Wow! - I wish Michael Oren would write some more books on Amercian history. This one is a clincher and a must read for any interested in American History. You'll also gain a clear understanding to the Islamic ideology that we so clumsily fight against today - just as we did as a new nation. This book should be sent to every member of congress to re-learn lessons learned and forgotten in our early days of international diplomacy and the military application thereof. Our fore-fathers learned acutely how to fight this fight by the same trial and error we seem to be experiencing today. A MUST READ for all true Americans. David - Bethel, AK

One of the best histories I've ever read. Packed with more information than one couldn't possibly hope to retain. I don't believe I had ever even heard of the Barbary Wars before reading this book. Possibly the most enlightening information were the chapters dealing with the American evangelical missionaries in the Middle East thru out the 19th century, this is the first respectable book I've read that laid out American christian's 100 years old obession with Palenstine. I highly recommend this book it is filled with treasures, Eygtian invasion of Mexico, Civil War heroes training arab armies, Christians failing to convert anyone but instead plant the seeds of secular education and Arad Nationalism, and the origins of the Saudi-US "friendship" just a great book!

"Power, Faith, and Fantasy" is a very balanced book. I think that Oren has gone above and beyond in his efforts to be objective. This book should be required reading for all those who study American policy in the Middle East. I enjoyed reading reading the propaganda lines used by politicians in 1800 which are the same as those used today. For example: If the Barbary Pirates are not dealt with, "they will soon invade the shores of America!" (never mind the pirates did not have ships capable of making the voyage across the Atlantic). Today's line is "if we leave Iraq/Afghanistan, the terrorists will follow us home."

I have enjoyed every word of this book (including the words which I had to look up in a dictionary while reading the book). Oren makes great use of the English language in crafting the amazing tales of American adventures and misadventures in the Middle East.

Superb book. Well Written and documented. One of the best books I have ever read on the Middle East and the Background of the establishment of the State of Israel and its history over the past 2600 years.

When George Washington drove away the British in 1776, little did he know that independence came with a price. America from that day on was on her own. There was no longer a superpower like Britain to look after America. And sure enough, as if on cue, unprotected American merchant ships became easy prey for Moroccan pirates in the Mediterranean. Immediately upon gaining her independence, America encountered her first foreign threat -- the Middle East.

Back in the day, it was far less costly to give in to extortion than to fight a war. So a European country's foreign policy was fairly simple -- set aside an annual fund for paying off pirates.

Not, however, according to the Founding Fathers. President Madison said, "It is a ... settled policy of America, that as peace is better than war, war is better than tribute ... The United States, while they wish for war with no nation, will buy peace with none."

Britain and France were the wealthy superpowers at the time. America was not even close.

But over time America became prosperous. And attributing their prosperity to Divine Providence, those who had money made pilgrimages to Palestine to see firsthand the land on which Jesus walked. What they saw however shocked them. Instead of spirituality, they found poverty, thievery, and a "backward" culture. Unable to stand idly by and do nothing, American missionaries flowed into the Middle East in hopes of converting the region to Christianity.

But the mission was easier said than done. Almost all the evangelists died from disease as soon as they arrived. The Muslims, they also found, steadfastly held to their religion. In the end, the missionaries stopped spreading Christian doctrine and focused instead on building hospitals and schools. They taught the republican ideals of democracy and freedom hoping that through education the people would come to their own and strive for American-style liberty.

And so when news that Jews were getting massacred in Russian pogroms reached America and Hitler started driving away the Jews, it became embedded in American minds that it was in their "Manifest Destiny" to find a permanent settlement for displaced Jews. Zionism, as the movement was called, found no place more fitting than the Jews' ancestral land of Palestine.

America knew then, however, that by recognizing Israel, the Arab world would rise in protest. Oil, whose rich deposits under Arab soil were only then being discovered, was just beginning to grow in demand as it drove Western civilization's industrialization. In the ensuing years, America had to strike a balance between upholding her ideals -- that of protecting Israel -- and protecting her interests -- that of oil.

It is easy to fault America for the region's conflicts today. A critic only need mention oil and any and all debate regarding American foreign policy quickly ends. But in reading the book, I came to see that America has been present in the region long before oil was discovered. American warships had gone wherever American citizens went to provide protection where none was available. Having succeeded in obtaining their freedom, Americans want nothing more than the same liberty to be enjoyed by peoples around the world.

If, indeed, oil was the one true thing that America coveted, she only needs to relinquish her support for Israel and no more American lives need be lost in the Middle East. But perhaps seeing in Israel her former self when droves of huddled masses left the Old World for the New in pursuit of happiness, that may not be something America can will itself do.

Michael Oren is a first class researcher and author. I found this book, like his book on the Six Day War, to be a "page turner", assuming that you like non-fiction. The level of detail is matched by his clear presenatation. Whenever I mention the title to anyone, they all ask the same question: "What was the US doing in the Middle East before the end of WWII?" This book answers that question so clearly. Perhaps the saddest part of the book is that if you read the first 100 pages, the early years of our involvement in the Middle East, it is like reading the New York Times. Nothing has changed. Great book!!

Why is the United States in the Middle East? According to this tome it is based on a three prong theme dominated by the most noble cause of faith while also supported by fantasy and established by power. I accept the last theme, "established by power", but in my humble opinion, the United States motivation for Middle East hegemony is Oil, Oil, and More Oil.

This book tries to put a very pious spin on a United States foreign policy that is truly based simply on economics and politics. I am sure anyone can apply the same three prong theme the author uses to describe U.S. involvement in sub-Sahara Africa - but the results are quite different. Unfortunately, trying to overlook the obvious, the author cannot disguise his very biased viewpoint in much of the narrative.

For me, there were also many quotes and references in the work that were left unexplained and without supporting notes. There were several instances where the author quotes some dialog but the quote is not referenced properly in the narrative nor the bibliographic notes. It led me to believe that the author himself was making the quote; but an author in third person narrative does not enclose his own thoughts in quotes!

I must also offer my opinion on the author's writing style. The style for some will be edifyingly eloquent but others may find it utterly pretentious. I personally wish the author had spent more time with his research notes than with a thesaurus. Maybe some of the unexplained quotes and references would be more thoroughly detailed.

In the end, I did find the book informative especially considering the substantial timeframe and material the author decided to cover. There were many snippets of information that I found extremely interesting. It is worth a read if you have time but I caution the reader to use this work as an overview on the subject and keep in mind that in many instances the narrative viewpoint is very biased.

Interesting book, captivating in the beginning. Quite biased though.

I can point out two cases where Mr.Oren might have filtered historical fact through his own prism in order to convey certain ideas:

Mr.Oren dedicates few lines on page 248 to the plight of thousands of Bulgarians in the Ottoman empire, being massacred by the hundreds in the years before the Liberation in 1878. Having described previously the ethico-political dilemma faced by the US administration, Mr.Oren informs us that the US State Department sent two investigators to the region, whose reports "emboldened the Russians to attack the Ottomans in 1887", but didn't lead to any actions from the side of the US, that instead chose to preserve the good tone with the Porte. Page 311 writes about the "Bulgarian bandits", who "forgetting America's earlier contribution to Bulgaria's struggle for independence", kidnapped an American missionary named Ellen Stone. The history remembers the case as "The Miss Ellen Affair" and is one of the most controversial pages of the Bulgarian history. After her release Ms Ellen herself bacame one of the voices of Bulgaria's struggle for independence. And more importantly, the only substantial and real contributor to Bulgaria's freedom at the time is the Russian Empire and some 105 467 of its soldiers, who perished on the battle fields, 91 652 wounded, and 3 500 missing.

And more importantly - speaking of enlightenment,education and the rise of nationalist ideas in the region Mr.Oren barely mentions few graduates from the American missionary schools and builds up the impression that this period is absolutely void of substantial intelectual activity. In fact the period had figures like Jamal ad-Diin al-Afghani, Mohammad Abdo, Abd ar-Rahman Kawakibi, Rifaat Rafi Tahtawi.

I began with the section on WWI and had to give up. I'd been hoping for history of the Middle East, but this is purely a history of Americans in their own words. Surely it matters what people who actually lived in the Middle East thought and said about what was going on, right? Yet this author did not bother consulting anything written in Middle Eastern languages. Clearly he hasn't learned those languages, but couldn't he at least have consulted other things written in English by people who know what was being said in Turkish, Arabic, Persian, etc.?
Two examples from the WWI section:
1. On the question of how much influence the German government had over Turkey during WWI: The author tells us that the Germans were controlling Turkish policy. This is a bold claim with a lot of implications. His evidence? Only this: that Turkey declared war on the USA when the US declared war on Germany, Turkey's ally by treaty. That is worthless as an argument: declaring war on the enemies of one's treaty partner was standard diplomatic practice in Europe at the time. It's recognized as one of the major factors that led to WWI in the first place that France and Britain went to war to support Russia as its allies by treaty. But only German conspiracy theorists would say that Russia was controlling French or British policy. Why would that logic work in the case of Germany and Turkey? The solution would be to look at Turkish and/or German government documents. Given the enormous amount of research done on WWI, surely someone has researched the question. How does this author get away with such a glib answer?
2. On the Armenian genocide: This is a massive controversy among historians. But this author looks only at what Americans were saying (i.e. that genocide really was taking place). On an issue this big, the author has the responsibility of referencing at least one non-American (and preferably Turkish) source, even if it's to support the American reports. If the point is this important, it should be made well. This author's laziness is inexcusable, and now I have to find a properly researched and written book.

Some of newborn America's first baby steps on the world stage were taken into the quicksand of Middle Eastern politics. Michael Orin draws a compelling line in the sand. Not as a challenge to cross, but a narrative line to follow. A timeline, if you will, of events enacted, of responses made, of good intentions meant.

Pick a year, any year. Pick a paper, any paper. If it was printed since 1776, the story of America in the Middle East will basically read the same, "Never ending or beginning, on an ever spinning wheel..." This well written book makes one feel as if a moth drawn irresistibly to the flame. The ending? You know it. The whole tangled mess of American Foreign Policy, the no-go efforts of NGOs (didn't we used to call them missionaries?), leaves us rubber-necking at a wreckage we cannot turn away from.

POWER, FAITH, AND FANTASY. America has not been napping, but in a Gullivereskian way, the Lilliputians of small minds from all sides has left America feeling POWERless, with a challenged FAITH, yet still clinging to the FANTASY of hope.

Reviewed by Charles Dusenbury, author MOLASBA and COMPUTER BRAIN, on Kindle.

I originally didn't intend to write a review of Michael Oren's "Power, Faith and Fantasy" after I completed reading it over a year ago. However, with the latest tragic outbreak of Israeli-Arab violence in the Gaza Trip, I was spurred on to do so after I saw Mr. Oren, complete in an Israel Defense Force camouflage smocks, speaking to CNN and giving the latest claptrap about how Israel was fighting for Western values and helping to the rid the world of terrorism - the sort of childish black and white fairy tales you heard when you were a child.

First of all, there is no need in denying that Oren is an excellent writer and his narrative from start to finish is written superbly and the text is, quite honestly, unparalleled to other works I have seen. Oren's style is unique and his presentation of such notable and easily recognizable American historical figures such as Theodore Roosevelt, Ulysses S. Grant Herman Melville, and Mark Twain in relation to the problems of the Middle East provides a delightful and informative account of how the United States' relations with the Middle East were formed shortly after the end of the Revolutionary War.

Thus, we learn about how the nascent US Navy took on the naval fleets of North Africa, of how 19th century Americans were captivated with the sensual tales of "1,001 Arabian Nights", and how American missionaries made inroads into the Middle East by proselytizing Eastern Christians to the Protestant denomination. Like many reviewers have noted, Oren's book up until the early 20th century, provides an entertaining perspective of how the Middle East was perceived by Americans and vice versa. There are always those inevitable elements that surprise even the most well-informed readers.

Of course, presentation is only half the work. The historian also has the duty and obligation to uphold facts and remain as much as objective as possible. This is where the book starts to hit the skid marks. Thankfully, we only get to this portion once we hit the 1940s - about 2/3 into the book - and thus, the creation of Israel. One gets the sense that Oren wants to summarize the history of the "special" relationship of the United States as quickly as possible but one can't help but wonder as to what happened to Oren's objectivity once we near this time period. Oren defends Israel, understandably I suppose, for every military engagement that it locked horns with the Arabs. He certainly doesn't waste any time in alluding to the US's current headaches with Iran by pointing the figure at the Islamic Republic for the 1983 Marine barracks bombing, often with no evidence to back up his claims.

Oren's defense of Israel and the US's foray into the Middle East in the 21st century fails on all levels to adhere to objectivity. On the last page of the book, Oren makes the claim that "On balance, Americans historically brought far more beneficence than avarice to the Middle East and caused significantly less harm than good," which, to anyone following up on the news, knows is absolute hogwash. The deaths of over 500,000 Iraqis in the just the latest war - to say nothing of Madeline Albright's shameless expression and satisfaction of the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children who died because of the sanctions were "worth it" - is never mentioned in one of Oren's most astonishing lapses in reasoning. Like others have said, read this book up until 1948 but if you want a better and far more honest review of the United States' relationship with the Middle East, I'd highly recommend Noam Chomsky's "Fateful Triangle".

The book we ordered arrived very quickly and was what we ordered so we were very happy.

This book is a fascinating read it's not just another long boring, cut and dry read. Power, Faith and Fantasy is informative and it keeps you interested the whole time. I found myself looking forward to having reading time for this book.

Michael Oren's POWER, FAITH AND FANTASY, a study of the United States' involvement in the Middle East since 1776, is an eye-opening read. Just be prepared to carve out some time to have your eyes opened. While consistently fascinating and well worth reading if you have any interest in why we are where we are in the morass of Middle Eastern politics, the book is not a quick read due both to its length and the density of its prose.

The vast majority of the book focuses on the period from American independence in 1776 through the declaration of Israeli independence in 1948 because, according to Oren, there has not been a quality overview of that period placed in print before. His study of that period is comprehensive, relating the experiences of minor diplomats and missionaries alongside those of more familiar names. After 1948, things get spottier, although as a basic introduction to the period for those whom this is all new, it does the job.

Oren's thesis is that American involvement in the region is a combination of America's need for power and Americans' efforts to evangelize and serve as missionaries to non-Christian regions. Oren believes that a lot of this involvement and interest is fueled by American fantasies and stereotypes of the region, which are the product of old-school mythology like 1,001 NIGHTS and newer releases from Hollywood like ALADDIN.

What struck me on reading the book is how strong US relations with many parts of the Middle East have been in the past, when Arab nationalism was a far stronger force in the region than today's increasing dominance of Islamic fundamentalism. I also became aware that the US's relations with Israel and with Zionism has not always been as strong as it is today and that at many points in history the US was more concerned about Arab issues than it was about Jewish issues in the region.

This is a strong read and if you want to know the genesis of today's headlines, it is a solid introduction to the history of American foreign policy in the Middle East. Just be prepared to invest some time since this is not a quick read. I highly recommend it.

From the founding of the USA in 1776 and the Ottoman Empire to today's Middle East, Oren writes clearly and compellingly about the USA and that area of the world. The detail is illuminating, the dispassionate scholarly approach is welcome, (there appears no political bias). It would be hard to imagine a better written or more complete history of the US and its continued involvement in the region. From the Ottoman Empire to its collapse in WWI, the ensuing colonial establishment by Europe and Russia, the massive need of the world for the oil of the region, the fated rise of Zionism, the battle waged to keep Russia from gaining control, the fall of secular control and the rise of fundamental Islam in many states, the continued failure despite so many efforts to bring peace to the area, the upsurge in militant Islam and the attacks on the USA and Europe, are all written about with enough detail to give the reader a clear sense of the continuing themes which reveal themselves and the very difficult challenges all American presidents since Wilson have had there.

From WWII's end to today, all the names and events are woven into a very readable narrative. Any reader will be far better informed as a reward for 604 pages of text and the 128 pages of reference material to support the work.

As at the ball park, you can't know the game without the program. This is a big help.

The title says it all. A wonderful exploration of our country's dealings with the countries and cultures of the Middle East from the time America was born until present day. Lots of fascinating historical information and personal stories. Reading the book added depth to my understanding of our historical relationship with the Middle Eastern countries and why we are where we are in the Mid East today. Well written and well worth the read.

Excellent. A true addition to my understanding of the world.

Should be required reading for anyone in public office.

go read it now.

yes, now.

"Power, Faith, and Fantasy" is worth buying. Given the major role the Middle East is playing in world affairs today, it pays to learn more about the history behind current events. This book will give it to you. I travel to that part of the world on occasion and wanted to learn more about it. The book satisfied my need in that regard.

Oren's writing style is clear, albeit at times with a few pretentious vocabulary choices. He does a good job of extracting history by using many stories. This narrative quilt works reasonably well most of the time, but sometimes leaves you wanting a more linear approach. Stories, however, are entertaining and that keeps you coming back for more. One of Oren's favorite tactics (that wears thin eventually) is to take you down one path -- 'things are looking bad, but ... there are some good things about to happen.' This back flipping is his way of balancing events. After awhile you get to expect the other shoe to drop and the device loses its effectiveness. However, the 600 pages are rarely boring and the amount of U.S. history behind the Middle East is unexpectedly enlightening.

In the end, you'll discover the book lives exactly up to its title in what Oren stresses. The U.S. government is constantly bedeviled by how to treat Arab/Muslim countries when there is such a cultural and religious difference. There is no way to "win" politically, morally, militarily, or popularly. The missionaries are frustrated by an inability to covert locals and switch to humanitarian care when not dying from disease or being attacked by natives. The U.S. population is enamored of the image of the nomadic and sensuous Arabs and easily enticed by cheap imagery. Until 911 that is.

Oren helps us understand the complex mix that makes the Middle East a place of shifting sands both physically and politically. See if you don't come away concluding the Jews and the Arabs will never reconcile over Israel. A perverse conclusion (mine, not his) from Oren's work is that the state of Israel is really Hitler's "final solution" -- a sort of simmering residual holocaust waiting to reignite.

You are now free to click the "order" button.

I found this a fascinating if somewhat redundant accounting of the U.S. involvement with the Middle East since our nation's birth. Many of the historical anecdotes are almost chilling in their forshadowing of events of the last few years.
I'd recommend it if your a solid history and politics student.

Detailing the United States involvement in what used to be known in the 18th and 19th century as simply the "Orient" (only to be labeled "the Middle East" by an American journalist in 1902), Michael Oren takes you through all of the various modes of relations these two areas have had. From economic to social upheavals, it seems to him that there are three underlying themes: the need for power, the search for faith, and the unmasking of fantasies for americans going to the middle east and vice versa.

The language is beautiful with balanced content.

Highly recommended

It is written from an American point of view. But it is factual.
The author accurately described the relations between the United States and the Arab World.
Some statement can be attested other debated.
In general, it is a good book. I give it 5 stars.

S. Mahdi, Cairo, Egypt.

I enjoyed this book immensely. Having previously read Six Days of War I have immense respect for Oren as a historian. His style is erudite, informative, easy to read and non-judgemental. He has to be one of the most unbiased historians around. He leaves the reader to draw his/her own conclusions.
I found the whole saga of America's involvement with the Middle East fascinating as I had not read of her earliest contacts with the region before e.g. the Barbary pirate wars and the enormous extent of American philanthropy in the area.
Oren cleverly weaves his triple themes of power, faith and fantasy through the unfolding historical events using them to bind those often complicated and disparate events together.
America's involvement in the Middle East is so complex,juggling anti-colonialism, support for nationalist movements while often backing tyrants, a need for oil, cold war exigencies and loyalty to Israel. Post 9/11 sees her embroiled in outright war and confrontation with Iran. I can't wait for Oren's next book!

Power Faith and Fantasy is an interesting book about the relationship between the US and the countries of the Middle East. This relationship has a long history going back to the declaration of American independence from England. Reading this tome helps the reader understand our current involvement in the region and put it into a realistic context.

I had a few problems with the book. Although the author's purpose is to elucidate this part of history, I felt that he occasionally was too focused on the relationship, losing sight of many other historical events. For example, to claim that the US navy was created in order to contain piracy within the Mediterranean Sea is a bit of an exaggeration. Although the battles in the Mediterranean may have been important, piracy in the Caribbean was much more threatening to US political and economic interests and was the primary driver behind the creation of the Navy. This is an example of misplaced emphasis that I found throughout much of this book.

Overall, this is a good book and useful for the reader of today, but it is not without faults.

This book is a comprehensive and highly enjoyable overview of the history of United States relations with the Middle East. Michael Oren is truly talented as a writer. He is able to illustrate the essentials from history in an engaging and educational manner while still remaining scholarly. He also presents history in a narrative fashion as he evidently recognizes the importance of past events in influencing attitudes towards shaping the future.

I especially enjoyed the sections on the Barbary Pirate wars, the Theodore Roosevelt Administration's handling of Ion Perdicaris' being taken hostage in Morocco, the history of the Zionist movement, the adventure involved in Getty's discovery of oil in the Arabian Peninsula and the U.S. attitudes and political involvements with the Arab-Israeli wars.

This book is a must read to help acquire a broad, integrative understanding of the history of the intersection of the United States and the Middle East.

Any parochial notion that America only recently stumbled into the maelstrom of Middle Eastern religious and political conflict will not long survive this entertaining, though flawed, survey of Americans' encounters with the region since the War of Independence. Oren identifies three overarching themes that have shaped the country's attitudes towards the Middle East (they're right there in the title, in case that weren't already obvious) and sticks manfully to a rotating tripartite structure through the volume, though the last chapter, which covers the period from the birth of Israel to the Iraq War, is hopelessly rushed and inadequate. A large number of typos and avoidable errors of fact, coupled with a prose style that can best be described as earnestly clunky, will probably set one's teeth on edge more than once, but there is plenty of information here that will come as a surprise to the average reader (for example, did you know that American veterans of the Civil War - both Union and Confederate - essentially created the Egyptian army? I certainly didn't). It's not a book I care to own, but I'm glad to have read it. One suggestion for future works, Mr. Oren: Describing each and every major personage's physical appearance is a luxury only, NOT a requirement!

An excellent textbook about our country's relationship/history with the Middle East over the past 230 years. I highly recommend it. Especially relevant in today's world.

this book is excellent for those who want a good read and some serious facts about the continued interwoven involvement of the US in the Middle East. The first part of the book adeptly describes how America came to think of the Middle East as a place where Americans could change history. Recommended reading for all who enjoy history and like reading in novel-style.

Oren's book offers an interesting description of 18th and 19th century Americans' vision of, and relations with, the Middle East. It includes good accounts of early American visitors to the region, the naval/pirate conflicts with North African states, and the origins of American evangelical ideas that Jews needed to be returned to the Holy Land. (Two of Oren's fun facts: the Star-Spangled Banner has its origins in an earlier work by Francis Scott Key on the conflict with the Barbary states, and the Statue of Liberty was a remodeled version of colossal statue that was supposed to depict the enlightenment of Egypt).

As the book plunges into the 20th century it becomes less adequate. Oren explains that he does not feel obligated to give more than a brief survey of events in the Cold War and after. That seems fair enough; the book is already 600 pages. But even before the post-1948 survey, the desire to chronicle what happened seems to overwhelm any incisive interpretation. The significance of oil in shaping relations and policy is definitely described, but it seems like it deserves a more prominent place. Also, Oren makes this grand claim in the final pages of the book: "On balance, Americans historically brought far more beneficence than avarice to the Middle East and caused significantly less harm than good." Does the history of US relations with Middle Eastern states really support that analysis? It seems a particularly risky proposition in 2008, with the US mired in Iraq. How would one go about trying to tabulate such a balance sheet? How would one factor in US bolstering of dictatorial regimes in places like Saudi Arabia? Or the overturning of a nationalist Iranian government by the CIA? Oren's own history shows how little Americans actually understood about the region and its people, even as they attempted to shape its future. It seems unlikely that a basically imperial perspective could also coincidentally be the basis for a good policy that put the people of the Middle East first. Oren seems to be falling into the trap that he describes in his book. His final judgment oddly seems to reinforce the myths about the American role in the region as a champion of enlightenment. It understates how much US policy was driven fundamentally by what all states are driven by: strategic interests and demand for economic resources.

As the title indicates, this book reviews US history in the Middle East from 1776 to 2006. The most interesting part for me was the first half which takes you up to WWI. I had no idea how ignorant I was about our pre-WWI history there, even though I've now read several books on the Middle East. Especially for a history book, it reads very well. It is fascinating, educational, sheds light on our current conflicts, and should be read by anyone with an interest in the subject.

I purchased this book with great, but hopefully realistic expectations. Looking for a further knowledge in my rather meager understanding of the history of this critical geopolitical and religious region, I was ready to put up with a variety of difficulties. What I found, however was really disappointing.
Firstly, FAITH. There was a decided lack of explanation of Islam. In order to understand why the missionaries were unable to get any Muslim converts, one needs to know what the "power" is within Islam to hold its adherents. To ignore the many sects within Islam, selecting only occasional reference to Shia groups doesn't help in our understanding of the animosity among Muslims. To deal so lightly in delineating the two main branches, let alone the numerous factions within them does little justice to the reader. Indeed, reading only a few pages of one of the dictionaries of religion gives far more edification about Islam, and Richard Burton's book (the polyglot spy, not the actor) illustrates the subterfuge amongst the Sunni factions which makes understanding difficult and infiltration nearly impossible. This is of great importance in our present "war." Further FAITH. The "conversion" of Eastern Orthodox Christians is referred to without any explanation as to why they, very early on, broke off from the "parent group," let alone what the inherent differences were originally and how that figured in to the interface with the evangelical Protestant missionaries. Indeed, one could even question whether they were truly converts. And FAITH, SELECTED AND SKEWED. In reading about the author, I found that his fellow Princetonian PhD had excoriated him for his previous book as being far too pro Israeli. This was a bit surprising since the critic, himself, is Jewish. Thus, I read this book, expecting no such slanting of history, yet willing to accept a bit here and there that would reflect the author's Israeli background. Spending page after page, chapter after chapter, and allusion after allusion on the importance of Restorationism, ie, bringing the Jews back to Palestine - ostensibly to facilitate the second coming of Jesus - without providing an historical counterbalance of the Palestinian's side is patently slanted. Repeating this theme whiile lauding the Jewish queue behind it begs for counterbalancing. SKEWING, SLIGHTING, NEGLECTING, AND, NOT SELECTING THE TRUTH. To spend less than two pages on the Armenian massacre before adding two more on Clara Barton could be said, at the least, to be SLIGHTING. Referring vaguely only to the incident in 1864, Oren neglects the three years of continued massacres. Indeed, he grossly misrepresentis the reasons for such. His noted source for this, "The Burning Tigris," clearly indicates what should have been written; Balakian (author of that source) delineates the numerous reasons (double taxation, Ottomans and Kurds, the umbrella of "the young Turks," etc.) as well as the important, massive, and varied responses in the United States. Oren indicated that the problem was due to Armenian suspected alliance with Russia and allegiance to Christianity. This is not what is indicated in his source. Such a representation borders on fantasy, and is history SELECTED, SKEWED AND SKEWERED. Of the approximate 800 pages, only some 600 are text. The reader is deluged with references, especially dealing with primary sources of minutia. When he hasn't gotten the facts straight from his own references, when he selects and disregards so misleadingly, and when he resets the nail and hammers home the restoration of the Jews from so many different angles, one cannot help but be disappointed. Perhaps Dr. Finkelstein (critic of "Six Days of War") had it right after all.
PAGEPHAGE

Fascinating, well-researched history of American's inevitable entanglement with the Middle East (for better or worse).

this book could have been cut down to only a few pages. Even then I wouldn't believe what he told me. Very one sided that is stated as fact.

This is a very good book and I found it a simple read for most western readers. It's fairly balanced with respect to US foreign policy in the middle east and even handed in its approach to the issues. It's a good read!