This is one of the first books that I read trying to get up to speed on the modern day dispute between the nation of Israel and the Arabs. It has a great chronological outline. It is entertaining and informative. It is also thoughtful if not very hopeful. The author's stay in Beirut is enough for me not to want to fly over there on my next vacation. His report highlights the nature of a place where violence has become the ruling authority.

The author, of course, feels that he is being objective and he is - if you basically consider the Arabs to be a totally whacked out, insane group of people who are impossible to deal with and are bent of the total destruction of Israel and maybe the world.

He concludes the book by saying in a round-a-bout way that the only solution is a decisive and all out war between the Jews and the Arabs. There is basically no satifactory compromise - one or the other must be vanquished.

He tries hard not to come to such a conclusion all through the book but by the time we get through all the modern history, this is basically the final conclusion.

I feel that no matter who you read on the subject you will not find an objective, impartial interpretation. You can try Alan Dersherwhitz or Noam Chomsky or Jimmy Carter. Actually though at the name of Jimmy Carter most people jump out of their political skins, but he may be the most objective and hopeful. He is not a Jew and he is not an Arab. He is a Christian though and on top of that he seems to be bent on peace as a realistic possibility. That's his problem, I suppose.

Books written by Richard Noble - The Hobo Philosopher:
"Hobo-ing America: A Workingman's Tour of the U.S.A.."
"A Summer with Charlie" Salisbury Beach, Lawrence YMCA
"A Little Something: Poetry and Prose
"Honor Thy Father and Thy Mother" Novel - Lawrence, Ma.
"The Eastpointer" Selections from award winning column.
"Noble Notes on Famous Folks" Humor - satire - facts.
"America on Strike" American Labor - History

I recommend this book whole heartedly by the fact that I consider it a classic by the way it helps the non-Middle Easterner understand how Lebanese Arabs and Israeli Jews actually think. In the events surrounding Israel's invasion of Lebanon in 1983 the reader sees into the way that the different partys and religious groups manipulated one another to accomplish their objectives, and how the Isrealis and the Americans were mislead at times. Friedman does a masterful job. It is a must read for the person interested in about or living in that area of the world.

This was my first look into the world of books on CD's & it was fair. The story was one that was recommended to me but I was not overly impressed. It felt more like a propanganda peice rather than true journelism. If you like the Middle East then you should enjoy this too.

If you only want to read one book on the Middle East, this is it. Despite all the press devoted to this area, the media does not offer context. This book does. It's an incredibly fast read and will open your eyes. Visit Apellicon's book recommendation site to read more reviews and see more book lists by category.

I apologize for the length of this review, but it's hard to condense all that is wrong with a Thomas Friedman book into a few short paragraphs.

This book is basically a memoir and reflection on Thomas Friedman's time in Lebanon and Israel as a New York Times reporter, from 1979 to 1989. It is not completely useless, but I do not recommend it because the weaknesses far outweigh the strengths, and 500 pages are too many to get the few interesting bits scattered throughout. Freidman's style is obnoxious, his assertions are unsupported, his chronology is meandering, and his conclusions are without merit.

Why would someone pick up a book about the Middle East? To learn about history, or culture, or about perennial political problems -- all of which interest me greatly. But this book isn't about any of those things. Consider the very first sentence: "In June 1979, my wife, Ann, and I boarded a red-and-white Middle East Airlines 707 in Geneva for the four-hour flight to Beirut." In one short sentence are five completely useless details. I don't care what Friedman's wife's name is, or what color his airplane was, or what airline he used, or how big the plane was, or the city where he had a connecting flight, or how long it takes to get from Switzerland to Lebanon. A good writer knows the importance of detail, to be sure, but it's the telling detail that matters. This book is not about the Lebanese civil war; it's about Tom Friedman reporting on the civil war. It's not about the intifada; it's about Tom Friedman's generalizations about the intifada. No matter how momentous the historical events he describes, Friedman is always the star of the show.

He isn't a very interesting star, either. I'm not just talking about mixed metaphors (on page 2, he mentions a "multicolored river of humanity that flowed through [Jerusalem's] maze of alleyways," because apparently people are water, water flows through mazes, and alleyways look like the front of David Bowie's castle in Labyrinth). I mean he concedes from the outset that he doesn't have anything to offer: "I had decided that the academic ivory tower was not for me and that if I was ever going to be able to hold my own on the Middle East, I had to live there and experience the place firsthand." P. 7. Even if we assume for some reason that academics can't or don't live in the Middle East, the statement is disturbing because Friedman admits he cranked a thick book out of nothing more than an exotic residence (it's certainly not his language skills. He mistranslates the phrase "alhan wa-sahlan" (p. 104), doesn't know Hebrew (p. 411) and, shockingly, calls a friend of his "Abdul" (p. 25)). Okay, he also spoke to some interesting people along the way, but he's a reporter. A reporter's job is to ask knowledgeable people questions, and write down the responses.

That's not to say reporters aren't entitled to share their opinions -- of course they are. But opinions about the Middle East are far more informative when backed up with facts. This book has virtually no citations. Western observers "assume that all the surface trappings of nation-statehood -- the parliaments, the flags, and the democratic rhetoric -- can fully explain the politics of these countries" (p. 103), according to whom? Did Friedman conduct a poll? Or does he just presume to speak for "most Westerners"? If that sounds presumptuous, it is far, far worse when he claims that Yasser Arafat "can never fully understand the needs and feelings of Palestinians under Israeli occupation, because he has never been one of them" (p. 422). Arafat can't possibly understand Israeli Palestinians, but Friedman is somehow qualified to write hundreds of pages on the causes, meanings, failures and future of the intifada? Please.

I also found Friedman's sympathy for Arafat's cause (even if Arafat's understanding was at sub-Friedman levels) noxious. Shortly after a rapturous review of Arafat's leadership qualities(pp. 116-17), not diminished in the least by the PLO's kidnapping and murder of Israeli athletes in Munich (p. 119, the massacre "kept the Palestinian cause relevant," nothing more), Freidman asserts that Arafat didn't share in the widespread PLO corruption (p. 121). No citation, of course. Friedman's boot-licking is made almost comical in light of his admission that Beirut's "international press corps" was "generally uncritical" (p. 119).

The primary problem with this book is, stated simply, a lack of command of important facts, which leads to over-generalizations and a total lack of confidence in Friedman's conclusions and the significance he attributes to his observations (like when he spends ten pages trying to interpret a pork chop. Seriously). He claims that for the first 200 years after independence, the U.S. had only two serious foreign engagements: the Mexican-American War and the Spanish-American War (p. 205). The War of 1812, the Barabary Wars and the undeclared war with France were perhaps insufficiently "serious" for Friedman's tastes, although British soldiers burning the White House strikes me as fairly serious. On the same page, Friedman claims America had "no real need ... to learn the seamier dimensions of diplomacy, espionage, and covert operations." Nowhere does Friedman betray the smallest indication of familiarity with Thomas Jefferson's diplomatic trip to France, of the names of spies like Benedict Arnold, John Andre, Edward Bancroft, Benjamin Franklin Stringfellow, or Lafayette Baker.

I admit I'm cheating a little bit, here. Other than Benedict Arnold, the other names in that list are not exactly household words. I can't really fault Friedman for not knowing them -- he's a Middle East reporter, not a historian of post-Revolutionary America. But that's exactly my point. He isn't a Middle East historian, either. Or a political science expert. Or a linguist. Or an ethnologist. Or an expert on anything, really, other than newspapers (I assume). The most interesting and thought-provoking parts of this book consist entirely of quotations or paraphrases of other people.

I still give this book two stars, rather than one, because it is not completely worthless. During his decade in the Middle East, Friedman talked to some interesting people, and saw some interesting things. Peppered throughout the book are little vignettes, the slices of life, stories about people and events that go beyond what you will see in the average history book. It is one thing to read that Hafez Assad butchered 20,000 of his own citizens in the city of Hama. It is something else to read the details of an entire neighborhood that was literally flattened by heavy machinery, along with its former residents. Friedman's account of the massacres at Sabra and Shatilla are more evocative than a bare report of the number of people who died.

But such gems are too few and far between. I do not recommend this book.

This book is vital reading for anyone interested in the Israeli-Arab conflict throughout Palestine. Friedman, a distinguished journalist, writes the book like a series of extended columns about the region, and his writing is filled with history, anecdote, and an oftentimes startling sense of perception. He begins in Beirut, where he tells of him barely missing fatal bombings, hiding his identity as a Western Jew, and becoming mentally attuned to the chaotic world that he is suddenly thrown in. He clearly lays out the conflict in Lebanon between Maronite, Druse, Phalangist, Muslim, and Jew, and through countless stories great and small gives the reader a vivid picture of politics and despair of the region. After that he moves to Jerusalem, and details the tumultuous post-1948 history in an accessible way. We learn of the machinations leading up to the intifada and the effect the numerous wars have had on these people living in the Middle East. What makes this book such an achievement is the way Friedman captured how the regular people, irregardless of religion, have been feeling and been put through by the times they live in, and how world leaders have been reluctant to help for a myriad of reasons. Most of all the book serves as a fascinating portrait of a country and a people in turmoil, written in Friedman's simple yet intellectual tone. Very important reading.

I'd recommend this book to anyone who is unfamiliar with the region because it really pulls you in like a novel or a flick, and it paints a vivid picture. However, several academics are unsatisfied with some of Friedman's views, and the omission of various facts. I think that's pretty tough to avoid considering the subject, though, and a sizable proportion of the work done on this region is accompanied by similar concerns. From Beirut to Jerusalem is a good place to start if you're interested in studying the Middle East, but it's only one of many views about the region, and to get a firm grasp on the struggles that occupy so many of our minds and TV screens, one will need to delve into the works of ALL sides.

Despite the thickness, it's a pretty quick read.

Being under 30, my firsthand knowledge of politics and world events only goes back about 15 years, so most things that happened in the Reagan Administration and before are historical to me rather than something I can look back on and remember. As this presidential election plays out, we are constantly reminded of the strategies employed by previous candidates, but looking at these things from a historical perspective is somewhat strange: since I already know the outcome to the election, I tend to view strategies through that lens rather than the situation as it existed on the ground at that time.

The same thing is true with respect to foreign affairs, only more so. I was almost exclusively interested in domestic matters before September 11th, so I only distantly followed events like Yassir Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin shaking hands at the White House. But as the last eight years have increased the relevance of the Middle East to our country, I have become progressively more and more annoyed with those who speak authoritatively about something they know so little about. My reading serves as much to inform me what I don't know than fill in gaps in my knowledge, so I've realized how little about Israel and Palestine I can really speak intelligently about.

Therefore I've been reading extensively on the region, last week finally getting to Thomas L. Friedman's From Beirut to Jerusalem, an account of his time serving as a reporter in Lebanon and Israel. Shifting from memoir to reporting adeptly, Friedman is able to help the reader understand the situation, as it existed in the 1980s. While I learned quite a bit about the political situation in Beirut involving the Druse, Maronite Christians, and Arafat's PLO, what stuck with me the most was the depiction of the everyday citizen. What must it be like to live in a world where car bombs have killed someone you know?

It shames me to admit, but I really didn't have a good sense of Lebanon's history prior to this reading. Considered the ideal with so many factions of people living together in relative harmony, the tensions underneath eventually exploded in violence, something that hindsight sees as inevitable. Friedman is at his best when intertwining interviews with people on the ground along with leaders of the various factions, occasionally throwing in his own viewpoint in order to flesh out the picture. What we tend to get is a real cross-section of the culture.

As he moves on to Jerusalem, the book shifts in tone. There is much less of Friedman himself in these chapters. Instead he focuses on the Palestinian/Israeli conflict and how that was handled during his time there. I have always been one to sympathize with Palestine, but reading these passages helped me to evolve my thoughts. Not that I am less sympathetic to the plight of the Palestinian people, but now I feel that I have a better grasp to the actual problems in the region and how they might concessions be made by each side in order to achieve lasting peace.

My edition had a chapter written in 1994, five years after the book was first published. In it, Friedman opines at length about the direction he feels the two sides must take in order to solve some of the conflict. Though no expert, I believe much of this to still be applicable today. I was fascinated by how little the region has seemed to change in the intervening years, even with the rise of Hamas and the death of Arafat. Though I would like a similar account of the intervening years, I nevertheless feel that From Beirut to Jerusalem to be quite valuable for anyone trying to understand the region. What happened twenty years ago may seem like old news to those of my generation, but in the communities of Lebanon and Israel, it seems like yesterday.

This is a great book for understanding the culture and situation in the middle east. After reading this book i have a much better understanding of the politics and motivations of the middle east countries. I't's also very gratifying that the author has an unbiased and neutral view of all parties involved.

The book was in very good condition and arrived promptly. I'm so pleased I may order additional copies.

I am going to Beruit in August and I find the book fascinating. Sandy Tracey

I now have such a better understanding of this area, geography, cultures, religions. A great read...very well written. A must read prior to travel in this part of the world.

I have always admired Thomas Friedman as an insightful writer of truth. Although a Jew his writing is impartial. He clearly states that he has friends both Israeli and Arab, and has been criticized by his American countrymen. I have often wondered why his opinions are not solicited by U.S. government officials, but perhaps no one wants to face the truth that on all sides of the Middle Eastern difficulties there are human beings whose opinions need to be heard and their concerns recognized.

In an spellbinding anecdotal presentation of the facts Mr. Friedman treats the reader with substance often lacking in the usual reporting that at best presents a few highlights of daily events.

Kenneth Ray Taylor author of Standup Comedian: The Secret and Beyond

This book is so amazing, just for the neutral opinion that the author has throughout all its chapters. Well of course, its been written as an eyes of an American, but none the less it is quite absorbing. I would definitely recommend it to anyone who is intrigues by the complexity of the region.

This book brings back to life the question I always asked myself, 'how come Yaseer Arafat received the Noble peace prize' which proves the fact that' one persons terrorist is other persons freedom fighter!!!!'

Definitely read it, you will not be disappointed. The humor in the book all through is outstanding.

I read this book right before I moved to Israel when I was 24 years old in 1996. This book helped to greatly broaden my perspective and empathy for people on all sides of the Middle East conflicts. Its also the complete opposite of a dry read. Its packed with personal stories and anecdotes that deeply personalize the plights of people on all sides. I think if I hadn't read this book first, I would have landed in Israel considerably more ignorant, arrogant, and just plain dumb.

Without a doubt, the most informative, intelligent and unbiased writer on the Middle East. A must read for anyone interested in the past or the furure of the Region.

This book was recommended to me by a Friend, after 9/11, to help me understand the "thinking" in that area. Since then I have done a great deal of research but this was my "starter" book. I found it to be excellent in giving the true complexity of what has been and is now going on in that area

I recommend this book to anyone who wants a history lesson on the Civil War of the 80's in Lebanon and then, compare what happened then to what is happening now.

I find it fascinating to hear what the perceived solutions to the problems at the time were, what was done, and what has happened since.

Best intellectual book on the Middle East that exists. Friedman is an experienced, thoughtful genius. A must read.

Tom Friedman occupies a unique place in the American Foreign Policy establishment elite. Not since Walter Lippman has the voice of a journalist been more influential in Washington DC. "From Beirut to Jerusalem" was his first foray into full-length treatment on critical international issues -- and it is still his best. Moreover, although it was written two decades ago and during a very different time, it is still incredibly relevant to current events.

What makes Friedman's narrative so powerful is his liberal use of personal anecdotes from his time as a New York Times coorespondent in the Middle East in the early 1980s. The story crackles with life as Friedman reconstructs the events of the Lebanonese civil war and Palestinian intifada from a broad spectrum of perspectives, from ultra-ortodox rabbis to American Jewish peace activists, Yasir Arafat and Palestinian schoolchildren, Washington policymakers and enlisted Marines. Friedman's description of life as a journalist at Beirut's Commodore Hotel is especially noteworthy and, on occasion, hilarious.

At the core of Friedman's analysis is the contrast between American naivete and the almost primordial savagery of tribal relations endemic to the Middle East. Friedman uses "Hama Rules" (after Syrian president Hafez al-Assad's brutal 1982 repression of a nascent Muslim Brotherhood insurgency in the Syrian city of Hama) as short-hand for the nature of power politics that shaped the flow of events in the region during his time there. The common demoninator in group identification is religion (by sect and by clan) and the gravest sin is to show weakness to your enemies. Friedman argues that the Reagan administration completely failed to understand this fundamental nature to life in Lebanon in the early 1980s when they committed Marines to help bolster the newly elected Maronite Christian president Gemayel, who was, in fact, more the leader of the Phalangist militia than true representative leader of the polyglot country.

Interestingly, Friedman writes that Israeli leaders often make the same mistakes as the US about the region, although some Israelis, such as Ariel Sharon, understand Hama Rules and act accordingly. Friedman describes the Israeli army reaction to the kaleidoscopic factional environment they found in Lebanon after their 1982 invasion as quite similar to the US army experience upon entering Baghdad in 2003.

Indeed, comparisons to Iraq are what struck me most when reading this book. After reading "From Beirut to Lebanon," I was amazed how optimistic Friedman was about the Iraq invasion in early 2003. He was relatively supportive of the war -- a position most likely held out of a deep desire and hope that it would succeed in bringing democracy to the Middle East, a position he passionately promotes, rather than any reasoned belief that the mixed Iraqi population would welcome a new US-installed regime. The civil war in Lebanon in many ways mirrors the intense factionalism of warfare in Iraq where religious identification -- Maronite, Druse, Shiite -- defines the membership of warring militias and undermines any attempt to use a national army to provide stability and bolster a central regime.

Many of the details about the war in Lebanon or the intifada make the book feel outdated, but the central underpinnings of conflict and discord in the region so lucidly explained by Friedman will not change anytime soon. The reader gets a sense of division and pure hatred that divides the people of that troubled land and seem to guarantee that the "peace process" is a meaningless charade.

As of this writing, 168 reviewers have reviewed this book, so I will be brief. Thomas Friedman, for all his real acumen and gifts with language (both spoken and written) tends to be cute or trite too much for comfort. That said, this book suffers from precious little of this. It is definitely in the genre of "New Journalism" now quite old, where the reporter is part of the story, maybe even the story itself at times, but this does not detract from the boldness of this work in the form of its written style, which is free, easy, yet complex, handling each topic with a certain grace and style and formal beauty. Friedman brings a complex topic to a general audience without sacrificing nuance (in fact, this is his main thrust) to show both Lebanon and Israel as cultures of almost impossibly subtle nuance, where small difference of sects and creeds can be the difference between war and peace, bliss and pain

The writing wasn't terrible, but it certainly wasn't good either. Much of the book read as if it was filler and stories he heard from someone else. The author's account of his time in Beirut was not informative and rather bland. I have read other accounts that really go in depth into either the political, military or personal experiences of those on the ground, but this book did not add anything to what's been written. His analysis of the Beirut conflicts left much to be desired.

I remember a part of the book where Friedman writes about his time in the Commodore Hotel and how this hotel was the place to be for any journalist in Beirut, and then reading Robert Fisk's Pity the Nation where he talks about all the hack journalists hiding out in the Commodore writing their stories from second hand accounts instead of going out and reporting the story with their own accounts. I don't know if Fisk was right, but I thought his book was much better than Friedman's.

I did find his writing on Israel to be informative (still bland though). His analysis of the psychology of the Israeli people I found to be highly insightful, and it gave me a perspective which I had never seen before. The only way to understand the Israeli people is to try and understand how the Holocaust and being surrounded by hostile people has affected their national psyche. The Israeli perspective was the best thing I took away from this book, but not even this was able to redeem the work for me.

One of the reasons I like reading reporter's books is that they are usually well written, entertaining and written with a passion or flare that the academics usually lack. This book had none of that. I felt bored and found myself having to concentrate pretty hard to stay in touch with what I was reading. I would have been fine with the shoddy writing had the analysis or the history been better but it just wasn't. There are just many books out there that treat the subject with much more competency.

If you're looking for a good book to learn more about this topic, keep looking.

Tom Friedman is a master at using charming, funny and fascinating anecdotes to illustrate broad historic events and cultural phenomena. His grasp of history is profound, and his observations are always spot on. The events he describes in this book may, indeed, be limited to only a very small part of the planet, but the human dynamics involved are universal and have profound implications for us all.

As a journalist Mr Friedman is at its very best when he reports the historical facts, puts them in perspective and analyses them. And reporting the facts is what he does in the first part of this book, Beirut. This is the best part hands down. His analysis is profound, true, and it gives a singular and personal lighting of the civil war in Lebanon and the Israeli invasion.
However, Mr Friedman, as a sociologist, isn't nearly as good (or just maybe his analysis has lost its relevance in the 20-odd years since the book was first published). The Jerusalem part is far too convoluted and sometimes downright obscure in its multi-layered division of the Israeli society.
Also Mr Friedman is a very good writer with a wit all its own. But at times the metaphors he uses are too cute for their own good and the author spends far too much time (his and ours) justifying their pertinence. The book is an impressionist analysis, sort of a 600 pages op-ed supported by impressions, but short on statistical data.
Still a great and essential read.

If you read one book to try understand this little place with such big impact on the middle east and the world, read this one. Friedman lived in Beirut during its turbulent upheaval of occupation by both Palestinian insurgents and the Israeli forces. He aslo live in Jerusalem as the state was under siege from the factions all looking to destory Israel.

True journalistic integrity holds you captivated. After this book, you cannot hold anything less than sypathy and disgust for both sides, and understand that there may not have been another way it could play out. If there is any hope of this land settling down to a normal nation, it will be from someone who started with this insightful study, and moved to find solutions to its violent history.

I first started reading this book when the latest conflict between Israel & Hezbollah was going on in Lebanon (Aug 2006). For someone like me, who did not know much about Lebanon, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli conflict, this book does a fine job of walking through the historical background as well as describing the (1980's) conditions on the ground. I think the author is objective for the most part trying to inform about all the sides of an issue/event, but at the same time also shares some of his personal observations on things, which makes this narrative more engrossing than just a collection of facts or opinions. It is also an excellent primer on the history of Israel and Palestine and the basis of the conflict. The updated text with an additional chapter describes what happened between 1990 and 1995 (there were significant changes in both the Israeli and Palestinian views of each other and major changes took place). I also liked the part where the author gives a series of possible solutions to taking the peace process forward. I guess it would be desirable if the author updates this book or comes with a follow up with what has happened in the last 10 years.

If you read one book to try understand this little place with such big impact on the middle east and the world, read this one. Friedman lived in Beirut during its turbulent upheaval of occupation by both Palestinian insurgents and the Israeli forces. He aslo live in Jerusalem as the state was under siege from the factions all looking to destory Israel.

True journalistic integrity holds you captivated. After this book, you cannot hold anything less than sypathy and disgust for both sides, and understand that there may not have been another way it could play out. If there is any hope of this land settling down to a normal nation, it will be from someone who started with this insightful study, and moved to find solutions to its violent history.

I first started reading this book when the latest conflict between Israel & Hezbollah was going on in Lebanon (Aug 2006). For someone like me, who did not know much about Lebanon, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli conflict, this book does a fine job of walking through the historical background as well as describing the (1980's) conditions on the ground. I think the author is objective for the most part trying to inform about all the sides of an issue/event, but at the same time also shares some of his personal observations on things, which makes this narrative more engrossing than just a collection of facts or opinions. It is also an excellent primer on the history of Israel and Palestine and the basis of the conflict. The updated text with an additional chapter describes what happened between 1990 and 1995 (there were significant changes in both the Israeli and Palestinian views of each other and major changes took place). I also liked the part where the author gives a series of possible solutions to taking the peace process forward. I guess it would be desirable if the author updates this book or comes with a follow up with what has happened in the last 10 years.

This book successfully illustrates the Middle Eastern conflict:

the first part of the book (Beirut) is about the Lebanese civil war.
Mr Friedman does a great job describing both the "mood" of the country and the Lebanese people in all their religions and political affiliations.

The second part is about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict before and after the Palestinian "Intifada",
with a peace solution suggested by the author at the end.

Through the book there's a lot of anecdotes told by the writer, these anecdotes make the book easier to read, illuminate the readers about people's mentality during war time and give them a "feel" about the Middle East.

I also recommend Mr Carter's book "Palestine : peace not apartheid" and Mr Fisk's books "Pity the nation: the abduction of Lebanon" - "The great war for civilization".

This is one of the most enlightening books I have read about the conflicts in the Middle East, and it is such an enjoyable read because of the stories Tom Friedman tells to illustrate the very complex problems that confront leaders and nations in trying to achieve a peaceful solution among and between so many different personalities and religious beliefs.

This is one of the most enlightening books I have read about the conflicts in the Middle East, and it is such an enjoyable read because of the stories Tom Friedman tells to illustrate the very complex problems that confront leaders and nations in trying to achieve a peaceful solution among and between so many different personalities and religious beliefs.

Don't get me wrong, I am truly a fan of Thomas Friedman. Although this book ends before Rabin's assassination by an ultra-Orthodox Jew who opposes the Oslo Accord. The above question and answer is the main reason that Palestinians have been ostracized from their birthplace. Yasir Arafat is highly criticized for not doing enough for his own people or for the western world. Never mind that he died of natural causes in Paris and that he lived in the slums of the West Bank. He never saw his wife or daughter because he was imprisoned among his people. Sadly, the Palestine/Israel issue has become a thorn in the side of the rose of our government. We don't forget the HOlocaust and that it helped bring about the Israeli state to the sympathy and empathy of the world. What happened to the Muslims and Christians who had lived in Palestine up until that point? They were displaced for the chosen people. After all these years, Arafat and Rabin are gone to a better place and Sharon is on his way there. Even with Sharon in a coma, things still look grim for both sides. Israel keeps bringing immigrants from Ethopia and Russia because they need to be a Jewish state. They are terrified of the Arabs and the Muslims themselves. Now, President Jimmy Carter says that the Palestinians are living in an apartheid state. Finally somebody with common sense, that's what it is when you separate people just because of their religions. Israel was supposed to be past that. I blame both sides because the Palestinians should know better and so should the Israelis. They know from personal experience the horror of inhumanity to mankind from the Holocaust and Anti-Semitism. I don't Friedman realized that it was Rabin who signed his death warrant with the Oslo Accords. Also, Shimon Peres who succeeded Rabin after his murder was not relected by the Israelis. Since then, they have had numerous prime ministers while Palestinians only had Arafat. Whether you liked him or not, most dislike him because he was such a pain in the side of Americans? Now, American Evangelical Christians are sending millions of dollars to Israel in supporting the country but they assume that Israel needs to remain a Jewish state until Jesus Christ returns to the Holy Land. They believe that the Israeli Jews will convert or be eternally damned. Their intentions are for themselves. The Palestinians from Amira Hass, a Israeli Jewish journalist who chooses to live in Gaza, are immediately suspected of being a suicide bomber intent on destruction. The Israeli Defense Force is not innocent either because nobody has stopped them from killing innocent Palestinian children, men, and women because it is assumed that they are guilty of something. The Palestinians living conditions are worse than the Israelis and they have to go to Israeli hospitals beause they don't have the facilities. The Palestinians and Israelis must live together rather than live apart. Remember separate but equal between blacks and whites in America, it's the same thing.

A must read for anyone interested in the understanding the MidEast situation which has held centrestage ever since WW2.

Mr. Friedman proves once again that he has the right vocation in life as a reporter and author. His ability to describe the streets of Beirut and Jerusalem, the fighting, the horror, the daily life of the residents, the religious faction clashes is remarkable. Though the time I spent in Beirut and Jerusalem was years ago, Mr. Friedman's book makes it seem like yesterday.

His insight in his book to the many religious factions in Lebanon and Israel, which thrive through out the Middle East, should be read by those wanting to know why the war in Iraq has taken many lives and lasted this long. Mr. Freidman explains the complex structure of the Middle East as only a first-rate novelist can. The book should be a required read for any soldier, peace keeper, negotiator sent to the region. The book details why religious conviction in the Middle East is stronger than any known in the West and why the peace process is and will be a difficult one.

I had been looking for a book that would provide a clear and concise overview of the issues behind the conflict in the middle east and this book was perfect for that. There is a very good summary of key events in the creation of the state of Israel and after its creation. The description of life in Beruit and Jerusalem and the descriptions of the psychological make up of the people and factions there was especially helpful in understanding the intractable issues confronting the people in these lands. The book is dated now, but I think the part about Israel's experience in southern Lebanon has lots of similarities with America in Iraq today. This book was very well written, was very interesting and informative, and was an excellent beginning text on the middle east conflict.

Though well written , the glaring biases , innacuracies and ommissions in the book make it just another unreliable source in trying to exploire the reality behind the conflict in the Middle East.
He demonizes Lebanon's Christians , writing much about the massacre of Palestinians , PLO terrorist camps , Sabra and Shatilla in 1982 , but ignore the context of this. That the Christian Lebanese millitia were merely retaliating after years of suffering and mass murder at the hands of the PLO.
Friedman simply gives one sentence to the massacre of thousands of Christian Lebanese men , women and children , at Damour , by the PLO , on the direct orders of the modern day Hitler , Yasser Arafat (may his name be erased and forgotten).
He ignores the fact that the Palestinian terrorists and their Syrian allies had massacred over tens of thousands of Christian Lebanese , and that Christian Lebanese young men and women had been forcibly drained of blood for transfusion to Palestinian terrorists.

In his strong urge for instant dialogue between Israel and the PLO , he glosses over the crimes and terror of the PLO against Israel's civillian population and that the fact that goal of the PLO was always the complete destruction of Israel , and a second holocaust against Israel's Jews.

He also completely villifies Israel's Likud government of the time , showing a naked prejudice that discredits his work.

In short he dwells on the suffering of Palestinian Lebanese and ignores the suffering of Israelis and Christian Lebanese.

There is a lot out there that simply adds to prejudice and obfuscation of what is the reality behind the Arab-Israeli conflicts and the Lebanon conflict.
I gave it two stars because it at least tries to achieve some balance and is not at the rotten level of such despicable and venomous anti-Israel hatemongers as Noam Chomsky , Edwards Said , Norman Finkelstein , Lenny Brenner , Naomi Klein , Virginia Tilley and Robert Fisk.
Unlike the above Thomas Friedman , though misguided is motivated by something other than hatred. He at least has some sympathy for some Israelis unlike ther above who'se hatred of the Israeli people is pure racism.
Ignore this one and rather read Joan Peters , Samuel Katz , Benjamin Netanyahu , Yaacov Lozowick and others who will show you are a more accurate picture.

Though well written , the glaring biases , innacuracies and ommissions in the book make it just another unreliable source in trying to exploire the reality behind the conflict in the Middle East.
He demonizes Lebanon's Christians , writing much about the massacre of Palestinians , PLO terrorist camps , Sabra and Shatilla in 1982 , but ignore the context of this. That the Christian Lebanese millitia were merely retaliating after years of suffering and mass murder at the hands of the PLO.
Friedman simply gives one sentence to the massacre of thousands of Christian Lebanese men , women and children , at Damour , by the PLO , on the direct orders of the modern day Hitler , Yasser Arafat (may his name be erased and forgotten).
He ignores the fact that the Palestinian terrorits and their Syrian allies had massacred over tens of thosuands of Christian Lebanese , and that Christian Lebanese young men and women had been forcibly drained of blood for transfusion to Palestinian terrorists.

In his strong urge for instant dialogue between Israel and the PLO , he glosses over the crimes and terror of the PLO against Israel's civillian population and that the fact that goal of the PLO was always the complete destruction of Israel , and a second holocaust against Israel's Jews.

He also completely villifies Israel's Likud government of the time , showing a naked prejudice that discredits his work.

There is a lot out there that simply adds to prejudice and obfuscation of what is the reality behind the Arab-Israeli conflicts and the Lebanon conflict.
Ignore this one and rather read Joan Peters , Samuel Katz , Banjamin Netanyahu , Yaacov Lozowick and others who will show you are a more accurate picture.

Given the recent outbreak of violence in Lebanon, it is worth revisiting this bit of investigative journalism and history given to us by Mr. Friedman. We need to understand the history, the culture, the religion and the personal vendettas that converge in this region to really make sense of the continuing conflict. Once we have accomplished that, then maybe the UN can come in and help broker a lasting peace or, more likely, a lasting segregation.

It's hard to say anything good about this book that hasn't been said dozens of times already, but Tom Friedman has produced one of the most important books on the modern Middle East that exists today. From Beirut to Jerusalem is a wonderful mix of contemporary history and reporting from someone who clearly cares about the region. Friedman is remarkably fair in his approach and doesn't give a free pass to anyone, Jew or Arab.

The book's only real flaw is that at times it can feel like a bunch of little stories and anecdotes rather than a book with a clear beginning, middle, and end. Part of this is probably the book's length. At 571 pages, it's a long read even though Friedman is an excellent writer. Another reason for this is that the subject doesn't lend itself to quick and easy explanation. Nonetheless, anyone that wants to understand the Middle East today will be at a serious disadvantage if they don't read this book.

If understanding the modern Middle East is your goal, then you would do well to read From Beirut to Jerusalem. Even though the book only covers two countries directly, the content can be easily extended to the rest of the region. And even though the book was written a decade and a half before the summer 2006 between Israel and Hezbollah, it goes a long way in explaning that particular conflict.

Slightly depressing, but a great overview of why the Arabs, Palestinians, and Israelis act toward each other the way they do.

Consent & deny. Filling in the gaps with retro-fitted pleasure craft billbowas, frittering away the last vestiges of ceiling con-cavedness, somewhat fluid morants of militancy are left hanging by a chad. Helping the booze bound will be tantamount to a feeling of dis-servatude. Catfish?

This book addresses one of the age old issues in the middle east, but does so with an intimate and fairly unprejudiced, and at times, as odd as it seems, somewhat humourous view.

There is a brief summary at the front of the book that takes the reader through the last century's occurences so it is fairly easy to get your thoughts around this highly complex state of affairs.

Thomas's Friedman's style is straightforward, very easy to read, and I became engrossed immediately from his first hand account of what went on during the critical time of the Palestinian cause, and the Arab and Israeli involvement during the 1980's.

The book delves into the cultural and psychological make up of the region and provides key insights into this battle torn region.

Having spent the last year in the Near East, I found that reading this book gave me an incite that was most helpful to me and my collegues. While this book was written about the Isreal-Lebanon issue during the 1970's-1980's, though it just reared its ugly head once again in the last few months, it was as I said a great help to me to understand or at least better understand the arabic way of life and culture. With the world attention squarely on the Near East we all, weather American, European, or other cultures throughout the world, need to know and understand the Near Eastern mentality, culture, and to some extend how the Islamic Religion plays into the everyday life and politics of that area. With this book being written by a Jewish American and with Thomas Freidman's understanding of the Near East way of thinking gives the book a credibility others could only hope for. I recommend this book to anyone that is a student of the Near East, Politicians and Military Personnel, Religious Leaders, and anyone who wants a better understanding of the Near East in general.

This story tells a well articulated synopsis at a look inside the life of what goes on in the war torn Lebanon of the 1980s. It also includes enough historical detail to help the reader understand dynamics (of factions) about what has led Lebanon to become what it is today. I reccomend it to anyone with a modicum of intrest in Middle East politics.

For century's it has been back and forth and back and forth. When will it ever end. We have three great religions preaching peace but waging war.

Neither Jew nor Arab will like this book. Is it honest? Well, let the reader read and see. this book will make u think, scream, laugh and cry. It is so sad what is going on in these Holy lands. The Lord must be in tears and somewhat upset!

I've been staring at a copy of Thomas Friedman's 'From Beirut to Jerusalem' on my shelf for nearly a year now, meaning to read it but always drawn to something else. Finally, recent events demanded that I learn more and I finally pulled it down, dusted it off, and read it. I'm so glad I did, especially now.

The book is not the easiest read, since it delves into a lot of regional history and politics, which gets complex no matter what you do. Friedman's writing style, however, goes a long way towards making the text quite accessible for just about anyone, and his unique perspective on the events that he witnessed and covered in his role as a journalist keeps it interesting and always relevant.

What I really appreciated about the way Friedman presents his story is that it really is HIS story. He is obviously a man gifted with a keen sense of observation, and so he picks up on many details others might miss, such as the faces of Israeli soldiers or the opinions of Lebanese taxi drivers. But still, the story is told mainly through events he observed directly -- he just happened to be there for many of the events that shaped the Middle East as it is today. He tells it in both large and small terms, from some of the politicians he met and interviewed to discussions he had with neighbors and colleagues while living in the region. The result is that you get the broad spectrum of what was going on in the region, particularly in the 1980's, a critical decade of events.

I also appreciated Friedman's fairness throughout the book. From his perspective on the Lebanese government to the Palestinian intifada to the Israeli occupation to the American involvement in the region, he deals with all of the players fairly, whether big or small, famous or unknown. That's not to say he doesn't have criticisms -- certainly, he has plenty to say about everyone...but one is never left with the feeling that he has been too harsh on one side and lenient on the other. Friedman's willingness to observe with an unbiased eye and ear is key to the strength of this book.

Even with the newer added chapters, dealing with the late 1980's and early 1990's, this book cannot be considered a "complete" history of the Middle East, or even of the events of the last 50 years. However, it is not meant to be that, I think. What Friedman has documented here is an excellent primer for anyone interested in learning more about how we got to where we are today in Lebanon and Israel and Palestine. The book is not an end in itself, but for someone who wants to learn more about the region that is in the news almost every day, this is an excellent place to start.

The only way to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past is to learn from them. As such, 'From Beirut to Jerusalem' should be required reading today.

Not in the "must read " class, but a good informative personal account of Thomas Freidman, the New York Times middle east journalist. The book contains his observances of the factional fighting that took place in Beirut and the larger Lebanon, Israel conflict in the 1980s. The book has interesting observances of these complicated situations. This is a good book for the 21st century where it appears Lebanon is again descending into chaos, and Israel has once again tried the tactic of invading southern Lebanon. Freidman does a good job making a chaotic situation interesting while providing new insights.

I have not yet completed From Beirut to Jerusalem, but I have been fascinated by every word. Mr. Friedman's intellectual approach to the every-day life, religions and politics of the Middle East is written in an easily understandable, conversational manner. He asks questions, finds a range of answers from varied sources, and shares his conclusions in a non-judgmental way. Mr. Friedman's in-depth study of the interplay of religions and politics in the Middle East has clarified many questions I had and has validated some of my thoughts. I better understand what is happening in the Middle East and am rethinking my own political views on today's events.

The book is primarily composed of anecdotes and the author's personal impressions of the people involved, both those who could be considered actors in the events and more ordinary types of people who tried to maintain some semblance of normalcy and survive the mayhem that was engulfing them. Though the book contains some interesting insights it is not as captivating as his columns. My final analysis is that while "From Beirut..." is worth reading, Thomas Friedman, superb columnist that he is, makes it clear that accomplishment as a foreign correspondent does not necessarily translate into a great author of the stature of say, a Mark Bowden.

I started reading this book about a year ago just out of interest and finished it up the other day. I must echo what other reviews have said in that this book is extremely pertinent to the issues of today in the region. The territorial fighting still goes on, the hatred still exists and the solutions are still few.
This book doesn't propose any "plan for peace," which is actually very refreshing. Other books on this topic are generally just the ranting of gasbags who have little comprehension of the history behind the conflict. The truth, as Friedman points out, is that the solution lies in the hearts and minds of the Palestinians and the Israelis. There is plenty of blame to go around, but no outside government--including the US--will ever be able to force peace on these people. Every president since the foundation of Israel has tried to gain peace in the Middle East, but it never works.
This book is not just history it's emotion as well; which makes it all the more entertaining. I recommend it highly.