IRL 22

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6570903.stm

News story
BBC
We were studying the Arab-Israeli crisis and this relates to the crisis because it shwos a moment of peace between the nations where the tensions are seemingly high after 60 years of fighting but the peace aggreements are trying to prevail.
It's value that it adds is time, this article is some 60 years after the intial wars between Arab and Israeli states and it shows that they are trying to work out peace but it's hard due to the neogiations due to past cnoflicts.
Limiations faced with this source is that its from a third hand person, the british whom indirectly are/were pulled into the crisis meaning that they had taken a side, though this article only shows demands of the Arab states that make Israel look bad for doing all this to them but not explaning why they did this to the Palestinans.

IRL 21

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8659894.stm
News Story produced by the BBC.
It connects to what were learning in class because we haven't studied to much American involvement in the Arab-Israeli crisis but we get firsthand account of recent American involvement in keeping the peace in the Middle East.
It adds value because this is some 60 years later to what we've already studied and we still see there is no negotiation between either sides on trying to keep peace while the Americans are trying to help being a middle man.
Limitations faced with this source are there are no direct quote from the Palestinians only the Israeli’s and the Americans. I feel by using evidence such as a direct quote you further the point your trying to make and hence justify it. In this case the point trying to be made is that either side refuses to come to a agreement while the Americans are the middlemen trying to get each side to this place of agreement.

IRL 20

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8650468.stm

News Story

BBC

It connects to what we've studied in class because we've looked at the effects of the Israeli's expanding their territory as they win 'wars' and with them feuding with Egypt the Palestinians whom were pushed into the Gaza strip are feeling the effects.

I guess it adds more value because we usually see the Israeli's looking like bad guys, or the Arabs but we see them both looking cruel towards the Palestinians. It's also recent so we see the effects of the Crisis in the middle east now in 60 years ago.

Limitations faced with this news story are it's one sided, the interviews were only towards the Egyptians whom denied the all allegations while the reports could just have easy asked the Israeli's who would also have a 'motive' to harm the Palestinians and just as easily blocked the Palestinians smuggling area killing them.

IRL 19

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7381364.stm

BBC New Story depicting a Israel time line

We just finished studying the 6 Day War, this seems like a continuation of the fighting between Israel and the Arab Nations surrounding it. It also depicts Israels invasion like attacks without truly thinking it through the consequences such as looking cruel.

It enhances what I've already learned because besides the 6 Day War this event also makes Israel look bad and feel sympathy for the Arab states because Israel is doing this too them. Usually what we've seen is Arabs trying to destroy Israel for the good of Palestinians but here it is not the case.

Limitations faced with this document is its bias because it says that the Palestine guerrilla fighters were in Lebanon after being expelled though giving no further detail but sparing no details on making the Israel's look bad and the true aggressors in this situation.

"CME" Key Questions 45-50

1) By the end of 1949 700,000 Jews total, the ones whom were in the army were trained. They set up kibbutzim's which the Jewish immigrants worked and lived on co-operative farms in which everything was shared. With aid from USA and reparations from Germany Israel was able to irrigate and cultivate the land. In the 1950s and 60s Israel became very industrialized.

2) The Fatah were apart of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan they were also apart of the PLO which explicitly said they were going to eliminate Israel since it was really Palestinian land. The Fatah had raids on the Israeli's which enraged Israel to attack them back. Syria however added to this by supplying men and weapons to the Fatah in order for them to attack Israelis.

3) I think the USSR has a little blame in the war because they told the surrounding Arab states that Israel was planning a attack which was not the case. Also Egypt and all the Arab states which moved troops in dangerously close towards Israel, Nasser had the UN troops removed from the Sinai as well meaning they share part of the blame. Also Israel shares blame in the war because they decided to strike pre-emptively in fear that it would be a repeat of 1948, the air force decided to destroy the air fields of the other countries on June 5th before they'd be able to all attack Israel.

IRL 18

http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/war/just/preemptive.shtml

Website

BBC

It connects to what we are doing in class because we see first hand how the world saw the pre-emptive strike by Israel and we also see the ethics and essential consequences of pre-emptive strikes.

It enhances because the article/website gives up the ethics of problems and solutions with pre-emptive strike. I also feel it enhances what we learned because we get a pretty good example which seems bias free giving the explanation to both the Arabs and the Israeli's but in this case.

The limitations of this article/website are it is essentially bias because it takes a side blaming the Israeli's because it talks about how some think its justifiable for their strike against the Egypt when Egypt hadn't made any attack on them first.

"CME" Key Questions 36-44

1)The causes of tension on Israel's borders were Arabs upset at the Western powers claiming they aided Israel to become independent. And the major tension was there was no treaty signed after the war and the ceasefire lines continue to have increasing tension were they was sometimes fighting. But with Jordan they had reprisals which were attacks from Palestine's whom fled to Jordan and reprisals from Israel.

2) The Egyptians resented the fact that British presence was in the country for several reasons; one because the Egyptians felt that the British were there to use the Suez Canal which the Egyptians built out of force labor. The Egyptians also resented them because the British were seen as bad along with the other western powers because of the creation of Israel and the fact that some Egyptians felt that the King was a push over for the British.

3) A bunch of educated officers called the "Free Officers" waited, plotted, and tried to gain support throughout the army without getting caught. Then in 1952 they easily took over the government buildings and announce that a general would be ruling.

4) To show up the leader and show he was weak and is army was the same. Israel also attacked Gaza because of the Palestinian raids on Israel.

5) They all decided to attack not essentially Egypt but its President Nasser, because he claimed and took over the Suez Canal, traded with communists, and the Israeli's were worried that his military combined with the other Arab nations would be to strong. So Israel invaded Egypt.

6) The Anglo-French told the Israeli's and the Egyptians both to withdraw from the area or they would be use force to get the Israeli's and Egyptians to leave. The Egyptians refused so they were bombed crippling their air force, so the Arab reaction was to halt Oil, American reaction was to cease aid to Britain.

7) The winners were the Egyptians and the Israeli's because Egyptians proved they could hold their own against Anglo-French and did't give up, even though they were attacked by Anglo-French and the Israeli's. The Israeli's also won because they claimed land and proved their deffence force to be the strongest in the Middle East, after this crisis the UN sent troops in order to protect Israel from the raids. While the Anglo-French were the losers of this crisis because they had failed to take control of the Canal and they also failed to overthrow Nasser.