Rating: 
Summary: A classic. The best book on the subject...
Review: I've read many books by many authors on the subject of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and I would have to say that this book is the best of the bunch. It is a classic. He backs up every single statement he makes with facts, often quoting Israeli sources. He is so thorough in his arguments that it is practically impossible to argue against him.One of the reviews below dismissed this work as being biased and anti-Semetic. This is a ridiculous claim considering the fact that Chomsky is Jewish and used to teach Hebrew when he was younger. This individual also stated that the Arab states created the problem of the Palestinian refugees. This is simply not true and even Israeli historians dismiss such claims as lies and propoganda (eg. Morris, Segev, Flapan, etc.). Buy it, read it, study it... it is an impressive work.
Rating:
Summary: Simply, the best book ever written on US Policy in Israel
Review: If I could, I would give this book better than a ten rating. Chomsky is eloquent, non-polemic and absolutely thorough on a topic that usually gets people screaming before you can finish your first sentence. His arguments are flawless, though they are long and require concentration. You may want to read this book only ten pages a day to absorb it. Nothing happens that gets by this guy. I don't know how many researchers he has, but he appears to have read everything from the bestsellers to the op-ed pages of obscure Israeli newspapers. He doesn't miss a trick. Therefore, his points and his arguments are virtually untouchable. This together with his academic training and excellence makes this book something of a masterpiece. It will never go out of date. I only wish he would write another edition covering the events last thirteen years so I could learn what he has to say about them
Rating:
Summary: American especially should read this book
Review: If you are comfortable with American foreign policy in the Middle East, this book offers a great opportunity to test your comfort. For some the most difficult part about reading something like this will be clearing their head of decades of US-Israeli bias in America's press and popular culture. Remind yourself that it really is ok to consider opposing views and then see for yourself if you still like the way the United States coddles and manipulates Israel's violent self-interest for its own gains. You will find excellent resources for further study and consideration, including updated discussion covering recent developments in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Sources are plentiful. Regardless of where you ultimately land on this debate, the book is well-documented and useful.
Rating:
Summary: This book is real!
Review: If you are wondering what I meant in my subject title. Go read this book and then spend some time in the occupied territories or vice versa. There is no question in my mind that reading this book will make you 'real'ly scared about US foreign policy in general and specifically with regards to the Middle East. With regards to Israel, by the end of this book you will know with great detail and clarity that the world is dealing with an incredibly dangerous country.
Rating:
Summary: Israel's Apartheid and the devastation of the Palestinians
Review: In addition to being "arguably the most important intellectual alive," according to the New York Times, renouned linguist Noam Chomsky was cited as a source more often than any living scholar between 1980-1992, by the Arts and Humanities Citation Index. He sure proves his supremacy in this detailed and angry account of the Palestinian Israeli struggle and the US & Western media role in it. Exposing human suffering and death is Chomsky's eternal goal in all of his foreign policy publications; he is merciless when it comes to injustice and violations of human rights. Not only does he meticulously detail all the factors and facts of the conflict in this book, but also transcends the big picture into the suffering and humiliation of the average Palestinian in his daily life, be it in the occupied territory or Lebanon. All facts are skillfully put into perspective where the views relating to both sides are listed, leading to irrefutable conclusions. As customary of Chomsky's writings, an infinite amount of quotes is collected from both sides of the conflict, which are then woven together into his text creating a factual, and often, sarcastic picture of the issue and the people involved. Using their actual words he exposes the hypocrisy and deception of the Israeli leadership. Chomsky's frequent use of long sentences makes it necessary to read the text slowly. Sometimes it is necessary to read each paragraph twice to comprehend the usually profound conclusion. As usual his analysis reflect his powerful insight into the issue involved, which gives the allusion that Chomsky is a scholar in this field only. The depth of Chomsky's account in anything he addresses surpass that of most scholars in the respective topics addressed. The Fateful Triangle is as deep as any analysis of the Arab-Israeli conflict gets. Chomsky is way ahead of his time in this writing, as he documents many of the issues that were only recently realized. These include the roots and deception of th! e present "peace process" (Oslo), and also the fact that the Israeli press is the best source for information, and is more superior to the western (U.S.) one which usually is dedicated to portraying Israel as the victim while the Palestinians as oppressors. Israeli press is not timid when discussing many issues that are considered taboos in the U.S. such as Israel's control (through its lobbies) of the U.S. Middle East foreign policies. Among the many Apartheid-style laws in Israel, Chomsky discusses how the Jewish National Fund, relying on U.S. tax-exempt donations, maintains 92% of the land in Israel for the sole use of Jews only. Another crucial issue discussed is the fact that the Labor left is more dangerous than the Likud right, which lies in the difference between their pronounced versus actual policies. While the Likud does things in-your-face style, the Labor preachs one thing to the world, while doing the complete opposite (such as settlement building). Labor usually speaks in a more mellow tone than Likud and is more skillful and diplomatic, -- a trait attractive to the West -- when it comes to covering up the oppression of the Palestinians. Yet another of the issues cleverly avoided in the Western Media (so as to shield Israel from criticism and keep the local population ignorant) is the many Arab initiatives for peace that were rejected by Israel, such as Sadat's 1971 and PLO's 1976 offers. Chomsky also exposes how the PLO would not respond to Israeli provocation, (prior to the 1982 invasion of Lebanon) the purpose of which is to give Israel pretext for an invasion or a raid. A monumental revelation is that of how Israel fears a more politically strong PLO than a terrorist organization, which is the direction the PLO was moving in, and which is the reason Israel was relentlessly trying to force the PLO into a terrorist path which would strip it from its growing international status. Chomsky's account of the Palestinian-Israeli-American relations is as usual, heav! ily documented and referenced. The volume of material researched is astounding to say the least. Chomsky's reliance on the Israeli press and Zionist publications as well as Arab and world literature on this issue makes this work highly authoritative. About 50% of the book is devoted to the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982 and the destruction of Palestinian society there, as well as the Western media coverage of it. The devastation and the civilian toll inflicted by Israel are angrily criticized, and the Israel-apologist nature of many of the U.S. reporters' coverage of the events there, are meticulously dissected and refuted. Notably, the coverage by the New Republic editor Martin Peretz, based on "testimonies of Israeli soldiers", are put into perspective by contrasting them to the coverage by the Israeli press, which portrays a vastly more accurate picture of the invasion. The Fateful Triangle is a masterpiece and should be the first and mandatory reading to all interested in this conflict and to human right activists in general. After reading Chomsky's work one surely feels wiser and more astute in analyzing issues and detecting media deception. 10/10.
Rating: 
Summary: questions for Chomsky
Review: In my earlier review, I didn't know as much about Chomsky's other historical views as I do now. One that I find particularly disturbing is his position on Cambodia and the Khmer Rouge. Chomsky goes to great lengths to whitewash the Khmer Rouge's genocide against the Cambodian people--undoubtedly one of the worst genocides of the century--claiming that the death toll may have only been in the thousands. This raises an obvious question: Why? Is it that he thinks that Cambodians inherently matter less than Palestinians, or that left wing atrocities should be viewed with greater tolerance than other atrocities? Either way, this should create misgivings in the mind of anyone who approaches the Palestine/Israel conflict from a huminitarian perspective, not least because Chomsky uses the same manipulative tactics in both cases. (E.g. To support his low-ball death toll in Cambodia, he cites a reputable magazine, only it turns out that he is really just citing a letter from a reader, not the magazine itself. Somewhat comparably, in Triangle, he treats reports from state-run Arab presses like gospel--when they support his position (as they often seem to).) One of the most interesting features of the history of the Palestine/Israel conflict has received little attention. It is the fact--or seeming fact--that neither side has any reason to believe it wouldn't have done (more or less) what the other side did, if the situation had been reversed. There is nothing in the history of the Middle East that suggests that Arab populations would have morally repudiated the idea of aggressively colonizing an already-inhabited region and taking over, as the Zionists took over Palestine. And there is nothing to suggest that the Zionists wouldn't have strenuously and violently resisted such aggressive settlement, if they were in the Palestinians' position. The fascinating thing is that both sides appear implicitly to have recognized as much. This seems to me to be the right place to begin discussion of this topic.
Rating:
Summary: questions for Chomsky
Review: In my earlier review, I didn't know as much about Chomsky's other historical views as I do now. One that I find particularly disturbing is his position on Cambodia and the Khmer Rouge. Chomsky goes to great lengths to whitewash the Khmer Rouge's genocide against the Cambodian people--undoubtedly one of the worst genocides of the century--claiming that the death toll may have only been in the thousands. This raises an obvious question: Why? Is it that he thinks that Cambodians inherently matter less than Palestinians, or that left wing atrocities should be viewed with greater tolerance than other atrocities? Either way, this should create misgivings in the mind of anyone who approaches the Palestine/Israel conflict from a huminitarian perspective, not least because Chomsky uses the same manipulative tactics in both cases. (E.g. To support his low-ball death toll in Cambodia, he cites a reputable magazine, only it turns out that he is really just citing a letter from a reader, not the magazine itself. Somewhat comparably, in Triangle, he treats reports from state-run Arab presses like gospel--when they support his position (as they often seem to).) One of the most interesting features of the history of the Palestine/Israel conflict has received little attention. It is the fact--or seeming fact--that neither side has any reason to believe it wouldn't have done (more or less) what the other side did, if the situation had been reversed. There is nothing in the history of the Middle East that suggests that Arab populations would have morally repudiated the idea of aggressively colonizing an already-inhabited region and taking over, as the Zionists took over Palestine. And there is nothing to suggest that the Zionists wouldn't have strenuously and violently resisted such aggressive settlement, if they were in the Palestinians' position. The fascinating thing is that both sides appear implicitly to have recognized as much. This seems to me to be the right place to begin discussion of this topic.
Rating:
Summary: useful and misleading
Review: It is interesting to see how many intelligent people rate this book very highly. The reviewer from Canada below is a great example. He argues that in my prior review I misinterpret and misrepresent Chomsky's views. Well, I beg to differ. Mr. Abbott says Chomsky never suggests that Israel alone should be blamed for the Six Day War, yet I challenge Mr. Abbott to look at those few pages in Triangle dedicated to the topic one more time and tell me where Chomsky even mentions the potential threat to Israel. I challenge him to find one-just one- sentence that even suggests that Israel was threatened. Mr. Abbott goes on to say that some evidence suggests that Israel was not really in danger of being destroyed. Maybe, but the fact is, there is also a lot of evidence for the opposite conclusion and chomsky completly ignores it, thus completely misleading his readers. Look, people, there is nothing with criticizing Israel and the US. Nothing! We give Israel a lot of money and they deserve to be scrutinized. But if you want to criticize them, at least do it right. Provide well-balanced arguments, take into consideration real threats to Israeli security instead of just ignoring them. anyway, if anyone wants to debate me on this, you can email me.
Rating:
Summary: By far the best analysis, even after 20 years
Review: Nearly 20 years after it was written, and recently updated with 100 pages of new material drawn mostly from Chomsky's articles in Z Magazine, _The Fateful Triangle_ remains far and away the most relevant and best analysis of the Israel-Palestinian conflict for American readers. As Chomsky never tires of reminding us, we are first responsible for the consequences of our own actions (or inaction). The United States and its pathetic Israeli client are not, of course, responsible for every terrorist outrage in the Middle East, but theirs are the crimes we, as Americans, can do something about. In Chomsky's book the United States' ugly role in the conflict is laid bare for all to see, and I can do better than to exhort every American with any interest in their role as citizens of the world to read it. (...) Chomsky has never defended Trotskyism, and is not a "communist" in any recognizable sense of the word; he is, as anyone who has taken the time to find out surely knows, a classical liberal who has great sympathy for anarchist ideas. What Chomsky has to say about Trotsky is: "Trotsky... wanted... to institute a program of militarization of labor in the totalitarian society that he and Lenin were constructing. That was... the Trotsky who sent his troops to Kronstadt and wiped out Makhno's peasant forces" (_The Chomsky Reader_, p. 41).
Rating:
Summary: Zionism's Brutal Occupation
Review: No matter how much evasion and no matter how much sugar coating is used, the truth stands clear: Israel/Zionism is just a brutal occupation, whose victims are the Palestinians. Chomsky's account sees clearly through all the sugar-coating and other media-overlaid gloss. Chomsky's account is of course imbalanced, because truth isn't either. Can one be asked to write a balanced account of the Holocaust, for example? The same is true here. No human rights violator is safe from Chomsky's rage. A refreshing account of the truth. From Richard Clogg - Choice:
{This is} a monumental work. . . . Chomsky's command of factual detail isoverwhelming, his argument is cogently made, and the documentation, which makes much use of the Israeli and European press, is careful. Recommended to students of US foreign policy, the modern Middle East, and to all general readers. From Avishai Margalit - The New York Review of Books:
Painful as it is for me to acknowledge it, we Israelis should, I believe,plead guilty to many of Chomsky's charges. Not to the charges as he states them, but to something not altogether unlike them. . . . Chomsky's indictment is highly detailed. Virtually no felony is missing, no misdeed left unaccounted for. And yet, though he finds Israel a sinful state, the clash between Israel and the Palestinians is in Chomsky's eyes a conflict of 'right against right.'
| 
