Customer Reviews for

Case for Israel

Average Rating 3.5
( 32 )
Rating Distribution

5 Star

(15)

4 Star

(3)

3 Star

(3)

2 Star

(1)

1 Star

(10)

Your Rating:

Your Name: Create a Pen Name or

Barnes & Noble.com Review Rules

Our reader reviews allow you to share your comments on titles you liked, or didn't, with others. By submitting an online review, you are representing to Barnes & Noble.com that all information contained in your review is original and accurate in all respects, and that the submission of such content by you and the posting of such content by Barnes & Noble.com does not and will not violate the rights of any third party. Please follow the rules below to help ensure that your review can be posted.

Reviews by Our Customers Under the Age of 13

We highly value and respect everyone's opinion concerning the titles we offer. However, we cannot allow persons under the age of 13 to have accounts at BN.com or to post customer reviews. Please see our Terms of Use for more details.

What to exclude from your review:

Please do not write about reviews, commentary, or information posted on the product page. If you see any errors in the information on the product page, please send us an email.

Reviews should not contain any of the following:

  • - HTML tags, profanity, obscenities, vulgarities, or comments that defame anyone
  • - Time-sensitive information such as tour dates, signings, lectures, etc.
  • - Single-word reviews. Other people will read your review to discover why you liked or didn't like the title. Be descriptive.
  • - Comments focusing on the author or that may ruin the ending for others
  • - Phone numbers, addresses, URLs
  • - Pricing and availability information or alternative ordering information
  • - Advertisements or commercial solicitation

Reminder:

  • - By submitting a review, you grant to Barnes & Noble.com and its sublicensees the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable right and license to use the review in accordance with the Barnes & Noble.com Terms of Use.
  • - Barnes & Noble.com reserves the right not to post any review -- particularly those that do not follow the terms and conditions of these Rules. Barnes & Noble.com also reserves the right to remove any review at any time without notice.
  • - See Terms of Use for other conditions and disclaimers.
Search for Products You'd Like to Recommend

Recommend other products that relate to your review. Just search for them below and share!

Create a Pen Name

Your Pen Name is your unique identity on BN.com. It will appear on the reviews you write and other website activities. Your Pen Name cannot be edited, changed or deleted once submitted.

 
Your Pen Name can be any combination of alphanumeric characters (plus - and _), and must be at least two characters long.

Continue Anonymously

Most Helpful Favorable Review

6 out of 6 people found this review helpful.

A MUST READ FOR ALL PEOPLE OF GOOD WILL WHO CONDEMN PREJUDICE

Written in a format that recognizes the arguments used by those who single out Israel for harsh judgment, the book uses established, verifiable facts and unassailable logic to refute those arguments and place the burden of explanation back on those who hold Israel to un...
Written in a format that recognizes the arguments used by those who single out Israel for harsh judgment, the book uses established, verifiable facts and unassailable logic to refute those arguments and place the burden of explanation back on those who hold Israel to unfair standards in the face of provocation by murderous atrocity. I eagerly await a reply by Chomsky and others who consistently overlook the despotic regimes of Israel's neighbors and other countries and, for reasons deep within their psyche, seek to villify the Jewish state. How can anybody who claims to stand up for the 'underdog' support movements that have consistenly rejected Israel's very existence, a two-state solution, and have fallen into the terrorists' trap of using murder to obtain sympathy in response to Israel's extremely legitimate efforts to prevent such murders of innocents? All one has to do is look at the dead on each side and see that many more Israeli women, chldren and innocents have been killed, whereas virtually all of the Palestineans killed have been men of terrorist age, with terrorist connections, often in their status of combatants. Unheard in the popular press, Dershowitz also makes the reader aware that, at the time of the UN Partition, the land awarded to the tiny Jewish state had a clear Jewish minority that had built the land up from a desert swampland. Read the book for more facts to enlighten!

posted by Anonymous on October 14, 2003

Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review

Most Helpful Critical Review

3 out of 7 people found this review helpful.

A hoax

Quite simply, the book Alan Dershowitz claims to have written is a hoax: (1) substantial swatches are lifted from another notorious hoax on the Israel-Palestine conflict, (2) it is replete with egregious falsifications, and (3) the few scholarly sources actually cit...
Quite simply, the book Alan Dershowitz claims to have written is a hoax: (1) substantial swatches are lifted from another notorious hoax on the Israel-Palestine conflict, (2) it is replete with egregious falsifications, and (3) the few scholarly sources actually cited are mangled beyond recognition. In this reply, I will only illustrate points (1) and (2). These, along with point (3), will be fully documented in a forthcoming monograph. In 1984, Joan Peters published From Time Immemorial, which claimed that Palestine was virtually empty on the eve of Zionist colonization, and that Palestinians are in fact foreigners who surreptitiously entered Palestine after the Zionists 'made the desert bloom.' The book is now widely recognized as a fraud. Baruch Kimmerling (of the Hebrew University) and Joel S. Migdal, in their authoritative study, Palestinians: The Making of a People, published by Harvard University Press, observe that Peters's book is 'based on materials out of context, and on distorted evidence,' and, citing my own conclusion that the book 'is the most spectacular fraud ever published on the Arab-Israeli conflict,' report that 'similar evaluations were expressed by notable historians' in Israel and Europe. Dershowitz states that he uses only a 'few sources' cited in the Peters hoax. In fact, fully 22 of the 52 endnotes in chapters 1-2 are lifted straight from her without any form of attribution. In his defense, Dershowitz claims that no foul play is involved because he checked Peters's original sources before citing them, a laughable argument were an undergraduate to make it before a plagiarism committee. Dershowitz focuses on a lengthy citation from Mark Twain to argue this point. Yet, although Dershowitz reproduces Peters's page references to Twain's book in his own endnote, the relevant quotes do not appear on these pages in the edition of Twain's book that Dershowitz cites. Furthermore, Dershowitz cites two paragraphs from Twain as continuous text, just as Peters cites them as continuous text, but in Twain's book the two paragraphs are separated by 87 pages. It would be impossible for anyone who checked the original source to make this error. Dershowitz similarly 'checked' Peters's other sources. Quoting a statement depicting the miserable fate of Jews in mid-19th century Jerusalem, Peters cites a British consular letter from 'Wm. T. Young to Viscount Canning.' Dershowitz cites the same statement as Peters, reporting that Young 'attributed the plight of the Jew in Jerusalem' to pervasive anti-Semitism. Turning to the original, however, we find that the relevant statement did not come from Young but, as is unmistakably clear to anyone who actually consulted the original, from an enclosed memorandum written by an 'A. Benisch' that Young was forwarding to Canning. One wonders if Dershowitz also consulted Peters's original source for the term 'turnspeak' - a coinage of Peters, which she says was inspired by George Orwell's 1984, but which Dershowitz, confounded by his massive borrowings from Peters, not once but twice credits directly to Orwell ('George Orwell's `turnspeak,'' 'Orwellian turnspeak'). On which pages of 1984 did Dershowitz find 'turnspeak'?

posted by Anonymous on November 24, 2003

Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
Sort by: Showing 1 – 20 of 32 Customer Reviews
Page 1 of 2
  • Anonymous

    Posted October 14, 2003

    A MUST READ FOR ALL PEOPLE OF GOOD WILL WHO CONDEMN PREJUDICE

    Written in a format that recognizes the arguments used by those who single out Israel for harsh judgment, the book uses established, verifiable facts and unassailable logic to refute those arguments and place the burden of explanation back on those who hold Israel to unfair standards in the face of provocation by murderous atrocity. I eagerly await a reply by Chomsky and others who consistently overlook the despotic regimes of Israel's neighbors and other countries and, for reasons deep within their psyche, seek to villify the Jewish state. How can anybody who claims to stand up for the 'underdog' support movements that have consistenly rejected Israel's very existence, a two-state solution, and have fallen into the terrorists' trap of using murder to obtain sympathy in response to Israel's extremely legitimate efforts to prevent such murders of innocents? All one has to do is look at the dead on each side and see that many more Israeli women, chldren and innocents have been killed, whereas virtually all of the Palestineans killed have been men of terrorist age, with terrorist connections, often in their status of combatants. Unheard in the popular press, Dershowitz also makes the reader aware that, at the time of the UN Partition, the land awarded to the tiny Jewish state had a clear Jewish minority that had built the land up from a desert swampland. Read the book for more facts to enlighten!

    6 out of 6 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted December 22, 2006

    The Honest Truth

    Hard hitting, factual, clearly stated accounts of what Israel has been up against since the late 19th century. A must read for any student of near east politic and history.

    3 out of 4 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted August 17, 2006

    Insightful

    I read this book for an international relations class last winter quarter. By the time I had finished it, I was totally incensed. Not, however, because I disagreed with the thesis of the book. Rather, the anger stemmed from Dershowitz's utterly compelling argument in favor of Israel and the obvious bias of much of the world. Although Dershowitz's assertions tend to favor Israel, his argument is not based exclusively on the premise that Israel is a perfect nation. Instead, he admits that Israel has faults and is more than willing to point them out. Yet it is also an indictment of terrorism and, specifically, the double standard that the international community harbors toward Israel (at least as Dershowitz perceives it). All in all, I would HIHGLY recommend this book to anyone even remotely interested in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

    3 out of 4 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted October 12, 2004

    Compelling argument in defense of Israel

    I just finished this book and found Dershowitz'arguments very compelling. He lays out his case and supports it every step of the way. I appreciated all the empirical evidence that he provides, such as populations figures, which can, presumably, be objectively supported or refuted through independent research. Excellent.

    3 out of 4 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted October 4, 2004

    A refreshing perspective

    It seems odd that this complex conflict is so often portrayed in such a black and white manner. This book adresses the conflict with facts that present alot of greys, greys that the 'objective proffessionals' (ie.media)'forget' to adress.

    3 out of 4 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted November 24, 2003

    A hoax

    Quite simply, the book Alan Dershowitz claims to have written is a hoax: (1) substantial swatches are lifted from another notorious hoax on the Israel-Palestine conflict, (2) it is replete with egregious falsifications, and (3) the few scholarly sources actually cited are mangled beyond recognition. In this reply, I will only illustrate points (1) and (2). These, along with point (3), will be fully documented in a forthcoming monograph. In 1984, Joan Peters published From Time Immemorial, which claimed that Palestine was virtually empty on the eve of Zionist colonization, and that Palestinians are in fact foreigners who surreptitiously entered Palestine after the Zionists 'made the desert bloom.' The book is now widely recognized as a fraud. Baruch Kimmerling (of the Hebrew University) and Joel S. Migdal, in their authoritative study, Palestinians: The Making of a People, published by Harvard University Press, observe that Peters's book is 'based on materials out of context, and on distorted evidence,' and, citing my own conclusion that the book 'is the most spectacular fraud ever published on the Arab-Israeli conflict,' report that 'similar evaluations were expressed by notable historians' in Israel and Europe. Dershowitz states that he uses only a 'few sources' cited in the Peters hoax. In fact, fully 22 of the 52 endnotes in chapters 1-2 are lifted straight from her without any form of attribution. In his defense, Dershowitz claims that no foul play is involved because he checked Peters's original sources before citing them, a laughable argument were an undergraduate to make it before a plagiarism committee. Dershowitz focuses on a lengthy citation from Mark Twain to argue this point. Yet, although Dershowitz reproduces Peters's page references to Twain's book in his own endnote, the relevant quotes do not appear on these pages in the edition of Twain's book that Dershowitz cites. Furthermore, Dershowitz cites two paragraphs from Twain as continuous text, just as Peters cites them as continuous text, but in Twain's book the two paragraphs are separated by 87 pages. It would be impossible for anyone who checked the original source to make this error. Dershowitz similarly 'checked' Peters's other sources. Quoting a statement depicting the miserable fate of Jews in mid-19th century Jerusalem, Peters cites a British consular letter from 'Wm. T. Young to Viscount Canning.' Dershowitz cites the same statement as Peters, reporting that Young 'attributed the plight of the Jew in Jerusalem' to pervasive anti-Semitism. Turning to the original, however, we find that the relevant statement did not come from Young but, as is unmistakably clear to anyone who actually consulted the original, from an enclosed memorandum written by an 'A. Benisch' that Young was forwarding to Canning. One wonders if Dershowitz also consulted Peters's original source for the term 'turnspeak' - a coinage of Peters, which she says was inspired by George Orwell's 1984, but which Dershowitz, confounded by his massive borrowings from Peters, not once but twice credits directly to Orwell ('George Orwell's `turnspeak,'' 'Orwellian turnspeak'). On which pages of 1984 did Dershowitz find 'turnspeak'?

    3 out of 7 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted November 5, 2003

    Tragic this book had to be written

    'The case for Israel' is a candid refutation of the litany of criticisms against the Jewish state. For the author, the task must have simaltaneously easy and painful - simple because so much of the anti-Israeli polemic is just that, and painful because that polemic is poisoning the well of the public discourse. Dershowitz presents few genuinely new defenses, but the strength of the book lies in his legal approach, and the comprehensive nature of the work. In short, the book is the best defense of Israel in a single volume to date. Some have commented on Dershowitz's obession with counterattacks on Said, Chomsky, and Finkelstein. I disagree. As anyone who is remotely familiar with college campus politics and academic trends, Said and Chomsky provide the foundation for Israel's worst critics, and I ask anyone reading this review to examine the 'one-star' reviews above - their recommendations validate this point, as well as their rating. As a serious student of Mideast affairs, I highly recommend this book, but only to those who have already been exposed to Israel's worst critics.

    3 out of 3 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted October 26, 2003

    A must read for anyone who wishes to understand the present Middle East situation

    This is a clearly written, well- researched work which exposes the prejudiced treatment Israel has received not only from its neighbors but from the United Nations, and most nations of the world. It proves the fundamental truth of the Middle East conflict over and over again- and that is that the source of the conflict is Arab rejectionism of Israel. Had the Arabs wanted had the Palestinians wanted they could have settled this conflict over eighty years ago. Their hatred of Israel, their inhumane murder , terror and suicide campaign has forced the Jewish state to defend itself, and in doing so become reluctantly one of the most powerful military states in the world.That it is also the only true democracy in the Middle East is a measure of its success. This success is of course the source of envy for its totalitarian neighbors whose only response to a continually outstretched hand in peace has been violence and more violence.

    3 out of 3 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted August 24, 2003

    All the sources you will ever need...

    If you are a left wing jew who finds him/herself surrounded by uninformed critics of israel, this book is what you've been waiting for your entire life. While admitting to Israel's mistakes, Mr. Dershowitz exposes the double standard that the Israelis have been held to since the inception of the state. My only desire is a response from Edward Said and Noam Chomsky.

    3 out of 3 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Posted December 25, 2008

    Highest Recommendation

    This book is a must read for anyone interested in the Middle East. Prof. Dershowitz not only states his position, but documents his statements completely. If anyone doubts his documentation, the footnotes are there for all to check out.<BR/><BR/>This is a scholarly work, but also an easy read. Top marks for this one!

    2 out of 3 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted April 3, 2008

    Not at all convincing

    Inaccurate and tendentious throughout. For example, he writes 'historians believe that the Hebrews arrived in present-day Israel sometime in the second millennium B.C.E. Under Joshua, and later King David and his successors, independent Hebrew kingdoms existed.' In fact, no respected Christian, Jewish or secular historian argues that an independent Hebrew kingdom ever existed under Joshua. Not even the Bible claims that Joshua was a king or had a kingdom! We have no demographic data to support his claim that Jews formed the main part of the population for most of the sixteen hundred years between 1000 BCE and 636 CE. This cavalier disregard for truth and historical accuracy is typical. Dershowitz is after all a lawyer, not a scholar, trained to make the best possible case for his client, not to investigate the truth. Read instead Avi Shlaim's The Iron Wall.

    2 out of 7 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted March 9, 2008

    Partial to the point of absurdity

    In fairness to Mr Dershowitz, in both his books `The Case For Israel¿ and `The Case For Peace¿, he performs the function of a good lawyer. His objective is to successfully argue the innocence of his client, in this case the State of Israel. His process is meticulous. He examines the facts, omits those which incriminate his client and correspondingly elevates to high prominence those likely to make Israel be seen in a favourable light. This is what a good lawyer is obliged to do, to construct the best possible defence for their client regardless of their client¿s actual guilt or innocence. While Mr Dershowitz¿s work is impeccable for a defence lawyer in a criminal court, as a prominent academic his work is potentially very harmful to prospect of a lasting peace emerging in the Israel / Palestine conflict given that it is likely to entrench those who already harbour a simplified and distorted notion of the nature of the conflict and its root causes. The consequence of Mr Dershowitz¿s approach is that his writings cannot be considered impartial or objective, as he himself has implicitly acknowledged during interviews about his books. At every opportunity he emphasises the virtue of Israel and Israelis while reducing the Palestinians to a vulgar stereotype of an irrational, primitive mob, irredeemably bound to anti-Semitic violence despite the perpetual efforts of peace loving Israeli leaders to reach a magnanimous accord. Some already disposed to believe such a partisan account of the conflict may find Dershowitz¿s writing credible. Others, even ardent Zionists, may find themselves winching as Dershowitz¿s attempts to justify transparently illegal acts such as settlement construction in the occupied territories and targeted assassinations of political opponents. Dershowitz¿s literally breathtaking claim that the high number of Palestinians civilian deaths is due primarily to the incompetence of Palestinian doctors rather than the Israeli soldiers who shoot them is sadly typical of the type of argument he resorts to in defence of his client. It is with arguments like the one above that he enhances his reputation as a lawyer while simultaneously discrediting himself as an academic. It seems in Mr Dershowitz¿s view that truth is merely a raw material for the production of propaganda, and nothing more. Both The Case For Israel and The Case For Peace begin with a kernel of truth, then stretch and distort it to such an extent that ultimately the contents of both books frequently verge on the ridiculous. Through shameless distortion and omission Dershowitz has create a body of work that merely further obscures an understanding of the conflict and therefore postpones it resolution, a postponement likely to be paid for with the lives of innocent Israelis and Palestinians. Perhaps Mr Dershowitz should reflect on this when he next chooses to lift his pen on the subject of Israel and Palestine.

    2 out of 6 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted July 15, 2006

    Dull read but excellent points

    Well the delivery is typical of someone in his position but his points were convincing. One would have hoped that the Palestinians could have diplomatically achieved more substantial territories following 1947 but continuous malicious targeting of israeli civilians and denial of a right to exist to the jews makes it obvious to me that the jews should defend themselves by any necessary means.

    2 out of 3 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted September 21, 2003

    Sanity Amidst The Propaganda. Highly Recommended !

    This timely book provides what is described as a detailed and penetrating analysis of the issues fuelling the continuing war against the Jewish State of Israel, both in the field of propaganda & on the ground itself. A whole plethora of secular issues are discussed in this work in order to provide a pro-active defence of the Jewish State. Despite this the book declares that it in no way defends every policy or action of the Israeli Government but vehemently defends the right of Israel to exist and to protect it's citizens from terrorism under the principle of self defence afforded every sovereign nation. The contents of this work depicting this principle as frequently being denied Israel by some elements of the International community. The latter being depicted as regularly singling out the Jewish State for unique criticism which is not directed at any other nations or at it's neighbouring Arab countries for that matter. The latter entities being demonstrated as having far worse human rights records than Israel. An underlying attitude described in the book as 'International bigotry' which crosses the line into the realms of anti-Semitism. The book addresses many fundamental points such as the historical fact that the Palestinians have been offered Statehood on three separate occasions, in 1937, 1947 and 2000-2001. On each occasion the book describes how each offer was rejected and on each occasion the response has been increased terrorism. A parallel issue addressed here is that the Palestinian Arabs never sought Statehood when they were 'occupied' by Jordan and Egypt and that the claim began as a tactic to eliminate the Jewish State of Israel. The PLO even being formed by Egypt in 1964 when the 'West Bank' and Gaza are described as being Arab occupied. The Arab-Israeli wars also receive attention and the book documents how it was actually the Arabs that were responsible for the Palestinian 'refugee' issue. The so called 'settlement' issue is also addressed, with references being shown that the Arabs/Palestinians refused to make peace with Israel when there were no 'settlements' in existence and also when Ehud Barak offered to remove them all. The Sinai 'settlement' issue being illustrated as no barrier to the 'peace' agreement between Israel and Egypt. The book declaring that the real barrier to 'peace' is that the Palestinians are utterly unwilling to accept the existence of a Jewish State in ANY part of what they describe as 'Palestine'. The book describes that Palestinian propagandists regularly invoke the 'human rights' issue merely as a tactic against Israel, whilst the Palestinian Authority is depicted here as having no respect for tolerance or human rights itself with a policy of 'torturing and killing alleged collaborators', often publicly, without even a semblance of a due process of law or trial. An issue which is described as being of little consequence to World opinion, which prefers to concentrate on alleged Israel wrongdoings. Also relating to 'human rights' the book investigates the UNHCR and what it describes as a substantive assault upon Israel, quoting the vast percentage of it's resolutions being against Israel which is the only nation to be subject to an entire agenda EVERY year. By comparison the book shows that the UNHCR has never passed a resolution against states such as Syria, China, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Chad, Liberia, Malawi, Mali, Pakistan, United Arab Emirates, Yemen or Zimbabwe, all of which are depicted as committing gross and systematic human rights abuses. Another disturbing issue addressed is that in chapter 29 of society's growing willingness to attach what is described as a 'moral equivalence between Palestinian terrorism & Israeli responses to terrorism.' A parallel issue also being addressed is the alleged 'moral equivalence' between Palestinians casualties sustained during acts of violence/terrorism against Israeli targets and the Israeli casualties sustained amongst i

    2 out of 2 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted October 22, 2003

    A Revelation

    The carefulness of the research here gets to you as you begin to realize that most of your misgivings about Israel (if you sympathize with it) or the charges against Israel (if you sympathize with the Palestinians) are not based on facts. After a while you may realize as a 'liberal' that you have been (as Stalin used to call his sympathizers in Western countries) a 'useful idiot' ~ a dupe of Arab propaganda. I now think that Dershowitz, if anything, is too even-handed, given his documentation. After reading this I am going to be much more wary. I have a lot more confidence in ~ and admiration for ~ Israel. They are in a really bad neighborhood and nevertheless have an ethical record in which they can rightly take pride. Their training, behavior, law and courts put them in sharp contrast with their enemies, who glory in the targeting of civilians. Now some of the anti-Israel views I read and hear strike me as unfortunate or unbalanced or ignorant. I realize now that some things people say are really shameful. Dershowitz is not the greatest writer in the world ~ he just soldiers on with his task ~ but what he has to say is so riveting that this is a real page turner. I stayed up two nights in a row with it. So I have to say it is a terrific book ~ it changed my whole outlook.

    2 out of 2 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted September 9, 2003

    Kudos

    Alan Dershowitz deserves a tremendous amount of credit and praise for this work. What he does in it,is go one by one, and systematically refute the arguments anti- Semitic enemies of Israel are presently making against it. In doing so he provides a very readable story of the whole conflict between Jews and Arabs over the Holy Land. His method is to take the charges made by the enemies of Israel, and one by one refute them. He in doing this shows the hypocrisy of the Arab nations and of the U.N. of some of the worst human rights violators in the world in the attacks upon the only democracy in the middle East. He shows how Israel which is singled out again and again for attack on human rights issues is one of the most advanced democratic countries in the world. He has special praise for the Israeli judicial system. Dershowitz is an advocate of the two- state solution in which there would be both an Israeli Jewish state, and a Palestinian Arab state in the land of the West of the Jordan. My own feeling is that since the Arabs already hold eighty percent of the land given for a Jewish state in the Balfour declaration, and since that vast territory could be used as their homeland, the two state solution should mean one on the West Bank of the Jordan( the Jewish state) and the other on the East Bank.( the Arab state). But my disagreement with Dershowitz over the best way to handle the problem does not in any way diminish my enormous respect and gratitude for what he has done. Any rational person of good will reading this book will understand just how terribly Israel is being treated by the world- community, and how it is not only more right than its neighbors, but in fact ' light' to their 'darkness'. This book is recommended to anyone who cares to truly be fair about the Middle East, and to understand what is going on in the conflict between the Jewish state and its enemies.

    2 out of 2 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted August 16, 2003

    A rational answer to critics of Israel

    Considering the complexities of the Middle East, Alan Dershowitz¿s ¿The Case for Israel¿ makes for easy reading, which is not to say that the author dumbs down his prose. Avoiding legal jargon, Dershowitz presents a series of rational arguments to counter those criticisms of the Jewish State which to him appear without merit. Since the author is Jewish, he could legitimately be accused of some bias. Yet some Jewish intellectuals, including Noam Chomsky, Rabbi Michael Lerner and Norman Finkelstein make a case for the other side as do numbers of Jewish students on our nation¿s campuses. Instead of setting down an essay to expound the case, he devotes a small chapter to each criticism of Israel and proceeds in legalistic prose to attack those rejoinders. Among the most important units are: 1) Have the Jews Exploited the Holocaust? 2) Did Israel Create the Arab Refugee Problem? 3) Was Arafat Right in Turning Down the Barak-Clinton Peace Proposal? 4) Is Israel a Racist State? 5) Is There Moral Equivalence between Palestinian Terrorists and Israeli Responses? 6) Are Critics of Israel Anti-Semites? Dershowitz points out that while the extreme right (Nazis, Fascists, and other hate-groups) have been the traditional enemies of Israel, today the Far Left finds it fashionable to condemn Israeli actions in the Middle East if not the very existence of the Jewish state. While the author finds nothing wrong with criticizing some Israeli policies such as the building of settlements, those critics who single out Israel¿s warts in a world that bears witness to genocidal conflicts in areas like Rwanda, Bosnia, and the Congo may indeed be guilty of anti-Semitism. Nor can a legitimate case be made for equating Israel¿s defensive actions with Palestinian terrorism in that the latter specifically targets non-combatants for suicide bombings while Israel regrets the loss of innocent Arab lives snuffed out largely because terrorist groups place military bases in the heart of civilian areas. The Clinton administration solution to the tension which would have given 95%-97% of the West Bank and all of Gaza back to the Palestinians and would have created a Palestinian state was accepted by Israel but rejected by Arafat, presumably because the PLO leader might have feared assassination by Hamas, Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations. The Far Left in America loves to think that it¿s looking out for the underdog and this book may not convince those who continue to believe that Israel occupies land for the fun of it rather than to seek out and neutralize so-called Arab militants (read: terrorists). Nonetheless Dershowitz makes a powerful case for showing that Israel, not the Palestinians, are the underdogs, in that the tiny Jewish state (which occupies a mere 1/5 of one percent of the land area of the Middle East) would be obliterated if it lost a single war. Israel emerges on the morally just side, a beleaguered nation who would live in peace with neighbors if not surrounded and greatly outnumbered by hostile forces.

    2 out of 2 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted April 18, 2010

    Israeli Apartheid

    Read Israeli Apartheid by Ben White and compare it to Dershowitz's The Case for Israel. Decide for yourself who makes the better case. It's amazing how far apart the two sides are--almost a black versus white difference

    1 out of 4 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted January 4, 2004

    One-Sided

    Alan's book is extremely one-sided!!! It does not evenly present the case for the Palestinian side. It is possible to have a peaceful solution between the Israelis and the Palestinians! This would guarantee Israel's security and the rights of the Palestinians as the same side. Mr. Dershowitz, you have done an incredible disservice to the peace process by your writings. Sir, you should know better!

    1 out of 5 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
  • Anonymous

    Posted October 6, 2003

    Lame and Desperate

    This book came across as a lame and desperate attempt to defend Zionism and its creation, Israel. Dershowitz hangs on to theories and 'facts' that history had debunked. Dershowitz ought to be following the footsteps of Jewish intellectuals in Europe and Israel who have concluded that Zionism has failed and are now discussing a post-Zionism Judaism. Not only has Zionism (and Israel) failed miserably as an experiance in nationalism, but it has also proven itself to be the worst thing to happen to Jews (not to mention Palestinians and other victims). Time to move on.

    1 out of 3 people found this review helpful.

    Was this review helpful? Yes  No   Report this review
Sort by: Showing 1 – 20 of 32 Customer Reviews
Page 1 of 2