Re: P.S.

Posted by Michaelson from mcross.utsi.edu (150.182.24.206) on Tuesday, September 28, 2004 at 1:36pm :

In Reply to: P.S. posted by Brett Maverick Lambert from d199-126-209-169.abhsia.telus.net (199.126.209.169) on Monday, September 27, 2004 at 6:39pm :

The interpretation was tailored, not the statement. Anyone can take any statement out of context and make it fit any given situation. Of course we can learn from past mistakes, but the circumstances must be like in nature. In this case, Lawrence was speaking about the British Empire's involvement in circumventing the Ottoman Empires interest in eastward expansion into Russia, as well as them throwing the Brits out of the area. He was disappointed, as he wanted full measures to be placed in HIS plan to create a unified Arabia, and therefore control the area for the British Empire along WITH the Arab rulers. This could be accomplished only with the full military support of the British goverment. The government disagreed, and his plan abandoned. Lawrence removed himself from service, and was killed in the motorcycle accident a few months later.
Most of the issues he mentioned were brought up at the Treaty of Versailles at the end of the war, but dismissed. The Arabs created their own alliances, and the rest, as they say, is history. So, it was all still military involvement in Lawrence's case, but wanted to be placed on a different front. His statement was given in order to dissuade them from going in one direction, and move militarily in the direction of HIS plan. So, how does this compare with today's situation? I see no parallel, with the exception that fighting is once again going on in the same area, but over completely different reasons. Regards. Michaelson

: : : Interesting, but not applicable. Different times, different global situations, different politics. It's easy to take phrasing stated from one point in history and tailor it to appear to match the current situation, when in reality it's referring to something COMPLETELY different. Regards. Michaelson

: : History repeats itself. It's just the names that change.

: P.S. - How was the T.E. Lawrence quote tailored to match current events? There was no alteration of TEL's quotes. It's just Ulla reading what he said and she couldn't help but parallel it to what's going on in present day Iraq.

: P.P.S. - If you want more history repeating itself, I'm interested in checking out "The Battle of Algiers" (1960) which is about how France's meddling with its (then) colony Algeria (PARTICULARLY in regards to fighting "insurgents" and putting up check-points to control the Arab/Muslim population). It's on DVD through the Criterion Collection. Guaranteed to be fascinating, I'm sure.

Indygear

Follow Ups:

Interesting but not relevant to Indy... - Micah 7:54pm 09/28/2004

Re: Interesting but not relevant to Indy... - Michaelson 9:26am 09/29/2004

Haha! - Brett Maverick Lambert 1:39am 10/07/2004

Post a Followup

Name:

E-Mail: ( default )

Subject:

Message:
: The interpretation was tailored, not the statement. Anyone can take any statement out of context and make it fit any given situation. Of course we can learn from past mistakes, but the circumstances must be like in nature. In this case, Lawrence was speaking about the British Empire's involvement in circumventing the Ottoman Empires interest in eastward expansion into Russia, as well as them throwing the Brits out of the area. He was disappointed, as he wanted full measures to be placed in HIS plan to create a unified Arabia, and therefore control the area for the British Empire along WITH the Arab rulers. This could be accomplished only with the full military support of the British goverment. The government disagreed, and his plan abandoned. Lawrence removed himself from service, and was killed in the motorcycle accident a few months later. : Most of the issues he mentioned were brought up at the Treaty of Versailles at the end of the war, but dismissed. The Arabs created their own alliances, and the rest, as they say, is history. So, it was all still military involvement in Lawrence's case, but wanted to be placed on a different front. His statement was given in order to dissuade them from going in one direction, and move militarily in the direction of HIS plan. So, how does this compare with today's situation? I see no parallel, with the exception that fighting is once again going on in the same area, but over completely different reasons. Regards. Michaelson : : : : : Interesting, but not applicable. Different times, different global situations, different politics. It's easy to take phrasing stated from one point in history and tailor it to appear to match the current situation, when in reality it's referring to something COMPLETELY different. Regards. Michaelson : : : History repeats itself. It's just the names that change. : : P.S. - How was the T.E. Lawrence quote tailored to match current events? There was no alteration of TEL's quotes. It's just Ulla reading what he said and she couldn't help but parallel it to what's going on in present day Iraq. : : P.P.S. - If you want more history repeating itself, I'm interested in checking out "The Battle of Algiers" (1960) which is about how France's meddling with its (then) colony Algeria (PARTICULARLY in regards to fighting "insurgents" and putting up check-points to control the Arab/Muslim population). It's on DVD through the Criterion Collection. Guaranteed to be fascinating, I'm sure.

Optional Link ( default )

URL:

Title:

Optional Image Link ( default )

URL:

This board is powered by the Mr. Fong Device from Cyberarmy.com