Just over a year ago I posted a short review of 'Lords of the Desert,' a tale of infighting between the US and UK as to who gets the oil, position and power in the Middle East. You may not have realised it but the US came out on top! We got Oman! The recent death of the leader there means we may not have that in our Empire remnant for much longer either. James Barr's study of that relationship is made even more understandable when browsing this book, 'A Line in the Sand.' This covers the arguments between two similar allies, the UK and France!
The line in the sand is the scribbled line drawn up between a government agent Mark Sykes, and the French agent Francois Georges-Picot, in 1916. Basically this split the land between the two nations rather in the manner of the Victorian Empire builders. However, this was a new century and such methods now longer applied, especially with two rather dubious representatives involved and two wary allies behind them.
The book begins in the Great War with the UK wishing to invade Syria but were opposed in this by France, they wished to claim Syria as their own having had influence there in past time, they said. In fact they had been kicked out some 600 years previously. From the beginning of the Great War until long after the second both sides bickered and fought for control of the Syria, Iraq and Palestine areas. It is not a nice situation.
While the author indicate the French, especially under General de Gaul, who thought he was France, were arrogant and indeed violently oppressive, he does not fail to mention the secretive workings and many intrigues made by the London command throughout the period.
For almost 40 years squabbles, leading to many deaths, continued while both sides sought control over the Arabs, while at the same time offering these same Arabs 'freedom' and 'sovereignty.' The UK it must be said, offered more freedom than the French offered, resistance to French rule was often callously put down.
Enter into this Zionists.
By the late 30's many Zionists were headed for Jerusalem citing the Balfour Declaration. The fact that this was a sham to gain support against the French did not matter and by 1940, with the war at its height many were escaping Europe to live in Palestine. After the Holocaust it is no surprise many thousands more wished to flee.
This gave rise to Israeli terrorists, a series of groups it must be said, more callous than any other, indeed even sinking a ship with their own people aboard. They do not come out of this well. Fair to say nobody does. Mass slaughter all around appeared to be the way forward, closed minds, open arms deals, and in the end both France and then the UK are removed from the scene to let them fight it out themselves. British soldiers would not be upset to leave such a difficult dangerous and unsettled region.
The book is jampacked with detail. Facts abound, as in the other James Barr books, and for a clearer understanding of the mess that is the middle East these two books, and his book on Lawrence of Arabia, 'Setting the Desert on Fire,' are all well worth reading.
You may have noticed by now that a new month has arrived. We notice this as until recently social media has been stuffed full off 'woofter month,' however, as of today it is 'International Women's Month.' I thought it already was, every month. Like myself, you will be aware that there is no, or little heard off, International Man's Month.' Men do not count, except when paying for the women, and men over 50 count for less than that these days. So, after a month of gays pretending they are normal and refusing to accept any other view we now have women telling us how hard their life has been. This usually from women who have never had a problem in their lives other than deciding their hair colour! So called 'equality,' the lie about earning less, and their hardships in having babies and working at the same time. How women suffer!
Of course such women have really no problems, certainly none that cause pain or suffering. Not that long ago women worked, in factories, mills, shops, offices, and as domestics. Muttering women today would never sink so low as to actually work. No, for them it is a desk, a coffee pot, a laptop and a page or two of their struggles. I feel for them.
Meanwhile, somewhere on the Turkish or Jordanian border, snuggly cramped into an overcrowded tent or UN shack, a women and her children await Syria's war to end so they can go home. Young men, probably her hsband also, have disappeared into Europe promising to call for them, aye, right! This woman may have worked also, possibly professionally. In Yemen similar women, not working, are standing over the grave of their baby child, killed by a UK made missile perhaps, or maybe a stray bullet. How she wishes she was struggling into work on a crowded commuter train and wasting her life being overpaid for doing nothing very important. No chance of that however.
Do women need a special month? Do men? Not that men will get one, men just get complaints, then have to do the work the women leave for them.
Am I fed up with the March Twitter feed today?
er, I came across this...
