Search Result in All

Description:

The ongoing turmoil in Egypt is taking its deadliest form in the Sinai Peninsula. Attacks by militants have dramatically increased since the ouster of President Mohamed Morsi. In the latest development, Egyptian media have reported that 10 militants were killed over the past 48 hours in an army offensive against militants in the north of Sinai.

Description:

Al Jazeera reports on the longest migration made by any mammal on earth. The Gray Whale itself is a phenomenal sight. These animals spend their entire lives within a few kilometers of the shoreline. Yet their 18,500 km annual migration take them from the Bering Sea between Russia and Alaska all the way down the coast to Mexico's western coast. Franc Contreras takes us to the world's oldest whale sanctuary in the Baja California peninsula.

Description:

The world's longest bridge over sea water has opened in opened to general traffic on in China's eastern coastal city of Qingdao. Jiaozhou Bay is located on the southern coast of the Shandong Peninsula in East China. It separates Huangdao District from Qingdao City and borders on two other cities, Jiaozhou and Jiaonan. The Qingdao Haiwan Bridge, with a total length of 42.4 kilometres would easily cross the English Channel and is almost three miles longer than the previous record-holder, the Lake Pontchartrain Causeway in the American state of Louisiana. Built in just four years at a cost of 55.5 billion pounds, the sheer scale of the bridge reveals the advances made by Chinese engineers in recent years.

Description:

A section of a gas pipeline has been blown up in Egypt\\\'s Sinai Peninsula, with militants the prime suspects. Security sources say the target of the attack was a domestic pipeline feeding natural gas to an industrial area. There are no reports of casualties so far. Security forces have encircled the area and have launched an investigation. In recent months, militants have repeatedly targeted another pipeline in the region, halting gas supplies to Israel and Jordan. The militants escalated attacks on Egyptian police and security forces following the ouster of Mohamed Morsi in July.

Description:

Saudi Ayatollah Nimr Al-Nimr Dares Saudi Regime to Attack Iran and Declares: We Are Loyal to Allah, Not to Saudi Arabia or its Royal Family Following are excerpts from a Friday sermon delivered by Saudi Ayatollah Nimr Al-Nimr, which was posted on the Internet on October 7, 2011. Nimr Baqir Al-Nimr is from the city of Awwamiyah in the eastern part of Saudi Arabia. He is an outspoken Shia cleric known for his criticism of the Saudi government and his constant call for freedom of religion, equality, and justice for the Shia minority in Saudi Arabia. In 2009, Al-Nimr said that the dignity of the Saudi Shia is more precious than the unity of the land, and suggested that Saudi Shia might secede from Saudi Arabia. Fearing arrest, Al-Nimr currently is in hiding. Nimr Al-Nimr: �For the past 100 years, we have been subjected to oppression, injustice, fear, and intimidation. From the moment you are born, you are surrounded by fear, intimidation, persecution, and abuse. We were born into an atmosphere of intimidation. We feared even the walls. Who among us is not familiar with the intimidation and injustice to which we have been subjected in this country? I am 55 years old, more than half a century. From the day I was born and to this day, I�ve never felt safe or secure in this country. �You are always being accused of something. You are always under threat. The head of the State Security Service admitted this to me in person. He said to me when I was arrested: �All you Shi�ites should be killed.� That is their logic. The head of the State Security Service in the Eastern Province said so himself. [...] �They are still plotting to carry out a massacre. They are more than welcome. We are here. Our blood is a small price to pay in defense of our values. We do not fear death. We long for martyrdom. [...] �A few months ago, the flame of honor was sparked in the spirits of the youth. The torch of freedom was lit. The people took to the streets demanding reform, honor, and freedom. There are people who have been held in prison unjustly for more than 16 years. In addition, the Peninsula Shield Force and the Saudi army invaded Bahrain. Then there were more and more arrests. �So who was it who instigated strife and unrest? [...] �The strife and unrest in Awwamiya were instigated by the regime, not the people. [...] �We will continue to defend both the veteran and the new prisoners. We will stand by them. We don�t mind being arrested, and joining them. We don�t even mind shedding our blood for their sake. We will continue to express even stronger solidarity with Bahrain. It is our own kin in Bahrain. Even if the Saudi army and the Peninsula Shield Force had not intervened, it still would have been our duty to stand by the people of Bahrain, our kin, let alone when the Saudi army takes part in oppression, the killing, the violation of women�s honor, and the plundering of money. [...] �[The Saudi regime says] that we are acting �at the behest of a foreign country.� They use that false pretext. By �foreign country� they mean Iran, of course. You can�t really tell if it�s Iran, Turkey, a European country, or the U.S., but they usually mean Iran. In December 1978, there was an Intifada to defend the honor of Awwamiya, when the riot police attacked the town. This was on December 10, 1978, before the Shah was deposed, before the Islamic Republic of Iran was even established. �It was in 1978 � four months before the fall of the Shah. A group of people convened to perform the religious rite of taziyeh for Imam Hussein. It had nothing to do with political or security matters, but the security forces arrived and attacked them, and a confrontation ensued. People were defending themselves, as well as their faith and their honor. That night, they arrested 100 people. This was in December 1978, prior to the fall of the Iranian [Shah]. So how can they talk about foreign interferen

Description:

On a Thursday, just three days before the demise of Prophet (PBUH&HF), the Messenger of Allah asked for pen and paper in order to state his last will and repeat the declaration/assignment of his successor for his Ummah. Major Sunni sources including Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim mentioned that an opposition group among the companions whose leader was Umar, accused prophet of talking non sense (May Allah protect us) in order to prevent this writing. They questioned the rationality of Prophet to discredit his will. Below is some of the traditions concerning this tragic episode: It is narrated in Sahih Muslim that: Ibn Abbas said:\"Thursday! And how tragic that Thursday was!\" Then Ibn Abbas cried severely so that his tears flowed to his cheeks. Then he added Prophet said:\"Bring me a flat bone or a sheet and an ink so that I could write (order to write) a statement that will prevent you people to go astray after me.\" They said: \"Verily the messenger of Allah is talking no sense.\" (Reference: Sahih Muslim, Chapter of \"Kitabul-Wasiyyah \" in section \"Babut-Tarkil-Wasiyyah\", 1980 Edition, Arabic version (Saudi Arabia), v3, P1259, Tradition (#1637/21).) The other version is given by al-Bukhari and Muslim which indicates the role of Umar in that catastrophe: Sahih al-Bukhari Hadiths: 9.468 and 7.573 Narrated Ibn \'Abbas: When the time of the death of the Prophet approached while there were some men in the house, and among them was \'Umar Ibn al-Khattab, the Prophet said: \"Come near let me write for you a writing after which you will never go astray.\" \'Umar said: \"The Prophet is seriously ill, and you have the Quran, so Allah\'s Book is sufficient for us.\" The people in the house differed and disputed. Some of them said, \"Come near so that Allah\'s Apostle may write for you a writing after which you will not go astray,\" while the others said what \'Umar said. When they made much noise and quarreled greatly in front of the Prophet, he said to them,\"Go away and leave me.\" Ibn \'Abbas used to say,\" It was a great disaster that their quarrel and noise prevented Allah ‘s Apostle from writing a statement for them. The above tradition can also be found in Sahih Muslim, Chapter of \"Kitabul- Wasiyyah\" in section \"Babut-Tarkil-Wasiyyah\", 1980 Edition, Arabic version (Saudi Arabia), v3, p1259, Tradition (#1637/22). As you see in the above traditions, the Prophet (PBUH&HF) was accused of talking no sense by an opposition group among the companions whose leader was Umar. In the above tradition, Ibn Abbas mentioned Umar and his company PREVENTED Prophet from writing his will which could prevent people from going astray after him. So the conclusion from the above tradition is that the writing it did NOT take place. In the following tradition, however, Sa\'id Ibn Jubair alleged that the Prophet said three things but he has forgotten the third one which was beneficial for Muslims: Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 4.393 Narrated Said bin Jubair: I heard Ibn \'Abbas saying, \"Thursday! And you know not what Thursday is? After that Ibn \'Abbas wept till the stones on the ground were soaked with his tears. On that I asked Ibn \'Abbas, \"What is (about) Thursday?\" He said, \"When the condition (i.e. health) of Allah\'s Apostle deteriorated, he said,\'Bring me a bone of scapula, so that I may write something for you after which you will never go astray.\' The people differed in their opinions although it was improper to differ in front of a prophet, They said,\'What is wrong with him? Do you think he is talking no sense (delirious)? Ask him (to see if he is talking no sense). The Prophet replied,\'Leave me, for I am in a better state than what you are asking me.\' Then the Prophet ordered them to do three things saying: \'Turn out all the pagans from the Arabian Peninsula, show respect to all foreign delegates by giving them gifts as I used to do.\' The third order was something beneficial which either Ibn \'Abbas did not mention or he mentioned but I forgot! Sa\'id Ibn Jubair claims that Prophet said three things but he has forgotten the third one which was beneficial for Muslims. It is interesting to see that the narrators who used to memorize thousands of traditions, simply forgot the last will of Prophet (PBUH&HF). Now if you look at the two things that the sub-narrator allegedly attributed to the Prophet, i.e., 1. Expelling pagans from Arabian Peninsula 2. respecting foreign delegates One can see that these are not the things that if Muslim do, they will NEVER go astray after Prophet. The matter should be much more important that would Guarantee the salvation of Muslims, and it could be no less important than the subject of leadership. Moreover such claim contradicts the saying of Ibn Abbas (in the early mentioned traditions) who claimed that the quarrel of the companions prevented the prophet from stating his will. Here is the last tradition I would like to mention in this regard. Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 5.716 Narrated Ibn Abbas: Thursday! And how tragic that Thursday was! The ailment of Allah\'s Apostle became worse (on Thursday) and he said \"Bring me something so that I (order) to write for you something after which you will never go astray.\" The people (present there) quarreled in this matter, and it was not right to quarrel in front of prophet. They said, \"What is wrong with him? (Do you think) he is talking no sense (delirious)?\" The above tradition is also in Sahih Muslim, Chapter of \"Kitabul-Wasiyyah\" in section \"Babut-Tarkil-Wasiyyah\", 1980 Edition, Arabic version, (Saudi Arabia), v3, pp 1257-58, Tradition (#1637/20). More addresses for similar traditions: Sahih al-Bukhari, in the chapter named \"The Book of Knowledge \" (Kitabul-Ilm), also in the chapter named \"The Book of Medicine \" (Kitabut-Tib), also in the chapter named \"Kitabul Itisam bil Kitab was-Sunnah\". Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1,pp 232,239,324f,336,355. And much more... Also as indicated above (Sahih al-Bukhari Hadiths: 9.468 and 7.573), Umar said: \"The Prophet is seriously ill, and you have the Quran, so Allah\'s Book is sufficient for us.\" Umar and those who supported him prevented prophet from writing (ordering to write) that statement, by accusing him of talking no sense. As I have mentioned in the discussion about \"Quran and Ahlul-Bayt\", prophet clearly indicated that we should follow both Quran AND Ahlul-Bayt in order not to go astray. So Quran alone is not sufficient as opposed to what Umar said above. There is a bizarre commentary in the footnote of above traditions in Sahih Muslim (1980 Edition, Arabic version). It says: The above incident shows the high virtue of Umar, since he knew that people might not follow what prophet would write, and as a result, people would go to hell because of their disobedience of the order of prophet. So Umar prevented Prophet from writing, in order to save people from going to hell ! Also in the footnote of the same section of Sahih Muslim it is mentioned that Prophet possibly wanted to assign a Caliph on that Thursday, and the matter might have been the matter of successorship which caused such dispute. In fact, most of the people who where present there, understood the intention of prophet, the same as what Umar did. Because prophet had previously indicated the issue when he said several times that: \"I shall leave for you two precious Symbols: The book of Allah, and my progeny, that is my family (Itrat & Ahlul-bayt). If you follow them, you will never go astray after me.\" (Sahih al-Tirmidhi; a close version is also given in Sahih Muslim), And also they were present in GHADIR KHUM where prophet said: \"Whoever I am his master, Ali is his master.\" (see Sahih al-Tirmidhi; Sunan Ibn Maja; Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal; al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim; Khasa\'is, by al-Nisa\'i). So when prophet during his illness said that \"Let me write something that you never go astray after me\", those people who were present, including Umar, quickly understood that prophet wants to repeat what he had already mentioned, but this time in writing. A few Quranic verses should also be mentioned here. Allah said in Quran: * \"O you who believe! Do not raise your voices above the voice of prophet ... lest your deeds become null while you do not perceive.\" (Quran 49:2). * Allah also said: \"Nor does he (prophet) speak out of his desire. (What he says) is nothing but revelation that is revealed.\" (Quran 53:3-4). * He, Exalted, also said: \"Whatever apostle tells you accept it, and from whatever he forbids you, keep back.\" (Quran 59:7). * He, Exalted He is, also said: But no by thy Lord! They can have no Faith until they make thee judge in ALL disputes between them and find in their souls no resistance against thy decisions but accept them with the fullest conviction. (Quran 4:65) So when such a prophet, three days before his death, wished to write a document of his will to save the Muslims from going astray, he was accused of talking no sense (paranoid)! The reason that prophet did not repeat his request (if it is true) was that he already was discredited by his companions and was accused of talking no sense. So even if he would say something, those people would not believe in him and would say such instruction has been given while he was talking no sense (paranoid). So Umar made it easy, and by saying that prophet is talking nonsense, ended it up. There are few Sunni traditions which allege that prophet was confused to assign which person as his successor and finally failed to assign any body as his successor and left it to people to decide. Some even claim that prophet was willing to assign Abu Bakr, but he left it to people. If Umar have ever heard of such sayings (that prophet was willing to assign Abu Bakr as his successor), he would never stop prophet from stating his will, and would never accuse him of talking no sense. Rather he would let prophet tell his will and assign Abu Bakr as his successor. We all know, the main support in \"Saqifah Bani Sa\'idah\" for the secret nomination of Abu Bakr for Caliphate, was Umar. So if Umar have not heard of such traditions (the tendency of Prophet to assign Abu Bakr), there is a great possibility that those traditions were fabricated later. Also it contradicts several authentic Sunni traditions regarding the assignment of Ali-Ibn-Abi-Talib as prophet\'s successor. As you know there are a huge number of fabricated traditions which was created by several pay-rolled scholars in support of some rulers, and mainly to justify what happened. Finally, I would like to bring to your attention the importance and seriousness of the tragedy: 1- Notice that any person utters his most important wishes when he wants to write the statement of his will at the end of his life. 2- Notice the importance of the person who wants to write the will, who is the last Prophet of God, the best mankind ever. No human in the world was more enthusiastic than him about his community. The person who Allah has ordered us in Quran to follow him unconditionally. 3- Notice that prophet said this statement would be the key element in the destiny of Muslims according to the above traditions. They will never go astray if they abide it. In such critical moment, people who claimed to be his sincere companions, stopped/insulted him. Those companions are responsible for misleading the Muslims throughout history and the generations to come. ============= Side Comments ============= Reading the article, a Sunni brother commented that: How could Umar prevent the manifestation of a Divine Commandment? If writing the will was the order of Allah to his Prophet, then how could be possible that Allah fails to manifest His own wish? This brother has confused two different issues. Umar was able to prevent the manifestation of divine commandment since he was a human and was gifted some free will. Yet, Umar or any other human can NEVER prevent what Allah foreordained (Taqdir) and what Allah wills (Mashiyyah). Please take a note of this: There is a difference between the commandment of Allah (which people can disobey) and the will of Allah (which people have no ability to go against). It was the commandment of Allah to write that statement, yet the Will of Allah was what happened. ========= Another brother mentioned that Prophet Muhammad never wrote a single commandment or teaching of his during his 23 years of ministry. Then how could he order people to bring pen and paper to write somthing for them? Yes, the messenger of Allah did not write in public, because he used to dictate writing. However, this does not mean that he did not know how to write. It is also true that the Prophet was \"Ummi\", but this does not necessarily mean he did not know how to read and write. It rather means that Prophet did not have any human teacher to teach him how to read and write since the time he was born to his mother (\"Ummi\" derived from \"Umm\" meaning mother). His only teacher was Allah. And this is why Quran is a true miracle from a person who did not have a teacher and he who did not go to school. I would say, clearing doubt about the Quran as God\'s revelation was the only reason that the Messenger of Allah was not ordered attempt to write in public or claim as such. Reading and writing not only in Arabic but also in all other languages, as well as the knowledge of language of all other creatures are not a lot to claim for the master of all messengers when we see in Quran that Prophet Sulayman and David knew the language of the animals. Again, all such knowledge could be released to the Prophet when he really needed, by the permission of Allah. But to the time it is not necessary, he would act as if he does not have such knowledge. It is like having access to the database rather than having all the knowledge within oneself. About the Tragedy of Thursday, however, what the Prophet (PBUH&HF) meant by \"writing\" was the common sense of \"ordering to write\", and people were aware of it and was not the first time they have heard of it. Based on the traditions no body even said at that time that how he wants to write. Moreover, even we suppose that Prophet wanted to write by himself and people did not know about his ability to write, they could have given him the benefit of doubt (!!) to see if he can do such miracle (!?) beside all the miracles he has had already shown. Were they suspicious to his miracles? This is the same Prophet that God said about him \"laa yantqu anil Hawaa\" (he does not talk of his own desires)? Never mind verses 33:36, 59:7, 4:80, 4:59, etc., and yet to justify a disobedience by some companions can we accuse him of rave? Did God know that there would be a time that His prophet could not stand to the above standard, and still going ahead and revealing such verses in his honor? ========= Another brother mentioned that if the Prophet inteneded to appoint Ali as the Imam, why did he not do so in the presence of the whole people and not in his house few days before his demise? The Prophet had already declared the appointment Imam Ali as Imam in many occasions from his first open preach in Mecca (see al-Tabari English, v6, pp 88-92; Ibn al-Athir, v2, p62; Ibn Asakir, v1, p85; al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Suyuti, v5, p97) to his last open sermon in Ghadir Khum (see Sahih Tirmidhi, v2, p298; Sunan Ibn Maja, v1, pp 12,43; Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal; al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim; Khasa\'is, by al-Nisa\'i). Note that it was not Prophet who appointed him on his own, but it was rather Allah who appointed him. What the messenger of Allah wanted to do in his last will was to write (or order to write) what he has already said. But, as quoted earlier, some people around him shamelessly reduced him to the level of insanity. What happened on that thursday is a proof by itself that the Prophet ALREADY assigned a successor, otherwise, there was no point of disobedience! ========= Another person mentioned the verse \"Today I have perfected your religion and completed my bounty upon you, and I was satisfied that Islam be your religion (Quran 5:3)\" which was revealed 2 months before the death of the Prophet shows that there was no new religious command is going to come thereafter. Otherwise, if that important statement the prophet was going to dictate to his followers would have been somthing which was forgotten, would make the verse untrue. Perhaps the above brother would be surprized to know that many Sunni commentators of Quran have confirmed that the above verse (5:3) was revealed in Ghadir Khum AFTER the Messenger of Allah said: \"Whoever I am his leader, Ali is his leader. O\' God, love those who love him, and be hostile to those who are hostile to him.\" (See the ariticled titled \"Ghadir Khum\" for extensive references). This means the perfection of the religion was due announcing the successor of the Prophet (PBUH&HF). In fact what prophet wanted to do on that Thursday (three days before his death) was just to repeat, to remind, and to emphasize the things that has been revealed before. He didn\'t want to add any thing new. No Muslim ever claimed that the position of prophethood has been taken from Muhammad sometime before his death. We do not have such case about other prophets either. Even let\'s suppose he was not prophet any more, or he wanted to say something new. Do you think you can find any man better or more enthusiastic than him about the destiny of his community?! Do you think his last wish was against the prosperity of his people?! How much should they have been rude that even they didn\'t let him talk!!! [Reference : Shia Encycloedia]- http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia

Description:

Saudi Ayatollah Nimr Al-Nimr Dares Saudi Regime to Attack Iran and Declares: We Are Loyal to Allah, Not to Saudi Arabia or its Royal Family Following are excerpts from a Friday sermon delivered by Saudi Ayatollah Nimr Al-Nimr, which was posted on the Internet on October 7, 2011. Nimr Baqir Al-Nimr is from the city of Awwamiyah in the eastern part of Saudi Arabia. He is an outspoken Shia cleric known for his criticism of the Saudi government and his constant call for freedom of religion, equality, and justice for the Shia minority in Saudi Arabia. In 2009, Al-Nimr said that the dignity of the Saudi Shia is more precious than the unity of the land, and suggested that Saudi Shia might secede from Saudi Arabia. Fearing arrest, Al-Nimr currently is in hiding. Nimr Al-Nimr: �For the past 100 years, we have been subjected to oppression, injustice, fear, and intimidation. From the moment you are born, you are surrounded by fear, intimidation, persecution, and abuse. We were born into an atmosphere of intimidation. We feared even the walls. Who among us is not familiar with the intimidation and injustice to which we have been subjected in this country? I am 55 years old, more than half a century. From the day I was born and to this day, I�ve never felt safe or secure in this country. �You are always being accused of something. You are always under threat. The head of the State Security Service admitted this to me in person. He said to me when I was arrested: �All you Shi�ites should be killed.� That is their logic. The head of the State Security Service in the Eastern Province said so himself. [...] �They are still plotting to carry out a massacre. They are more than welcome. We are here. Our blood is a small price to pay in defense of our values. We do not fear death. We long for martyrdom. [...] �A few months ago, the flame of honor was sparked in the spirits of the youth. The torch of freedom was lit. The people took to the streets demanding reform, honor, and freedom. There are people who have been held in prison unjustly for more than 16 years. In addition, the Peninsula Shield Force and the Saudi army invaded Bahrain. Then there were more and more arrests. �So who was it who instigated strife and unrest? [...] �The strife and unrest in Awwamiya were instigated by the regime, not the people. [...] �We will continue to defend both the veteran and the new prisoners. We will stand by them. We don�t mind being arrested, and joining them. We don�t even mind shedding our blood for their sake. We will continue to express even stronger solidarity with Bahrain. It is our own kin in Bahrain. Even if the Saudi army and the Peninsula Shield Force had not intervened, it still would have been our duty to stand by the people of Bahrain, our kin, let alone when the Saudi army takes part in oppression, the killing, the violation of women�s honor, and the plundering of money. [...] �[The Saudi regime says] that we are acting �at the behest of a foreign country.� They use that false pretext. By �foreign country� they mean Iran, of course. You can�t really tell if it�s Iran, Turkey, a European country, or the U.S., but they usually mean Iran. In December 1978, there was an Intifada to defend the honor of Awwamiya, when the riot police attacked the town. This was on December 10, 1978, before the Shah was deposed, before the Islamic Republic of Iran was even established. �It was in 1978 � four months before the fall of the Shah. A group of people convened to perform the religious rite of taziyeh for Imam Hussein. It had nothing to do with political or security matters, but the security forces arrived and attacked them, and a confrontation ensued. People were defending themselves, as well as their faith and their honor. That night, they arrested 100 people. This was in December 1978, prior to the fall of the Iranian [Shah]. So how can they talk about foreign interferen

Description:

The world is coming to an end on December 21 2012. The ancient Maya made this stunning prediction more than 2000 years ago. We will peel back the layers of mystery and examine in detail how the Maya calculated the exact date of doomsday. Journey back to the ancient city of Chichen Itza - the hub of Maya civilization deep in the heart of MEXICOs Yucatan Peninsula - to uncover the truth about this prophecy. The Maya were legendary astronomers and timekeepers--their calendar is more accurate than our own. By tracking the stars and planets they assigned great meaning to astronomical phenomena and made extraordinary predictions based on them--many of which have come true. Could their doomsday prophecy be one of them. In insightful interviews archaeologists astrologers and historians speculate on the meaning of the 2012 prophecy. Their answers are as intriguing as the questions.

Description:

Blood and Oil Middle East in WWI Pt 4 Suez Advance Suez Advance. Less than two weeks after the disaster at Sarikamesh, Minister of the Navy Jemal Pasha leads 20,000 men in a secret operation across the Sinai Peninsula -- the target is the Suez Canal, British lifeline to the Persian Gulf and India. A Turkish assault against the canal is broken up by the British defenders with the loss of 2,000 men. London sends so many troops to Egypt that the Ottoman Army will never attack the Canal again. Except for the Dardanelles/Gallipoli campaigns, the extensive combat operations in the Middle East during World War I have been largely overlooked in documentary programs. Given the historical significance of the Ottoman Empire's demise in 1918, and the ongoing importance of Middle Eastern oil reserves to Western economies, a close study of this conflict provides two important lessons: 1. The Treaty of Versailles, agreed to by the Western Powers in 1919, paved the way for military and political chaos in the Middle East, which continues to this very day. 2. Oil reserves in the Middle East became an important strategic concern for Western Powers, helping to justify their economic, diplomatic and military interference in the region. After the end of World War I, most of the Ottoman Empire was carved up into "spheres of influence", controlled mostly by the British and French. The remaining territories became the modern state of Turkey in 1923 -- after a five-year struggle by Turkish nationalists against Western domination. With little regard for cultural, historical, religious and demographic considerations, the West sponsored the creation of several new nations: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Thus, a "tinderbox" was built from Western greed, igniting a multitude of wars, revolts, coups and military occupations that truly have made the defeat of the Ottoman Empire little more than a hollow victory.

Description:

Blood and Oil Middle East in WWI Pt 5 Gallipoli Gallipoli. April 25, 1915: 78,000 British and Anzac troops land on two beachheads on the Gallipoli peninsula. They are opposed by 60,000 Ottoman troops, commanded by German General Liman von Sanders. At Anzac Cove, the Australian and New Zealand Army Corps move up the slopes and are stopped by Colonel Mustafa Kemal and men from his 19th Division. On the other beach, Cape Helles, British troops land in broad daylight and pay a heavy price. As the Turks encircle the small beachheads with fortified positions, the British find themselves in the same kind of trench warfare that exists on the Western Front. Except for the Dardanelles/Gallipoli campaigns, the extensive combat operations in the Middle East during World War I have been largely overlooked in documentary programs. Given the historical significance of the Ottoman Empire's demise in 1918, and the ongoing importance of Middle Eastern oil reserves to Western economies, a close study of this conflict provides two important lessons: 1. The Treaty of Versailles, agreed to by the Western Powers in 1919, paved the way for military and political chaos in the Middle East, which continues to this very day. 2. Oil reserves in the Middle East became an important strategic concern for Western Powers, helping to justify their economic, diplomatic and military interference in the region. After the end of World War I, most of the Ottoman Empire was carved up into "spheres of influence", controlled mostly by the British and French. The remaining territories became the modern state of Turkey in 1923 -- after a five-year struggle by Turkish nationalists against Western domination. With little regard for cultural, historical, religious and demographic considerations, the West sponsored the creation of several new nations: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Thus, a "tinderbox" was built from Western greed, igniting a multitude of wars, revolts, coups and military occupations that truly have made the defeat of the Ottoman Empire little more than a hollow victory.

Description:

Middle East in WWIPart 9 - Desert War. Beginning in early 1917, British troops under General Archibald Murray clear the Sinai Peninsula of Turkish forces. Murray begins a limited offensive into Palestine, where the Turks have built defensive positions along the ridges between Gaza and Beersheba, two natural gateways into the region. The British advance is slow and methodical; a railroad is built for supplies and reinforcements, and a pipeline is built to carry water for the troops and animals. But the searing Sinai Desert has a fierce effect on the British soldiers, and the sun's terrible heat becomes their worst enemy. Except for the Dardanelles/Gallipoli campaigns, the extensive combat operations in the Middle East during World War I have been largely overlooked in documentary programs. Given the historical significance of the Ottoman Empire's demise in 1918, and the ongoing importance of Middle Eastern oil reserves to Western economies, a close study of this conflict provides two important lessons: 1. The Treaty of Versailles, agreed to by the Western Powers in 1919, paved the way for military and political chaos in the Middle East, which continues to this very day. 2. Oil reserves in the Middle East became an important strategic concern for Western Powers, helping to justify their economic, diplomatic and military interference in the region. After the end of World War I, most of the Ottoman Empire was carved up into "spheres of influence", controlled mostly by the British and French. The remaining territories became the modern state of Turkey in 1923 -- after a five-year struggle by Turkish nationalists against Western domination. With little regard for cultural, historical, religious and demographic considerations, the West sponsored the creation of several new nations: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Thus, a "tinderbox" was built from Western greed, igniting a multitude of wars, revolts, coups and military occupations that truly have made the defeat of the Ottoman Empire little more than a hollow victory.