ebooks Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of the Modern Middle East by Michael B. Oren in History

Review

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful. Easy to followBy Kindle CustomerMany historical works become bogged down in the details; often putting up so many trees; the forest becomes non-existent; let alone unanswerable; a recent book I read on Douglas MacArthur being a good example; not here.Michael Oren has written a very easy to flow; yet very detailed; account of The Six Day War. Even with few maps in the book. it is easy to follow the maneuvers of that war although to truly appreciate the dynamics of the conflict in The Middle East one should seriously study maps of the region or visit the region. Of course; Mr. Oren only had to detail six days of war detail.The book also gives extensive detail to historical figures of the time; portraying Nasser more favorably than many perceive him; King Hussein as an easily duped and mianipulatable ruler; yet with an uncanny ability to survive; Dayan as a dangerous; to a democracy; military genius; Eshkol as an irrelevant figure; even as Israel's P.M. during the war; al-Assad as the despotic thug he was; and which he so well passed to his son.Aside from the attention to detail; without bogging down in the same; the book reiterates two well proven facts; one general;one specific: way too often; winning parties to a conflict stop short of mission completion; two; although the U.S. talks a good talk as regards it's support for Israel; Israel has every reason to believe that if Israel ever really needed the U.S. to be there for it; the U.S. would not.10 of 10 people found the following review helpful. A comprehensive and generally unbiased look at a pivotal battle in the ongoing Middle Eastern conflictBy Craig MACKINNONAt first I was skeptical about this book. It's hard enough to get a balanced account of a battle without it skewing towards the victor; but then I heard the author is Jewish and he now lives in Israel (although he is of American descent). My thoughts were; how balanced can this account be? My fears were assuaged by the editorial reviews; and having read the book I can verify that it is as fair and balanced as possible; given the limitations placed on the author: namely; the lack of information forthcoming from the regimes that were on the losing side. I suppose this is understandable in the context of those governments - democracies like Israel (and the U.S.) declassify documents much sooner than other types of governments. This is further exacerbated by the fact that the leaderships of the losing countries are still in place - the Ba'ath Party in Syria; the industrio-military complex of Egypt; and the Hussein monarchy in Jordan.So; given that the account is scholarly and balanced; how does the book read? I was pleased to note that the author; Michael Oren; is an accomplished storyteller and the book mostly reads with all the spice and excitement of an early Tom Clancy novel. It flashes back and forth from the battlefield to the governments to the man on the street. More time must be spent on Israel; naturally enough; because the decisions were made by committees (when not made ad hoc on the battlefield). It takes some time to describe the arguments. In contrast; the facts that Egyptian decision-making structure was essentially non-existent; and that Jordan was an absolute monarchy; meant that there was little to report about internal politics in those countries. Oren is also adept at keeping an enormous cast of "characters" alive and in play - I never felt at a loss; even though this is the only book I've read on the conflict and was not even alive in 1967.This brings me two the first of my two criticisms of the book: there is not enough material on the actions of Syria and her government. Although Syria didn't do all that much fighting; they were certainly involved in both the diplomatic and military efforts. Even so; after having read the book I couldn't tell you the name of a single Syrian leader or general off the top of my head. This is is stark contrast to the amount of time spent in the Tel Aviv; Cairo; and Amman. The second shortcoming is the length of the narrative describing the diplomatic efforts to resolve the crisis before the shooting started. Although necessary to fully describe the history of the conflict; did we really need to be told about every phone call between President Johnson and the Soviets? Every diplomatic overture from the U.N.? As such; pages 100-200 drag somewhat. We are ultimately rewarded by the quality of the narrative once the war begins; so ultimately it is worth the slog through the diplomacy.0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. Throws light on the past 65 years; and on current eventsBy djdA thorough;detailed telling of the occurrences of the 1967 Six-Day War in the Middle East. It was fascinating to learn of the behind-the-scenes diplomatic action; the personalities; and the politics involved. I was a teenager when this war was fought and I was closely following the news in the build-up of tensions; the reporting of the days of war; the astounding result (compared to the statements in the newspapers prior to the war); and the commentary afterward. Reading this book awakened a lot of memories; helped me to understand the realities behind the images; and to ponder the parallel tensions; personalities; and politics of our day.