LOGO: Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines. A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.   Exclusive Truthdig Merchandise: Mr. Fish T-shirts and Signed Prints
November 23, 2009
Log in / Register

 Choose a size
Text Size

Most Read

Refuse Allegiance to Coal

Give Kennedy His Cracker

Beautiful Steamer

The Guantanamo Lawyers: Shipwrecked

Obama's Third Way in Afghanistan

Most Comments
Most Emailed

Reports

Ear to the Ground

A/V Booth

Arts & Culture
Freedom’s Fight: Part II

Digs
Financial Meltdown 101
Vetting Sarah Palin

Truthdig Bazaar
Field Days

Field Days

By Jonah Raskin
$16.47

more items

 
Reports

Lawrence of Arabia Had it Right About Iraq

Email this item Email    Print this item Print   
Posted on Jul 19, 2007

By Robert Fisk

Back in 1929, Lawrence of Arabia wrote the entry for “Guerrilla” in the 14th edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica. It is a chilling read—and here I thank one of my favourite readers, Peter Metcalfe of Stevenage, for sending me TE’s remarkable article—because it contains so ghastly a message to the American armies in Iraq.

Writing of the Arab resistance to Turkish occupation in the 1914-18 war, he asks of the insurgents (in Iraq and elsewhere): “... suppose they were an influence, a thing invulnerable, intangible, without front or back, drifting about like a gas? Armies were like plants, immobile as a whole, firm-rooted, nourished through long stems to the head. The Arabs might be a vapour…”

How typical of Lawrence to use the horror of gas warfare as a metaphor for insurgency. To control the land they occupied, he continued, the Turks “would have need of a fortified post every four square miles, and a post could not be less than 20 men. The Turks would need 600,000 men to meet the combined ill wills of all the local Arab people. They had 100,000 men available.”

Now who does that remind you of? The “fortified post every four square miles” is the ghostly future echo of George W Bush’s absurd “surge”. The Americans need 600,000 men to meet the combined ill will of the Iraqi people, and they have only 150,000 available. Donald Rumsfeld, the architect of “war lite,” is responsible for that. Yet still these rascals get away with it.

Hands up those readers who know that Canada’s Defence Minister, Gordon O’Connor, actually sent a letter to Rumsfeld two days before his departure in disgrace from the Pentagon, praising this disreputable man’s “leadership”. Yes, O’Connor wanted “to take this opportunity to congratulate you on your many achievements (sic) as Secretary of Defence, and to recognise the significant contribution you have made in the fight against terrorism”. The world, gushed the ridiculous O’Connor, had benefited from Rumsfeld’s “leadership in addressing the complex issues in play”.

Advertisement

O’Connor tried to shrug off this grovelling note, acquired through the Canadian Access to Information Act, by claiming he merely wanted to thank Rumsfeld for the use of US medical facilities in Germany to ferry wounded Canadian soldiers home from Afghanistan. But he made no mention of this in his preposterous letter. O’Connor, it seems, is just another of the world’s illusionists who believe they can ignore the facts—and laud fools—by stating the opposite of the truth. Bush, of course, is among the worst of these meretricious creatures. So is the late Tony Blair.

Oh, how we miss Lawrence. “The printing press is the greatest weapon in the armoury of the modern (guerrilla) commander,” he wrote 78 years ago, accurately predicting al-Qa’ida’s modern-day use of the internet. For insurgents, “battles were a mistake ... Napoleon had spoken in angry reaction against the excessive finesse of the 18th century, when men almost forgot that war gave licence to murder”.

True, the First World War Arab Revolt was not identical to today’s Iraqi insurgency. In 1917, the Turks had manpower but insufficient weapons. Today the Americans have the weapons but insufficient men. But listen to Lawrence again.

“Rebellion must have an unassailable base ...

“In the minds of men converted to its creed. It must have a sophisticated alien enemy, in the form of a disciplined army of occupation too small to fulfil the doctrine of acreage: too few to adjust number to space, in order to dominate the whole area effectively from fortified posts.

“It must have a friendly population, not actively friendly, but sympathetic to the point of not betraying rebel movements to the enemy. Rebellions can be made by 2 per cent active in a striking force, and 98 per cent passively sympathetic ... Granted mobility, security ... time, and doctrine ... victory will rest with the insurgents, for the algebraical factors are in the end decisive, and against them perfections of means and spirit struggle quite in vain.”

Has the US General David Petraeus read this? Has Bush? Have any of the tired American columnists whose anti-Arab bias is wobbling close to racism bothered to study this wisdom? I remember how Daniel Pipes - one of the great illusionists of modern American journalism - announced in the summer of 2003 that what the Iraqis needed was (no smirking here, please), a “democratically minded strongman”.

They had already had one, of course, our old chum Saddam Hussein, whom we did indeed call a “strongman” when he was our friend and when he was busy using our gas against Iran. And I do wonder whether Bush - defeated, as he is, in Iraq - may not soon sanction an Iraqi military coup d’état to overthrow the ridiculous Maliki “Green Zone” government in Baghdad. Well, as one of my favourite expressions goes, we’ll see.

But wait, Pipes is at it again. The director of the “Middle East Forum” has been writing in Canada’s National Post about “Palestine”. His piece is filled with the usual bile. Palestinian anarchy had “spewed forth” warlords. Arafat was an “evil” figure. Israeli withdrawal from Gaza had deprived Palestinians of the one “stabilising element” in the region. Phew! “Palestinianism” (whatever that is) is “superficial”. Palestinian “victimisation” is a “supreme myth of modern politics”. Gaza is now an “[Islamist] beachhead at the heart of the Middle East from which to infiltrate Egypt, Israel and the West Bank”.

One of these days, Pipes concludes, “maybe the idiot savant ‘peace processors’ will note the trail of disasters their handiwork has achieved”. He notes with approval that “Ehud Barak, Israel’s brand new Defence Minister, reportedly plans to attack Hamas within weeks” and condemns the Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, for buoying Mahmoud Abbas’ “corrupt and irredentist Fatah”.

So we are going to have yet another war in the Middle East, this time against Hamas - democratically elected, of course, but only as a result of what Pipes calls “the Bush administration’s heedless rush to Palestinian elections”? It’s good to see that the late Tony Blair is already being dubbed a “savant”. But shouldn’t Pipes, too, read Lawrence? For insurgency is a more powerful “vapour” than that which comes from the mouths of illusionists.

     
Originally printed in The Independent.     


Elsewhere: .

Comments

Are you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig.

By AJZ, July 25, 2007 at 11:58 pm #

< The Americans need 600,000 men to meet the combined ill will of the Iraqi people, and they have only 150,000 available. Donald Rumsfeld, the architect of “war lite,” is responsible for that. Yet still these rascals get away with it. >

Actually, to be honest, there are about 300,000 troops and contractor/mercenaries in Iraq working for the Pentagon.  See http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-na-private4jul04,0,5808980.story?coll=la-home-center

Most analysts, particularly on the left, conveniently omit this information.  Of course, the other side of the coin is that, despite having twice the usually reported number of “troops” in Iraq, we haven’t done any better.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, July 25, 2007 at 3:27 pm #

LOL Thanks Ernest for pointing out this simian oversight.

Report this

By cann4ing, July 25, 2007 at 12:33 pm #

Michael, it’s “guerrilla warfare” not “gorilla warfare.”  I hate to think that we would drag other primates into this mess.

Report this

By Michael Shaw, July 25, 2007 at 11:06 am #

IE Gorilla warfare…TE Lawrence was right! He ought to have known since he himself was an expert at it. It didn’t hurt being an expert on the crusades, archeology and military history either. By comparison we have an illiterate, draft dodging AWOL in wartime calling the shots. The only thing George Bush is expert at is posing for Gary Cooper style photo opts and lying to the American people.

Report this

By dick, July 23, 2007 at 12:26 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

More recently, 1940s, Jewish terrorists in Palestine outdid the entire British army occupying Palestine, resulting in the abandoning of Palestine by England. Now it’s Iraq.

Report this

By Hammo, July 23, 2007 at 12:03 pm #

Fighting a war against a motivated and adequately-supplied guerilla force who are inhabitants of a certain area is going to be very difficult, to put it mildly.

By using “asymmetric warfare,” or unconventional guerilla tactics against the stronger opponent, the indigenous guerilla force can inflict a lot of damage.

Examples obviously include the American Revolution against the British and the Vietnam War (though the American revolutionary forces and the North Vietnamese also had a conventional army).

The Iraq situation seems similar to these two conflicts in some ways.

Food for thought in the article ...

“Americans felt turning points on Vietnam, Iraq in ‘70, ‘07”

PopulistAmerica.com (Populist Party of America)
July 14, 2007

http://www.populistamerica.com/americans_felt_turning_points_on_vietnam_iraq_in_70_07

Report this

By ocjim, July 23, 2007 at 11:17 am #

It must have a friendly population, not actively friendly, but sympathetic to the point of not betraying rebel movements to the enemy. Rebellions can be made by 2 per cent active in a striking force, and 98 per cent passively sympathetic ... Granted mobility, security ... time, and doctrine ... victory will rest with the insurgents, for the algebraical factors are in the end decisive, and against them perfections of means and spirit struggle quite in vain.”

I wonder if Lawrence’s words of “2% active” could apply to Bush administration supporters/plotters who planned a coup with the ultimate takeover in the form of martial law after a terrorist attack. We should be wary.

Report this

By kikz, July 20, 2007 at 3:34 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

and we ignore lawrence & kipling’s lessons of the “great game” at our peril.

Report this

By billybookworm, July 20, 2007 at 1:45 pm #

General Patraeus has read Lawrence see pg. 1-3 http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm3-24fd.pdf , no one in the Bush administration has.As the invasion unfolded I had the same question as he: how does this end? The surge is not General Patraeus’ plan it is the adminstration’s plan. They decided on the surge before October 2006 then carried on a charade pretending to mull options. General Patraeus was then selected to lead and ordered to carry out their plan.
Do Bush and his advisors know anything of history or war? Compelling evidence they do not was revealed in the Kerry-Bush debates. Bush saw the problem in Iraq this way: “They made it too easy, they didn’t fight us.” What did he expect, Custer’s Last Stand? Has he heard of “Art of War” much less read it? Did he think all the insurgents were ex-Iraqi military who unfortunately survived due to their stong instinct of self preservation? If the failure to wipe out the Iraqi army was the root problem why did he have it disbanded? Why would he expect a “cake walk” and a fight to the last man?
Insane is the only word that explains the architects of this invasion.

Report this

By Leefeller, July 20, 2007 at 12:43 pm #

Great article.

Bush the president has his head up his arse now as he did as a history major, or is it all a grand illusion, a comprehensive part of the smoke and mirrors?

Report this

By omop, July 20, 2007 at 8:36 am #

An anonymous French critic of years past remarked that rulers “never learned the lessons of history and never forgot any”.

If one is brutally frank in stating this so be it. It took the Jews, a semitic people several decades to achieve what they claimed was God’s gift to them albeit at the expense of a fellow semitic people that are at present in a revolutionary mode from the Atlantic to the Indian Oceans.

Their quest may in all probability take them as much time as it took the Jews/Zionists to establish Israel and if one were a betting man the money would be on them rather than on the Coalition of the Willing or NATO or any other crusade model.

Firsk’s views and comments about the Middle East reflect an understanding based on having lived in the region for years as well as being devoid of arrogance.

Truthdig is commended for including commentaries by reputable and experienced correspondants.

Report this

By johnnyfarout, July 19, 2007 at 11:41 pm #

I have to repaste this from some time in the past on here because I just feel it is right on:....I love this picture of the Saudi’s. They are not wearing western business suits and it’s not because they can’t find any that they like. Bush was photo’d holding the hand of one of these guys and talking nicey-nicey. These men have no delusions about who westerners are. No matter what color their ties are. I hope the guys we send there can actually converse in French, and not only about wine, because these guys can. But you know I only imagine Bush saying “Duh”, and Cheney snarling something, and Condoleezza acting out her queen of violence fantasies against men. And I do bet these guys deserve it and maybe she should give it to them right on right on… But let’s get real. Conquer the Middle East because we have satellite laser beams, big nuclear weapons, and we consume chillingly bazillions of gallons of oil, and have no “plans” to stop before it’s all gone forever. If we only had 300 good lawyers! Oh , right and 3,000 back up professionals who will do or die…then we can get it done in the green zone. It’s THEM OR US. Plan B: We print all the money in the world and it’s ours. We take it all with us when we blast off into outer space…all the white people! And live in peace and security on space stations around the stupid dumb earth that doesn’t want us because we are too paranoid about our gene purity for the race of mankind to survive in the future unless we fly away in our pale saucers.

white johnny

Report this

By cann4ing, July 19, 2007 at 10:58 pm #

lilmamzer, I think this is the very first time you and I agreed.  “Fisk is one [of] the finest writers to grace the pages of Truthdig.”

Report this

By DennisD, July 19, 2007 at 10:57 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

Sounds like history repeating itself? And what happens to those that don’t learn from it? The problem is that we have a president in name only who probably can’t name three books that he’s read in his entire life without pictures in them.

Report this

By tsaoyen, July 19, 2007 at 6:56 pm #

So Daniel Pipes says that “Palestinian victimization is a supreme myth of modern politics.”  Pipes’s
account of reality is exactly how Bush would have corrupted reality if had been the U.S. President in the 1700s and was addressing the founding of America and the annihilation of 25 million indigenous American Indians in order to appropriate their land.
How can Pipes,  who knows Israel’s history thoroughly,  truthfully state something like that? Pipes knows absolutely what Israel’s celebrated war-hero Defense Minister Moshe Dayan knew when Dayan publicly stated (before 1967)  that: “The declaration of the State of Israel was at the expense of ethnically cleansing 513 Palestinian villages, creating over 700,000 Palestinian refugees, and expropriating their lands, homes and businesses in 78% of Palestine…THERE IS NOT ONE SINGLE PLACE BUILT IN THIS COUNTRY (Israel) THAT DID NOT HAVE A FORMER POPULATION (of Arabs).”
Israeli General Dayan spoke as if was proud of these wicked facts, and proud he contributed to achieve that “success.”  What exactly did the Palestinians do to deserve that “ethnical cleasining”? Pipes, Bush, Cheney, Blair, Rice, Rumsfeld, the Defense Minister of Canada, 90% of the U.S. Congress and probably 60% of Americans are just a minuscule few “of the world’s illusionists who believe they can ignore the facts of history by stating the opposite of the truth.” Their life (and professional motto - especially when it comes to Bush) is: “fake it, fake it, until we can make it.”  And with the help of America’s mass media also corrupt reality by carefully managing and manipulating the information they dole out to the hopelessly unconscious American public regarding the Palestinian “terrorists” and the “innocent Israelis,”  they will probably succeed in faking Middle East history - just as they successfully have faked American history. This is what our illustrious world leader’s believe is ‘progress” and “the civilizing the world.”
If these people and our world leaders are not demented then what are they? Dissemblers, con-artists? They certainly are not honest - to themselves or to others. Don’t these dissimulators believe what Franz Boas once said is righteous and should be rule rather than the exception to the rule? Boas said:  “The only thing that a man can do for humanity is to tell the truth, whether it be
sweet or sour.” Boas should have added the word “free” in there between “a” and “man” because it is obvious to anyone who is clearheaded that the American Congress and the world leader’s are not really “free” enough to state the truth about what has been going on in Palestine and the Middle East since “the declaration of the State of Israel….”

Report this

By THOMAS BILLIS, July 19, 2007 at 6:36 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

When told of Lawrence of Arabia George Bush remarked “Isn’t he the one who leads the Lawrences.“All through an easily researched history of the middle east occupiers have not done well in the middle east.We can come forward from the crusades to present times.Tony Blair being British only had to ask what hapeened the last time we occupied the middle east.The greed of oil overcame any good sense.What they need in the middle east is a good civil war and we will do business with the winner.Our only interests in the middle east are Israel and oil.We had our civil war to determine the future of the country and trying to keep a lid on the civil war that is destined to envelop the middle east is not worth one American life.By the way the first people to die in a civil war in the middle east will be AL Qaida.

Report this

By Hammo, July 19, 2007 at 5:42 pm #

The late Harvard psychiatrist John Mack, MD, wrote a Pulitzer Prize-winning biography of Lawrence of Arabia.

Mack also participated in a research study about terrorism.

He also believed the invasion and occupation of Iraq by the Bush-Cheney administration was a grave mistake.

For more on this, see the article ...

“With knowledge of Iraq, terrorism and unusual phenomena, John Mack, M.D., speaks to us now”

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=3443

Report this

By vet240, July 19, 2007 at 5:17 pm #

george bu$h doesn’t read and he’s proud of it! Could it be he doesn’t read because he’s too stupid?

Report this

By James V, July 19, 2007 at 5:17 pm #

I think perhaps the most tragic side effect of an overly populated world is that within that vastness of numbers exists a haven for a greater number of philosophically rabid idiots of which Pipes can humbly consider himself a resident. And if he were to look up and down the street of that vile gated community he might very well see neighbors such as Dick Cheney, George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld.

Report this

By JKoch, July 19, 2007 at 4:58 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

Careful.  Sometimes good advice comes from people you might disagree with 95% of the time.  Occasionally, they might be right.

Pipes was at least right, going back to 2003, in warning against the idea of presuming that Iraqis would accept an infidel occupier or subscribe to parliamentary rule imposed by that occupier.  He agreed with Pearl that the trick was to get an Iraqi (Chalabi, Allawi) in charge as soon as possible, then get out.  And even if that proxy had fallen, would the succession process have been any messier than what we’ve witnessed since?  Watch: come 2009 and we will come full circle and leave the place in the hands of some strongman.

Report this

By Rob Cox, July 19, 2007 at 4:48 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

The government of my fine dear country, learn from history? Hah!

This nation was formed with a government of/by/for the people. It has not continued that form. The people grow tired of this. People speak of “King” George Bush. Why is there no common sense in our leaders?

What will it take to wake them up?

Report this

By lilmamzer, July 19, 2007 at 4:43 pm #

Fisk is one the finest writers ever to grace the pages of Truthdig.

He knows who pulls the strings of the puppet in the White House.

Report this

Add Your Comment

Posts by unregistered readers are moderated. Posts by members
are published immediately. Why wait? Register today!







Number of characters remaining: 4000

Notify you when others comment on this article?


Are you a human?
Retype the word you see here.


Please read and abide by our comment policy.
By submitting this comment, you agree to this site's terms and conditions.

 
 

 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2009 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved.