)


u/ironsolomon · 1 pointr/videos

It's hard to answer this question without explaining significant background history of the conflict. It looks like you want Cliff's Notes on the conflict, and I'm afraid it isn't possible. In short, it's quite like any other land possession conflict, but the inclusion of religion (i.e., Biblical significance of the land), the holocaust, and the role of the U.S. make this particular conflict more relevant to Americans than a similar dispute elsewhere.

If you really want an answer to your question, you'll have to do some reading:

If you want a progressive viewpoint: Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid (Jimmy Carter)

If you want a pro-Israeli viewpoint (this doesn't mean the progressive viewpoint is anti-Israeli): The Case for Peace: How the Arab-Israeli Conflict Can be Resolved (Alan Dershowitz).

For the record, I have read neither but I am familiar with where each of the author stands on Israel.

u/EstacionEsperanza · 2 pointsr/islam

The Israel-Palestine Conflict: One Hundred Years of War by James Gelvin is a good overview that tries to touch on both sides. I read it in 2008 though, so it's not 100% up to date, but it's a good account of how we got where we are.

u/puppeteer107 · 1 pointr/travel

Thomas Freidman wrote From Beirut to Jerusalem about two decades ago and it is still such a great read.

u/InsiderSwords · 7 pointsr/AskAnAmerican

For more information, I recommend you read

[Force and Fanaticism: Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia and Beyond]
(https://www.amazon.com/Force-Fanaticism-Wahhabism-Arabia-Beyond/dp/1849044643)
Describes the history of Wahhabism and its effects. Author spent time in Saudi Arabia.

[The ISIS Apocalypse: The History, Strategy, and Doomsday Vision of the Islamic State] (https://www.amazon.com/ISIS-Apocalypse-History-Strategy-Doomsday/dp/1250112648/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1496875330&sr=1-1&keywords=The+ISIS+Apocalypse)

Self explanatory.

[Kingdom of the Unjust: Behind the U.S.-Saudi Connection] (https://www.amazon.com/Kingdom-Unjust-Behind-U-S-Saudi-Connection/dp/1944869026/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1496875675&sr=1-1&keywords=kingdom+of+the+unjust+behind+the+u.s.-saudi+connection)

Easy to read description of Saudi crimes.

[The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11] (https://www.amazon.com/Looming-Tower-Al-Qaeda-Road-11/dp/1400030846/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1496875754&sr=1-1&keywords=Looming+Tower)

Excellent narrative history of Al Qaeda. Highly recommended.

[My Year Inside Radical Islam: A Memoir] (https://www.amazon.com/My-Year-Inside-Radical-Islam/dp/1585426113/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1496875857&sr=1-1&keywords=My+Year+inside+Radical+Islam)

Not a wide-sweeping narrative but a personal story of someone who worked for a Saudi-funded charity and slowly adapted their beliefs.

[On Saudi Arabia: Its People, Past, Religion, Fault Lines -- and Future]
(https://www.amazon.com/Saudi-Arabia-People-Religion-Lines/dp/0307473287/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1496875930&sr=1-1&keywords=On+Saudi+Arabia)

Written by a reporter who spent years in Saudi Arabia, gives a description of Saudi society.

[The Siege of Mecca: The 1979 Uprising at Islam's Holiest Shrine] (https://www.amazon.com/Siege-Mecca-Uprising-Islams-Holiest/dp/0307277739/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1496876042&sr=1-1&keywords=The+Siege+of+Mecca)

A great history of an almost unknown terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia. Goes into the relationship between the Saudi royal family and Wahhabi religious establishment.

[Knowing the Enemy: Jihadist Ideology and the War on Terror]
(https://www.amazon.com/Knowing-Enemy-Jihadist-Ideology-Terror/dp/0300122578/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1496876149&sr=1-1&keywords=Knowing+the+Enemy)
Really good explanation of Salafi-Jihadism.


Edit: Added links and made it look nicer. If you want more, just ask. If anyone has any other recommendations, I would like to know. :)

u/txpunjabi14 · 1 pointr/islam

It's important to look at modern Muslim-majority nations within the context of post-colonialism, and it's also important to note the biases of western media, authors, and audiences when discussing. The fact that you think that Muslims cannot objectively comment on on narrate their own histories or politics is a really problematic point of view. Do you think western perspectives on Islamic societies are unbiased towards and unaffected by western colonialist and imperialist involvement in said societies? Do you seek out Muslim, Chinese, Russian, or African narrations of western history and society too? Deeming non-western narratives of and contributions to historical or political discourse, among many other subjects, as being deficient is frankly a hallmark of western exceptionalism.

As for the first topic, the subject is really broad, and each Muslim-majority country has its own post-colonial narrative, but The Oxford History of Islam has three chapters specifically dealing with what you're trying to learn about - Ch 13 European Colonialism and the Emergence of Modern Muslim States, Ch 14 The Globalization of Islam, & Ch 15 Contemporary Islam: Challenges and Opportunities. Keep in mind though that this book just scratches the surface in terms of covering the historical development of modern-day Muslim states and the discussion doesn't really delve into the details of each individual country.

Secondly, I think you should maybe read some work by Edward Said. Specifically, you should look at Orientalism and Covering Islam: How the Media and the Experts Determine How We See the Rest of the World. Orientalism is a critique of western perspectives on and representations of eastern societies. Covering Islam is a bit more specific obviously, and it analyzes objectivity of western narratives on modern-day Islam and Muslim-majority society.

u/pickles_the_cucumber · 3 pointsr/booksuggestions

Might be a bit more detailed than you are looking for but we used an older edition of this in an undergrad course and I think it was as balanced as you’ll find.

Benny Morris’s Righteous Victims is also good especially for the historical side up to the 60s/70s

u/Inoku · 1 pointr/Israel

IMHO Michael Oren's Six Days of War is the best book on the '67 war.

But then again, Michael Oren is one of my personal heroes, so I'm biased.

u/IamTheFreshmaker · 1 pointr/pics

From Beruit to Jerusalem is fantastic. You can find it used anywhere,

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0385413726/

u/lolmonger · 2 pointsr/PoliticalDiscussion

In no particular order:

http://www.amazon.com/Beirut-Jerusalem-Thomas-L-Friedman/dp/1250015499

http://www.amazon.com/Lawrence-Arabia-Deceit-Imperial-Making-ebook/dp/B00BH0VSPI/ref=zg_bs_4995_5

http://www.amazon.com/My-Promised-Land-Triumph-Tragedy-ebook/dp/B009QJMXI8/ref=zg_bs_4995_4


http://www.amazon.com/Ethnic-Cleansing-Palestine-Ilan-Pappe/dp/1851685553/ref=zg_bs_4995_10

http://www.amazon.com/Arabic-Thought-Liberal-Age-1798-1939/dp/0521274230/ref=cm_lmf_tit_3

http://www.amazon.com/History-Arab-Peoples-Albert-Hourani/dp/0446393924/ref=cm_lmf_tit_4

http://www.amazon.com/Women-Gender-Islam-Historical-Modern/dp/0300055838/ref=cm_lmf_tit_9

http://www.amazon.com/Emergence-Modern-Studies-Eastern-History/dp/0195134605/ref=cm_lmf_tit_10

http://www.amazon.com/Peace-End-All-Ottoman-Creation/dp/0805068848/ref=cm_lmf_tit_17


As a non-Muslim, non-Jew, non-Arab, non-Semite, American, and having read these (yay strict immigrant parents!) and some other histories, as well as having had the attacks of 9/11 give me a neurosis about following the news in the Middle East/Central/South Asia as regards potential US involvement and issues:


A lot feels familiar to me, some of it even seems like stuff I know a good deal about, and a few things about "The Middle East" which is a massively rich and complex sociopolitical place and slice of humanity are things I'd consider myself very well read on.


And I don't know shit.


I can tell you as a native born American and US voter what I think my country's policies (in a limited, broad strokes sense) should be - - - but beyond that, there's very little I've ever seen as conclusive and firm coming from anyone who by dint of identity didn't have 'skin in the game' .

u/InfiniteRelease · 9 pointsr/worldnews

"Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," authored by Jimmy Carter, published in 2007.

u/bejammin075 · 19 pointsr/politics

Former President Jimmy Carter actually wrote a book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid

u/ummmbacon · 37 pointsr/NeutralPolitics

Mark Tessler's A History of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict is often cited as a very balanced work on the subject.

/r/AskHistorians also has some good information such as:

  1. To what extent is it true that the Palestinians have turned down several 'reasonable' offers from Israel for full statehood?

  2. I've always understood that the Israeli attack in the Six-Day War was very much a justified pre-emptive attack. It appears that this may not be supported by evidence and that there was no actual threat to Israel in 1967. What do we know about the reasons for war?
  3. Was there ethnic cleansing in Israel/Palestine in 1948? What caused it? Is there a historical consensus on what happened?
  4. What plans did the Arabs have for Israel had they won the arab Israeli wars?
  5. What were the United Arab Armies plans with Israel and the millions of jews there Should they have won any of the founding,6 day or yom kippur war and "defeated" Israel?

    There are many others on the sub as well, but I think that covers the most frequent topics I have heard about Israel.

    For a few more books My Promised Land by Ari Shavit is about the history of Israel, Shavit is a writer for Haaretz which is a very 'left' publication in Israel. Also, Israel by Daniel Gordis Gordis has written for a variety of publications including the New York Times and the New Republic

    We have also had some posts here on /r/NeutralPolitics about this subject, which are a bit more modern than AH:

  6. Is Israel an apartheid state?
  7. Looking for sources that give both sides of the Israel/Palestine debate for a class I'm teaching.
  8. Why has Israel established settlements in the West Bank and Golan Heights in spite of opposition from major nations and the UN Security Council?
u/Iconoclast123 · 2 pointsr/Israel

Take a look at this - she's pretty right wing, and this book is her set of solutions (btw, if you go on youtube and look up the book title, I'm sure she's done interviews that you can watch):

https://www.amazon.com/Israeli-Solution-One-State-Peace-Middle/dp/0385348061

u/shimewaza_specialist · 2 pointsr/AdviceAnimals

yeah, one of the things that pisses me off so much about the "israel = evil" brigade is the absolute lack of responsibility laid on the palestinian "leaders" who have fucked over their own people over and over with zero criticism.

israel has done terrible things as a state, there's no denying that, but it's hardly a one sided issue. i strongly suggest that anyone really interested in the subject read an academically published, unbiased history that doesn't cut too many corners (it's gonna be around 1000 pages at least.) i found this one to be very very good http://www.amazon.com/History-Israeli-Palestinian-Conflict-Indiana-Islamic/dp/025322070X

u/Covenant_Breaker · 4 pointsr/exbahai

> Is calling people 'biased white Americans brainwashed by their government' going to help that?

What inclusivity are you speaking of that automatically demonstrates a bias towards anything associated with Iran or the Islamic world in general and then dismisses everything else said based on this bias? You hold some bizarre ideas about inclusivity. Do you have a problem with the fact that white Anglo-North Americans are automatically conditioned by decades of relentless media and institutional propaganda to hold such bias? Because that is the truth of the matter and there is plenty of social science literature and analysis saying exactly this very thing. Start with Edward Sa'id's Covering Islam https://www.amazon.com/Covering-Islam-Media-Experts-Determine/dp/0679758909
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covering_Islam

You say you support Iran and claim that you believe Baha'ism is a lie and false religion. Whether you actually do, well, the jury is out on that https://www.reddit.com/r/iranian/comments/aqvmvm/has_anybody_else_grown_to_like_ahmadinejad/egnh4dl/?st=juzmvf8d&sh=5d3f4656

u/CasualtiesofConflict · 1 pointr/IsraelPalestine

Read James Gelvin's The Israel-Palestine Conflict: One Hundred Years of War

Also, this MERIP page is a good starter.

u/balletboy · 1 pointr/worldnews

http://www.amazon.com/The-Invention-Land-Israel-Homeland/dp/1781680833

http://www.amazon.com/From-Beirut-Jerusalem-Thomas-Friedman/dp/1250015499

http://www.amazon.com/Shoah-Criterion-Collection-Blu-ray-None/dp/B00BX49B6G/ref=sr_1_1?s=movies-tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1420265971&sr=1-1&keywords=shoah

http://www.amazon.com/Conspiracy-Kenneth-Branagh/dp/B00KG2S00O/ref=sr_1_1?s=movies-tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1420265806&sr=1-1&keywords=conspiracy

I took classes on Jewish history and on the "Israeli-Arab conflict."

Likewise one might claim that you have a very conditioned and conformist view of the conflict. Try asking people outside of the western world what they think of Israel. Most people from countries that were actually colonized and made part of European empires see Israel as a natural extension of European colonialism.

u/brazillion · 1 pointr/worldnews

That is not what I recall from my professor's book, nor his course on the subject.

https://www.amazon.com/History-Israeli-Palestinian-Conflict-Indiana-Islamic/dp/025322070X/

Alas, I don't have the book in front of me.

With that said, refer to the chart on Page 5 of the below PDF. Note that it is a source which is "Pro-Zionist," but the numbers mentioned align with my former professor's research. Of the land under Jewish control in 1947, 57% of it came from Arab landowners.

http://www.wordfromjerusalem.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/the-case-for-israel-appendix2.pdf

On a personal note - I don't have a horse in the race. The course I took at the University of Michigan was quite the eye opener for me with impassioned arguments from both the Jewish and Muslim communities. For many of these kids, it was the first time they actually got to debate the matter outside of the safe space of their family dinner table.

Edit: Removed a sentence I used twice.

u/Drumlin · 3 pointsr/politics

Jimmy Carter supports Palestine.

Is it any wonder that the media completely ignores him?

u/LocalAmazonBot · 2 pointsr/worldnews

Here are some links for the product in the above comment for different countries:

Link: http://www.amazon.com/The-Missing-Peace-Inside-Middle/dp/0374529809


|Country|Link|
|:-----------|:------------|
|UK|amazon.co.uk|
|Spain|amazon.es|
|France|amazon.fr|
|Germany|amazon.de|
|Japan|amazon.co.jp|
|Canada|amazon.ca|
|Italy|amazon.it|
|China|amazon.cn|



This bot is currently in testing so let me know what you think by voting (or commenting).

u/learnhtk · 1 pointr/saudiarabia

Hey, I got some recommendations for you!


The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Almaz's story and a redditor's comment.


As for myself, I am currently reading On Saudi Arabia by Karen Elliott House.

u/SomeGuyInOttawa · 17 pointsr/politics

The fact that he'd write this book calling out Israel demonstrates that Jimmy Carter has more fucking sack than any present day western public figure.

u/shillforyou · 1 pointr/suggestmeabook

Suggestion: History through Prof. Mark Tessler. Unbiased. Informative.

u/L0rd_Baron · 3 pointsr/worldnews

You don't get to take land from an population entirely innocent of the persecution of the European Jews without doing horrible things.

I urge you to take your own advice and read say The Israel-Palestine Conflict: One Hundred Years of War

You will get a far more balanced view of the conflict and get maybe a little insight to the Palestinian POV.

u/shlomotrutta · 1 pointr/ofcoursethatsathing

Tried it out, seems not to reliably recognize the presence of reviews: "UNABLE TO CALCULATE DUE TO LOW NUMBER OF PRODUCT REVIEWS" with 0 recognized reviews e.g. on this, with 1678 reviews:

http://www.amazon.com/My-Promised-Land-Triumph-Tragedy-ebook/dp/B009QJMXI8

u/roses_are_blue · 3 pointsr/Ask_Politics

> Just google "Israel-Palestine Mark Tessler 2014", I forget the exact name.

It is very aptly called 'A History of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict'. It's on its second edition now (2009).
amazon link

u/The_Vulture1 · 3 pointsr/AskHistorians

The Israel-Arab Reader is almost entirely composed of primary sources, with almost no commentary by the authors apart from the foreword and afterword.

https://www.amazon.com/Israel-Arab-Reader-Documentary-History-Conflict/dp/0143113798

u/LineNoise · 7 pointsr/Israel

http://www.amazon.com/Palestine-Peace-Apartheid-Jimmy-Carter/dp/0743285026

I'd imagine that's a big part of it.

He's got to be about the only US President to bluntly denounce the policies in action in the Occupied Territories.

u/samfaina · 1 pointr/worldnews

Apartheid is a discriminatory legal separation. In the US an example of apartheid was the famous blacks-only, whites-only water fountains in some parts of the US South. The term is famous from the racist system used by Israel's old ally, the country Israel worked with to develop nuclear weapons, the apartheid regime of South Africa.

The US president that negotiated the Israeli-Egyptian peace deal, Jimmy Carter, wrote a book on the topic: Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid.

In one interview Carter described one aspect of Israeli apartheid this way: "When Israel does occupy this territory deep within the West Bank, and connects the 200-or-so settlements with each other, with a road, and then prohibits the Palestinians from using that road, or in many cases even crossing the road, this perpetrates even worse instances of apartness, or apartheid, than we witnessed even in South Africa."

u/working_class_shill · 3 pointsr/Documentaries

That's part of the idea. Make the waters so muddled that it's too difficult to cut through the good-faith replies from the bad-faith replies. Make it so that you eventually just lose interest since it's not you being directly affected!

Here are some good debates to get your started:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ux4JU_sbB0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6To-o-aiRg

I'd also recommend reading President Jimmy Carter's Peace Not Apartheid (amazon link not necessary, use your public library!). It's a decent, short primer to the conflict.

u/speedy-G · -1 pointsr/Israel

Prepare yourself for some harsh comments.

Try The Gun and the Olive Branch, by David Hirst. I feel you'll like it.

u/StudyingTerrorism · 3 pointsr/Ask_Politics

Just how much do you know about Saudi Arabia or the Saudi political system? I ask because in your first sentence, you state that a decapitation strike against the Saudi government pushes the royal family from power, yet the House of Saud is comprised of roughly 15,000 people--2,000 of which have power in one form or another in the government. Additionally, there are systems in place to help facilitate succession of the kingdom. And there are entire military services dedicated to ensuring the security of the government against internal threats. So the idea of a decapitation strike is fairly unlikely, which is to say nothing of the numerous other political and societal structures in place that would either facilitate or inhibit any attempt at a coup (especially by a non-state actor).

Before you continue drafting your storyline, I encourage you to read up on the history of Saudi Arabia, political Islam and Islamic extremism, and the international relations of the Arab World. Additionally, I would suggest taking a greater look at the Grand Mosque seizure of 1979 and its aftermath, and instances of a monarchy being overthrown by a non-royal entity. The coups against King Farouk of Egypt (1952), King Faisal II of Iraq (1958), King Idris I of Libya (1969), and the attempted coup against King Hussayn of Jordan (1970) might be good places to start. Not all of them will be applicable to you, but it should give you an idea of what a coup entails, what a successful coup looks like, and what the aftermath is.

With that in mind, I suggest the following books as a place to start:

History of Saudi Arabia and the Arab World

u/nsocks4 · 16 pointsr/neutralnews

TLDR the international plan was not just a "sorry about that whole holocaust thing" that called for booting out the Palestinians. The Zionist concept of an independent Jewish state predates the Holocaust by decades, and plans had been drafted well before Hitler rose to power in Germany. By the time the UN voted to partition the country, a large Jewish community had been living in Palestine for sixty+ years, and smaller Arab-Jewish communities predated even the aliyahs.

Disclaimer: I have attempted to avoid biased language in this. I did not have space to cover every massacre or infraction by either side. This is intended to be a brief overview of the situation and a starting point to read and learn more about this immensely complicated subject, not a comprehensive history of the creation of Israel. It should be noted that Zionist != Jewish != Israeli. Likewise Arab != Muslim != Palestinian. There are and were Arab Christians, Arab Jews, and non-Arabs all involved in the situation.

Sources (just the first two I grabbed off my shelf):

Lacquer, Walter. The Israel-Arab Reader: A Documentary History of the Middle East Conflict , 7th Edition.

Gelvin, David. The Israel-Palestine Conflict: One Hundred Years of War.

u/JimmyBobbyNeutron · 1 pointr/ukpolitics

Yes because Wahhabis exist within and subvert the governmental structure it does not mean the government supports terrorists. There have been digressions in the past but they are most certainly not colluding with ISIS, as a government. It's a very complicated theocratic, monarchistic structure.

Saudi Arabia has been victim to plenty of terror attacks.

>Yes their population is ultra conservative but they don't want to spread terrorism worldwide like the Saud family does.

You literally have it precisely fucking backwards. I try not to swear but this is insane. Read some literature on the subject.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Saudi-Arabia-People-Religion-Lines/dp/0307473287/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1496609398&sr=8-1&keywords=elliott+saudi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Saudi_Arabia